[–] [deleted] 1 point 27 points 28 points (+28|-1) ago
In any thread about weightloss this low effort comment is reliably the most upvoted. Everyone thinks it's clever because it is technically correct, but it is completely useless, and adds nothing to the discussion. It shuts down any useful conversation about hunger management and motivation, or in this case the sociological reasons why a group happens to be less willing or less able to control their caloric balance.
[–] xX720-noscopeXx 1 point 12 points 13 points (+13|-1) ago
obviously they don't exercise enough and eat shit food.
Maybe its because they feel more comfortable with one another as there all chicks and not picky guys.
butch lesbians do tend to be stocky though.
[–] thatsmrdickface 0 points 14 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago
obviously they don't exercise enough and eat shit food.
Somebody write this guy a check for $3.5 million.
[–] xX720-noscopeXx 0 points 2 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago
I thought gays would be more fit seeing as they like muscle men and aren't all chubby chasers?
its stupid that people wonder why there fat and the reason is always x amount energy in x amount energy out
[–] Broc_Lia 0 points 7 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago
The double standards here are ridiculous. Straight men are also more likely than straight women to be obese, but I don't see anyone decrying that they are being "disproportionately affected by an epidemic" (as if obesity were a product of an infectious disease rather than personal choices).
As for "lower athletic esteem"... that applies to overweight people in general. Have they controlled for that?
Plus, the theory that this is caused by gender normative team selection is bunk given that gay men seem to manage just fine.
[–] ElementalPee ago
I believe this is the full text of the study being referenced and they said they adjusted for obesity.
[–] KarmaComber 1 point 7 points 8 points (+8|-1) ago
Fuck off, for real?
[–] lps2 3 points 2 points 5 points (+5|-3) ago
? It seems like they have identified a sub-group with a particular health problem, obesity, and are trying to find the root of that health problem.... you know, one of the many jobs of governance. I would be willing to bet there are similar studies about other social groups and their particular health issues
[–] BiscuitFever 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
Well, it's interesting I guess. Homosexual males tend to be the least obese and most fit out of any sexual orientation.
[–] Nationalist ago
So that's why when you go out of anything put PIV-sex it's all fat and old bitches.
[–] [deleted] 2 points 3 points 5 points (+5|-2) ago
[–] toatsmavoats 1 point 2 points 3 points (+3|-1) ago
BUT WHERE WILL WE FIND THE MONEY FOR OUR NATIONAL INFRASTRUCTURE??? WON'T SOMEONE THINK ABOUT THE ROADS!! damnit...
[–] Nationalist 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
There should be a fat tax, or a thin rebate.
[–] o_V_o 7 points 38 points 45 points (+45|-7) ago (edited ago)
Well, seeing as being "born that way" hasn't actually been proven (and to be perfectly honest, doesn't even make sense), I'm willing to bet that what we're looking at here isn't that lesbians are obese, but... obese women [are more likely to] BECOME lesbians. Pretty obvious.
You can see exactly what each gender is about by looking at their respective homosexual populations. For the most part: Men are visual, women are emotional. Science knew this long ago... please try and catch up. Thanks.
Mute downvoters: speak up, that's the only way to change anything. What you're doing now is simply an attempt at moving opinions you don't like out of view. See, the catch is: if you actually had anything to base your dislike on other than "feels" you wouldn't need to rely on mute downvotes. Mute downvotes essentially mean I'm right. Think about it... if you had any real proof to support your side, you'd be tripping over each other to post it.... but all you got is downvotes. Too bad, so sad.
Sad what it takes to get people to speak up...
[–] Spacehuman 1 point 9 points 10 points (+10|-1) ago
I think men are generally 'born that way'. Women tend to have a sexual preference - which is fluid. Man tend to have a sexual orientation - which is rigid. Women do 'switch teams' whereas men are not wired to do so.
[–] ForgotMyName 2 points 3 points 5 points (+5|-2) ago
Strange, now that you mentioned it, I've had the same experience. Anecdotally, the gay guys that I've known since they were kids were pretty gay when they were kids. The lesbians, were all over the place. Girls that only dated girls in high school are married to guys now. Girls that I'd never have guessed were gay are now lesbians.
Not even going to pretend like this is remotely scientific, but it's just interesting that my own observations happen to align with it.
[–] cynoclast 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago (edited ago)
I think women are just prettier, even to other women. They haven't been called 'the fairer sex' for eons for no reason.
[–] o_V_o 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
I think both are fluid, but men are socialized to be rigid, women aren't.... and it goes all the way back to the simple fact that homosexuality in women isn't a threat to the population the same way it is in men (btw, that's why the church was against it... fewer birth means fewer followers)... lesbians can always be over-powered when reproduction is absolutely necessary or vacant uteri are in short demand. On the other hand, with exception to something like raping them in their sleep, gay men aren't much use in this regard.
[–] Broc_Lia 2 points 0 points 2 points (+2|-2) ago
Wut?
[–] Darmoth 0 points 1 point 1 point (+1|-0) ago
I pretty much agree. I think sexual preference is a spectrum. Most are born near the straight or gay ends of the spectrum, but others are in the middle to varying degrees.
The visual vs emotional observation is interesting and seems plausible. One of my exes dated a jock after me(I'm not fat but not built like him) and she went from a size 2 to 00. Next she dated a chick, and both of them gained like 100lbs in a year lol. Now she's with another man and has lost a lot of it.
[–] archdog99 1 point 1 point 2 points (+2|-1) ago
I actually used to be on the fence about "born this way" because if you look at the function of nature, males & females need to get together to procreate and spread our species. So at that time, I wasn't buying it.
Then I (and no, I don't have any sources) read around and listened to a couple of people on NPR and there's an argument to be made about genetic variations and possibly a population control safeguard where a certain percentage of the population is "discouraged" from procreating and therefore attracted to the same sex.
The point is, the arguments made sense and made me rethink my opinion. I think there is a percentage of the population that, for whatever reason, is born predisposed to preferring the same sex.
[–] King_Carcosa 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
I like the old Socratic method of questioning "When did you choose to be straight then?" As a straight male I cannot fathom being gay, or making that "choice." Just seems natural to me that people that are gay were born with different preferences than me.
[–] Broc_Lia 1 point 0 points 1 point (+1|-1) ago
How do you figure that?
[–] flyawayhigh 3 points 3 points 6 points (+6|-3) ago (edited ago)
Never mind. The statement is self-contradictory. Logic time.
If lesbians are not born with sexual orientation, then sexual orientation is 'learned' so to speak.
If sexual orientation is 'learned,' then it is not born-in.
If sexual orientation is not born-in, then heterosexual orientation is not born in.
All sexual orientation is learned. LOL
Yes, this is the place where a word applies: nonsense.
Edit: I'm not one of those downVoaters, but I do agree that
However, I don't agree with
I am thinking about it and I don't think there is any logical rule that all uncontested statements are true. In fact, I'm pretty sure there is not. Positive really. :D