0
35

[–] syntaxaxe 0 points 35 points (+35|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I love the logic in this article. For those who couldn't stomach the whole thing, here were some of the points the article seemed to be making.

-1300+ men in 10 different countries aren't enough to present meaningful data to the scientists at Allure

-But, the study also gave the true answer that everyone already knows is true because you see it everywhere

-The methodology relies on the BMI scale, which has been thoroughly debunked, and thus produces meaningless results concerning health

-But the results also have grave implications for health, because the preferred BMI was around 19. This is underweight, and HAES doesn't apply to every size.

-In the abstract of the study, the scientist theorizes that men's sexual preferences for women who are fit and young comes from evolutionary pressures, due to those women being more fertile. The scientists at Allure thinks this sounds more like the bigotted ramblings of your grandmother, rather than actual scientific thinking.

-Instead, some magazine writer with likely a degree in some liberal arts field has the actual answer. Peoples' sexual preference is based purely on societal expectations. Fat, infertiley obese, old, ugly women are actually the most healthy and beautiful and suited to be a man's mate, but we've socially constructed eyes that can't see this, apparently.

-This study shows us the toxicity of modern society, helping us understand why we need more inclusivity in our standards of beauty.

-But this study also didn't tell us anything and shouldn't have been done.

I love it. It certainly didn't tell any women that, if they want a good selection of potential mates, that they should work out, eat right, and don't waste all their fertile years bitching about toxic masculinity on the internet. It seems like everyone likes science when it supports their narrative, and most people hate it when it raises data and conclusions to that don't support their preferred narrative.

0
10

[–] HamsterSlayer 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

But the results also have grave implications for health, because the preferred BMI was around 19. This is underweight

I thought under 18.5 was underweight?

0
10

[–] DevilsMonkey 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Under 18.5 is underweight.

0
1

[–] Chicup 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Being BMI is for both sexes, it errs for men on the high end. A man with a moderate amount of muscle will be healthy at bmi 25 or so. Likewise for women it errs on the low end and a woman who isn't a lifter type will be fine at 18.

0
8

[–] TwistedAnon 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Sure we men can suppress some parts of our biology, however I have literally no control over who I am attracted to or what makes my dick hard. I don't understand how they can't seem to grasp that. Since the part of my brain that does control that is healthy I'm not attracted to people who are obviously unhealthy.

0
3

[–] ohnellie 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

That's because you need to go to some sort of reassignment therapy. Your preferences are wrong, harmful, and backwards /s

0
8

[–] Runner4lyfe87 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Thank you for this, I couldn't handle reading the article.

0
6

[–] mk46gunner 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

It seems like everyone likes science when it supports their narrative, and most people hate it when it raises data and conclusions to that don't support their preferred narrative.

Why do you think there's such a proliferation of and mindless adherence to pseudo-science among zealots, religious, social justice, anti-vaxxers, etc.? People like to hear what they want to hear.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 12 points (+12|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
6

[–] HamsterSlayer 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Get out of here with your logical thinking skills, shitlord

0
4

[–] TriggeredLardTub 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Don't lesbians like skinny girls more, I mean besides the fat ones that are probably lesbian because they can't get a man of course

[–] [deleted] 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] Fatrification 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

I'm quite slim and get hit on by lesbians a lot idek why, I don't get hit on nearly as much by men.

0
1

[–] droopy2525 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I would like a study like this with lesbians, maybe some will lose weight when they realize that even females prefer thin girls.

0
2

[–] Revenantae 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

I used to work with a woman who was 100% lesbian. Not bi in the least. Her taste in women was exactly the same as a healthy man's.

0
7

[–] g33k3ss 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Only in history books and journalism does ranting about facts ever change those facts. I also love how "heteronormativity" (Hm, my Google dictionary doesn't know that word. I'm so surprised!) is a great evil. I am not exactly hetero myself, and even I know that from a biological and evolutionary standpoint, heterosexuality is normal for a reason.

0
7

[–] Bubblegun [S] 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

To be clear, I'm only calling the author a turncoat because she seems to be at a normal weight herself. Also I forgot to archive, sorry. Here it is.

0
1

[–] GrammarStalinist 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

She's pretty on the outside. It's too bad that on the inside she's a time bomb waiting to explode into a pile of lard and rotten cottage cheese.

0
6

[–] ETres 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

The author argued her point poorly. Whining doesn't win an argument. Also, that magazine is a crock of shit, judging from its content.

2
2

[–] KeksMex 2 points 2 points (+4|-2) ago 

Same magazine that had the butt ugly muslim model on the cover last month. Started arriving at my house unsolicited. That's how hard they are pushing the agenda.

1
5

[–] swimfanfan 1 points 5 points (+6|-1) ago 

I think everyone is naturally attracted to thin people, both because of cultural norms and because of health. I don't think evolution factors in and I think almost all evolutionary psychology is bullshit pseudoscience, and I don't think we needed another study telling us that men find young, thin women hot, so I agree with the author there. She lost me with the HAES shit though.

I was also annoyed by the study sensationalizing a 19 BMI as 'borderline underweight' because, while 19 is literally 1 number above the 'underweight' cutoff, those words imply something different. It makes those of us with a BMI of 19 sound like we're seconds away from becoming unhealthy. My BMI is 19 and I'd have to lose 5% of my total body weight to become underweight.

0
9

[–] mybrotherans 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Imagine all the REEEEing if you called BMI 24 "borderline overweight!"

0
4

[–] syntaxaxe 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Why do you think that evolutionary pressures do not factor in to mate selection?

Do you not believe in evolution, or do you have a theory of evolution where sexual selection doesn't play a meaningful role in the development of the gene pool and how suited a species is to its environment?

0
5

[–] Runner4lyfe87 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I'm with this one. Strong, healthy people are best suited to pass on genes so they make the best mates, evolutionary wise. Fat fucks are able to breed because we are no longer survival of the fittest.

2
1

[–] swimfanfan 2 points 1 points (+3|-2) ago 

I absolutely believe in evolution, which is why I think what you're saying is rooted in a fundamental misunderstanding of both what 'evolution' and what 'survival of the fittest' entail.

If what you were suggesting were true about evolution, 'sexual selection' would not change or fluctuate so widely with cultural norms and men would always be attracted to women with a particular waist-hip ratio and of a particular age. These things have fluctuated almost exactly in line with trends for all of modern history, rather than remaining static. For instance, in studies done less than 10 years ago, the ideal BMI for women was closer to 21, but as the cultural trend has shifted more toward thinner women with things like thigh gaps being in fashion, the ideal BMI (according to male observers) has lowered to 19.

There are elements that are innate and provable so far in line with evolutionary theory that mostly have to do with symmetry, hormones, etc. Things like waist-hip ratio were once widely considered to be a factor, but again, this has also fluctuated with time and fashion.

Evolution is something that takes place over millions of years, not hundreds, not thousands. It is not something that human beings are conscious of or that we can participate in. "Survival of the fittest' has nothing to do with physical fitness but with who is best adapted to their environment, so over time this can change with environmental changes and the organisms who are best adapted to their environment could be decidedly physically 'unfit' in ways.

Of course, this doesn't mean that being fat ever was or will be in fashion. But evolutionary psychology is largely junk science, usually from men who want to try to give scientific explanations for what their dicks want.

0
0

[–] alc0 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

FAs consider any woman under a 25bmi to be anorexic skinny bitches. Most even consider overweight (25-30) to be skinny bitches/sluts.

0
3

[–] LessRealsMoreFeels 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

( because heteronormativity )

Wow, this is what goes for writing articles now? Can't go more than 20 words without pointing out what a speshul snowflake she is.

0
3

[–] maltespier 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

In public she is a fat apologist. There is not a fucking chance she would go after a guy that was obese, not even fat cunts think they want to grind another fat cunt

load more comments ▼ (13 remaining)