Lean girls vs. "full-figured"?

Women are either built for comfort or built for speed.

 

Total B.S. If not utterly disingenuous, your reply shows that you are still being-- and I find it a shame that this word, ironically, is appropriate to describe the absence of rational thought, in your reply-- hysterical.

My, "argument," was a reply to MJ Davies' post, specifically about her objection to the use of the word, "girl," to apply to a woman. Here is the quote I put at the top of my reply (which you only excerpted, for your own response):

MJ Davies said: ↑
Yeah, not to be nitpicky, "girls" are females under the age of 12. "Young lady" is somewhere between 13 and 17 and a woman is 18+. Young lady is usually the preferred address when one does not know the other person's age and/or there is a significant age gap between the speaker and the female he is addressing.

Nobody goes around calling adult men "boys" (unless it's used in a derogatory way toward adult black males and that generally only happens with older people that are dyed-in-the-wool racists and refuse to treat non-white men as their equal).
<End Snip>

So my reply was ALL about this use of the word, "girl," to refer to an adult woman, in reply to that same idea, which I'd quoted from MJ's post. Then you attack this post of mine as being,
"The same CRAP woman been handed since one ever dared speak up about anything from unfair pay to being beaten freely by their husbands..." claiming, without citing your reason, that the mere fact that I'd used the term, "overly-sensitive," meant that I was treating MJ as though she were on, "her period and is being emotional." You add on top of this, that I am being, "effing condescending."

So I'm sorry to have to mansplain this to you, but if the part of MJ's quote, to which I am replying, is ALL ABOUT the "girl," terminology, and my reply is ALL ABOUT the "girl," terminology, and in your response, you "addressed (my) entire 'argument,' " that means that your reply is implicitly against my argument for the acceptability, in some cases, of the use of the word, "girl," to apply to a woman.

That you didn't actually mention anything from my argument, which you were supposedly addressing, with your baseless attack, is nothing for you to now hide behind (and, incidentally, takes a lot of balls). It only disproves your claim, in this quoted reply of yours, that you addressed my, "entire argument."

I did, in fact, in my reply, ask if your conclusions were drawn solely from my use of the words, "overly-sensitive," as if this description of a woman's view of ANYTHING, automatically is an, "effing condescending," and unfair charge, because of the known fact that women cannot ever be overly-sensitive. You did not answer this question, but it seems that is your only basis for your remarks.

Forgive me, for seeing that you need help with the math on this one, too-- but associating my comments, in any way, with wife-beating (as you did), alleging that they must be predicated on my assumption of a female "period," in play, and implying that my view is, "crap," while calling it, "effing condescending," are all far more indicative of the reaction of someone whose, "sensitive nerve," has been struck, than your fallaciously characterizing of my response as being off-base.

 

Meh, doesn't really matter to me, so long as it fits them well and they own it. I've been with both kinds. Both can be sexy.

 

I see nothing that would speak against a leg of this thread, comparing female perspectives on lean versus "big-boned," men; I actually think it would be an interesting counterpoint. The only reason, then, that men have been thus far excluded from the "judging," is a lack of anyone taking this tack, in their post. But now that you have opened up that line of commentary (to get the ball rolling, so to speak), we only need others to opine along with you, in this area.

 

I would've given your clever quip a "like," but, unfortunately, it's become apparent that there is heightened need for concern with how some participants may misread into remarks, in this particular thread (and I don't want to be accused of endorsing a post that is later condemned as being chauvinistic, or anti-woman).

 

FoxHastings said: ↑
Could you please show in the post of mine you quoted where I posted the word "girls" or "girl" ?

I can't find it.

I addressed your entire "argument" with :



""THERE IT IS ... the "when a woman complains, pat her on the head and tell her she's being overly sensitive....and assume she has her period and is emotional"

The same CRAP woman been handed since one ever dared speak up about anything from unfair pay to being beaten freely by their husbands....


Hey , MJ Davies wasn't that poster so nice when they "OK'd" your feminism....how effing condescending of him """""


But I must've hit a sensitive nerve...

I was addressing another poster and my comments were directed at sexists and their pat answers to women who DARE question them or disagree in general....but again , must've hit a nerve:

""THERE IT IS ... the "when a woman complains, pat her on the head and tell her she's being overly sensitive....and assume she has her period and is emotional"

The same CRAP woman been handed since one ever dared speak up about anything from unfair pay to being beaten freely by their husbands....


Hey , MJ Davies wasn't that poster so nice when they "OK'd" your feminism....how effing condescending of him """""

Every word is true and stands pat.


Here's some fun stuff: You: """That you didn't actually mention anything from my argument, which you were supposedly addressing, with your baseless attack, is nothing for you to now hide behind """

LOL, so now I'm hiding because you realize I wasn't addressing you ? Hilarious....as hilarious as your Completely Totally Sexist words here:


""""(and, incidentally, takes a lot of balls)""

HOW RAGINGLY sexist and I bet you don't even know it...it's too deeply ingrained.

 

It's about attraction....

Women have different criteria on what they find attractive. Some thought Ted Bundy was "hot". Or talent may make the man attractive. I'll wager Mick Jagger has spread more seed over the Earth than all of you put together. Wearing a Rolex and driving a Porsche may make a man more attractive no matter what he looks like. Overweight women surveyed found overweight men to be the least attractive. So what we have is the most attractive man would be handsome, rich and talented.

Men have much simpler requirements.

 

she doesn't like it if you call her "womanfriend" or "ladyfriend"

 

I am a fan of Mehgan Trainor
it's all about the bass song - search results (bing.com)

 

Full figured girl

 

Plus size rules!

 

Your replies are not doing your image any favors. Saying that you were, "addressing another poster," is as insincere a load of s**t as I've seen from any extremist on the Right: you were talking about my post. Therefore, it is disingenuous to suggest that you weren't alluding specifically to me--

As I said about your earlier, transparently false excuse-- implying that you had not been speaking of the topic of calling women, "girls," because you didn't mention that word, despite that being the only topic of my post which you quoted (though without most of my argument)-- this new attempt to avoid responsibility for what you posted reflects poorly on the litmus of truth which you employ, in your posts.

And you are now adding to your baseless character assassination, by using a backhanded method, above, of calling me a sexist (which is both wrong, and which you do w/out showing any justification) and saying that my answer was "pat." Once again, nothing could be farther from the truth. But you have established your disregard for that, in your crusade against any man who terms any woman's attitude, about anything, as manifesting, "sensitivity.''

On top of your erroneous assessment, you have still failed to produce a single line of my posts that supports any of your bad-mouthing of me (to the poster who you were, "addressing"). Your unsupported charges do not even qualify as debate, IMO. They are only so much black-balling.

Your continued,<COMMENT EDITED> attempts to paint my response as anything other than cool-headed, & logical, demonstrate the same inability on your part to do anything but make things up, and post your bogus conclusions with no demonstration of what you allege, other than my using the words, "over-sensitive," from which you have extrapolated everything else, that you falsely assert. It is this which inspires my animus, not your theoretical idea of some "nerve" in me, which you repeatedly claim to have hit. I do not care for people lodging false charges against me, and refusing to show their source for their opinion; strange as that may seem to you.

 

Speaking of women, I often find it disconcerting that PF members who I had always assumed were females because of their opinions and posting style, turn out to apparently be males based on their recent posts. I suppose that makes me a blatantly sexist person for expecting men to post with certain thoughts and feelings and women to post with certain thoughts and feelings, but oh well.

 

small butt, enormous tits. That's the thing for me. Oh, and well trained pelvic muscles.

 

Brains are really nice.... a little scary... but scary can be good.....


Can really, really, really intelligent women be hot?

?
Is Ms. Faith Goldy "hot?"

1. 
   
   
   • *
     Obviously....
     41 vote(s)
     89.1%
   • 
     No..... too smart..... and too pushy....
     3 vote(s)
     6.5%
   • 
     I think I may have to watch this again to decide????
     2 vote(s)
     4.3%

Change Your Vote







I have a suggestion for Ms. Faith Goldy's next major project......


Will Chris Sky be the next Prime Minister of Canada????

 

I believe the concept of full-figure is Barbara Eden. Not fat.

 

And, that's about it

 

The scale of 1 - 10 is an arbitrary opinion. I like to use the "pretty" - "non-pretty" concept. I divide "pretty" into categories: Cute, Hot, Beautiful, Gorgeous, Glamorous.

 

Holy hell, she may break your.........well, you know.

 

Neither is ideal to me. I hate the anorexic look and I remember in college I saw dozens of women daily who were more attractive than so-called models and I didn't go to Arizona State or anything like that. Athletic is nice as long as there is some feminine shape still.

You live in a different culture than me. Nobody uses the term young lady except being ironic or condescending. Girls is just a more informal way of saying women. Boys is just a more informal way of saying men. "Guys" is actually the informal word even for a mixed gendered group.

 

Quite specific! I have never known anyone to have such a regimented ratings system. Then again, I have no way of knowing that such systems aren't fairly common, if guys just aren't mentioning it.

In fact, I'm sure that I could even suggest an expansion of your categories, if I wished to entertain that line of thought. Instead, though, I have two questions about it:
1) Is there any relation between your descriptors, and scale? That is, among those considered, "pretty," are those terms hierarchically arranged? If so, is "Cute," at the top, or the bottom of the order? I know the natural assumption would be that this was your entrance level category, for "pretty." Some women, apparently, even take being called cute, as almost a slight; a kind of booby prize, if you'll forgive the expression. But, personally, I find that being incredibly cute-- of a woman, that is, not speaking about myself-- can be every bit as appealing as for a woman to be, "beautiful."

2) I'm curious as to your differentiation between "beautiful," and "gorgeous." Does that have anything to do with fat?

 

I agree with "cute." In fact, I'd put my first real girlfriend in high school as cute and when we broke up, it took me 5 years to get over her completely. If a guy put her on a 1-10 scale she'd be about a 6. But, with her other qualities, she shot right up to a 10. As for others, she may not be someone who they would entertain as a girlfriend. It comes down to personal choices and lots of other variables.
The winners of beauty contests are generally beautiful. Some are also gorgeous. Beautiful doesn't always make my putter stand up and flutter. But, gorgeous women do. They have a touch of hotness to them as well.
Glamorous are women who look great but don't necessarily turn everyone on. Many actresses and models are in this category. To me, Gwyneth Paltrow falls into this category.
Hotness doesn't mean a perfect 10 either. There's just something about a hot woman that you can't say no to and they don't have necessarily great boobs and so on. But, their face is hot! don't know if that makes sense.

I'm sure everyone's concept of these categories would be different. But, this is what define pretty as. I will have you know that I used to have a card since I was about 13 that said I am a member of the "Girl Watcher's Society of America." My friends used to call me radar as I knew when pretty girl was in the area. My head was always swiveling. lots of neck sprains...

Of course, women have their own categories as well.

 

No, not ever. This is a fallacy (and fantasy) propagated by unattractive old men, and is only ever exploited by a certain type of women. The kind of woman who isn't 'quality' enough to attract a high quality male.

There are several things women like - and none of them are wealth alone. We like good looks, but a sense of humour and dependability will always be more attractive than good looks. Physical fitness is another winner. You can be average looking, but if you're as fit as you can be (at any age), it shows you are determined, strong willed, committed, and not afraid of hard work. You are making the very best of whatever hand you were dealt, and that's very seductive.

As for the rolex & porsche .. if a man is a great person FIRST (funny, fit, and responsible etc), then any wealth is not especially relevant in our attraction.

 

Yes, I understood your meanings clearly, as with the "sexy," woman who just oozes sensuality. I would possibly disagree with you on a few points but, as you noted, this is to be expected for something as individual, even idiosyncratic, as what physical features (and other qualities) one finds attractive, in a woman.

If you don't mind a story, I used to wait tables with a woman with whom I used to swap appraisals, of which female customers were most attractive. It was she who began this practice-- I add for any haters out there, ready to condemn me for "objectifying women," which, in fact, was not the case for, as I previously posted, I believe that a woman's attitude, style, and overall "energy," are far more key ingredients in desirability, than superficial looks-- by calling my attention to one particular guest and saying how beautiful she found the woman to be (my co-worker was not gay). I actually, in my honest manner, admitted that I did not find that to be especially true. Anyway, this led her to want to know what qualified as my idea of attractive.

It was not long before we were visited by a family of regular customers, the wife & mother of which, I found extremely compelling. When my co-worker asked what I found so attractive, I explained that it was the way she was so calm, collected, pleasant and friendly, yet in a somewhat formal way-- not suggesting, "stuffiness," but rather of being very much in control of herself, presenting such a near perfect image while, bridled under her will, I felt there was so much raw, innate passion, just beneath the surface, which she held in check.

As the two of us took a rare chance to just stand, in front of the bar, I looked over at my waiter friend. Though we were wide out in the open, and the close restaurant was packed, I watched her mindlessly take her hand and place it just beneath her neck, as she continued to gaze out, at the diners. Then she very slowly, and caressingly snaked her hand downward, gently fingering her undone, top buttons, while sliding it down, between her small breasts, then over her abdomen, down to her belt line. I stood transfixed, watching what was such an erotic display, in front of the full restaurant, as if I were frozen in the moment (and I wouldn't doubt if my mouth had fallen partly open). I realized that she was demonstrating this quality of powerful female sensuality, completely under her control. It was quite the tease! That was also the first time that I ever saw her as attractive.

Returning to your comments, I do not think of Paltrow as "glamorous," though I don't follow any of the celebrity stuff. I do think of her as pretty, but in more of a "natural," way, than the word glamorous implies to me. She seems sort of the girl next door type, from what little I've seen of her, although certainly with a casual air of sophistication. The first word that comes to my mind, though not one of your categories, is "Sweet."

As for typical "beauty pageant," types, I rarely find them very appealing, or attractive. I've frequently watched the opening sequence of a pageant, but the few who might have caught my eye are usually all or most eliminated, in the first cut. I don't remember any that I was rooting for, making it to the end. For the sake of clarity to other readers, though this is understood, we should acknowledge that, of course, mere appearance and physical grace are not the only criterion the judges use.

I actually will commend one of the big pageants I peeked in on (I want to say "recently," but am not good with longer time intervals, so it may easily have been a decade ago) to see they were really taking this part of the pageant seriously, because all the young women had very impressive educational backgrounds, and many were involved in laudable, public service projects or charities. I think this might have had something to do with a woman taking over, in running the pageant but, as I implied, these are no more than a curiosity to me; I mean, who doesn't love a competition, and comparing your own impressions with the the assessments of the judges?

If I can use this reply to send out an invitation to any female members, this post reminded me how enjoyable it was to talk about female attractiveness, with a woman. So, maybe some kind of interplay of male & female perspectives, on feminine beauty, is something that might interest any of you?

 

someone made fun of her chicken legs when she was little, she showed them

just kidding, no idea who she is, but those are some leg muscles for sure