Men, be honest, if your wife was fat

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy here. I don't know or care about womens dress sizes. Everyone looks better and is more attractive when they are fit though - and that includes us guys.

Disagree. I find muscles on women to be very unattractive.

Where did you read muscles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy here. I don't know or care about womens dress sizes. Everyone looks better and is more attractive when they are fit though - and that includes us guys.

Disagree. I find muscles on women to be very unattractive.

Where did you read muscles?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy here. I don't know or care about womens dress sizes. Everyone looks better and is more attractive when they are fit though - and that includes us guys.

Disagree. I find muscles on women to be very unattractive.

Where did you read muscles?

"when they are fit though - and that includes us guys."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy here. I don't know or care about womens dress sizes. Everyone looks better and is more attractive when they are fit though - and that includes us guys.

Disagree. I find muscles on women to be very unattractive.

Where did you read muscles?

"when they are fit though - and that includes us guys."


Fit is a euphemism for thin, muscles or no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy here. I don't know or care about womens dress sizes. Everyone looks better and is more attractive when they are fit though - and that includes us guys.

Disagree. I find muscles on women to be very unattractive.

Where did you read muscles?

"when they are fit though - and that includes us guys."

Fit is a euphemism for thin, muscles or no.

Not really...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Guy here. I don't know or care about womens dress sizes. Everyone looks better and is more attractive when they are fit though - and that includes us guys.

Disagree. I find muscles on women to be very unattractive.

Where did you read muscles?

"when they are fit though - and that includes us guys."

Fit is a euphemism for thin, muscles or no.

Not really...

You wouldn't happen to be "big boned" would you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:size 14 is considered average in the US.

Average if you're a walrus. 14 is NOT attractive at any height. Those who say it is are fat-out wrong!

[Anonymous]

20 pages of troll bait?! wtf.

[Anonymous]

Yup, 20 pages. It's considered acceptable to fat shame women.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Go look at statues of fertility goddesses and Aphrodites. They all have full thighs, bellies, butts. This American obsession with adult women looking like adolescent boys is insane. If you really want an adolescent boy, go get yourself one.

This is what fat women tell themselves to feel better about their poor lifestyle choices. A fit woman does not, at all, look like an adolescent boy. But sure, keep devouring those twinkies while you blame everyone else for their lack of good taste.

I am really tired of this myth that classic paintings and statues depict a "healthier" type of woman, meaning fat. That's complete bullshit. Outside of Rubens, an outlier with his own personal issues, women on classical paintings are all conventionally trim. Classical Greek and Rodin statues are all of conventionally proportionate women. Go look. They are maybe one size larger than what would be considered ideal today, and they don't have chiseled muscles, but they are NOT fat. Your typical Greek woman in marble would be about 5'6'', smallish breasts, subtly rounded bellies, shapely legs, slender arms and shoulders. Enough with the bullshit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aphrodite_of_Knidos

By the standards of DCUM the Aphrodite of Knidos would be considered fat.

I don't think so, but given the predilection for size 0-2, and the horror of any signs of fat on a woman's body, that is the truth.

BTW, it's not just Rubens who painted zaftig women. He was not an outlier. Lots of paintings of ideal young women with double chins out there and thick arms.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You just proved my point. None of the images you posted support the "full butts, bellies, thighs" nonsense. The women in these pictures are height/weight proportionate, with small breasts and shapely legs. They are perhaps one size up from what is desired today, and their bellies are slightly rounded. But animate them, put them in today's clothes, and they would be imminently desirable. No one said anything about "protruding bones" model, most people realize that's a body designed to sell clothes, not attract desire.

The protruding belly was actually considered sexually desirable - it was a sign of a fertile gal.

[Anonymous]

given the predilection for size 0-2, and the horror of any signs of fat on a woman's body,

You're not competing with women who wear size 0. You're competing for men with women who aren't obese.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'd give my left tit to be a size 14, but the last thing I would want to do is attract guys who read DCUM.

LOL! You sound fun and I would be way more attracted to you than to that skinny braggy PP with her perfect measurements.

[Anonymous]

OP curious why you didn't address the question to people in general about their spouses, women as well as men?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yup, 20 pages. It's considered acceptable to fat shame women.

I'm not attracted to fat women. Why is that an issue? Some people are not attracted to skinny women, short women, tall women, whatever.

It's a shame we are no longer allowed to have opinions in America