# Finding a wide range of sizes attractive?



## LalaCity (Oct 22, 2010)

This has always made me curious: how many FAs here consider themselves "specialists" (i.e., you have _one_ preference -- let's say for SSBBW -- and _one alone_); and how many are "generalists" (you can find a woman attractive and sexually desirable whether she be 150 lbs or 650 lbs +)?

For that matter, does a particular shape (e.g., pear-shaped, hourglass, super-bellylicious) entirely decide your preference or is it possible to have a fluid appreciation for a broad palette of types in this regard?

I guess I'm just wondering how flexible you are in your taste, because it seems as though most people here operate from the point of a decided preference for one size that appeals to them exclusively. Maybe I am wrong?


----------



## Blockierer (Oct 22, 2010)

I'm a sucker for 300+ lbs women, height 5'0" to 5'7". I'm more attracted to pear-shaped Goddesses and / or Belly Queens.  But I can admire all shapes within my preferred weight range. Skinny women (below 220 lbs) are a no-go to me. :happy: Of course a woman should be witty, smart and charming.:bow:


----------



## Durin (Oct 22, 2010)

I think the FA's size range of desire is quite larger than most folks. That being said there is a certain magic in the SSBBW catagory. 450+


----------



## kioewen (Oct 22, 2010)

Fairly wide range. But a key factor here is _gaining._

A thinner woman (provided she is already at least minimally full-figured) who is gaining is more desirable, in many cases, than a larger woman who is diminishing in size.


----------



## LalaCity (Oct 22, 2010)

Thanks for the responses so far.

I realize this topic has probably been done to death already; I also realize you guys never tire of the subject...heh.


----------



## disconnectedsmile (Oct 22, 2010)

LalaCity said:


> ...and how many are "generalists" (you can find a woman attractive and sexually desirable whether she be 150 lbs or 650 lbs +)?


although i'm certainly not a "generalist" by any means, i definitely do have a standard.
i don't really put a numerical weight limit things, but i do have a certain minimum size requirement. it's more like a i-know-it-when-i-see-it kinda thing. i guess i can say i do prefer girls who are typically over a size 20. girls who are typically below a size 14 do little for me. and if a girl's under a size 10? forget it.



LalaCity said:


> For that matter, does a particular shape (e.g., pear-shaped, hourglass, super-bellylicious) entirely decide your preference or is it possible to have a fluid appreciation for a broad palette of types in this regard?


oh, i absolutely do _not_ have a broad palette.
i prefer girls who are all-over-fat or pear-shaped. girls who have emphasized fat in their thighs, hips, and butt are definitely my preference.
fat girls with legs smaller than their arms and apple shapes are not my cup o' tea.


----------



## Mishty (Oct 22, 2010)

disconnectedsmile said:


> fat girls with legs smaller than their arms .....



Is that even possible? 
I've seen some fatties with really tiny legs compared to their bellies(me included), but smaller than their arms?

I mean, I'm all for an example here.


----------



## disconnectedsmile (Oct 22, 2010)

Mishty said:


> Is that even possible?
> I've seen some fatties with really tiny legs compared to their bellies(me included), but smaller than their arms?
> 
> I mean, I'm all for an example here.


okay... so my statement _may_ have been a slight exaggeration (although i can and will say i have seen this body type twice or thrice in local malls and stuff).
but i think my point comes across


----------



## LalaCity (Oct 22, 2010)

Mishty said:


> Is that even possible?
> I've seen some fatties with really tiny legs compared to their bellies(me included), but smaller than their arms?
> 
> I mean, I'm all for an example here.



Maybe he means people who are sort of top-heavy with a large belly and full upper arms and a "slim" lower body? I can't really picture what he means, either...and I don't want this thread to turn into a "let me bash x, y, or z body type as 'gross.'"

I'd like it to stay generally positive, if possible.


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Oct 22, 2010)

I have fond memories of two heartbreakingly-beautiful women I met: one was six feet tall and weighed 400 pounds; the other was three feet tall and weighed forty pounds. I'm not necessarily restricted to within that range, however.


----------



## Jon Blaze (Oct 22, 2010)

I'm a generalist, and I really don't care for numbers, but more so appearance. 

I have a thin range and a sort of thick and above range. It's dependent on the person, but the latter is anywhere between 150-500ish from personal estimates. 

As for the second question:
For me shape doesn't entirely decide things, but I think the two sort of go together for me. How curvy someone can contribute a lot to how attractive I find them, and in some cases (I.e. Very thin, but curvy women) it can be more important than size. 

But I'm open to all shapes. It all depends on the person. Some people can rock the apple shape to my liking, some may not entice me as hourglasses, and so on. Not to mention all the other factors that go into it all.


----------



## CurvaceousBBWLover (Oct 22, 2010)

I like average sized women, pudgy women, and fat women. What matters to me is how well the woman wears her weight, whether her appearance is attractive to me and how mobile she is. I would not want to be with someone who needed a wheelchair or scooter to get around, but when I become elderly in 40 years, I might think differently.

I really don't have any hangups about numbers. I really like women with big breasts and hips, but size is negotiable depending on how much I like the lady's personality.


----------



## natepogue (Oct 23, 2010)

I need a pear shape gal. I don't mind if she's short and only 150lbs as long as its real thick in the thighs, butt, tummy area. 

I love BBW of course and SSBBW too.


----------



## IrishBard (Oct 23, 2010)

I generally am a sort of wide range kind of guy (mainly cause I'm mostly in it for the personality) first girl I dated looks positively tiny next to my current girlfriend (both in height and weight), and I've chatted up people who would make her feel slim in the past. Likewise, my current girlfriend is a very nice apple shapped BBW, but in the past I have attempted to get off with a Pear-shaped SSBBW (which failed rather embarrasingly) and with a girl who were just chubby hourglasses (interestingly enough, both of them hooked up later.)


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Oct 23, 2010)

CurvaceousBBWLover said:


> when I become elderly in 40 years, I might think differently.




I'm sorry, but you must be at least 18 to be on this board.


----------



## Webmaster (Oct 23, 2010)

I can see beauty and appeal in a wide variety of sizes and shapes and therefore would not consider myself a "specialist." However, if there is a common theme to what I personally like best, it's a figure dominated by a fat belly.



LalaCity said:


> This has always made me curious: how many FAs here consider themselves "specialists" (i.e., you have _one_ preference -- let's say for SSBBW -- and _one alone_); and how many are "generalists" (you can find a woman attractive and sexually desirable whether she be 150 lbs or 650 lbs +)?
> 
> For that matter, does a particular shape (e.g., pear-shaped, hourglass, super-bellylicious) entirely decide your preference or is it possible to have a fluid appreciation for a broad palette of types in this regard?
> 
> I guess I'm just wondering how flexible you are in your taste, because it seems as though most people here operate from the point of a decided preference for one size that appeals to them exclusively. Maybe I am wrong?


----------



## Jello404 (Oct 23, 2010)

disconnectedsmile said:


> fat girls with legs smaller than their arms and apple shapes are not my cup o' tea.



lmfao WHERE THE HELL DO THEY DO THAT AT? Ive never seen that lol 


AS A FFA I prefer females to be from 5'0-5'5 (cuz Im a shortie lol) and I'm attracted to medium BBWs (250+) to SSBBW like myself (450+) However I get strict when it comes to body shaped.Im a suck for a pear shaped girl or an hourglass figure. Throw in a big ass and Im al yours.


----------



## ManBeef (Oct 25, 2010)

My preference is 4'9"-5'7" with an hourglass shape. But I have been with everything. Quite a few skinnies too. It doesn't matter to me. As long as we mesh. Physical attraction can only hold up for so long


----------



## StickMan (Oct 25, 2010)

I've found that while larger women are much more attractive to me, smaller women (we're talking Hollywood Average skinny, here.) aren't exactly a turn-off. (My dating history is rather checkered. The first girl I got with was an exercise nut, the second was a recovering anorexic, and the girl I'm attempting to ask out now is also rather thin. I recently had a fling with a midsized BBW, but personality issues shut that one down rather quickly. :/ )


----------



## LovelyLiz (Oct 25, 2010)

StickMan said:


> I've found that while larger women are much more attractive to me, smaller women (we're talking Hollywood Average skinny, here.) aren't exactly a turn-off. (My dating history is rather checkered. The first girl I got with was an exercise nut, the second was a recovering anorexic, and the girl I'm attempting to ask out now is also rather thin. I recently had a fling with a midsized BBW, but personality issues shut that one down rather quickly. :/ )



That doesn't seem "checkered" to me. Just trying to clarify - because it seems like you dated 2 thin girls and now want to date a third thin girl, and then had a "fling" with one fat girl. Were there some other fat girls in the dating mix too?


----------



## sexysiciliangal (Oct 25, 2010)

are there special sites for women with big legs or men that like big legs?? i cant find any if they exist


----------



## AnnMarie (Oct 25, 2010)

sexysiciliangal said:


> are there special sites for women with big legs or men that like big legs?? i cant find any if they exist




**edit**

Do you mean social/dating sites? If so, it's against the rules to link to those here or place personals. However, this community is full of people on both sides of this, so I recommend you just hang out and meet people.


----------



## sexysiciliangal (Oct 25, 2010)

AnnMarie said:


> **edit**
> 
> Do you mean social/dating sites? If so, it's against the rules to link to those here or place personals. However, this community is full of people on both sides of this, so I recommend you just hang out and meet people.


thanks for your suggestion, i appreciate.


----------



## Elfcat (Oct 25, 2010)

LalaCity said:


> This has always made me curious: how many FAs here consider themselves "specialists" (i.e., you have _one_ preference -- let's say for SSBBW -- and _one alone_); and how many are "generalists" (you can find a woman attractive and sexually desirable whether she be 150 lbs or 650 lbs +)?



I have for a while called myself a "full-spectrum FA". My eyes key in to women of weight ranges from plump to supersize. Wide hips catch my eyes especially, but it's not an all-or-nothing issue.


----------



## Adrian (Oct 26, 2010)

I am very attracted to BBWs (approximately) dress size #22 and larger. SSBBWs are great but fewer in my experience. Now MS-BBW dress size #14 to #20, I can find attractive but, consistently think about them gaining weight. So being an MS-BBW to me, is a good starting point! A woman can be smaller the than a size #18 and attractive but, that esthetics. There is no lust in the smaller sizes for me.


----------



## StickMan (Oct 26, 2010)

mcbeth said:


> That doesn't seem "checkered" to me. Just trying to clarify - because it seems like you dated 2 thin girls and now want to date a third thin girl, and then had a "fling" with one fat girl. Were there some other fat girls in the dating mix too?



None that have ever been into me. I was homeschooled until my senior year of high school, and the only girls I've dated are while I've been at college. What I'm trying to say is, I've had crushes on several fat girls, but none were ever reciprocated. (And the one that I had a fling with came on to me first. I hadn't considered dating her before that point, mostly due to the aforementioned personality problems.)


----------



## jakub (Oct 26, 2010)

Unfortunately specialist..., BMI over 60 only.


----------



## Chimpi (Oct 26, 2010)

I don't really know...
I don't particularly care, either. I know when I'm attracted to someone and that's what matters to me. There may be tendencies to types I am attracted to, but I've never had the energy nor the desire to analyze it and classify myself as anything relating to this matter. At least not anymore.

I know I find fat women very erotic; very exotic; very sensual; very sexual; very beautiful; very feminine and desirable. That's what I know and that's what I stick to.


----------



## bmann0413 (Oct 28, 2010)

Hm, I guess you can say I'm a generalist, then. I'm pretty much attracted to any size woman. I just HAPPEN to find big women a little more attractive.


----------



## trackstar (Oct 28, 2010)

I'm kind of limited I guess. I like small to mid size bbw's. there have been alot of skinnier girls that have turned me on. My range is probably 140 - 225 (with a preference for 160-180ish.

Has anyone else gone through 'phases' of really liking breasts for a while and not caring about anything else, and then all of sudden being like "omg thighs" or belly or anything for that matter. for me I feel like I change every few months. 

I am always into gaining though :smitten:


----------



## Dromond (Oct 29, 2010)

As long as a woman has at least a little extra padding, I don't particularly worry about where she falls on the Plump/BBW/SSBBW scale. I'm also not into gaining for it's own sake. If she gains on her own, it's her body. I won't lie and say I wouldn't appreciate the extra cushion, but it's not that important. If she loses weight, I'm not fussed about that either. As I said, it's her body and her choice. If my wife were to ever get skinny (she doesn't want to be skinny, so it'll never happen) I wouldn't leave her. That would be a douchebag move. Love is more important by far than looks.


----------



## CurvaceousBBWLover (Oct 29, 2010)

Dr. Feelgood said:


> I'm sorry, but you must be at least 18 to be on this board.



Buddy, you just made a very erroneous assumption. I'm 34, almost 35.


----------



## velia (Oct 29, 2010)

I'm kinda a specialist when it comes to guys, but I feel like my preference is more flexible there. Anything under 200 on a 6ft or so guy is a bit too small for my liking, but I think I could go up to 450 or so there. And then my only concern would be mobility. I'm not into anyone being miserable because of mobility issues just so I can get off.

As far as women are concerned, I'd say I'm a bit more of a specialist about it. A woman 350+ is the ticket for me. That's not to say I don't find smaller BBWs (probably down to a size 22) attractive. 

The thing is, the person I'm with needs to be a person I love, not just a hot body adept in the sack. I couldn't be happy with a person based on their fatness alone. Mobility, as I mentioned is a big deal to me. I want to be damn sure that this ideal person knows their own personal boundaries and that I wouldn't be the final factor in whether they chose to gain or lose weight for themselves. Does that make sense? Eh, every time I go to post something like this, I'm concerned I'm going to offend someone.

On a slightly different note, I seem to know more generalists than I do specialists like myself, though as the OP mentioned, there seem to be more specialists 'round here.


----------



## Shosh (Oct 30, 2010)

CurvaceousBBWLover said:


> I like average sized women, pudgy women, and fat women. What matters to me is how well the woman wears her weight, whether her appearance is attractive to me and how mobile she is. I would not want to be with someone who needed a wheelchair or scooter to get around, but when I become elderly in 40 years, I might think differently.
> 
> I really don't have any hangups about numbers. I really like women with big breasts and hips, but size is negotiable depending on how much I like the lady's personality.



Ok what is wrong with a chick riding a scooter? I have one.

It is not due to immobility though.


----------



## Aurora (Oct 30, 2010)

I'm attracted to a wide variety of shapes and sizes (and personalities!), male or female, so I guess you could call me a generalist. I like both fat and not so fat, as long as they have some meat on them lol (no sticks, but muscle is okay). I have an upper limit though, so I'm not so much into the super sized folks as far as attraction goes. I can't give it a specific weight or something, it really depends on the person and how the weight is carried.


----------



## burtonboardrline (Oct 30, 2010)

If I am _physically_ attracted to someone it is because I think they have a pretty face, with the eyes being the most important part. I am a sucker for eyes. So basically, I will find a girl attractive at any size as long as she has pretty face/eyes. However, I guess I would say that I am more _sexually_ attracted to bigger girls. Idk if that is the right word, but I guess i prefer bigger girls. If there were two girls with the same face and different size bodies, I would choose the bigger one. And in terms of size, I prettymuch have no limit, however I do enjoy "plump, or BBW" girls like those on the bigcuties site, and also SSBBWs. But if you find a girl that is an SSBBW and has a pretty face, I will be speechless and drooling probably.


----------



## escapist (Nov 3, 2010)

Ok I know some people might think I'm nuts but I imagine those in this forum might understand...I normally have no attraction to Mariah Carey but now she's put on some lbs...uhhhh, WOW. :wubu:







Now the funny thing to me is I'm just not attracted to Mariah Carey smaller, but I am attracted to smaller women like Jessica Biel: 





I really think it just depends on the woman. Some women look better at different sizes and I personally don't have 1 feature that makes it a law that if you have this or that you would look best at this or that weight. It just is what it is and I don't normally try to understand it.


----------



## CastingPearls (Nov 3, 2010)

Wow. Mariah looks stunning.


----------



## LalaCity (Nov 3, 2010)

Mariah is pregnant, apparently. (Which, by the way, makes her weight gain temporarily "acceptable" in the eyes of the media. Expect to see a regular shit storm rain down upon her if she fails to take off the baby weight in record time, post-partum.)


----------



## natepogue (Nov 3, 2010)

LalaCity said:


> Mariah is pregnant, apparently. (Which, by the way, makes her weight gain temporarily "acceptable" in the eyes of the media. Expect to see a regular shit storm rain down upon her if she fails to take off the baby weight in record time, post-partum.)



Funny how that works 


Yes she does look nice.


----------



## trackstar (Nov 3, 2010)

escapist said:


> Now the funny thing to me is I'm just not attracted to Mariah Carey smaller, but I am attracted to smaller women like Jessica Biel:
> 
> I really think it just depends on the woman. Some women look better at different sizes and I personally don't have 1 feature that makes it a law that if you have this or that you would look best at this or that weight. It just is what it is and I don't normally try to understand it.



Yea, I know what you mean, some women just have something unexplainable that makes them attractive -- even if it goes against a pre-concieved 'type'.


----------



## escapist (Nov 4, 2010)

I have to agree with all the comments. She does have baby on board and yeah I guess I'm say'in I'd actually watch one of her videos if she did one as a plus sized performer most likely because I'd be in a semi state of stunned shock:smitten:...I guess thats where the phrase 'you look stunning' really comes from...kind of a duh, but I never thought about it. The reality is it already happened I watched that exact interview that the photo was from.

I know the world has given hell to other singers who refused to change like American Idol singer Kelly Clarkson (who I can hardly call a BBW) but she is not ashamed of her cute chub and nor should she be. You would think that parents and whatnot would embrace her for her own self acceptance and hope that her self-esteem would rub off on the young fans of such a performer. Instead I wouldn't be surprised if they join the heckling club just because its what the social group mind says is right.



trackstar said:


> Yea, I know what you mean, some women just have something unexplainable that makes them attractive -- even if it goes against a pre-concieved 'type'.



Yep, and sometimes it can almost blindside you. You start talking to one girl (thinking she could be the one) only to find the other woman has some kind of invisible pull on you and you just can't put you're finger on it....you can't explain it but man it can be really cool


----------



## Webmaster (Nov 5, 2010)

Attraction is an interesting thing, and you're never quite sure what might attract your attention. I also think that one's general preference -- i.e. what you generally consider your "type" -- is not necessarily identical with what might grab your sexual attention or imagination, and that again is different from small things -- like eyes, a nose, hair, a smile -- that can make someone very attractive. And then there's mannerisms and personality that can make someone appear very attractive when initially they were not.


----------



## Carrie (Nov 5, 2010)

Webmaster said:


> Attraction is an interesting thing, and you're never quite sure what might attract your attention. I also think that one's general preference -- i.e. what you generally consider your "type" -- is not necessarily identical with what might grab your sexual attention or imagination, and that again is different from small things -- like eyes, a nose, hair, a smile -- that can make someone very attractive. And then there's mannerisms and personality that can make someone appear very attractive when initially they were not.


This is so true. I find that my physical "type" is so frequently trumped by other qualities and intangibles I find attractive (humor, intelligence, great eyes/smile, etc.) that it almost becomes irrelevant.


----------



## LalaCity (Nov 5, 2010)

Webmaster said:


> Attraction is an interesting thing, and you're never quite sure what might attract your attention. I also think that one's general preference -- i.e. what you generally consider your "type" -- is not necessarily identical with what might grab your sexual attention or imagination, and that again is different from small things -- like eyes, a nose, hair, a smile -- that can make someone very attractive. And then there's mannerisms and personality that can make someone appear very attractive when initially they were not.



Yes. I may have some vague notion of a physical type that appeals to me, but the men I truly fall for usually blow that notion right out of the water. It's is a nice feeling, really. It always tickles me to realize I find some new and different physical quality attractive where once I hadn't considered it.


----------



## Candy_Coated_Clown (Nov 5, 2010)

LalaCity said:


> Mariah is pregnant, apparently. (Which, by the way, makes her weight gain temporarily "acceptable" in the eyes of the media. Expect to see a regular shit storm rain down upon her if she fails to take off the baby weight in record time, post-partum.)



At first, I had to really examine the photo but she looks great in that photo! The extra weight really gives her a cute look and she wears it well since she is naturally curvy and busty anyway. However, no way the media would accept her being that size or bigger after she gives birth.

I agree with your statement that she'll get a shitload of negative press if she stays that size long after delivery. Also, I wonder if Nick himself would mind if she stayed bigger. I seriously doubt he has any FA tendencies. 

My thinking is that it is more common for a lot of men to care about their woman's weight than not, all the while clamming die hard love for, IF the *woman gets too big* whether it is due to pregnancy or just gaining weight over time. 

Doesn't always mean he'll leave or cheat, but deep down, many would prefer their women to be smaller if they've gotten "too big" or bigger than what they're comfortable with.

I think this is why I am bothered a great deal by men who have found me far more attractive after I've lost a lot of weight in the past, men who *also knew me* when I was larger. They can't help being more attracted to a smaller build and that's fine, but I wouldn't date a guy who'd want to date me smaller knowing I've been bigger and that I could very likely be big again. Not sure if this makes any sense. I think a guy that like would always expect me to stay and be smaller, so although I'd be LOOKING the part after having lost weight in this scenario, I still would not really be his type. Maybe that sounds crazy or confusing, but trying to explain that thought process.


----------



## Tad (Nov 5, 2010)

Just to mention that more than one woman has commented on the inverse around here regarding FAs, that they feel that if they've put on some extra degree of weight they get more attention, but they are pretty sure that if they lose down to a size they are more comfortable at those guys would not be as interested.

Physical attraction and love for the person interact in weird and often uncomfortable ways.


----------



## extra_m13 (Nov 10, 2010)

hot topic i guess. i enjoy being with chubby girls but yes, the most exciting thing is a women gaining. that beats them alll, sizes and shaped =)


----------



## Oirish (Nov 10, 2010)

I've said this at least a few times before but I really am an equal opportunist. Of course, I'm on this board and am very attracted to bbw's and ssbbw's but I am quite fond of thin girls too. There are a lot of factors that contribute to my being attracted. Sure, personality is a factor. That's the case for anyone with a pulse unless they're completely shallow. I really do find a shapely thin form extremely attractive. I also love fat girls and all sizes in between. I can't really generalize what attracts me to a woman. Maybe the feeder aspect of myself wants to fatten up those thin girls or something but I still find myself gawking their direction as much as I do any big girl.


----------



## JBfromNH (Nov 10, 2010)

sexysiciliangal said:


> are there special sites for women with big legs or men that like big legs?? i cant find any if they exist



I am not aware of one- usually there are ones for boobs and butts but no big legs. Sounds like a yummy idea. Jbfrom NH


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (Nov 10, 2010)

Webmaster said:


> Attraction is an interesting thing, and you're never quite sure what might attract your attention. I also think that one's general preference -- i.e. what you generally consider your "type" -- is not necessarily identical with what might grab your sexual attention or imagination, and that again is different from small things -- like eyes, a nose, hair, a smile -- that can make someone very attractive. And then there's mannerisms and personality that can make someone appear very attractive when initially they were not.



"Sometimes there's one with big bluue eyes, cute as a bunny,
With hair down to here, and plenty of money,
And just when you think she's the one in the world,
Your heart gets stolen by some mousey little girl."

--The Lovin' Spoonful, "Did You Ever Have To Make Up Your Mind?"


----------



## iglooboy55 (Nov 10, 2010)

Beauty Admirer
I was talking to Big Cutie Brooke and her friend at the recent bash, and she asked me if I was an FA, I said yes. Her man friend who was there told me he was a Beauty Admirer, and his was so much better. We don't need to be tied down by labels, like if you find larger girls attractive, you're an FA. In my opinion, there are so many ways that a girl can be beautiful, she doesn't just have to be up in the 500s or 400s or 300s or 200s. Almost all of the girls I've been with were under 150, but smaller girls can be just as attractive and sexy as the larger. If you keep an open mind and your hormones under control, you'll be able to find beauty in so many more places than girls with bellies down to their knees, 60 inch waists, and GG bra sizes. 
Talking about shape, however, I love the booty


----------



## Forgotten_Futures (Nov 10, 2010)

The range of women I find attractive is so ridiculous as to defy logic. I cannot definitively state what _is_ my type, just what _isn't_ my type.

For example:
The only female assistant manager at work is an average height (5' 5" - 5' 7") twig with almost no curves to speak of. She also smokes, which is typically a huge turn off for me. And yet, I find her incredibly attractive, because of her face (smile, eyes, nose, ears) and her personality. On the other extreme, one of our regular customers is nearly my height (I'd guess 6', give or take), and _quite_ heavy - definitely into the SSBBW range. Her shape is more or less all-around fat. Her single most pronounced feature is her hips, though her whole body is fairly wide, and her belly doesn't have much hang because she has a large waist. And I find her incredibly attractive.

In general, though, I prefer bottom heavy plumpers, women with noticeable chubbiness around the middle, hips, thighs, and ass. I generally prefer breasts below C-cup, arms not too big. The part that really knocks out a lot of larger BBWs and SSBBWs is that I have a thing for jawlines and cheekbones (I get a serious thrill running my tongue along a woman's jawbone). Of all the bones in the body, these are the only two I *like* to see. Anyone with enough jowls or chins to hide their facial structure is pretty much right out (sorry).

My either minor limitation is height. I don't like women taller than me, and I generally prefer either tall or very short (both have STRONG natural dominance/submissiveness factors), but average is quite alright too = P


----------



## ZainTheInsane (Nov 16, 2010)

I personally find pear-shaped women to be the most attractive, though occasionally belly or breast heavy women attract me.

For me however, only a small focus is on the woman's body itself. My prime focus is her face. Specifically the shape, and proportions of it. I find specific types of faces very attractive. Namely women who tend towards Heart, Diamond, or Oval shaped faces. The features must fit the face their in, and work well together. I'm a fan of a smaller double chin than a large one, but again that is dependent on what else is involved. So, for the most part, its the face which draws me in. The rest is just the icing on the cake!

Examples of some women who's faces I find attractive:
-My girlfriend's
-Scarlett Johannson
-Plump Princess
-Sweet&Fat
-Nadine Jansen
-BigCutieValerie
-Asshley


----------



## Scorsese86 (Nov 23, 2010)

Let's see... I love Tina Fey, Meghan McCain, Bristol Palin, Tatum O'Neal and Jessica Simpson. For their faces, really. It's impossible for me to be turned on by their bodies, actually.

Then there are the plus-size paysite models... who are pure perfection


----------



## illmatic840 (Nov 23, 2010)

I prefer a nice big juicy 450 pound SSBBW but I definetly still find girls on all sides of the spectrum attractive.


----------



## Zephirym (Nov 24, 2010)

In general I don't have a strict preference, though i do like larger women, in any sense of the word, a bit more than others. If you're cute, that does it for me. however, if we're going to talk about loving someone that's a whole different story.


----------



## Christov (Nov 26, 2010)

Don't actually care.


----------



## furious styles (Nov 26, 2010)

Christov said:


> Don't actually care.


----------



## bigcutiebrooke (Dec 7, 2010)

iglooboy55 said:


> Beauty Admirer
> I was talking to Big Cutie Brooke and her friend at the recent bash, and she asked me if I was an FA, I said yes. Her man friend who was there told me he was a Beauty Admirer, and his was so much better. We don't need to be tied down by labels, like if you find larger girls attractive, you're an FA. In my opinion, there are so many ways that a girl can be beautiful, she doesn't just have to be up in the 500s or 400s or 300s or 200s. Almost all of the girls I've been with were under 150, but smaller girls can be just as attractive and sexy as the larger. If you keep an open mind and your hormones under control, you'll be able to find beauty in so many more places than girls with bellies down to their knees, 60 inch waists, and GG bra sizes.
> Talking about shape, however, I love the booty



Hehe, I believe I called him and HA (hot admirer). It is true, if you are hot, you are hot, no matter what size! This goes for men and women in my opinion. I would call myself an HA any day! I love fat girls, fat boys, medium, skinny, as long as they are HOT and sexy and REALLY nice! The whole package for me!
Nice meeting you there sweetie!


----------



## HeavyDuty24 (Dec 11, 2010)

LalaCity said:


> This has always made me curious: how many FAs here consider themselves "specialists" (i.e., you have _one_ preference -- let's say for SSBBW -- and _one alone_); and how many are "generalists" (you can find a woman attractive and sexually desirable whether she be 150 lbs or 650 lbs +)?
> 
> For that matter, does a particular shape (e.g., pear-shaped, hourglass, super-bellylicious) entirely decide your preference or is it possible to have a fluid appreciation for a broad palette of types in this regard?
> 
> I guess I'm just wondering how flexible you are in your taste, because it seems as though most people here operate from the point of a decided preference for one size that appeals to them exclusively. Maybe I am wrong?



well i do find a wide range of women attractive.i don't put a huge emphasis on height,weight,or race.i actually do look at the person first and foremost.but i do think that BBW and SSBBW are the most beautiful though so i do perfer to be with them over other types.but if a girl liked me and we got along real good and hit it off i wouldn't demise her if she was like 120 pounds you know,but hopefully she would be MUCH MUCH bigger then that though.


----------



## The Orange Mage (Dec 11, 2010)

I do find a wide range attractive, but that's because I can find somewhat chubby people attractive, and I don't really have an upper limit. Easy to claim my "range" is wide when you can't find the other end!


----------



## agouderia (Dec 13, 2010)

Even though I find a wide range of sizes attractive in men and women, I confess I have recently been noticing I am seriously put off by really scrawny skinny people, often to the point I'm no longer objective in dealing with them.

Don't get me wrong, this does not affect my dealing with people who have a naturally small, delicate build - that doesn't bother me at all, since it mostly is proportionate to their features, making them attractive or unattractive based on a whole set of more objectifiable criteria.

No, it's more the people who are visibly too skinny for their build: The lollipop girls with heads disprotionally large to their emanciated bodies. Or men who seem to consist of skin, bones and sinew. 

I've noticed that I virtually do not listen to what these men have to say, do not take their statements seriously - whereas a big bear can sell me almost anything. (This prejudice most recently almost cost me employing the best handyman I ever had - fortunately my more objective neighbor talked me into taking him!)
And with this type of women it's not much better - I have very little patience with them, tend to brush off their opinions and concerns to an unfair degree.

Anybody else have this problem too?


----------



## CastingPearls (Dec 13, 2010)

agouderia said:


> Even though I find a wide range of sizes attractive in men and women, I confess I have recently been noticing I am seriously put off by really scrawny skinny people, often to the point I'm no longer objective in dealing with them.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, this does not affect my dealing with people who have a naturally small, delicate build - that doesn't bother me at all, since it mostly is proportionate to their features, making them attractive or unattractive based on a whole set of more objectifiable criteria.
> 
> ...


I'm not put off by the thinness of a person at all but I will admit that a fat guy could probably sell me or talk me into relatively anything under the right circumstances and if he's wearing a suit or trench coat or overcoat I'm mush.


----------



## Tad (Dec 13, 2010)

agouderia said:


> Even though I find a wide range of sizes attractive in men and women, I confess I have recently been noticing I am seriously put off by really scrawny skinny people, often to the point I'm no longer objective in dealing with them.
> 
> Don't get me wrong, this does not affect my dealing with people who have a naturally small, delicate build - that doesn't bother me at all, since it mostly is proportionate to their features, making them attractive or unattractive based on a whole set of more objectifiable criteria.
> 
> ...



To some degree, yes. I'm aware of it, and try to fight it, but it is there. I think it is a classic case of the halo/horns effect, where when you start by having a single positive or negative thing about someone you tend to associate other positive or negative things to them. People who are really emaciated strike me as likely having values quite different from mine on some pretty fundamental priorities, so it is easy to extend that to thinking that we won't connect in other areas either.


----------



## MrRabbit (Dec 13, 2010)

If we are talking about pure physical, body-type attraction, then I would say all BBWs approximately 275+ lbs. Between 200 and 275 lbs, mainly if they are belly-heavy. Below 200 lbs it will be very difficult to find a woman who I find sexually attractive.

Of course, there are other types of attractiveness as well, such as a cute face, which can come at any weight and of course the inner beauty!


----------



## Meddlecase (Dec 18, 2010)

I like women of all sizes. I'm more so attracted to women with great personality(and a good appetite for sex), but I do tend to prefer women with meat on their bones, namely the butt bone. That being said, it doesn't mean I'll pick a bbw over a skinny girl, every time. More like, 7/10.


----------



## patmcf (Dec 18, 2010)

LalaCity said:


> I guess I'm just wondering how flexible you are in your taste, because it seems as though most people here operate from the point of a decided preference for one size that appeals to them exclusively. Maybe I am wrong?



In recent years I have developed, or rather embraced, my preference for the big and beautiful. Initially, I dated thinner women because I did not know any better and it was not until I dated my first BBW that I was able to enjoy a truly fruitful sexual experience. From that point on I have strictly preferred big, beautiful women. Of course I have imagined what my "ideal" woman would look like; however, I am generally just attracted to someone who is fat because I find this sexy. This is down to a biological predisposition. It is what I like and I am not about to question it. 

However, the down side to being so particular is that I have ruled out a large portion of the female population. I can agree that many thin women are beautiful from an objective view, but I admittedly do not not find them to be subjectively attractive. There have been a few occasions wherein young women have expressed a certain interest in me. Friends will say that these women are absolutely beautiful and encourage me to pursue them. In all such occasions, however, these women have been thin. I feel a tremendous amount of guilt and I am constantly struck with the feeling that I am "missing out" whenever I turn down these girls because of my preference. Some may call me insane, but the attraction is just not there. 

I feel fortunate to know exactly what I like sexually. However, sometimes I do wish that my "range of attraction" was much more broad. It would make things easier I suppose.


----------



## HeavyDuty24 (Dec 19, 2010)

patmcf said:


> However, sometimes I do wish that my "range of attraction" was much more broad. It would make things easier I suppose.




that's why i am glad i find a wide range of women and races attractive.being open like that can lead to much more possibilities and oppurtunities.although i would perfer a BBW above all is,but as long as she has a good personality and we click,that is all that really matters to me...


----------



## some_guy85 (Dec 20, 2010)

I wouldn't lock myself completely into a particular range, but I do have a strong preference for extreme pear-shaped SSBBW


----------



## bloke_who_likes_bbw (Dec 22, 2010)

G'day,

I'm firstly attracted to a womans face and what is behind it. That is, a pretty face and a pretty mind. 

I like big boobs and curvy bums, but have had my share of skinny girlfriends (face and mind are #1). 

There is definately too skinny - I don't like seeing ribs, hip-bones or collarbones. So anywhere between 65kg (130 lbs) and up to around 150kg (330lbs) is good for me. I prefer girls over 175cm (5'9").



Bwlb


----------



## Forgotten_Futures (Dec 23, 2010)

Hmm, collar bones I actually like... like to trace them with the tip of my tongue. So I guess I like cheek bones, jaw bones, and collar bones. The rest can all stay hidden under a nice layer of soft, sexy fat.


----------



## CastingPearls (Dec 23, 2010)

Forgotten_Futures said:


> Hmm, collar bones I actually like... like to trace them with the tip of my tongue. So I guess I like cheek bones, jaw bones, and collar bones. The rest can all stay hidden under a nice layer of soft, sexy fat.


Funny...all three are pretty much prominent on me and I weigh WELL over that guy's limit. Heh.


----------



## olly5764 (Dec 27, 2010)

it would be narrow minded of me to say I would never find a slim girl attractice, and I have gone for a couple of girls of 150 lbs in the past, butu I do prefere bigger girls, as in 600 lbs or bigger


----------



## eriofool (Dec 28, 2010)

yeah im an equal oppurtunity dater i would say.
last gf was like 110 pounds and thin but she was very nice, pretty and caring and we got along well. 
current girl im seeing is about 245 and just as pretty in my eyes but in a different way. 
im just attracted to beautiful women, both in and out.
you could be stunning but vain and in my eyes it would make you alot less dateable than the opposit.


----------



## Dromond (Dec 28, 2010)

It baffles me how some people can state so definitively that below this number or above that number is a deal breaker. People are individuals, so what looks one way on one person will look completely different on another.

For instance, 300 lbs on a five foot tall woman will likely make her an SSBBW, whereas a six foot tall woman would carry the weight very differently. Even within the same height/weight range, body type plays the dominant role in how a woman (or man for that matter) looks. Numbers alone do not tell the story.


----------



## Forgotten_Futures (Dec 28, 2010)

Yeah, I'm bad at guessing numbers, so I don't even try = P Size ratios (proportions) are what really matters (physically, but we are talking physically, so...), since they scale with height and weight.


----------



## rarepearman (Jan 30, 2011)

Webmaster said:


> I can see beauty and appeal in a wide variety of sizes and shapes and therefore would not consider myself a "specialist." However, if there is a common theme to what I personally like best, it's a figure dominated by a fat belly.



i always thought your wife was a pear or hourglass conrad


----------



## Fatdoug373 (May 7, 2012)

for me, a woman definetly needs to have some fat on her belly. I'm fat and uncomfortable with a skinny woman feeling my flabby body. I need at least 50 lbs of extra weight and as much as 150 lbs or even more. I don't mind a woman that is fatter than me.


----------



## LoveBHMS (May 8, 2012)

Human sexuality is likely never going to be an exact science anyway.

I'm sure many FA (myself included) have been with a skinny person because that particular individual just "did something" for them. Just as many fat people have been with non-FAs. Many straight people have had homosexual encounters because they were turned on in a certain situation or because there was "just something about" that male/female.

I think we also sometimes miss the difference between aesthetics and sexuality. An FA can admire the beauty and elegance of a fashion model or the powerful muscles on a female marathoner but not be turned on by them.


----------



## MRdobolina (May 8, 2012)

attractive is attractive .. nuff said


----------



## sco17 (May 13, 2012)

I would definitely classify myself as someone who finds a wide range of sizes attractive. Camryn Manheim and Eva Longoria are both hot in my book.


----------



## Captain Save (May 15, 2012)

While I generally gravitate sexually towards the soft, curvy and cuddly, I also have those exceptions to the rule that captivate my imagination. I would imagine it's like porn; you can't necessarily define it in specific terms, but you know it when you see it, and it's different for everyone.


----------



## ScreamingChicken (May 15, 2012)

For myself , it was always short and fat. Heights ranged from 5 foot to 5'4, weight from 185 to 300. Blonde or light brown hair. Hourglass or pear shape .I liked what I liked,, I knew it, and I never seemed to have deviated from those preferences until recently.

I have begun seeing a 5'10" SSBBW , strawberry blonde, blue eyes, freckles, with an amazing apple figure. Add in to the equation that she carries this aura of confidence, comfort in her own skin, smarts, warmth, sense of humor, and sensuality and all I can say is wow...just wow.
,


----------



## Webmaster (May 15, 2012)

This topic pops up quite often. And there's simply not a good, all-encompassing answer. Sexual fantasies and desire may make a certain size or body shape seem all that matters. Deviating from those needs may feel like a sell-out and denial of who and what you truly are and want and need, or it may be a realization that at any given time, there are always conflicting visions of what we want and need in our lives. Finding the balance of what it truly is that, in the overall scheme of things, makes us happy and fulfilled is not easy at all. All you can hope for is that you make the right decisions.


----------



## The Fat Man (May 18, 2012)

Without question I'm of the "if a girl is pretty, she's pretty at whatever weight whether that's a hundred pounds or three hundred, makes no diff"... fantasy? Obviously when it comes to (for lack of a better word) porn, smaller girls just don't do it for me. Never have. My fantasies always involve girls of size. Real life personality and who they are play such a role, any question of size is just icing.


----------



## NewfieGal (May 19, 2012)

I was just reading through this thread and couldn't believe I didn't put something here already LOL  
I have to agree with some of the comments, I like what I like, sometimes it has been a guy who is small at times it has been a man who has a keg as opposed to a 6 pack(and we all know how I feel about 6 packs LOL), although I prefer a man to be a bit bigger or a lot bigger than "normal" I would not tell someone smaller that I couldn't like them, it depends on the person and how they treat you


Of course I would like him to be taller then me (at 5'3 thats not difficult) and other then that its all good


----------



## RabbitScorpion (May 20, 2012)

I'm definitely in the "wide range / acceptance" category. Though the "girl of my dreams" would be 5'0"/200, and an "appleglass" (top-heavy hourglass) shape, I've found ladies of many different shapes and sizes to be quite attractive over the years.


----------



## LifeInFL (May 27, 2012)

Personally, I've dated women of all sizes and I found them all attractive, it all comes down to personality. It's a little off topic, but I'm not very tall (5'8") so I'm usually attracted to women who are on the short side.


----------



## Weirdo890 (May 27, 2012)

Looking back, it's interesting to see how my preferences have changed as I've gotten older. When I first hit puberty, I found myself most attracted to "plumpers" (150-200 lbs. range). That expanded (no pun intended) as I got older and discovered Dims, and now I am heavily attracted to BBWs and SSBBWs.

Has that happened to anyone else, where your range of attraction has changed as you got older?


----------



## Jon Blaze (May 27, 2012)

Weirdo890 said:


> Looking back, it's interesting to see how my preferences have changed as I've gotten older. When I first hit puberty, I found myself most attracted to "plumpers" (150-200 lbs. range). That expanded (no pun intended) as I got older and discovered Dims, and now I am heavily attracted to BBWs and SSBBWs.
> 
> Has that happened to anyone else, where your range of attraction has changed as you got older?



Yes, but it got wider in both directions really for me. Especially shapes. I used to be only into hourglasses, but my bread and butter became busty apple-shaped women. Now I'm open to a plethora of shapes.


----------



## Weirdo890 (May 27, 2012)

Jon Blaze said:


> Yes, but it got wider in both directions really for me. Especially shapes. I used to be only into hourglasses, but my bread and butter became busty apple-shaped women. Now I'm open to a plethora of shapes.



It's fascinating to see how one's sexuality seems to develop as time goes by. I wonder why that is. I guess I shouldn't wonder too much about it, but simply enjoy it.


----------



## Jon Blaze (May 27, 2012)

Weirdo890 said:


> It's fascinating to see how one's sexuality seems to develop as time goes by. I wonder why that is. I guess I shouldn't wonder too much about it, but simply enjoy it.



Nothing wrong with thinking about it. Just never question it.


----------



## Weirdo890 (May 27, 2012)

Jon Blaze said:


> Nothing wrong with thinking about it. Just never question it.



Right on brother.


----------



## bbwbud (Jun 5, 2012)

Friendly and sexy comes in all sizes, and so does intelligence. Please forgive me for speaking ill of the departed, but this was proven to me by the late Anna Nicole Smith. How could I not be turned on by a busty, BBW bazillionaire who was not opposed to posing nude, but she just didn't do it for me. And a friendly small woman with come hither eyes and a beautiful smile will bet me worked up as much as a generous chest and a yummy tummy. It does take all kinds in this world.


----------



## ClashCityRocker (Jun 6, 2012)

bbwbud said:


> Friendly and sexy comes in all sizes, and so does intelligence. Please forgive me for speaking ill of the departed, but this was proven to me by the late Anna Nicole Smith. How could I not be turned on by a busty, BBW bazillionaire who was not opposed to posing nude, but she just didn't do it for me. And a friendly small woman with come hither eyes and a beautiful smile will bet me worked up as much as a generous chest and a yummy tummy. It does take all kinds in this world.



truth! there are attractive women of all sizes..their bodies are part of who they are..those that understand and embrace that exude appeal naturally.

but i sure do love me some bbw's..:smitten:


----------



## Falling Boy (Jun 6, 2012)

Weirdo890 said:


> Looking back, it's interesting to see how my preferences have changed as I've gotten older. When I first hit puberty, I found myself most attracted to "plumpers" (150-200 lbs. range). That expanded (no pun intended) as I got older and discovered Dims, and now I am heavily attracted to BBWs and SSBBWs.
> 
> Has that happened to anyone else, where your range of attraction has changed as you got older?



Very true for me as well. I typically find ladies of all shapes and sizes attractive but I will admit that as I have gotten older and "experienced" more the BBW's and SSBBW's are big head turners for me. I think maybe it took me longer to erase the old teachings that fat=bad. Early on I always felt that I was weird or different for what I liked and tended to gravitate towards "safe" girls aka curvy because I was in the closet for lack of a better term.


----------



## Wheels and the Legman (Jun 27, 2012)

I'm actually attracted to all sizes of women. I would never not date someone based on their body shape. I wouldn't be as attracted to them as I am to bbws though. I guess my perfect range would be 180 - 300.


----------



## Jah (Jul 3, 2012)

I think personality is most important but generally I'm attracted to anywhere from slightly chubby to super size.


----------



## The Orange Mage (Jul 3, 2012)

Weirdo890 said:


> Looking back, it's interesting to see how my preferences have changed as I've gotten older. When I first hit puberty, I found myself most attracted to "plumpers" (150-200 lbs. range). That expanded (no pun intended) as I got older and discovered Dims, and now I am heavily attracted to BBWs and SSBBWs.
> 
> Has that happened to anyone else, where your range of attraction has changed as you got older?



Definitely building up a tolerance. First experiences were with someone a littler over 200 lbs. Then I had a few short times with some ladies nearly double that. I can't go back, now! :doh:


----------



## James (Jul 3, 2012)

A sage friend had some thoughts on this topic that I am inclined to agree with. First up, I don't think there is any obligation to date people of a particular size and I think many FAs (and non-FAs) do experience genuine attractions toward people that aren't physically their type. I think that, in truth, the attraction is in these cases is driven by the personality; the intellectual connection; and the quality of the personal rapport that exists. Essentially, these things win out over (or in spite of) the core aesthetic being absent. That isn't to diminish or invalidate those things - just to say that the aesthetic attraction is not a primary ingredient of the connection. So what my friend was saying about this is that all that is fine... until the relationship hits a rocky patch. It might seem a bit base but the fact is that in these times, the jump off point for renewing the relationship is usually through sex. And this kind of make up sex is driven by the fact that in spite of having differences, you are still extremely physically attracted to the person on an aesthetic level. If you aren't feeling all of those other non-physical things toward a person at that point then you'll feel a lot less inclined to stick at the relationship and give it another chance. Of course... if the relationship doesn't have those anyway then this might not always be for the best but that's another matter!


----------



## Angel (Jul 4, 2012)

James said:


> until the relationship hits a rocky patch. It might seem a bit base but the fact is that in these times, the jump off point for renewing the relationship is usually through sex. And this kind of make up sex is driven by the fact that in spite of having differences, you are still extremely physically attracted to the person on an aesthetic level. If you aren't feeling all of those other non-physical things toward a person at that point then you'll feel a lot less inclined to stick at the relationship and give it another chance. Of course... if the relationship doesn't have those anyway then this might not always be for the best but that's another matter!



_That_ has me thinking about a couple things. A "relationship" means different things to different people. For me a relationship should be about honesty and trust and mutual respect, what some may consider emotional aspects. From my experiences I have found that with the FAs I have been involved with, that it was the physical aspects they were more (or only!) interested in. They also seemed to think that their physical attraction to me would cause me to overlook or forgive their 'misbehaving' or whatever other issue there was. 

I guess it all comes down to what two individuals believe a relationship is and what that relationship is based upon. If one person is basing the relationship purely upon what they find physically attractive, and believes _that_ will *solve* any or every issue that may arise, and the other person who is looking more for an emotional connection that is based upon honesty, trust, and mutual respect probably will feel taken for granted and even possibly _used_ when Mr. OhYourFatBodyIsSoooSexyToMe thinks him expressing the lust he feels is going to smoothe everything over. 

Even if I am extremely physically attracted to someone, and / or extremely emotionally attracted to them, and / or in love with them, the fact that they are attracted to my fat body isn't an acceptable excuse for them acting disrespectful towards me or is it a get-out-of-jail-free-card. Maybe It's just that I don't even believe in "make up sex" at all because by the time a relationship has hit that kind of low, the other person has already shown their true colors, and physical sex is just that - a physical act. At that point there is usually nothing left worth persuing or fighting for. 

That's just me, though.


----------



## LoveBHMS (Jul 4, 2012)

There is a fairly prevalent view on here and in the FA community in general that sexuality and physical attraction form the core of a relationship. Many feel a relationship isn't whole or complete without it. What James seems to be relating is that sex really is the glue that holds it all together.

All that may be true in some cases and for some people but I don't believe it's always the case. Plenty of happy and successful relationships are based on other factors and it's really about the needs and values of those involved. I honestly think in some cases having a sexual attraction can interfere with happiness as it may cause somebody to pursue the "wrong" relationship or may hold together one that's unhealthy or unsatisfying.

As far as being attracted to a wide range of sizes, sexuality is hardly a science. I self ascribe as a heterosexual FA. In a few cases I've been attracted to thin men. Those attractions develop through factors apart from body size but they are sexual attractions. They aren't lesser sexual attractions if the men aren't fat and they aren't less intense.


----------



## James (Jul 6, 2012)

Saw this on jezebel today - and granted, while the subject matter of sex on first dates is not exactly the same as I what I was referring to in my earlier post, their quote from the associated study rang a bell;



> _What they discovered was a bit surprising  love and sexual desire both activate the striatum, showing a continuum from sexual desire to love. _
> 
> _Each feeling impacts a different area of the striatum._
> 
> ...


----------



## James (Jul 7, 2012)

LoveBHMS said:


> All that may be true in some cases and for some people but I don't believe it's always the case. Plenty of happy and successful relationships are based on other factors and it's really about the needs and values of those involved. I honestly think in some cases having a sexual attraction can interfere with happiness as it may cause somebody to pursue the "wrong" relationship or may hold together one that's unhealthy or unsatisfying.


 
In principle, I definitely agree with this but I also think that the inverse is at least equally true in most (if not the vast majority of) FA cases. Having a sexual attraction for a particular aesthetic can interfere with happiness but equally so can persuing a relationship where it is absent. For both parties.

I don't think that FAs are fundamentally different from non FAs in this regard. With the only significant variation in outcomes arising from the manifestations of fat stigma as they influence the willingness to give and receive size-related aesthetic appreciation.


----------



## bigrich711 (Jul 7, 2012)

The ONLY physical preference that I have is for a woman to have a big ass and thick thighs. I've dated 100 pound women, 300 pound women, and every size in between. I have no sexual attraction to women without asses. If it's just a wide ass, it's not what I'm looking for. She's got to have a bubble butt. I mean, I want that thing to stick out. I wanna be able to put a drink on it when she's standing up.. Everything else depends on the mind and heart. I like a sweet, nurturing, intelligent woman that can keep me in line. I'm not a submissive man by any means whatsoever, though. I'm actually VERY dominant. If a woman can handle me without getting loud, holding something against/from me, and still calm me down... she's a keeper.


----------



## bigrich711 (Jul 7, 2012)

bigrich711 said:


> The ONLY physical preference that I have is for a woman to have a big ass and thick thighs.



Oh, and cute, maintained feet would be a plus, too.


----------



## happyfatlover (Oct 21, 2012)

When reading through this thread, I realise that fat admirers are truly blessed because the body of a fat woman offers a huge variety of attractiveness. 

When a woman weighs about 250-300 pounds at let's say 5'5, she's of course fat and she carries an excess of 100 or more pounds of body. Isn't it the excess of unnecessary body fat that turns us on?

This fat covers the entire body, but it's not evenly distributed. Some women have huge bellies and thin, yes thin thighs. Others have very fat thighs they can barely walk and not even a belly. I think you get the point.

As far as I am concerned, I prefer an even distribution of the fat with a huge belly as highlight. I love harmonious proportions: Fat everywhere, a round face, a double chin, a thick neck, a thick layer of fat on the back, fat arms, a large butt, fat thighs/legs and an outstandingly fat double belly. Rather small boobs.

I love women of such proportions at all sizes beyond 250 pounds, even 500 pounds or more.

But I wouldn't want to live with an extremely fat woman because it's not very practical to me. 

My wife has reached her peak at 290 pounds which is certainly the limit for a healthy and mobile life. We love sports, walking, swimming, ice skating, cycling etc. Of course, we love to eat too, go figure. She stores her excess of body fat exactly the way I love it, very well rounded indeed. When she sits, her huge belly wells forth, and my fingertips don't touch each other when I wrap my arms around her.


----------



## I'm Not Zoidberg (Dec 12, 2012)

From a purely physical perspective I'm open to pretty much all body types, from very thin to SSBBW and everything in between. There's no particular rhyme or reason. Either I find a woman physically attractive, or I don't - and as simplistic as it sounds, that's pretty much all there is to it. Ultimately, size is seldom a factor.

That said, if I had to choose one body type over all others, I think it would be a woman of "average" to slightly chubby build overall, but with a prominent, protruding belly...the kind that at first glance appears pregnant, but is actually all soft, squeezable fat. Add some love handles and a good overhang in front, and I'm a happy man! 

Also, I'll second the comment about nice feet. I'm very flexible on body type, but pretty feet are a must.


----------



## loopytheone (Dec 14, 2012)

The lightest person I've ever found attractive was 5'9 and 85lbs and the biggest I've found attractive was the same height and around 440lbs. One female, one male. So it is suffice to say that for me, weight isn't important for me find someone attractive, even if I do think chubby things are cute!


----------



## jigenbakuda (Dec 22, 2012)

LalaCity said:


> This has always made me curious: how many FAs here consider themselves "specialists" (i.e., you have _one_ preference -- let's say for SSBBW -- and _one alone_); and how many are "generalists" (you can find a woman attractive and sexually desirable whether she be 150 lbs or 650 lbs +)?
> 
> For that matter, does a particular shape (e.g., pear-shaped, hourglass, super-bellylicious) entirely decide your preference or is it possible to have a fluid appreciation for a broad palette of types in this regard?
> 
> I guess I'm just wondering how flexible you are in your taste, because it seems as though most people here operate from the point of a decided preference for one size that appeals to them exclusively. Maybe I am wrong?



I am a generalist. I have found 105 pound women attractive, I have found 350+ pound women attractive. I like women period. But to quote myself, every thin girl would look better thicker. Simply because fat feels good and its what I like...

I prefer pear shaped girls regardless of their size. I am INSTANTLY attracted to pear shaped women, but every woman has something sexy about her and I'd like to discover what that is  So I have been with all kinds of women.

So in short, I have clear preferences, but that does not exclude any woman of any size, creed, race, or religion... Cause there are too many sexy women for that foolishness, lol.


----------



## ~KawaiiFFA~ (Dec 24, 2012)

I can be attracted to all kinds of people. (Men, women, non-binary folks, etc.) To me things like race, weight, or gender are irrelevant in the end...an attractive person is an attractive person.

That said, there are certain things that always initially catch my eye. I might find all types of people attractive, but I am most drawn to fat men and women, at least initially. I also find androgyny sexy, regardless of body type.

I find super-size people incredibly attractive...but in 8th grade I went to a dance with a guy-friend I had a crush on who was 85 pounds. We're still friends and he's still only 110. 

So I'll probably always have a strong preference for fat people (I wouldn't be on this board if I didn't) but I can appreciate beauty of all varieties. :happy: And as cliche as it sounds, personality goes a long way in making people (more or less) attractive to me.


----------



## Cobra Verde (Dec 24, 2012)

I'm disappointed that nobody has coined the term 'bi-sizeual' yet so I'll have to do it.


*bi-sizeual*


----------



## Jon Blaze (Dec 24, 2012)

Cobra Verde said:


> I'm disappointed that nobody has coined the term 'bi-sizeual' yet so I'll have to do it.
> 
> 
> *bi-sizeual*



It got coined a while ago. Generally spelled "Bisizual" though. Ann Marie coined it in what... 2006 I think? lol


----------



## ~KawaiiFFA~ (Dec 25, 2012)

Jon Blaze said:


> It got coined a while ago. Generally spelled "Bisizual" though. Ann Marie coined it in what... 2006 I think? lol



Ha, I've been using that for a while. Or maybe it should be pansizual?!


----------



## x0emnem0x (Dec 26, 2012)

Cobra Verde said:


> I'm disappointed that nobody has coined the term 'bi-sizeual' yet so I'll have to do it.
> 
> 
> *bi-sizeual*



I've never heard of this until the other day when someone from Dims said something about it and I was like wait what. I dunno just not something I hear often. XD


----------



## CastingPearls (Dec 27, 2012)

~KawaiiFFA~ said:


> Ha, I've been using that for a while. Or maybe it should be pansizual?!


People use both. Whatever works.


----------



## Webmaster (Dec 27, 2012)

CastingPearls said:


> People use both. Whatever works.



And let's not forget variosizual!? Over my lifetime I have noticed that whatever size a beloved partner is, that's the size I like best.


----------



## balletguy (Dec 28, 2012)

I find women attractive. As long as they are nice, funny, and a good person. I don't just prefer woman who look like sticks. So yes a wide range of sizes i like i guess


----------

