# Article in the paper today.....



## qwertyman173 (Feb 27, 2008)

Thought you might like!

http://www.metro.co.uk/metrosexual/article.html?in_article_id=105696&in_page_id=8




> It's a common assumption that women like their men with chiselled cheekbones and a taut stomach. Studies of male physical attractiveness tend to support this idea, with research by University College London finding that women like their men muscular (we're talking athletic, not Arnie) and with a narrow waist and wide shoulders.
> 
> Of course, there are always exceptions. David Beckham's rippled torso might make most girls go weak at the knees but, for some, fleshy wobbles are a huge turn-on.
> 
> ...


----------



## SnapDragon (Feb 27, 2008)

Thanks. I think we should all comment on it to raise the profile of 'chubby chasers', before all the idiot 'this is unhealthy' brigade get at it.

-SnapDragon.


----------



## stefanie (Feb 27, 2008)

I saw your comment, *SnapDragon*! Just left one myself, but I don't know how long it takes to go through moderation.

What I wrote: _

Some points for correction:
1. Not every man who likes bigger women is a "feeder."
2. Not every woman who likes bigger men "has dominance issues." 
2a. Fat men are not "unmasculine," even if they are softer.
3. Women who like big men are "less common?" Nonsense. There are an awful lot of fat guys with girlfriends/wives - obviously someone likes them.

Some good things about the article:
1. Thanks for recognizing that not everyone has to like the same thing, or find the same "type" attractive.
2. Nice illustration - I like the guy lifting the girl; that he's handsome; that the two subjects are interacting and seeming to have fun. So much better than headless torsos eating a giant sandwich. We could use more positive stock illustrations of fat people, especially men._


----------



## Miss (Feb 27, 2008)

I have to admit, I DO love the picture they used. The guy there is pretty handsome! I hope he isn't a thin guy in a fatsuit, though, that would disappoint me a lot.



> When men date fat women, they are called feeders and get pleasure from feeding her and being dominant. This could also be the case here.



This comment pissed me off no end, though ¬_¬


----------



## stefanie (Feb 27, 2008)

Miss said:


> I have to admit, I DO love the picture they used. The guy there is pretty handsome! I hope he isn't a thin guy in a fatsuit, though, that would disappoint me a lot.



He looks pretty for-real to me, with his chubby face, a little roundness on the arms, a bit of "back fat" - and that nice round middle. I do have a passionate hatred of fat suits, too ...



> This comment pissed me off no end, though ¬_¬



Yeah, me too - forgot to put that on the list. Ah, well.


----------



## flippedover (Feb 27, 2008)

Had my beef...although it got me so riled up that I ran out of characters! Don't know how long it takes to get through moderation, but my comments should be under 'Kate, Melbourne, Australia'


----------



## Miss (Feb 27, 2008)

I get pissed off about bad reporting, regardless of the topic - firstly, on an utterly feminist point, no one really cares what women are into sexually. Oh yes, Cosmopolitan may have popularized oral sex, but for most men, it doesn't seem to be about making her happy for the sake of it, but having another feather in his sexual caps (I have met exceptions to this rule, but still I'd say for a number of men this is the case). To actually make a point about this - for all the various fetishes men have, assuming they're not gay, there must be a female counterpart - and in this case, the fact that the female counterpart hasn't been explored is simply because no one had really bothered to find out what women really find attractive before.

Secondly, don't make assumptions about people until you get to know them. It's not always practice, but assuming women like being dominant over a man because he's not the socially encouraged shape is bullshit. It'd be like claiming women who fancy, say, men of different racial background to them is all about power. I'm sure there are a few, but generally, BULLSHIT!

Sorry about being a little over-serious, I'm really not usually like this, but any form of bad reporting, insidious sexism and to top it off, half-truthing about a a particular sexual preference just makes me angry. 

Doesn't mean that I don't appreciate the article though. I just wish papers like this who have a history of poor reporting and sensationalism would just leave stuff like this alone. 

...SO wanna be that girl, though


----------



## William (Feb 28, 2008)

Hi

Thanks for the article

I will comment after I finish this 3000 word Power-point Presentation on Project Management that is due Friday 

William


----------



## Melian (Feb 28, 2008)

William said:


> Hi
> 
> Thanks for the article
> 
> ...



Oh, you poor man.....


----------



## Dr. P Marshall (Feb 29, 2008)

On the one hand, it was kind of nice just to see an article that acknowledged our existence. 

BUT- I felt like FFAs were treated like some strange rare species just discovered. Actually, the entire "scientific" aspect just gets on my nerves sometimes. Who really cares why anybody likes what they like. It just sends the message that it's wrong somehow. That science has to come up with a reason why I like BHM. And yes, like pretty much everyone else here, I don't get the whole "dominance issue" thing. They didn't seem to be talking about physical dominance obviously, and to be honest, I'm not sure what they were talking about. I don't see how one person being thin can make them more "dominant" and that's what it seemed to be saying. (It also bugged me that it seemed to only be talking about thin FFAs.) If the implication is that a thin woman with a fat man has the "upper hand" because she has "more options" or is "more acceptable," well, that's just BS. First of all, relationships really shouldn't be power struggles. And secondly, when a person is in love, the person they are in love with pretty much has all the power. Hopefully, it goes both ways and there is balance, but my point is an FFA feels the same way about BHM that a non FFA feels about thin men. We are attracted to them, fall for them, and they are the men who excite or break our hearts. To imply anything else implies that FFAs aren't really FFAs, but rather women who go for "easier targets" in the dating pool. At least that's my opinion of statements like that. And it's just offensive.

I also didn't like the generalization that BHM never take the lead in a relationship. That may be true sometimes, but all the time? Come on. Also, I don't think playing hard to get is ever a great idea anyway(sorry to any who do), and although I know a woman said it in the article, it still seems sexist to me, this notion that women have to "play games" while courting. ( Of course, what do I know, I just play hard to want. )

Wow, reading over this, I think I need to get off my soapbox now. I didn't even realize I had brought it with me today. I apologize for my bad attitude, but I think I woke up on the wrong side of the bed this month. I think I need to seriously go to the mountains and chill out.


----------



## topher38 (Feb 29, 2008)

When folks write these kind of articles, my skin starts to crawl.. sounds like a man of my size will only get to date women with a fetish whats sad is society
thinks this is the case.. FFAs are sick and I'm a sad sorry person in need of gastric bypass, but I know this is total BS..
just my 2 cents
Topher


----------



## SnapDragon (Feb 29, 2008)

Dr. P Marshall said:


> Actually, the entire "scientific" aspect just gets on my nerves sometimes.



I'm a scientist, albeit an unemployed one, and I thoroughly agree with this. Science has no place in defining individuals' behaviour, the same as religion etc. has no place in science. I hate all this shite that gets spread about over what Men and Women are supposed to be like. So they did some statistical study, and overall there was some sort of trend, and a huge midden of bogus literature is published on the false assumption that an overall trend in a statistic is supposed to be reflective upon the life and habits of every individual alive. An overwhelming proportion of books written on how to make relationships work are from this perspective (like that rubbish 'men are from mars' which boils down to 'men are rude and have no feelings' and 'women are vague and stupid and can't read maps'), and we can only guess at the amount of damage that has been done to individuals and the general public in their perception of the opposite sex. I know women who seem to revel in getting together and slagging off men -- not individual men, but men as a collective -- and men who won't include a woman in their conversation.

Someone's sex should not be the definition of themselves. Gender is part of someone's description, i.e. I am a woman with black hair and I wear glasses. I am a PERSON, an individual, not a woman, not a black-haired person, or a bespectacled person. That's my physical description, not who I am. Any given person should strive to be an individual and be the best they can at what they want to do, not just conform to some dumb gender stereotype.

Note that I'm not talking about psychology. Psychology would involve analysing the actual personalities of fat fetishists of both sexes, rather than trying to analyse the populace as a whole and then trying to distort people so the fit a generalised mould. (Ya, I know some people round here don't like the term 'fetishist', but myself and others have countered that and I'm happy with it as a description of myself, so read it how you like)

And I hate fat suits too. They make the wearers look like overinflated sex dolls. And this is just as offensive as the old films where Caucasian people smeared boot polish on themselves and pretended to be black -- why does no-one outside the fat acceptance community seem to notice it? In twenty years' time from now, these films are going to be an embarrassing taboo.

-SnapDragon.


----------



## Lady Bella UK (Mar 2, 2008)

SnapDragon said:


> And I hate fat suits too. They make the wearers look like overinflated sex dolls. And this is just as offensive as the old films where Caucasian people smeared boot polish on themselves and pretended to be black -- why does no-one outside the fat acceptance community seem to notice it? In twenty years' time from now, these films are going to be an embarrassing taboo.
> 
> -SnapDragon.



Snapdragon, how I love your intelligent and stimulating posts. This is a very, very apt point. It annoys me too, as well as the attitude of - "we can't use a real fat person, oh no, it has to be a very normal sized celebrity wearing a ridiculous fat sat suit. Only then will it be seen as acceptable" 

Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.

Bella x


----------



## fat hiker (Mar 3, 2008)

I'm really glad Metro published that article, especially with that photo. Most Metro readers won't get past the photo, the caption, and the first four paragraphs, and will leave with a positive impression - especially if they've been repressing their desires for a BHM!


----------



## bellyboy (Mar 10, 2008)

Check it out, it's another documentary on ffa's

http://www.metro.co.uk/metrosexual/article.html?in_article_id=105696&in_page_id=8


----------



## SnapDragon (Mar 10, 2008)

When I click, I just get the same article as that one posted earlier.

-SnapDragon.


----------



## bellyboy (Mar 10, 2008)

Whoops...sorry...was it posted earlier? Didn't see it.


----------



## beckyking (Mar 11, 2008)

It's OK
I checked it before


----------



## Tina (Mar 11, 2008)

> unsightly muffin top



Nice. :blink:

I've known many women who like BHMs, because big guys make them feel smaller and accentuate the stereotyped physical differences between the sexes -- perhaps in the same way that some hard-bodied guys like us fat women.

Loved the photo in the article.


----------



## BigCutieSasha (Mar 17, 2008)

I don't know if this has been posted or not, but James showed me this article. Thought of all of you guys on the BHM/FFA board. Read it and let me know what you think. Do you agree with a lot of what is said? Do you disagree? I actually quite interested. 

Women Who Love Fat Men


----------



## LoveBHMS (Mar 17, 2008)

It somewhat cracks me up to see so much wrong stuff in a single article.

Like "men who like fat women are called feeders." No they're not. Men who are feeders are called feeders, not men who just like fat women. 

And calling fat guys "bears" is common in the gay community, no straight woman uses that term. You might say "he's so cute he's like a big teddy bear" but you would not call him a "bear."

The second worst part is where they say that men who date fat women have dominance "issues" and this may be true of women who like fat guys. What short sighted bullshit.

The absolute worst part is at the end where they list a number of celebrities who have gained weight and refer to each in a very negative way such as saying one has become a "recluse" due to his extra pounds or pointing out that a Russell Crowe is "no gladiator" anymore. If these guys are unhappy with their weight, it's rude and tabloidy to point it out. Why could they not have pointed out an already large celebrity such as John Goodman or Kevin James, or list a few fat guys who were *successful* at higher weights such as mentioning who has a longtime marriage or a successful movie out right now?


----------



## Tychondarova (Mar 17, 2008)

Wow, this is offensive in more ways than one. I mean, its nice to see them doing a piece on the subject, but in a way that almost makes it worse. Seriously, I'm amazed they could get so much wrong in a single article.

They should come to Dimensions next time to get their facts straight from the source.



LoveBHMS said:


> Why could they not have pointed out an already large celebrity such as John Goodman or Kevin James, or list a few fat guys who were *successful* at higher weights such as mentioning who has a longtime marriage or a successful movie out right now?



Because _that _would have been balanced reporting.

Thanks anyway though Sasha!

-Ty


----------



## Baigley (Mar 18, 2008)

They make it seem as if FFA's are trying to actively challenge the 'attractiveness' stereotype. Are people not allowed to, oh, I don't know, have individual opinions or preferences anymore?



> Leonardo DiCaprio has recently been sporting an *unsightly* muffin top on Californian beaches.


They couldn't just say it without the cheap jab, could they?
I for one want to see what Leo looks like with a muffin top. :eat2:


----------



## BeaBea (Mar 18, 2008)

There are some interesting responses to the article on the site. Some of them are very positive - are they from Dims readers...?

I'm tempted to wade into the debate myself but maybe a response from an FFA would be better? (Not that I'm not an FFA, more an equal-opportunity kind of girl  )

Tracey xx


----------



## Kiki (Mar 19, 2008)

BeaBea said:


> There are some interesting responses to the article on the site. Some of them are very positive - are they from Dims readers...?



In one of the previous threads about this article
http://www.dimensionsmagazine.com/forums/showthread.php?t=37316&highlight=metro
a few Dims members said that they would post comments about it. Well done Dimmers!


----------



## Qit el-Remel (Mar 19, 2008)

The author blew it with the last paragraph.

-Qit


----------



## Ninja_Panda (Mar 19, 2008)

Good find by the way. I do have to disagree with the "Fat Fetish" portion. I don't think it a dominance issue or who's controlling who, but rather a nurturing instinct. Food is like the ultimate "I made this special for you" gift. It shows that you love a person enough to think of something fairly complex as food and spend hours making it. Although a simple PB&J will make me happy, food just the greatest way to express ones self...IMO.


----------



## pani (Mar 21, 2008)

I thought it has some good points, although I do agree with Qit that they blew it at the end. To me, getting the terms wrong is not as offensive as trying to pathologize the attraction! At least it will make some people realize that we all don't have to march to the same drum! And great job posters! Thanks for posting this Sasha!


----------



## Green Eyed Fairy (Mar 23, 2008)

Baigley said:


> They make it seem as if FFA's are trying to actively challenge the 'attractiveness' stereotype. Are people not allowed to, oh, I don't know, have individual opinions or preferences anymore?
> 
> 
> They couldn't just say it without the cheap jab, could they?
> I for one want to see what Leo looks like with a muffin top. :eat2:



You know....I always thought him too thin in his younger days. Have found his "thicker" (not by much but a start anyway) look in The Departed was much better/more attractive. I want to see his muffin top, too


----------



## BLUEeyedBanshee (Mar 23, 2008)

Alrighty I merged all three threads about the same article. 

I figured it would help that way all responses on the same subject are in one place.


----------



## Rojodi (Mar 26, 2008)

I've been on both sides of this conversation: I had the chiseled rock hard abs and the Santa belly - full of jelly. I attracted women when I was in shape, and when I was in "shape" - round IS a shape after all. It's all a preference. And I've attracted women because they like my "Italian good looks" (which I ain't.)


----------

