# Guys Who Like Fat Chicks: Village Voice Article



## LovelyLiz (May 4, 2011)

I am surprised no one has yet posted up this article that prominently featured several (active and inactive) members of the Dimensions community. It's in the Village Voice and called "Guys Who Like Fat Chicks."

Overall I really liked it - it described some of the realities of men liking and dating fat women in straightforward ways without a lot of apology or defensiveness. It did have the requisite paragraph(s) about fat=unhealthy, but that was just a tiny part of a larger very positive article.

It was definitely from a man's perspective most of the way through and presenting primarily the voices of men (though some women's experiences were shared too), which I can imagine some women might take issue with; but that was really the point of it, in my view - specifically to take steps to de-stigmatize men's attraction to fat women and to speak to other men about it. So I didn't take issue with that.


----------



## Ned Sonntag (May 4, 2011)

I wuz gonna but ya beat me.:bow:


----------



## penguin (May 4, 2011)

I really liked it. I have no idea which dimmers were interviewed in the article, but I still enjoyed it. It was a really positive piece.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (May 4, 2011)

Yes, excellent article. :bow: Subscribing.


----------



## Ned Sonntag (May 4, 2011)

Ernest Nagel said:


> Yes, excellent article. :bow: Subscribing.



I read the VV cover-to-cover faithfully from early '68:bow: to right after 9-11 when caregiving for my father-in-law began to consume all my time. I'd just go over to Barnes&Noble and buy this one. They treat their cartoonists like sh*t.


----------



## EtobicokeFA (May 4, 2011)

Great Article. Thank you for sharing.


----------



## PeanutButterfly (May 4, 2011)

This is a great article! I wish more stuff like this would make it into mainstream society.


----------



## altered states (May 4, 2011)

This may be the first article on FAs I've ever read that isn't Journalism's Exploitive Cabinet of Curious Freaks. And a rare terrific article from a magazine that, like Ned says, _used to be_ required reading for New Yorkers, current, ex-, and aspiring. At least now it's free, and usually worth every penny. 

Props where props are due though to the VV and Mr. Ex Machina.


----------



## verucassault (May 4, 2011)

as with most things i can find fault in it 
not with the article itself but with the sentiment of equating liking fat women to homosexuality. as a fat woman, who at many times is treated like the lowest person on the totem pole, i just dont have much sympathy for men who dont feel comfortable sexualizing/objectifying a fat women with his buddypals in the locker room. 

then the cloak of anonimity, its not a fetish bleh, and i am totally proud of it meh but ooh wait dont show my face and thangs and give me a play name cause i want to be famous one day. put me the fattie loving witness protection program. (although many people on the site know who alot of the people are)

but it was great to see the images of the couples showcased and to see "this topic" being addressed in a mainstream paper. small step for fattykind i s'pose.


----------



## TraciJo67 (May 4, 2011)

I loved the article, although I didn't read it through from beginning to end. I read only the first few pages, with some fascination as I knew (via Dims) the person who was interviewed. I loved it. It explains Dan's perspective very well, and it's something that I would have liked to have seen when I was young and fat and thought that nobody would ever be able to see beyond my chunky thighs and jiggly belly. It's not relevant to me anymore, being old and married and having come to terms with my body issues (as completely irrelevent to who/what I am), but I could feel the youthful energy, the unabashed enthusiasm that he (and the other men interviewed for the article) have for the rubinesque form, and I was happy to see that the article gave very little lip service to that tired old nugget about teh death fats for a so-called "balanced" perspective ... as so many of these types of articles do.

I don't know who else was interviewed, but I thought that Dan did an excellent job of representing himself as a young man who just happens to love fat women.

OOPS - meant to add, most importantly: Clearly, by using his real name, Dan is putting his preference out there, boldly, with no apology and no excuse. I'd like to know why the others chose to remain anonymous. That did undercut the overall message, IMO.


----------



## Blackjack (May 4, 2011)

TraciJo67 said:


> OOPS - meant to add, most importantly: Clearly, by using his real name, Dan is putting his preference out there, boldly, with no apology and no excuse. I'd like to know why the others chose to remain anonymous. That did undercut the overall message, IMO.



I think that there were two(?) people quoted who didn't use their actual name. "Charlotte" actually has an understandable reason for not using her real name. "Lawrence" has been getting a shitload of flak for it and even more for what he's said, and he deserves every bit of it.


----------



## verucassault (May 4, 2011)

if you were gonna pick a fake name, why pick lawrence. no offense to men actually named lawrence, but my fake name would be Maximillian or Optimus Prime, something cool like that


----------



## LovelyLiz (May 4, 2011)

I've read some very fair and legitimate criticisms of this article in various other online places: that conventional standards of beauty are still underscored, like youth, facial symmetry, not appearing "poor", having the right shape of body, etc. - but the article is just advocating the addition of more pounds to those conventional categories of physical beauty. So the article is still marginalizing and devaluing fat people who are not the "right kind of fat", and that is certainly a bad thing.

But it does open up people's imaginations to the possibility of fat people being desirable romantic companions, even if it does so while holding to other more shallow and unhelpful cultural categories of beauty.

So my question is this, and it's a question that has been posed in many contexts and ways over the years in this community: Do these articles and ways of presenting the arguments still do some good? Does that fact that this article operates mostly within conventional ideas about beauty make it more palatable and relatable for the general public (thus being helpful to the cause), or does that fact actually hurt the movement overall?

ETA: My own stance is still being worked out and is open for revision, but at the moment I am thinking that by first letting the "cute ones" into the group of those deemed "acceptable" it does not actually pave the way for the less conventionally "cute ones" to be accepted later, but instead it continues to reinforce and strengthen ideas that will continue to exclude those who do not fit.


----------



## Tad (May 4, 2011)

Given that this was an article about FA, in essence, rather than about size acceptance, I thought it was fairly good. These observational/anecdotal articles do show up once in a while*, hopefully someone gains from them.

My only quibble would be that it implied that 'guys who like fat chicks' all prefer them somewhere north of 400 pounds. FA come in a lot more variety than that, I'd say. But if you are only going to talk to a few people, you are bound to leave out important aspects one way or another.

* for example I recall reading an article around a dozen years ago, in GQ or something like that (it was some magazine that a friend had brought to a guys weekend for reasons I don't remember--something aimed at men that was pretty mass circulation). It was of similar tone, focuessed on a couple that was a SSBHM with a petite FFA.


----------



## butch (May 4, 2011)

I enjoyed the article, but I would add an addition to McBeth's concern about how the article might reinforce, instead of open up, other conventional ideas about beauty. The fact that the article is only about heterosexual slender male FAs is sort of a let down, and I wonder if the reporter made any effort to widen her scope a bit and at least talk to one FFA.

That being said, for what it did cover, it was a very informative article, and a huge and hearty thank you to the FAs willing to go on record with their real names, as that is perhaps the most revolutionary thing about the article. I hope it leads to more objective articles in other media outlets about fat sexuality in all its many many flavors.


----------



## LovelyLiz (May 4, 2011)

Good points, Tad and Butch. 

I also want to add that I realize these articles, flaws and all, do encourage some individuals and open their minds to possibilities and self-acceptance in the skin they're in. Those are good things.


----------



## Wild Zero (May 4, 2011)

butch said:


> I enjoyed the article, but I would add an addition to McBeth's concern about how the article might reinforce, instead of open up, other conventional ideas about beauty. The fact that the article is only about heterosexual slender male FAs is sort of a let down, and I wonder if the reporter made any effort to widen her scope a bit and at least talk to one FFA.
> 
> That being said, for what it did cover, it was a very informative article, and a huge and hearty thank you to the FAs willing to go on record with their real names, as that is perhaps the most revolutionary thing about the article. I hope it leads to more objective articles in other media outlets about fat sexuality in all its many many flavors.



She interviewed my girlfriend Kelly and I. While not an FFA per se, Kelly likes the fact that I'm not a slender guy.


----------



## butch (May 4, 2011)

Wild Zero said:


> She interviewed my girlfriend Kelly and I. While not an FFA per se, Kelly likes the fact that I'm not a slender guy.



That is good to know, Wild Zero. 

The article is great, don't get me wrong, and I readily recognize that these articles can't cover all bases. I hope it has a ripple effect outside our community.


----------



## russianrobot (May 4, 2011)

is this the same Dan who has posted here for years,writes for pitchfork & and I think villiage voice as well?

interviewed beth ditto a while back?


----------



## The Orange Mage (May 4, 2011)

russianrobot said:


> is this the same Dan who has posted here for years,writes for pitchfork & and I think villiage voice as well?
> 
> interviewed beth ditto a while back?


Yes, the very same.


----------



## Blackjack (May 4, 2011)

My biggest issue with this article (other than everything awful that I can say about "Lawrence") is that Jen referred to me as "normal".

I think I'm actually offended.


----------



## penguin (May 4, 2011)

Blackjack said:


> My biggest issue with this article (other than everything awful that I can say about "Lawrence") is that Jen referred to me as "normal".
> 
> I think I'm actually offended.



A girl I worked with dubbed me "Denise the Normal", saying that I was the most normal person she'd ever met. Given that she didn't know me that well, or what I liked to get up to in my spare time, I'm still not sure if it was a good thing or not.


----------



## AmazingAmy (May 4, 2011)

For me, this is currently the most awesome thing on the Internet.


----------



## Sweetie (May 4, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> I am surprised no one has yet posted up this article that prominently featured several (active and inactive) members of the Dimensions community. It's in the Village Voice and called "Guys Who Like Fat Chicks."
> 
> Overall I really liked it - it described some of the realities of men liking and dating fat women in straightforward ways without a lot of apology or defensiveness. It did have the requisite paragraph(s) about fat=unhealthy, but that was just a tiny part of a larger very positive article.
> 
> It was definitely from a man's perspective most of the way through and presenting primarily the voices of men (though some women's experiences were shared too), which I can imagine some women might take issue with; but that was really the point of it, in my view - specifically to take steps to de-stigmatize men's attraction to fat women and to speak to other men about it. So I didn't take issue with that.



I love this article and I soooo appreciate Dims. I feel like someone who just found out that pigs really do fly. Its so awesome to finally hear real men explain just how attracted they can be to a big girl. The remarks reverberated deep down in my soul. Thanks so much for sharing this article.


----------



## rg770Ibanez (May 4, 2011)

This article seems pretty positive. I liked it for the most part. I didn't really like how "Lawrence" kept his identity hidden because he doesn't want to be pinned questions about his preference when he becomes a big time producer. I mean wouldn't him saying "I like chubby/fat girls" have an overall positive influence in general rather than a negative one on his career?


----------



## rg770Ibanez (May 4, 2011)

AmazingAmy said:


> For me, this is currently the most awesome thing on the Internet.



And most definitely agreed


----------



## joswitch (May 4, 2011)

AmazingAmy said:


> For me, this is currently the most awesome thing on the Internet.



^That is a verrreh cool photo! 

The article was great. As Les said - nice to see a mainstream paper give the "freakshow" the bum's rush for a change!


----------



## russianrobot (May 4, 2011)

rg770Ibanez said:


> This article seems pretty positive. I liked it for the most part. I didn't really like how "Lawrence" kept his identity hidden because he doesn't want to be pinned questions about his preference when he becomes a big time producer. I mean wouldn't him saying "I like chubby/fat girls" have an overall positive influence in general rather than a negative one on his career?



i agree, it seemed kinda of a shaky reason, the whole record producer rational

in fact it actually sounded like something a politician would say. 

it should be very easy to admit whether your seeking fame or living a normal life, that you love beautiful women of size, sexy curvy goddess who captivated most of us from our youth. 

its not like your sniffing meth of whores ass in Yuma or something to that effect

i dunno call me a realist


----------



## tonynyc (May 4, 2011)

Great article - thanks for posting


----------



## HeavyDuty24 (May 4, 2011)

loved the article!


----------



## HeavyDuty24 (May 4, 2011)

AmazingAmy said:


> For me, this is currently the most awesome thing on the Internet.



i agree! i wish i had that,guy is lucky to have such a gorgeous women straddling him like that.


----------



## Alzison (May 4, 2011)

Hi so now that I've had a day to mull this article over, I hope you guys can indulge a still-newcomer and talk to me about this. I *really* wanted to like this article. I really did. Not just because I obviously have no issues with FA's and also know people who were involved, but because, as a concept, using a big publication like this to show how men who like fat chicks can be normal, awesome guys and that it is OK to have a preference for the fatties could have been really really great. 

But for me, the article just really didn't work. The FA's involved were portrayed as some sort of anti-heroes. They sounded arrogent, self-involved, and some of the quotes were just flat out ridiculous. I chalk this up to editing rather than the participants, to be clear. And, though the article was about FA's, to have those involved basically put across in this light of "wow, look at all the BS these amazing and noble guys have to put up with for liking fatties" was just tedious and annoying. To not address, even in a single sentence, that the response these FA's get from dating fat women is based on societal intolerance of the WOMEN themselves leaves this awkward hole in the content. The FA's are portrayed as idols who step in the line of fire of their fat counterparts, then act indignant and defensive when they get shot, but never admit or acknowledge that they were merely involved in friendly fire that really stems back to the fat women themselves. For this reason, and because the girlfriends were barely given a voice, and "Caroline" was shown as more of a "wow! 500 lbs and she can get a date! that is craaazy, right?", I felt like the women were totally objectified and dehumanized. Some sort of damsel in distress caricature crap, some charity case that these noble gentlemen are amazing enough to be into. 

Beyond that, the tone and pacing was just all off for me. It was too all over the place, too cavalier. The author deliberately avoided portraying these men as fetishists, but, to me, it is clear that she still thinks (and conveyed) that the concept of men loving fat women is weird and not normal, even if she admits that it happens frequently.

*to be clear, I don't know Dan, but I have read his blog and Hairpin articles, and I found everything he has written to be incredibly well-done, thoughtful, honest, useful, and positive. I respect his involvement in this piece and his reference to liking fat women as being a preference, like any other (and therefore pushing this to the normative). To me, the issue is with the writing/editing in this article not the men themselves.

It seems like I'm the only one who got this from the article, so it could just be my foggy reading glasses. My foggy invisible reading glasses.


----------



## Wild Zero (May 5, 2011)

Alzison said:


> Hi so now that I've had a day to mull this article over, I hope you guys can indulge a still-newcomer and talk to me about this. I *really* wanted to like this article. I really did. Not just because I obviously have no issues with FA's and also know people who were involved, but because, as a concept, using a big publication like this to show how men who like fat chicks can be normal, awesome guys and that it is OK to have a preference for the fatties could have been really really great.
> 
> But for me, the article just really didn't work. The FA's involved were portrayed as some sort of anti-heroes. They sounded arrogent, self-involved, and some of the quotes were just flat out ridiculous. I chalk this up to editing rather than the participants, to be clear. And, though the article was about FA's, to have those involved basically put across in this light of "wow, look at all the BS these amazing and noble guys have to put up with for liking fatties" was just tedious and annoying. To not address, even in a single sentence, that the response these FA's get from dating fat women is based on societal intolerance of the WOMEN themselves leaves this awkward hole in the content. The FA's are portrayed as idols who step in the line of fire of their fat counterparts, then act indignant and defensive when they get shot, but never admit or acknowledge that they were merely involved in friendly fire that really stems back to the fat women themselves. For this reason, and because the girlfriends were barely given a voice, and "Caroline" was shown as more of a "wow! 500 lbs and she can get a date! that is craaazy, right?", I felt like the women were totally objectified and dehumanized. Some sort of damsel in distress caricature crap, some charity case that these noble gentlemen are amazing enough to be into.
> 
> ...



As someone who was interviewed for the article I feel pretty much exactly as you do on the piece.


----------



## mithrandirjn (May 5, 2011)

A few thoughts on it:

-In a way, it was a positive that the guys shown in this story weren't portrayed as over-the-top romantics, as totally 100% nice guys, etc: instead, they were being treated as they were, younger guys who aren't all looking for long term relationships, who have preferences that differ from what's considered "the norm".

What's positive about that is that these guys aren't being depicted as "looking beyond a person's appearance": no, they find fat women attractive, period, and want to date them, hit on them, etc., in the same way guys who prefer skinny women do with their preferred body types.

In this way, the message becomes clear, that these are normal (using the term relatively, of course) men, they have their strengths and flaws, and they just happen to like bigger women. I think that sends a better message when it comes to combating a stigma, to be honest.

-I don't really mind the guy using a pseudonym. I'll be honest, if I was being interviewed concerning anything about my sexuality, I'd have to give it a thought to decide if I wanted to put my full name on it. There's certain things that do follow you around in life, and even though people would be stupid to make a big deal out of something like "what body type do you prefer?", that wouldn't stop them from doing it.

-No problem from me with the references to stuff said by some doctors. The article cited a doctor (admittedly a FA, himself) saying that fat isn't the deciding factor in a person's health, but I don't think it's unfair to cover what's generally accepted about size in the health community.

-Not digging the whole "bisizual" or whatever label, or the idea that it's somehow an unacceptable feeling in a FA. Sorry, but most of the women I've have the deepest romantic feelings for in my life have been anywhere from thin-yet-curvy to downright small/skinny. That said, I never deny that I really, really appreciate curvy women (what good Italian boy doesn't?), and I've spent time with and really enjoyed dating a number of bigger women, as well. 

But that's just me, and I don't think there's anything weird about that, just as I can't judge a guy who only finds women of a certain size, by they small or large or in between, attractive. You're wired the way you're wired, that's just how it is, and I know myself, and know that while curves often jump out at me first, I can still fully appreciate a good looking thin girl and find her incredibly attractive.


----------



## russianrobot (May 5, 2011)

Alzison said:


> Hi so now that I've had a day to mull this article over, I hope you guys can indulge a still-newcomer and talk to me about this. I *really* wanted to like this article. I really did. Not just because I obviously have no issues with FA's and also know people who were involved, but because, as a concept, using a big publication like this to show how men who like fat chicks can be normal, awesome guys and that it is OK to have a preference for the fatties could have been really really great.
> 
> But for me, the article just really didn't work. The FA's involved were portrayed as some sort of anti-heroes. They sounded arrogent, self-involved, and some of the quotes were just flat out ridiculous. I chalk this up to editing rather than the participants, to be clear. And, though the article was about FA's, to have those involved basically put across in this light of "wow, look at all the BS these amazing and noble guys have to put up with for liking fatties" was just tedious and annoying. To not address, even in a single sentence, that the response these FA's get from dating fat women is based on societal intolerance of the WOMEN themselves leaves this awkward hole in the content. The FA's are portrayed as idols who step in the line of fire of their fat counterparts, then act indignant and defensive when they get shot, but never admit or acknowledge that they were merely involved in friendly fire that really stems back to the fat women themselves. For this reason, and because the girlfriends were barely given a voice, and "Caroline" was shown as more of a "wow! 500 lbs and she can get a date! that is craaazy, right?", I felt like the women were totally objectified and dehumanized. Some sort of damsel in distress caricature crap, some charity case that these noble gentlemen are amazing enough to be into.
> 
> ...




your assessment on the article was like a carpenter hitting the head of a nail. direct & hard as hell. great post!


----------



## Alzison (May 5, 2011)

Wild Zero said:


> As someone who was interviewed for the article I feel pretty much exactly as you do on the piece.



Were you edited a lot, do you think? I've heard that a lot was pared down to appear sensationalist. 



russianrobot said:


> your assessment on the article was like a carpenter hitting the head of a nail. direct & hard as hell. great post!



that's what she said. I mean thanks!


----------



## malami (May 5, 2011)

I found this forum through that article! I NEVER knew FA exist, I mean I knew that there are people who have their preferences but it really opened my eyes to the whole FA & BBW/SSBBWs. It kind of gave me hope that hey there are guys who would be into me and I would be into them as well, I just haven't found them:batting:


----------



## JMNYC (May 5, 2011)

Wild Zero said:


> As someone who was interviewed for the article I feel pretty much exactly as you do on the piece.




As someone who was also interviewed for the article, I do, too. Let's just say it's not because of ageism that no one older than 28 is represented.


----------



## Ernest Nagel (May 5, 2011)

Y'know, I quit trying to explain or justify my preference to anyone decades ago. I liked the article but I doubt it will change any minds or convince any closeteers to come out. My biggest problem with it is that it needed to be written in the first place. How do you write a good article about an issue that shouldn't ever have to be addressed though?

We are what we are, we like what we like. When guys are expected to defend their predilections for blondes, boobs or petite girls I'll start trying to dissect what I like about SS/BBW. I don't expect to get very far though. An out FA is someone who knows societal concerns and judgmental aesthetics shouldn't keep him from having what he wants. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of my preference so there's nothing for me to rationalize or think about. It's just what's so. It's not like I'm trying to order pizza in a Chinese restaurant; more like I'm in a steakhouse and I want THE BIG ONE! Would anyone question that choice?


----------



## Dr. Feelgood (May 5, 2011)

Well, I would, Ernest, but then I'm a vegetarian. Seriously, I think your point is important. I can't speak for anyone else, but when I have felt the need to defend a choice or an action of mine, the person I was really trying to convince has always been myself.


----------



## joswitch (May 5, 2011)

@Alzison (mainly)


The article never claimed to be about BOTH / ALL sides of the story, or even about all people-who-dig-fat-folks - it set out to talk about "guys who like fat chicks". Just that. The guys. The het guys. In fact: the young het guys who happened to be interviewed and then edited. It never claimed to be an encyclopedia entry.

Gettin' mad at it cos it didn't cover all the bases, e.g. about how fat women feel*, is a bit like getting mad at corn flakes for not being bacon and eggs. (I'm all over the food analogies lately  ).

(*Oh, wait! I remember there was a part about one SSBBWs experience in Spain, and another about how one BBW felt wary when some dude approaches her with romantic interest. So, clearly fat women DID get a look-in.)

Also, is there anyone, anywhere in the Western world who doesn't already know that fat people in general and fat women in particular get shitloads of grief all the time? Have there not been endless column inches devoted to this? Ok, it didn't receive much mention in the article, but then if you were reading an article about how e.g. 
- astronomers struggle with their sleep pattern, you probably wouldn't need to mention that they have to be awake at night to look at the stars, eh?



Suggestion: This Camille person seems a pretty decent journo and Dan has her contact info. - maybe people who want to have fat people's POV aired in VV should get in touch with her? It could turn into a series! Fat women and dating. Fat guys and dating. Het peeps, gay peeps, bi peeps, trans peeps from fat people and people who dig them's POV. 

Just sayin'


----------



## Alzison (May 5, 2011)

joswitch said:


> @Alzison (mainly)
> 
> 
> The article never claimed to be about BOTH / ALL sides of the story, or even about all people-who-dig-fat-folks - it set out to talk about "guys who like fat chicks". Just that. The guys. The het guys. In fact: the young het guys who happened to be interviewed and then edited. It never claimed to be an encyclopedia entry.
> ...



Um... yeah I realize in retrospect that I should have probably said another few or 50 times that I get that the article was about the dudes not about the fat women themselves. I'm just saying that the way the language framed the subject, it was like said dudes were into some inanimate object (thus objectification). It was as if the article was about why children love kittens or why astronauts (cause I gotta reference your own subject matter) love the stars. I'm not saying that the article was presented to be anything else or that it pretended to be more than it was set out to be, but describing only one side of the puzzle created, without even talking about it or referencing it, a fetishistic point of view. The women were just "giant boobs," or were just personifications of some attractive physicality. 

I say this because I disagree with its representation of FA's. If a guy is dating or in love with a fat woman (and to respond to an above post- this clearly isn't about twentysomethings who just want to bang, because at least two of those interviewed have longterm girlfriends), it isn't just about the objectified attraction. I get the subject matter. I get the point of the article. I'm not commenting to say "hey what about me! let's do a series so it can be about me too!". I'm commenting because of the way FA's were portrayed and, vis-à-vis, the way that fat women were turned into simplistic objects of desire.


----------



## butch (May 5, 2011)

the article also had a weird progression. It's about 'guys who like fat chicks' but yet there is a long middle piece aboue Charlotte, so it isn't just about the guys, and yet it is. I think it is valid to wonder why the reporter made the choices she did about what to write about and what to not write about. Although, it must be noted that reporters never write the headlines, so who knows if the article was pitched as being about 'guys who like fat chicks' or if it was pitched as being about fat sexuality more broadly, and the editors and copy writers made it into something more about the young men and their wild and crazy FA NYC lives then about the subculture that men and women occupy together.


----------



## Chimpi (May 5, 2011)

I thought the segment about Charlotte was attuned well into the topic. The article, primarily 'guys who like fat chicks', shows the perspective of a woman whom is the object of affection and admiration from said 'guys who like fat chicks'. Showing the reality that a very fat woman, whom said guys desire and seek out, have much the same dating and sex lives as "normal" folk (if not better than some) is a healthy addition. I really enjoyed it, and the article overall.

With a few little tidbits in the article, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and felt at home within the information and viewpoints given. I'm in agreement and disagreement with this portion of the article:
I have a type, too. Mines just bigger. He may like skinny blondes with bangs and long legs. I like pear shapes with brown hair and green eyes. I have a typeit just happens to be fat. - Lawrence
All the other normal benchmarks of attractiveness are in place. Proportions, symmetry, everything else, from tone of voice to texture of skin. That is exactly the same. Its just that youre talking about a different scale. - Lawrence

Relating to the question mcbeth brought up, I think it has the potential to do good as well as re-emphasize the cookie cutter, unrealistic ideology that you have to be X, Y & Z in order to be desirable, beautiful and attractive. It's good to inform people - or just be open about the preference - that liking fat chicks is perfectly normal and a commonplace attraction. The more people know, the more accepted it shall hopefully be in the long right. But when it coincides with "you have to be a _certain_ type of fat to be attractive," well that's just nonsense. That's detrimental to the fundamental reasoning behind the article, really. I realize it happens all the time, but I believe it completely diminishes the open minded approach people should be making about attraction as a whole.

Also, to the above people that say the particular photo from the article is pretty much the most awesome thing - I agree!


----------



## LalaCity (May 5, 2011)

I've seen the article criticized in various quarters as not being size acceptance-y _enough_; that the sentiment (as expressed by at least one of the interviewees) that not all FAs find all fat women universally attractive somehow undermines the SA movement. I wouldn't expect to be found universally attractive, nor would I accept as legitimate any piece of journalism that attempted to persuade me thus.

The purpose of this piece is to expose a truth, not salve the wounds of the oppressed; but, in being an honest piece of writing, it manages, at least for me, to do precisely that inasmuch as it leaves no doubt that the sentiments expressed are genuine. For that reason it means much more to me than the usual boilerplate "hot at any size" editorials designed to push a clothing line.

Good journalism is meant to anatomize and lay bare every muscle, nerve and bone of a particular story, and the results, whether pleasing, painful, or shocking, are meant to enlighten us, _not_ reinforce our prejudices or indulge our fantasies.


----------



## butch (May 5, 2011)

Just to clarify-I'm not criticizing that the Charlotte portion was in the article, it just seemed to be at odds with the purpose of the article, since it allowed a 'fat chick's' sexual agency to be on display, as well. In the Charlotte portion, she was allowed to have as much a voice, and a presence, as the FAs had, and in that context, the article subverts the idea that it is only about the POV of 'guys who like fat chicks.'


----------



## Lamia (May 5, 2011)

Me thought article good.


----------



## mithrandirjn (May 6, 2011)

Chimpi said:


> I thought the segment about Charlotte was attuned well into the topic. The article, primarily 'guys who like fat chicks', shows the perspective of a woman whom is the object of affection and admiration from said 'guys who like fat chicks'. Showing the reality that a very fat woman, whom said guys desire and seek out, have much the same dating and sex lives as "normal" folk (if not better than some) is a healthy addition. I really enjoyed it, and the article overall.
> 
> With a few little tidbits in the article, I thoroughly enjoyed it, and felt at home within the information and viewpoints given. I'm in agreement and disagreement with this portion of the article:
> I have a type, too. Mines just bigger. He may like skinny blondes with bangs and long legs. I like pear shapes with brown hair and green eyes. I have a typeit just happens to be fat. - Lawrence
> ...



Have to disagree on one point: in a way, I think printing those lines *was* important in terms of framing fat attraction the way it was presented in the story.

There IS a perception out there about some men that if you like one, or two, or however many various types of fat women, then you obviously must find *all* fat women attractive. In doing this, the framework moves away from a fat _attraction_, and the perception becomes that of a fat _fetish_.

That, I think, is at the heart of what this article is combating. It's not an article trying to make everybody feel warm and fuzzy, and it's not about full, 100% open-mindedness about attraction. It's saying that people all have their own preferences, their own standards, their own likes or dislikes. Preferring fat women isn't much different from preferring a certain other body type, hair color, etc. It's just the way some guys are wired, and it's as normal and filled with positives and negatives as the preferences of any other men.


----------



## joswitch (May 6, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> I've seen the article criticized in various quarters as not being size acceptance-y _enough_; that the sentiment (as expressed by at least one of the interviewees) that not all FAs find all fat women universally attractive somehow undermines the SA movement. I wouldn't expect to be found universally attractive, nor would I accept as legitimate any piece of journalism that attempted to persuade me thus.
> 
> The purpose of this piece is to expose a truth, not salve the wounds of the oppressed; but, in being an honest piece of writing, it manages, at least for me, to do precisely that inasmuch as it leaves no doubt that the sentiments expressed are genuine. For that reason it means much more to me than the usual boilerplate "hot at any size" editorials designed to push a clothing line.
> 
> Good journalism is meant to anatomize and lay bare every muscle, nerve and bone of a particular story, and the results, whether pleasing, painful, or shocking, are meant to enlighten us, _not_ reinforce our prejudices or indulge our fantasies.




^Cannot rep you. Great post. I agree completely.


----------



## NoWayOut (May 7, 2011)

verucassault said:


> if you were gonna pick a fake name, why pick lawrence. no offense to men actually named lawrence, but my fake name would be Maximillian or Optimus Prime, something cool like that



Veruca, you don't get to pick your fake name. It's the writer's discretion. Most times, the writer will just say "a man who spoke on the condition of anonymity". Trust me, you will never see anyone identified as Optimus Prime in a published article as their only identification.


----------



## joswitch (May 7, 2011)

Optimus Prime sed: "I Haz BoneRz 4 Fat Chickz! Tehy HOTTEZ!!"


----------



## verucassault (May 7, 2011)

NoWayOut said:


> Trust me, you will never see anyone identified as Optimus Prime in a published article as their only identification.



i suppose i should have riddled my post with smiley faces to convey that i was being sarcastic sigh


----------



## verucassault (May 7, 2011)

joswitch said:


> Optimus Prime sed: "I Haz BoneRz 4 Fat Chickz! Tehy HOTTEZ!!"



now its going to be my life's mission to write an article and name my anon source as optimus prime, just cause it would look cool


----------



## CleverBomb (May 7, 2011)

verucassault said:


> now its going to be my life's mission to write an article and name my anon source as optimus prime, just cause it would look cool


"Fatfomers -- Transform, and bulk out!"

-Rusty


----------



## Jenella (May 7, 2011)

Before joining Dims and reading quite a bit of the threads on here. I had no idea there were 'guys who like fat chicks'. I wish that this article would of come out earlier...
So for me, the article was okay. I'm still in the accepting stage of 'omgwtf, guys find my fat ass attractive?'


----------



## asmiletoday (May 7, 2011)

Confession. I joined dims yesterday BECAUSE of that article. I didn't know there was an active ( and healthy) online community. 

I will say this. I don't like how the article portrays all fat women as down on themselves for it or seeing themselves as unlovable. There are fat women, like myself, who don't look in the mirror and cringe at their body- they smile. In fact when I look at why I am single, it's because no one has been good enough for me yet- not the other way around. 

Did any other fat women feel the same way about that portrayal of fat women in the article?


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 7, 2011)

asmiletoday said:


> Confession. I joined dims yesterday BECAUSE of that article. I didn't know there was an active ( and healthy) online community.
> 
> I will say this. I don't like how the article portrays all fat women as down on themselves for it or seeing themselves as unlovable. There are fat women, like myself, who don't look in the mirror and cringe at their body- they smile. In fact when I look at why I am single, it's because no one has been good enough for me yet- not the other way around.
> 
> Did any other fat women feel the same way about that portrayal of fat women in the article?


I don't think Charlotte was portrayed that way at all. Do you?


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 7, 2011)

JMNYC said:


> As someone who was also interviewed for the article, I do, too. Let's just say it's not because of ageism that no one older than 28 is represented.



Charlotte is 32, FWIW.



Jenella said:


> Before joining Dims and reading quite a bit of the threads on here. I had no idea there were 'guys who like fat chicks'. I wish that this article would of come out earlier...
> So for me, the article was okay. I'm still in the accepting stage of 'omgwtf, guys find my fat ass attractive?'



Really glad you got something out of it, and that you're here.


----------



## asmiletoday (May 7, 2011)

BigBeautifulMe said:


> I don't think Charlotte was portrayed that way at all. Do you?




My comment was in regards to this quote. Like, "If only. Try convincing an archetypal easy fat girl to do it with the light on, or let you play with her belly, or refer to her as fat without sobbing and trying to throw up the nice dinner you bought her. Spend weeks convincing her youre Not Joking, your buddys not gonna jump out of the closet with Tucker Max and a camera. "


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 7, 2011)

asmiletoday said:


> My comment was in regards to this quote. Like, "If only. Try convincing an archetypal easy fat girl to do it with the light on, or let you play with her belly, or refer to her as fat without sobbing and trying to throw up the nice dinner you bought her. Spend weeks convincing her youre Not Joking, your buddys not gonna jump out of the closet with Tucker Max and a camera. "



Perhaps that quote does portray many fat women that way, but the article also included someone not like that. So I don't think we can really say it portrays ALL fat women that way.


----------



## asmiletoday (May 7, 2011)

true the " all" should be removed from my original statement


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 7, 2011)

BTW, I'm really glad this article is bringing in new folks like you, asmiletoday. It's good to have new folks who actually care about the issues.


----------



## CastingPearls (May 7, 2011)

asmiletoday said:


> I joined dims yesterday
> 
> Did any other fat women feel the same way about that portrayal of fat women in the article?




#1 Welcome to Dimensions

#2 I didn't feel the same way. I felt that it portrayed some women as that way (and in all honesty I felt Dan was using hyperbole to get his point across) and some (like Charlotte) as not that way. I personally fall under the latter category and so do scores of my friends.


----------



## asmiletoday (May 7, 2011)

So I ended discussing this with a few friends and came to an interesting crossroads. For every fat women that live as excepts there bodys there are 4 that dont or are unsure. So maybe his assessment was entirely accurate. I myself am surround by a wry supportive group of friends and live in a city where there are all types of people. A lot of women don't have the same luxury.

Thanks everyone for causing me to mull this over futher


----------



## Al Diggy (May 7, 2011)

good article...my only "issue" is that the "fat world" should be accepted as norm, and not even NEED an article to open eyes...in a way, it's sad that our society even needs to put out an article of this type...you would never see "Guys Who Like Thin Chicks"...fat, skinny, tall, short, black, white, green...we r ALL the same...hopefully one day the world won't even need a "Guys Who Like Fat Chicks"...but still, glad to see it...(just my 2 cents)


----------



## FA Punk (May 7, 2011)

bisizualism!?...You have got to be kidding me, I've never heard of this term before but I don't like it, just another useless label that we don't need *sigh*. 

I liked the article for the fact that it's from a male perspective which is a nice change but compareing gay people to FAs I find to be insulting towards gay people, yes us ''FAs'' do go through our own share of shit but I don't think anybody has been killed for dating a fat woman, just saying.


----------



## CastingPearls (May 7, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> bisizualism!?...You have got to be kidding me, I've never heard of this term before but I don't like it, just another useless label that we don't need *sigh*.
> 
> I liked the article for the fact that it's from a male perspective which is a nice change but compareing gay people to FAs I find to be insulting towards gay people, yes us ''FAs'' do go through our own share of shit but I don't think anybody has been killed for dating a fat woman, just saying.


I don't think that there has to be a pissing contest over who's been persecuted more for two groups to find commonality sharing grievances.


----------



## Surlysomething (May 7, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> bisizualism!?...You have got to be kidding me, I've never heard of this term before but I don't like it, just another useless label that we don't need *sigh*.
> 
> I liked the article for the fact that it's from a male perspective which is a nice change but compareing gay people to FAs I find to be insulting towards gay people, yes us ''FAs'' do go through our own share of shit but I don't think anybody has been killed for dating a fat woman, just saying.



Bisizualism has been around for awhile. There's a whole big world out there that doesn't include the paysite section.

I would consider myself bisizual. I lean towards husky, thick men, but I don't limit myself.


----------



## Hathor (May 7, 2011)

I was introduced to a couple new terms in that article, but overall I enjoyed reading it. 

I, too, was one of those chicks who thought any guy who would be interested in me romantically thought I was an easy lay. And eventually I found a guy who opened me up to this whole world of FAs and size acceptance. Eventually I found Dims, so it's all a win-win.


----------



## FA Punk (May 7, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> I don't think that there has to be a pissing contest over who's been persecuted more for two groups to find commonality sharing grievances.



I can agree with you on some of that, my own Father has told me to my face that me being with a fat woman is no differnt then fucking a 5-Year-Old in the ass, but at the same time I have a cousin who is gay and has gone through a hell of alot worse then I have!

I just don't see the comparison between the two groups, being gay is something that is wired into your DNA from brith but having a preference for fat women isn't IMO. Yes it's a strong preference for sure but again it's just a preference, I'm sorry but when I see guys make the claim that they only like fat chicks I laugh, theres more to attraction then just the body.

I'm not trying to start a pissing contest, all I'm doing is throwing in my two cents.


----------



## FA Punk (May 7, 2011)

Surlysomething said:


> Bisizualism has been around for awhile. There's a whole big world out there that doesn't include the paysite section.
> 
> I would consider myself bisizual. I lean towards husky, thick men, but I don't limit myself.



Uhmm..I've posted in more then just the paysite section miss. I'm just not a fan of labels,(Yes I know this is coming from a guy who's user name is ''FA Punk'' lol) it just seems eveything now adays needs some half-ass name to go along with it, what I am is a man who likes women nuff said.


----------



## CastingPearls (May 7, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> I can agree with you on some of that, my own Father has told me to my face that me being with a fat woman is no differnt then fucking a 5-Year-Old in the ass, but at the same time I have a cousin who is gay and has gone through a hell of alot worse then I have!
> 
> I just don't see the comparison between the two groups, being gay is something that is wired into your DNA from brith but having a preference for fat women isn't IMO. Yes it's a strong preference for sure but again it's just a preference, I'm sorry but when I see guys make the claim that they only like fat chicks I laugh, theres more to attraction then just the body.
> 
> I'm not trying to start a pissing contest, all I'm doing is throwing in my two cents.



Please don't misunderstanding me. I'm not saying YOU personally are starting a pissing contest but that it's an issue that's come up time and time again and rather than find common issues where groups can be supportive of each other, respecting their differences, it can devolve over who suffered more.

Can't help you with your dad there, Pal. Tough luck. Um wow. 

However, we'll have to agree to disagree on your last two points. Many gays will tell you they were not hardwired. It hasn't yet been proven scientifically and the plural of anecdote is not data. As far as FA's being hardwired, I love fat dudes and I love average size dudes. They both melt my butter. Hardwired? I dunno. Partially possibly for me (for a lot of men here though, they say only a fat girl will do and who am I to argue) I don't need analysis to know I like what I'm looking at when I'm looking at it.


----------



## Surlysomething (May 7, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> Uhmm..I've posted in more then just the paysite section miss. I'm just not a fan of labels,(Yes I know this is coming from a guy who's user name is ''FA Punk'' lol) it just seems eveything now adays needs some half-ass name to go along with it, what I am is a man who likes women nuff said.




I agree. But _I_ like bisizualism. I feel less guilt. Haha.

And it's allll about me.




Just kidding. Sort of.


----------



## FA Punk (May 7, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> Please don't misunderstanding me. I'm not saying YOU personally are starting a pissing contest but that it's an issue that's come up time and time again and rather than find common issues where groups can be supportive of each other, respecting their differences, it can devolve over who suffered more.
> 
> Can't help you with your dad there, Pal. Tough luck. Um wow.
> 
> However, we'll have to agree to disagree on your last two points. Many gays will tell you they were not hardwired. It hasn't yet been proven scientifically and the plural of anecdote is not data. As far as FA's being hardwired, I love fat dudes and I love average size dudes. They both melt my butter. Hardwired? I dunno. Partially possibly for me (for a lot of men here though, they say only a fat girl will do and who am I to argue) I don't need analysis to know I like what I'm looking at when I'm looking at it.



I would say being gay is hardwired for my cousin, even we were little it always seemed she was like a boy trapped in a girls body. I know that really doesn't sound right but anyway, I'm sorry for misunderstanding you.

I gave up a long time ago trying to figure out why I love fat women, in the end I like what I like, if I marry a fat woman I marry a fat woman, if I marry a skinny woman I marry a skinny woman, all in all I just want to find someone who can handle all the love I can give

And about my Dad, I told him to fuck off, he's a good man and I love him but he can be a real asshole sometimes, in his defense he was VERY DRUNK! at the time. At least he isn't as bad as my Mom...''How do you whipe your ass sweetie'' *sigh*...my folks aren't normal I tell'ya.


----------



## Wholelottarosie78 (May 7, 2011)

I really enjoyed this article: I am a confident ssbbw but I am always wanting to expand my views about this dance we call dating/love. I think that is the key to this article. Although a little tongue in cheek, the word I took away from this article is OPENNESS: articles like this can be very inspirational. It is not a new thing/concept that there are in fact guys who enjoy the company of large women and are comfortable with themselves enough to be open in their desires. I have always been attracted to strong,confident men. Thank God for Dims or I would still be in the dark. I can see the light at the end of the tunnel and I am not scared of it anymore. Finding FA's in and around Nebraska is the hard part. LOL


----------



## FA Punk (May 7, 2011)

Surlysomething said:


> I agree. But _I_ like bisizualism. I feel less guilt. Haha.
> 
> And it's allll about me.
> 
> ...



Haha, I get ya


----------



## curvydiva445 (May 7, 2011)

I really enjoyed the article but I can definitely see how it still rated womens value only in measures of appearance. BUT I think it's great that there is an article out there at least forcing the general public to question the whole fat=unattractive view point.


----------



## yourhandsonyourhips (May 8, 2011)

I really liked the article as well. Several quotes were very easy to relate to and some actually better informed me of my own preferences, which was surprising.

I took issue with the fact that they never showed any of the women's faces. These women are modeling their bodies for this article, and you don't cut the face off of a model. I realize that it could either be the magazine or the woman being photographed who said no to showing faces, but either way it eats at me a little.

+1 to CastingPearls' comment about no need for a pissing contest. Don't hate the daters, hate the game


----------



## Punkin1024 (May 8, 2011)

I saw several links to this article on Facebook. I was so tickled to see an article like this out there in the real world. I wish I'd have seen articles like this when I was young and single. It would have made me feel so much better about my size and would have given me a reason to NOT diet.


----------



## Blockierer (May 8, 2011)

I really enjoyed the article.
I think more FAs should be interviewed.


----------



## verucassault (May 8, 2011)

Surlysomething said:


> . There's a whole big world out there that doesn't include the paysite section.
> .



i just cried outloud with laughter, LOL PREACH


----------



## LalaCity (May 8, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> I can agree with you on some of that, my own Father has told me to my face that me being with a fat woman is no differnt then fucking a 5-Year-Old in the ass, but at the same time I have a cousin who is gay and has gone through a hell of alot worse then I have!
> 
> I just don't see the comparison between the two groups, being gay is something that is wired into your DNA from brith but having a preference for fat women isn't IMO. Yes it's a strong preference for sure but again it's just a preference, I'm sorry but when I see guys make the claim that they only like fat chicks I laugh, theres more to attraction then just the body.
> 
> I'm not trying to start a pissing contest, all I'm doing is throwing in my two cents.



I don't believe that the co-opting of "gay terms" was a conscious effort on the part of FAs to ally or compare themselves with gay rights. 

People will use whatever language is convenient and easily communicates their condition.


----------



## superodalisque (May 8, 2011)

who is Lawrence? i really liked what he had to say. as far as the FA thing, goes most of the rest seemed too much like freak baiting to me. it was sort of unseemly and cartoonish to me in general. the talking about body parts rather than beauty and overall desirability was disappointingly predictable. besides Lawrence not too many of the others do much to take this out of the realm of fetish into making it a simple fact that fat women are beautiful. as far as guys go, he was the only one who seemed in touch with the real world in the least. too bad its not going to be a good intro to the public perception of FA. i'm glad, for his own sake, that he stayed anonymous and won't have to deal with that association. he's one smart cookie. overall as far as many of the other guys went it seemed strangely socially out of touch. it was a great attempt and i congratulate everybody who took a chance and put it out there though. i really respect that. better luck next time.


----------



## LalaCity (May 8, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> the talking about body parts rather than beauty and overall desirability was disappointingly predictable.



Ha, we're talking about guys here, remember?


----------



## superodalisque (May 8, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> Ha, we're talking about guys here, remember?



sure but even guys should have some sense of how to present themselves to the public when they really want to be acceptable and respected. sometimes boys will be boys does not do the trick. there is a time and a place for everything.


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 8, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> who is Lawrence? i really liked what he had to say. as far as the FA thing, goes most of the rest seemed too much like freak baiting to me. it was sort of unseemly and cartoonish to me in general. the talking about body parts rather than beauty and overall desirability was disappointingly predictable. besides Lawrence not too many of the others do much to take this out of the realm of fetish into making it a simple fact that fat women are beautiful. as far as guys go, he was the only one who seemed in touch with the real world in the least. too bad its not going to be a good intro to the public perception of FA. i'm glad, for his own sake, that he stayed anonymous and won't have to deal with that association. he's one smart cookie. overall as far as many of the other guys went it seemed strangely socially out of touch. it was a great attempt and i congratulate everybody who took a chance and put it out there though. i really respect that. better luck next time.


Does this mean you didn't like any of it?


----------



## Fox (May 8, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> sure but even guys should have some sense of how to present themselves to the public when they really want to be acceptable and respected. sometimes boys will be boys does not do the trick. there is a time and a place for everything.



If men cannot behave, exist, or function as men, then how can they ever be accepted or respected as men?


----------



## CastingPearls (May 8, 2011)

'Because I'm a man' is no excuse for unacceptable behavior.


----------



## Fox (May 8, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> 'Because I'm a man' is no excuse for unacceptable behavior.



The guy was asked what makes him physically attracted to big women, and he answers. Unless we are talking about something I missed, this isn't really unacceptable.


----------



## CarlaSixx (May 8, 2011)

I agree with Fox. I don't see anything wrong. Basically the article was about "what is it that makes you hot" and the guys answer. 

Very rarely do you you see a man who says "It's not about physical attraction. It's about her value as a person."

Pffft! Puh-lease. _That_ would be a wad of bullshit. This article, however, was real. And that's something I appreciated. It was an unapologetic man's view on attraction. That was the whole point from the start, and that's nothing to get your panties in a wad over, either.


----------



## sweetfrancaise (May 8, 2011)

Normally, I read articles like this critically and look for things to be frustrated with, but this time... I didn't. 

Because instead, I was like HEY. THAT'S KINDA LIKE ME. I've been wondering and worrying so long that because I didn't fit into some obtuse standard of beauty, I should change. But I didn't want to... and that article validated that thought, and led me here. Which is way cool.


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 8, 2011)

welcome, sweetfrancaise.  We're glad it got you here!


----------



## superodalisque (May 8, 2011)

BigBeautifulMe said:


> Does this mean you didn't like any of it?



i liked some of it. i just don't think it accomplished the goal re: FAs . i think the women came off much better on the whole. the guys were mostly being made fun of.


----------



## superodalisque (May 8, 2011)

Fox said:


> The guy was asked what makes him physically attracted to big women, and he answers. Unless we are talking about something I missed, this isn't really unacceptable.



the problem is that a lot of guys really have no clue whats acceptable when it comes to the general public and get shocked when it all backfires. sometimes they just play things wrong altogether.


----------



## Fox (May 9, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> the problem is that a lot of guys really have no clue whats acceptable when it comes to the general public and get shocked when it all backfires. sometimes they just play things wrong altogether.



Perhaps it was because he was giving incite of a very unusual concept.
Do you really think that just because society disapproves of something means it's wrong? If society just all got together and jumped off a cliff- you know what, nevermind. I feel that's going to go nowhere fast. 

Instead, put yourself in the FA's shoes. If you were asked what physically attracts you to larger women, how would you respond appropriately?


----------



## joswitch (May 9, 2011)

Fox said:


> The guy was asked what makes him physically attracted to big women, and he answers. Unless we are talking about something I missed, this isn't really unacceptable.



Exactly. All this talk about "be yourself" and "honesty is the best policy" and then when someone tells the truth about their desires it all "OOoooooOOOOhhhh NNnnoooooo you can't SAY that!!!"




@SuperO - the article wasn't some kind of PR excercise on behalf of FAs everywhere. Individuals were asked how they feel and they answered. That you don't like them / their answers? Has no bearing on anything.


----------



## LoveBHMS (May 9, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> who is Lawrence? i really liked what he had to say. *as far as the FA thing, goes most of the rest seemed too much like freak baiting to me. it was sort of unseemly and cartoonish to me in general. the talking about body parts rather than beauty and overall desirability was disappointingly predictable. *besides Lawrence not too many of the others do much to take this out of the realm of fetish into making it a simple fact that fat women are beautiful. as far as guys go, he was the only one who seemed in touch with the real world in the least. too bad its not going to be a good intro to the public perception of FA. i'm glad, for his own sake, that he stayed anonymous and won't have to deal with that association. he's one smart cookie. overall as far as many of the other guys went it seemed strangely socially out of touch. it was a great attempt and i congratulate everybody who took a chance and put it out there though. i really respect that. better luck next time.



Totally unfair.

You're missing a very real nuance here which is that the interviewees aren't talking about specific women, they're talking about their sexuality. If Dan had said "What I love about my partner is her arms" that's one thing, but speaking about what in general turns you on isn't freakish and certainly isn't innappropriate. It's also not particular to males---go to the FFA/BHM board and there are numerous threads about favorite body parts and discussions about liking or not liking moobs or what your ideal weight for a man is.

The only difference between fat people and skinny people is the fat. They don't have difference personalities or morals or levels of intelligence. If you're talking about being an FA, it's ridiculous to say "Well I like fat women for their overall beauty" because if it wasn't about size you wouldn't be an FA. Being an FA is only about size. 

Being attracted or not attracted to a specific individual is of course not only about size and the article speaks to that as well. FA's are not turned on by "every single fat woman alive" and i certainly haven't read any posts on here that say anything along the lines of "Just hook me up with some fat and I'm satisfied." As i said on another thread, if it were only about the fat then nobody would be single and personal ads could be written just using one word. 

There's a clear difference between trying to articulate why you might be attracted to a person versus why you're an FA.


----------



## joswitch (May 9, 2011)

Oh, fuck "appropriately"! It's such conformist BS!!! 

"Oh, you're being INappropriate! Teh horrorz!"

Ugh.

This idea that if you just follow an enomous handbook of social rules and then everyone will lurrrve you is total crap. 

Face it, in your life: 
the majority of people will be indifferent to you, some will hate you, some will like you and if you're lucky a few will love you - and that's probably going to shake out in similar numbers regardless. 

Why twist yourself up trying to deny your true self?
Crazy talk.


----------



## Surlysomething (May 9, 2011)

LoveBHMS said:


> The only difference between fat people and skinny people is the fat.


This.

And it seems to be the same players complaining about the same thing over and over again. I honestly see almost ANYTHING written about this subject as positive because it shines a light on something that so many people feel SHAME about.

Normal men/woman are attracted to fat. Why pick it apart to death?


----------



## swordchick (May 9, 2011)

I love the term "freak baiting". I am happy that Charlotte's story brought so many ladies out. As a fat woman, it is hard for me to put myself in an FA's shoes. I am the one that's living in this fat body. I am a social & sexual being, not a fetish or a freak.


----------



## FA Punk (May 10, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> the problem is that a lot of guys really have no clue *''whats acceptable when it comes to the general public''* and get shocked when it all backfires. sometimes they just play things wrong altogether.



Oh really now? Thats something that changes with the tide SuperO, like it or not men are blunt by nature, the fact is these men were asked a simple question and they answered it honestly. And you want to give them hell for that? How absurd, I may not agree with everything that they said but I give them both props for telling it like it is. By god isn't our world bloody ''PC'' enough.


----------



## stevenbbwlvr (May 10, 2011)

It's re-inspired me to continue looking for a nice full figured partner.

I cannot blame you fat chicks a bit...but you are not very receptive. If I were subjected to repeated humiliations at the hands of schmucko-males I'd feel the same way. And, perhaps, I am not much of a pick up artist. I see y'all in public, give you the 'glad eye'...rarely get a positive response.

Wrong forum, perhaps...I'd still like to have a picnic up at Pelham Bay Park for Fat Chicks and FA's...the bus to the BBQ area starts May 31...any takers? Best park in NYC.

I have some friends that will be joining me, love for you to meet them.


----------



## stevenbbwlvr (May 10, 2011)

asmiletoday said:


> Confession. I joined dims yesterday BECAUSE of that article. I didn't know there was an active ( and healthy) online community.
> 
> I will say this. I don't like how the article portrays all fat women as down on themselves for it or seeing themselves as unlovable. There are fat women, like myself, who don't look in the mirror and cringe at their body- they smile. In fact when I look at why I am single, it's because no one has been good enough for me yet- not the other way around.
> 
> Did any other fat women feel the same way about that portrayal of fat women in the article?



I went to the department store with her to buy her something to wear (she had this ratty old hoody, and I wanted to buy her a new one) and she fled in tears because she was so ashamed of her weight.

That's part of why she is my ex: you let the world judge you that way? I think you're pretty; what do you care about all those assholes?


----------



## swordchick (May 10, 2011)

The "glad eye" can come off as creepy. I wouldn't respond positively to that. What is wrong with talking to a woman? Why let the world judge you?

Superodalisque, I am glad that you aren't accepting just any kind of shit. You do not have to like what everyone said in the article. You see lots of fat people in relationships outside of this community. Many will not understand your views.


----------



## superodalisque (May 11, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> Oh really now? Thats something that changes with the tide SuperO, like it or not men are blunt by nature, the fact is these men were asked a simple question and they answered it honestly. And you want to give them hell for that? How absurd, I may not agree with everything that they said but I give them both props for telling it like it is. By god isn't our world bloody ''PC'' enough.



its not about being PC but knowing when the general public might think something is creepy. you know, its possible to say the exact same things without looking out of touch with reality. and if you are looking for a chance to help other people to relate to its better to darned well figure out what it takes to do that. its all well and good that in someone's own group certain things are fine to say. the trick is to learn what works for people outside of it as well. taste doesn't change with the tide. neither does common sense. you might think it does. but generally speaking among average day to day people there are always things that are deemed for public consumption and things that are not. its okay to do the boys will be boys thing in some places but then there are always times when people have to grow up and recognize how to get what they want out of a situation.


----------



## superodalisque (May 11, 2011)

Fox said:


> If men cannot behave, exist, or function as men, then how can they ever be accepted or respected as men?



if is not functioning as a man then maybe they need to look to themselves to do that. as far as i know men chart their own path and aren't interested in who will "allow" them to be who and what they are anyway. at least thats what my Daddy always taught me--a man who survived Jim Crowe. he was unquestionably a man by his own design and definition no matter what others said or did and waited on no one to tell him that he was acceptable. he and men like him became accepted by the force of their will and honor as men and not through some kind of step and fetch it show for others exploit and to laugh and point at. he was just openly, honestly and forthrightly a man of honor and not a permanent boychild.


----------



## superodalisque (May 11, 2011)

Fox said:


> Perhaps it was because he was giving incite of a very unusual concept.
> Do you really think that just because society disapproves of something means it's wrong? If society just all got together and jumped off a cliff- you know what, nevermind. I feel that's going to go nowhere fast.
> 
> Instead, put yourself in the FA's shoes. If you were asked what physically attracts you to larger women, how would you respond appropriately?



no. its just that there is a way to say anything in public that shows the utmost respect for the person/people someone is attracted to. if one relays too much objectifying info the others are going to disrespect you and your admiration. i rarely see men in similar venues referring to specific body realities of women of other sizes in this way unless is for playboy or something. the voice is not playboy. if you disprespect the people your attracted to people will disprespect your attraction as well.


----------



## superodalisque (May 11, 2011)

Fox said:


> The guy was asked what makes him physically attracted to big women, and he answers. Unless we are talking about something I missed, this isn't really unacceptable.



whats so hard about saying that a fat woman is beautiful or other similar descriptions along with that. is it really necessary to exclude words like gorgeous, sensual, glamourous, feminine etc...? the title of the article was guys who "like " fat chicks, not just guys who want to fuck fat body parts.


----------



## superodalisque (May 11, 2011)

Fox said:


> Perhaps it was because he was giving incite of a very unusual concept.
> Do you really think that just because society disapproves of something means it's wrong? If society just all got together and jumped off a cliff- you know what, nevermind. I feel that's going to go nowhere fast.
> 
> Instead, put yourself in the FA's shoes. If you were asked what physically attracts you to larger women, how would you respond appropriately?



i can talk about what attracts me to a fat man and respect him at the same time. those two concepts ar not mutually exclusive for me. i myself think fat men are gorgeous, manly, loving , warm desirable human beings. i think they are extremely sensual. there is nothing sweeter than a big warm all encompasing hug. i love how they look and feel. there are a lot of very handsome fat men out there that i find completely adorable. now was that really so hard to do? 

PS: for those who don't know, these are my true feelings about fat men even though i'm not an FA myself.


----------



## superodalisque (May 11, 2011)

swordchick said:


> The "glad eye" can come off as creepy. I wouldn't respond positively to that. What is wrong with talking to a woman? Why let the world judge you?
> 
> Superodalisque, I am glad that you aren't accepting just any kind of shit. You do not have to like what everyone said in the article. You see lots of fat people in relationships outside of this community. Many will not understand your views.



thx hon. you know there ar a lot of BBWs on the street who run from that kind of talk and people don't understand why. its not because they don't want their body loved and appreciated along with the rest of them. they just dont want to be disrespected as a woman. no one needs to talk about very intimate aspects of why they like a woman with strangers. the same affection, love and admiration can be shown in public without going too far. its a beautiful thing when a man expresses how he feels fat women are beautiful and attractive but as with anything you have to know when and how to put the brakes on.


----------



## joswitch (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its not about being PC but knowing when the general public might think something is creepy.



"Creepy" is in the eye of the beholder.

And as for what the general public - well the general public is mostly fat hating, so why on earth would you put value in what they think???



> you know, its possible to say the exact same things without looking out of touch with reality. and if you are looking for a chance to help other people to relate to its better to darned well figure out what it takes to do that. its all well and good that in someone's own group certain things are fine to say. the trick is to learn what works for people outside of it as well.* taste doesn't change with the tide. neither does common sense.*



Errr... Yes, it does. Read some history.

Clue: When Rubens was painting BBWs were the height of good taste.



> you might think it does. but generally speaking among average day to day people there are always things that are deemed for public consumption and things that are not. its okay to do the boys will be boys thing in some places but then there are always times when people have to grow up and recognize *how to get what they want out of a situation.*



^Here's a thought - maybe all the people in the article were looking to "get" out of the "situation" was to genuinely express themselves so as to be understood. Regardless of what other people might think.

i.e. maybe the men being interviewed weren't thinking "Oh, man, I'm really gonna score some chicks now!" maybe they were thinking "Oh, it's good to be honest."


----------



## joswitch (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> if is not functioning as a man then maybe they need to look to themselves to do that. as far as i know men chart their own path and aren't interested in who will *"allow" them to be who and what they are *anyway. at least thats what my Daddy always taught me--a man who survived Jim Crowe. he was unquestionably a man by his own design and definition no matter what others said or did and waited on no one to tell him that he was acceptable. he and men like him became accepted by the force of their will and honor as men and not through some *kind of step and fetch it show for others exploit and to laugh and point at.* he was just openly, honestly and forthrightly a man of honor and *not a permanent boychild.*



^Wow! could you BE more insulting to the interviewees?? Damn.

Also, that you got *that (bolded)* out of the article says way more about you
than the article itself, IMO.


----------



## joswitch (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> whats so hard about saying that a fat woman is beautiful or other similar descriptions along with that. is it really necessary to exclude words like* gorgeous, sensual, glamourous, feminine *etc...?



^you mean words that gloss over all physical reality and can be applied to anyone that anyone anywhere is attracted to? :doh:



> the title of the article was guys who "like " fat chicks, not just guys who want to fuck fat body parts.



^again, if that's all you got out of it? = your problem


----------



## joswitch (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i can talk about what attracts me to a fat man and respect him at the same time. those two concepts ar not mutually exclusive for me. i myself think fat men are gorgeous, manly, loving , warm desirable human beings. i think they are extremely sensual. there is nothing sweeter than a big warm all encompasing hug. i love how they look and feel. there are a lot of very handsome fat men out there that i find completely adorable. now was that really so hard to do?
> 
> PS: for those who don't know, these are my true feelings about fat men even though i'm not an FA myself.



Congratulations on expressing YOURself. Shame you have such a problem with others doing so.


----------



## joswitch (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> thx hon. you know there ar* a lot of BBWs on the street who run from that kind of talk*



Bwahahahaha!!!
I have a mental image of Dan reading this article outloud with a loud hailer and starting some kind of mass exodus, like in Independence Day.




> and people don't understand why. its not because they don't want their body loved and appreciated along with the rest of them. they just dont want to be disrespected as a woman. no one needs to talk about very intimate aspects of why they like a woman with strangers. the same affection, love and admiration can be shown in public without going too far. its a beautiful thing when a man expresses how he feels fat women are beautiful and attractive but as with anything you have to know when and how to put the brakes on.



Oh, puh-leeeeeeeze. 
Not all women are terrified of teh menz and teh sex.

You really need to get out more. 
That article was waaaaaaay tame.


----------



## MarkZ (May 11, 2011)

Excellent article, The Village Voice, when I worked in The East Village back in The 70's, was the coolest publication anywhere. Growing up in NYC, was always an interesting experience. As a young FA, I was ostrasized for my taste in women all the time. The article was very refreshing, and a reminder of how far we have come in our acceptance movement. For those like myself, and Ned, who have witnessed it all for the past 40 years, it has been a great ride!


----------



## Eclectic_Girl (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> whats so hard about saying that a fat woman is beautiful or other similar descriptions along with that. is it really necessary to exclude words like gorgeous, sensual, glamourous, feminine etc...? the title of the article was guys who "like " fat chicks, not just guys who want to fuck fat body parts.



Maybe because they don't particularly like women who fit the adjectives you mention. There are men who like skinny tomboys, hippie chicks, executive bossypants, geeky girls, or just plain quirky ladies - Why wouldn't there be FAs who like the same broad range of styles and personalities? 

Anyway, how do you know the guys *didn't* expound on the less tangible aspects of loving us fat girls, and those quotes didn't make it in the article because they didn't add anything to the story? Journalism 101: don't write vague bullshit about what people already know (different people like different qualities in other people), write about something specific that's outside of someone's general sphere of reference and therefore interesting to them.



superodalisque said:


> i can talk about what attracts me to a fat man and respect him at the same time. those two concepts ar not mutually exclusive for me. i myself think fat men are gorgeous, manly, loving , warm desirable human beings. i think they are extremely sensual. there is nothing sweeter than a big warm all encompasing hug. i love how they look and feel. there are a lot of very handsome fat men out there that i find completely adorable. now was that really so hard to do?
> 
> PS: for those who don't know, these are my true feelings about fat men even though i'm not an FA myself.



I don't think fat men are automatically gorgeous, manly, loving, warm desirable human beings that are extremely sensual. I have known *some* fat men that are (oh, yes I have :smitten, and I have known some fat men that are neurotic, and some that are cold, and some that are not particularly handsome, and some that are just plain dull to be around. I respect them all as people, but nobody's going to write a story about that. News Flash: Some guys are mensches and some are jackholes! It's so obvious it hardly bears talking about.

And I'm not seeing a difference between you talking about loving an all encompassing hug from a fat guy and Dan talking about enjoying falling asleep on a fat girl's upper arm. Nothing disrespectful in either case.


----------



## Lamia (May 11, 2011)

stevenbbwlvr said:


> And, perhaps, I am not much of a pick up artist. I see y'all in public, give you the 'glad eye'...rarely get a positive response.
> 
> .



I am hoping this helps you out with this one. If a guy is smiling at me or looking me up and down. I don't know if he's thinking "wow she's hot" or "GOD what a fat pig!"

Fat women are going to need the direct reproach. If a guy approached me and said "Hi I noticed you across the way and wanted to tell you I think you're very pretty. Here is my number if you'd like to get to know each other better."

That to me is the perfect pick up because it puts the ball in our court and there is no hazy interpretations to be made.


----------



## Donna (May 11, 2011)

joswitch said:


> *snip*
> Oh, puh-leeeeeeeze.
> Not all women are terrified of teh menz and teh sex.
> *snip*



Errr, am I reading you correctly...you think that because a woman doesn't like to discuss sex publicly that she is somehow terrified of men/sex?


----------



## Chimpi (May 11, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its not about being PC but knowing when the general public might think something is creepy. you know, its possible to say the exact same things without looking out of touch with reality. and if you are looking for a chance to help other people to relate to its better to darned well figure out what it takes to do that. its all well and good that in someone's own group certain things are fine to say. the trick is to learn what works for people outside of it as well. taste doesn't change with the tide. neither does common sense. you might think it does. but generally speaking among average day to day people there are always things that are deemed for public consumption and things that are not. its okay to do the boys will be boys thing in some places but then there are always times when people have to grow up and recognize how to get what they want out of a situation.



The only problem with all of that, though, as I see it is that you cannot appease the minds of everyone reading the article. If it's said one way, _someone_ will disagree, get upset, become offended, etc etc. If it's said another way, someone else will disagree, get upset, become offended, etc etc. There's no possible way to frame everything in a presentable manner to everyone.
As others have said, they were straight-forward questions, and the answers given were honest answers. I appreciated the manner in which they were answered (especially via Dan) because not only was it simple and seemingly "normal" (in the sense that it's a common occurrence), but it shows that fat people have sexual aspects to their being as do the men/women that desire fat people. I do not think most of the things said in the article were coarse or disrespectful, nor "freak baiting."
This unknown phenomenon - "The general public" - aren't always made up of mindless, negative, judgmental scumfucks who jump on people for not wording things in a presentable fashion. I would say that the general trend of society over the years has become more edgy, more honest and free, sometimes more harsh and coarse. 

... I just don't see what you see. I thought the questions were answered in a very fair way and fat admirers were represented very well; decent, "normal people" type fat admirers.

*EDIT:* WhiskeyTangoFoxtrot, I had some very strange typos...


----------



## AnnMarie (May 11, 2011)

I like when people speak their truth, no matter what it is. Padding, planned bullshit isn't real - and I'd rather have real and possibly negative any day over fake, insincere, or tempered just to appease the masses. 


Change is often about brutal honesty to open eyes... revolutionary change at least. I don't think we need anything short of that. Articles like this blaze a path in that direction and I'm grateful for that and for those who contributed to the piece. All of them.


----------



## superodalisque (May 12, 2011)

Donna said:


> Errr, am I reading you correctly...you think that because a woman doesn't like to discuss sex publicly that she is somehow terrified of men/sex?



thats what the man said hehe


----------



## superodalisque (May 12, 2011)

Chimpi said:


> The only problem with all of that, though, as I see it is that you cannot appease the minds of everyone reading the article. If it's said one way, _someone_ will disagree, get upset, become offended, etc etc. If it's said another way, someone else will disagree, get upset, become offended, etc etc. There's no possible way to frame everything in a presentable manner to everyone.
> As others have said, they were straight-forward questions, and the answers given were honest answers. I appreciated the manner in which they were answered (especially via Dan) because not only was it simple and seemingly "normal" (in the sense that it's a common occurrence), but it shows that fat people have sexual aspects to their being as do the men/women that desire fat people. I do not think most of the things said in the article were coarse or disrespectful, nor "freak baiting."
> This unknown phenomenon - "The general public" - aren't always made up of mindless, negative, judgmental scumfucks who jump on people for not wording things in a presentable fashion. I would say that the general trend of society over the years has become more edgy, more honest and free, sometimes more harsh and coarse.
> 
> ...




i can respect that. part of the reason that i said what i said was because i actually passed it by my housemates and other friends who have no idea of any of this. they aren't anti fat at all. they just wondered why it was so hard for someone just to say that these women were beautiful. i wondered myself. as far as i saw there wasn't one 'awwww" moment, that lot of my friends seem to be waiting for, in the entire piece. a guy friend of mine also said that he thought a lot of what was said was equal to a guy talking about what he liked about his gf boobs in the voice in detail to the general public. all i'm saying is that people creepify FAs for a reason i'm just passing on what IMO the reason is based on that article. 

most times the issue its not even because the women they like are fat. its mainly because a lot don't seem to know exactly what it really should sound like to compliment someone. some seem to have no clue about when and where to say what and make their attraction look very fetishy and impersonal to the outside world. i have nothing against fetish at all. but, if you are looking at people and saying "i want to be accepted" and "i AM normal" what that actually takes has to be acknowledged. you can't go around saying out of the way things that would be looked at in a suspect way even if the woman weren't fat. thats all i'm saying. honestly, how do people usually react to a man who is always going around talking about his gf's various body parts to strangers? in general conversation do you tell people that you love your gf because she is beautiful or just because you think her arms are fat? do you see how the contrast between the two sounds? at the very least shouldn't you say she is beautiful first before you go into all of that?

sometimes i get the feeling that some guys feel so outside of things and so different on their own that they bring that perspective to every discussion about their attraction, even exagerrating exactly how different they are from every other man out there. the perspective they take doesn't hold water. people who don't call themselves FAs are reading the article and asking me what all of the fuss is about and saying that their sister in law is really fat etc... and they don't see anyone making that big of a fuss out of it. they say they certainly are not asking other men to look at thier wives and approve of her body so that they can personally feel better about who they choose. i just find the whole approach strange myself. but then i'm finding that i'm not the only one. like one firend said "who are they trying to prove something to? its not me because its none of my business." i do tend to wonder exactly why someone would actually make that into the whole world's business as though there is no such thing as a private life. why does someone need all of the general public's support of his private sex life, particularly from people who don't care. and even worse why do they need the approval from people who care in a negative way toward something, thats for the most part the most normal and human thing happening right now, based simply on demographics. 

this is one of the very few times i that i think a reporter has actually been nicer to fat women than people who should know better, the writer quickly acknowledged them as a large beautiful smokey eyed woman etc... there were other descriptions that were perfectly delightful to anyone from the reporter. all i'm asking is where were ours? its kind of sad to think a stranger was more appreciative and respectful thanmost of the male participants.

over all for me the insistance that guys can't or won't or shouldn't at least also say that a fat woman is simply beautiful, lovely, attractive etc... after the fact smacks of some kind of internalized hogging to me. it says she isn't worthy of those kinds of compliments and that guys who like them don't have to give them. and that maybe deep down he doesn't feel she is actually beautiful. if a guy can't actually even say it why would a fat woman believe he thinks that its so? that could be one reason why some women don't believe that some guys are really attracted--because they can't come out and say so. otherwise why so much resistance to simply saying so. what would it cost them anyway? and also why so much resistance to the idea. others, including the reporter who as far as i know isn't an FA, can see that beauty in fat women even if they aren't personally their thing. sometimes the fuckability quotient just isn't enough. after all even hoggers can fuck a fat body part. sometimes maybe FAs need to be able to totally differentiate themselves and be able to bring out everything positive they have to offer a fat woman very clearly , distinctly and without a doubt to anyone.

simply, if you want people to think that you are more than just some guy who is just driven by a crazy fetish you must act like one. respect yourself and the woman. a fat woman's body may be somewhat different but she is still a woman and needs to be seen as being treated as one. she is not just someone so horrendous that will grasp at any straw since she is so desperately unattracive. so it needs to be clear to people that she is desirable , as are all women, on all kinds of levels. 

sorry but the way that some of the guys talked about the women and their bodies remind me of how men used to compare "N" wenches during the times of slavery. i half expected the reporter to relate how one opened her mouth to show her teeth. they were not people, they were not beautiful, they did not deserve the status of being a full woman. some slaveholders loved enslaved women very much. but they were ashamed and bowed to custom and prejudice even selling their own children out of shame and embarassment and keeping other wives who were more socially acceptable. that was just just wrong. there were others who were just happy to degrade and use any warm hole they could own and control. for their own sake, i just don't want FAs to look like that. but if they want to take that path then who am i to stop them?


----------



## Wild Zero (May 12, 2011)

There's this thing called nuance that hardly comes across when a heartfelt two hour plus interview with me and my girlfriend of eight years meets the editor's axe. I'm certain other participants had similar interviews that weren't just "FAT FAT FAT FAT FAT BONERS FAT"


----------



## superodalisque (May 12, 2011)

joswitch said:


> "Creepy" is in the eye of the beholder.
> 
> And as for what the general public - well the general public is mostly fat hating, so why on earth would you put value in what they think???
> 
> ...



BBWs are still the height of good taste unless someone is weak minded enough to totally buy into the cheap yellow journalism diet product selling media of today. 

what are people supposed to understand? that most of these guys are attached to specific kinds and sizes of body parts and might even be incapable of other human feelings? 


so being honest means that the only consideration a guy could possibly have for a fat woman or any woman is her body parts and the sizes of them? is that what you are trying to say? is that the total basis of human relationships as you know them? 

when someone is trying to express themselves its important to keep in mind who you are talking to and to be able to relate to the audience and allow them to see themselves in you. IMO this train was missed at the station by some of the participants--sorry.

yes, creepy is in the eye of the beholder. according to my friends who know absolutely nothing about this and were waiting openly to be educated, a lot of creepiness was beheld--and not because the women were fat.


----------



## superodalisque (May 12, 2011)

Wild Zero said:


> There's this thing called nuance that hardly comes across when a heartfelt two hour plus interview with me and my girlfriend of eight years meets the editor's axe. I'm certain other participants had similar interviews that weren't just "FAT FAT FAT FAT FAT BONERS FAT"



i'm glad. i liked what they quoted from you in the article very much. but the way a lot of others were related didn't come across that way to me. i wonder, what was the difference? maybe the reporter was trying to relate each participants overall impression. i hope not. if it was that was worrying. but i don't really think she wrote what wasn't intended because no one has really said in this thread that the author somehow twisted and misrepresented what they actually said. and going by what those same people have written on dims previously i doubt it as well. its okay to express yourself that way here but claiming to want to be accepted by outsiders and then falling headlong into making yourself look exactly like the stereotype you claim you don't want to be is a problem.


----------



## superodalisque (May 12, 2011)

joswitch said:


> Bwahahahaha!!!
> I have a mental image of Dan reading this article outloud with a loud hailer and starting some kind of mass exodus, like in Independence Day.
> 
> 
> ...



then why are you guys always bemoaning the fact that women don't want to deal with you especially when you go into the i like fat chicks thing. get a clue. a woman wants you to be attracted to her as an individual and not as one of a mass of fat chicks whose body parts you like.


----------



## ashmamma84 (May 12, 2011)

Felecia, 

What happened to individuality? Isn't that what you've gone on about when talking about black folks being lumped together or being stereotyped in some form or fashion? That for you, because you're an individual it doesn't bother you so much because you are who you are. Who's to say some fat admiring folk don't feel the same way and the general public can and will think what they want regardless concerning both fat and black people. 

I'm trying to understand how this is different. I'm coming up short. Help a sista out.


----------



## Chimpi (May 12, 2011)

Thanks for taking the time to explain your viewpoints, Felecia 




superodalisque said:


> sometimes i get the feeling that some guys feel so outside of things and so different on their own that they bring that perspective to every discussion about their attraction, even exagerrating exactly how different they are from every other man out there. the perspective they take doesn't hold water. people who don't call themselves FAs are reading the article and asking me what all of the fuss is about and saying that their sister in law is really fat etc... and they don't see anyone making that big of a fuss out of it. they say they certainly are not asking other men to look at thier wives and approve of her body so that they can personally feel better about who they choose. i just find the whole approach strange myself. but then i'm finding that i'm not the only one. like one firend said "who are they trying to prove something to? its not me because its none of my business." i do tend to wonder exactly why someone would actually make that into the whole world's business as though there is no such thing as a private life. why does someone need all of the general public's support of his private sex life, particularly from people who don't care. and even worse why do they need the approval from people who care in a negative way toward something, thats for the most part the most normal and human thing happening right now, based simply on demographics.



Then you pose thoughts in my mind where in response I ask:
Why write articles at all?
Why inform people of anything?
Why discuss news and happenings?
Why do blogs and books and conversations exist?
Pardon my sarcastic dialogue, but in response to this, it seems you're hinting that fat admirers, fat attraction, fat sex, fat women should not be written to be viewed by any audience. At least that's what I took away from this. What's wrong with showing people that fat admirers exist, that fat women (and men) _can_ and *are* the object of mens (and womens) desires? I wouldn't mind saying in a public outlet that I have sex (or make love to, or fuck, or delve deep into the womb of...) with fat women and like it. I also wouldn't mind saying in a public outlet that I think fat women are the most aesthetically beautiful figures and shapes in our known world; both physical and dimensional.
Honestly, if it's none of your friends' business what has been displayed in this particular article, then her viewpoint is completely void of discussion. It wasn't written for her. It was written for fat people, fat admirers, and those open to this way of life, this type of attraction.



superodalisque said:


> this is one of the very few times i that i think a reporter has actually been nicer to fat women than people who should know better, the writer quickly acknowledged them as a large beautiful smokey eyed woman etc... there were other descriptions that were perfectly delightful to anyone from the reporter. all i'm asking is where were ours? its kind of sad to think a stranger was more appreciative and respectful thanmost of the male participants.



And then quickly went into sexual discussion:


> Entries happily, ravenously, robustly referenced double bellies, back rolls, and “big old ham thighs.” Feminine body shapes were compared to pears, apples, and one calabash squash; their weights spanned from 180 pounds to over 500. “Big Fat Sexy Kitty,” a young woman who described herself as five feet tall and 260 pounds, wrote in: “I want fat sex. I want my jiggly bits rubbed and squished and fondled sexually.”



This set a specific tone. The writer used "Big Fat Sexy Kitty" as an example, not "Big Beautiful Bellied Bonnie" or "Sweet Sensitive Supersized Samantha" (or whatever example one could think up) expressing how they love to be treated above and beyond wonderful, like real women, real persons, etc etc. The entire tone set by the writer that I'm aware of is sexual in nature. When questions such as "Dear Askaguywholikesfatchicks: Is it because fat girls are easy? —AAA" and "Misconception #1: Loving fat women is a fetish." and "Misconception #2: Fat Admirers pursue fat women because they are vulnerable prey." and "Misconception #3: Guys who are sexually attracted to fat chicks are sexually attracted to all fat chicks." come into the picture, you answer the question. I'd answer in the same manner - directly, honestly - true to the question.

I still see nothing wrong with fat women being talked about sexually. Sure, there can (and certainly should) be articles written about fat women in poetic and complimentary manners (of which I would fail hardcore at), expressing how fat women are real women and not sexy fat body parts. But again, I don't see an issue with it. I think it was a very healthy article overall, doing exactly what Dan said on the very first page: “I write about my preference for fat women in hopes that other men who share my preference will make themselves known so they’ll stop being little ballsacks and let the millions of fat women in this country find them.” *In other words, Guys Who Like Fat Chicks are not make-believe. “We’re out there.”*


----------



## swordchick (May 12, 2011)

I wish they would have put your interview in. I like what you said in the article.



Wild Zero said:


> There's this thing called nuance that hardly comes across when a heartfelt two hour plus interview with me and my girlfriend of eight years meets the editor's axe. I'm certain other participants had similar interviews that weren't just "FAT FAT FAT FAT FAT BONERS FAT"


----------



## PeanutButterfly (May 12, 2011)

Chimpi said:


> I still see nothing wrong with fat women being talked about sexually. Sure, there can (and certainly should) be articles written about fat women in poetic and complimentary manners (of which I would fail hardcore at), expressing how fat women are real women and not sexy fat body parts. But again, I don't see an issue with it. I think it was a very healthy article overall, doing exactly what Dan said on the very first page: “I write about my preference for fat women in hopes that other men who share my preference will make themselves known so they’ll stop being little ballsacks and let the millions of fat women in this country find them.” *In other words, Guys Who Like Fat Chicks are not make-believe. “We’re out there.”*



I agree with this. I think that main point of the article was to show that fat can and IS sexually attractive to a percentage of people. A lot of fat women know they have "beautiful souls" or "beautiful personalities" but if they haven't been exposed to our community they often doubt being taken seriously as a sexual being. I think the article was trying to prove that all those fat women in relationships that SuperO was referring to are probably (or possibly) with men who aren't just in it for the "beautiful soul". Those men aren't saints willing to look past an outer shell or put up with the extra pounds. They think those women are sexy as hell. They're with fat women because that fat women are they're ideal, not just a consulation prize. Many non-Fa's can't fathom a guy actually wanting to be with a fat chick unless she has something really spectacular to offer, then maybe it's ok to put up with her body. I liked that the article dispelled this myth and showed that FAs are not settling. I think that was the purpose of the sexual emphasis.


----------



## ConnieLynn (May 12, 2011)

Ernest, I so want to rep you, but seems I can't since I repped you recently in a silly fetish thread  



Ernest Nagel said:


> We are what we are, we like what we like. When guys are expected to defend their predilections for blondes, boobs or petite girls I'll start trying to dissect what I like about SS/BBW. I don't expect to get very far though. An out FA is someone who knows societal concerns and judgmental aesthetics shouldn't keep him from having what he wants. I'm neither proud nor ashamed of my preference so there's nothing for me to rationalize or think about. It's just what's so. It's not like I'm trying to order pizza in a Chinese restaurant; more like I'm in a steakhouse and I want THE BIG ONE! Would anyone question that choice?



I enjoyed the article, have no complaints about it, but then I didn't really expect it to be ground breaking. Thought it was great that there were a few fat loving guys willing to go on the record. Kudos to y'all. There were two things in the in the article that I think have even more of a chance of making a difference than the text of the article -- the awesome photos and the mention of Dimensions.


----------



## mithrandirjn (May 13, 2011)

PeanutButterfly said:


> I agree with this. I think that main point of the article was to show that fat can and IS sexually attractive to a percentage of people. A lot of fat women know they have "beautiful souls" or "beautiful personalities" but if they haven't been exposed to our community they often doubt being taken seriously as a sexual being. I think the article was trying to prove that all those fat women in relationships that SuperO was referring to are probably (or possibly) with men who aren't just in it for the "beautiful soul". Those men aren't saints willing to look past an outer shell or put up with the extra pounds. They think those women are sexy as hell. They're with fat women because that fat women are they're ideal, not just a consulation prize. Many non-Fa's can't fathom a guy actually wanting to be with a fat chick unless she has something really spectacular to offer, then maybe it's ok to put up with her body. I liked that the article dispelled this myth and showed that FAs are not settling. I think that was the purpose of the sexual emphasis.



Yep, you just made a point I tried to make earlier better than I did.

An article that spends its time dwelling all on the "beautiful soul/personality" aspect isn't a bad thing at all, but an article like this tells a big woman "You can be appreciated by some guys for your surface looks just like any other woman." Does it mean there's a few guys out there who are shallow and not looking for anything deep or committed? Absolutely, but, well, that's not a very uncommon thing among guys of ANY body type preference.


----------



## Fox (May 13, 2011)

PeanutButterfly said:


> I agree with this. I think that main point of the article was to show that fat can and IS sexually attractive to a percentage of people. A lot of fat women know they have "beautiful souls" or "beautiful personalities" but if they haven't been exposed to our community they often doubt being taken seriously as a sexual being. I think the article was trying to prove that all those fat women in relationships that SuperO was referring to are probably (or possibly) with men who aren't just in it for the "beautiful soul". Those men aren't saints willing to look past an outer shell or put up with the extra pounds. They think those women are sexy as hell. They're with fat women because that fat women are they're ideal, not just a consulation prize. Many non-Fa's can't fathom a guy actually wanting to be with a fat chick unless she has something really spectacular to offer, then maybe it's ok to put up with her body. I liked that the article dispelled this myth and showed that FAs are not settling. I think that was the purpose of the sexual emphasis.



Totally. The article is about guys who like fat chicks. This was obviously an article in which the writers/editors wanted to gear in specifically toward the physical aspect of it (because people already understand the concept of how the mental/emotional attraction would work). If the interviewer asked the FA "What do you find PHYSICALLY attractive about your heavy partner?" And the FA answered "My partner is beautiful, sensual, and has a wonderful personality. Physical attraction is not THAT important."
The interviewer is going to think "So basically, this guy doesn't like fat women. He just sucks hard at getting with a hot chick and he's learning to settle."

I guaranty you that's what would happen. But instead, that guy said, "Fat upper arms are awesome. I would almost say Im an arms guy. I didnt know that they would be that soft. I, like, fell asleep on a girls arm once."
And the interviewer's response was "wow" and I think that rather than a "what a freak" kind of wow, his response was more of a "OMG They really are real!" Because the writer, editor, interviewer, whatever, is obviously being selective of what he wants to be in the article.

SuperO, what you don't get is the point of journalism. I mean, you saw each person interviewed was only quoted for 1-3 sentences each. Do you really think that's all there was to the interviews? Or do you think the editor and the writer selected certain quotes that they thought pertained to the subject? Do you really think the article was written LIVE with all the interview subjects in the room answering single questions at a time while some jackass narrated the whole thing in third person and some guy was typing the whole thing out painstakingly before a live audience of baked commentators who should stop reading articles and go to bed? 
I know that you're pretty much mad at all FAs for... I guess quite a list of reasons, but don't let your rage blind your common sense.


----------



## joswitch (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> then why are you guys always bemoaning the fact that women don't want to deal with you especially when you go into the i like fat chicks thing. get a clue. a woman wants you to be attracted to her as an individual and not as one of a mass of fat chicks whose body parts you like.



Er, *I* don't "bemoan" such a thing. Yeah, I've met women who FREAK when they learn I like cute fat chicks. I don't date them. I date chicks who are comfortable / don't mind or *appreciate* my orientation. Yes, they exist! Thank you, ladies!

It's not a "problem" for me (other than the rarity of said sane chicks). *It's a problem for the fat-negative chicks who are missing the fuck out.

That *last sentence is just thrown in there as a hypocrite detector.. Biting? 
Nice try, tho'.

Also, that you took "one of a mass of fat chicks" from the article means you totally missed the important point that was CLEARLY made (by Dan): FAs do NOT fancy ANY and EVERY fat chick, anymore than TAs fancy any and every thin chick. FFS!

So, once again you're reading selectively to confirm YOUR prejudices.


----------



## Jes (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i'm glad. i liked what they quoted from you in the article very much. but the way a lot of others were related didn't come across that way to me. i wonder, what was the difference? maybe the reporter was trying to relate each participants overall impression. i hope not. if it was that was worrying. but i don't really think she wrote what wasn't intended because no one has really said in this thread that the author somehow twisted and misrepresented what they actually said. and going by what those same people have written on dims previously i doubt it as well. its okay to express yourself that way here but claiming to want to be accepted by outsiders and then falling headlong into making yourself look exactly like the stereotype you claim you don't want to be is a problem.



Super, I understood a lot of the points you were making, but one thing that occurs to me is that the tone of a discussion is already set by who is asking the questions and why. I do think (and we may disagree) there's still a stigma with liking partners who are not considered 'conventionally attractive' (whatever that is) and so it's already seen as an unusual thing, something outside of the mainstream. THAT is why these people are being talked to. That specific issue is the reason they hold any interest for the reporter and the reader. They're not being interviewed b/c they're average everyday people (though, certainly, they are), they're specifically being asked to address fat-related stuff. We may know that functional fat people and functional FAs are just like everyone else, but if you're going to write a specific article about the phenomena of fat people and FAs, then you're setting up a dynamic in which the situation is considered fringe. It's not surprising that the answers to fringe-y questions read as noticeably fringe-y, right? And, WZero's point about what was kept and what was discarded in the writing of the article is a good one as well.


----------



## Surlysomething (May 13, 2011)

The only think i'm curious about is where you all find the time to write these long, winding posts. It's mind-boggling!


----------



## Fox (May 13, 2011)

joswitch said:


> So, once again you're reading selectively to confirm YOUR prejudices.




And I'm sorry if it seems like I'm bashing you, SuperO, but a number of us are convinced that you've got some serious prejudice (Me especially). I've spent my whole life suffering prejudice for a number of different things. I'm sensitive to it. I know what to look for in a prejudice person. I know the symptoms. I know how one would function, think, feel, etc. I KNOW for a fact, that most prejudice people would never just come out and admit they have prejudice against anyone (those who are proud of their hatred aren't that common, but I actually have a little more respect for the ones that admit to it than the ones who don't).

It seems that you think the FAs here are mad because they're trying to force BBW on the same site to date them, or something like that (Your theory still confuses me a little). That's not what's happening as far as I've seen. It's just that some of the stuff you say tends to come off as offensive sometimes. I just read some of the things you say and it puts me in a subconsciously defensive state. Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing or something you shouldn't do. You are an American citizen on an internet forum made for people like you. You have the right to say what you want. My only point here is that if you walk into a room of FAs and say "Being a FA isn't really anything more than a physical attraction and I want more than that." you shouldn't be surprised if you get into an argument.


----------



## superodalisque (May 13, 2011)

ashmamma84 said:


> Felecia,
> 
> What happened to individuality? Isn't that what you've gone on about when talking about black folks being lumped together or being stereotyped in some form or fashion? That for you, because you're an individual it doesn't bother you so much because you are who you are. Who's to say some fat admiring folk don't feel the same way and the general public can and will think what they want regardless concerning both fat and black people.
> 
> I'm trying to understand how this is different. I'm coming up short. Help a sista out.



its only different since these people claim they are asking for acceptance and some kind of normalcy when it comes to how the public views them. do you really feel its the public standard to go around generally talking about women's body parts as the sole and only reason a person can/should be attracted to them? i'm sorry but i just don't live in that world. its okay for a sex site or for locker room talk or kidding around with friends but not for any kind of serious advancement of yoursefl from the land of creeps in the public eye. 

as far as myself personally, i'm not asking anyone to accept me. i accept my self. in that sense we are not all so different. however, i'm not the one coming here and claiming that people are stopping me from being black, fat or anything else about who i am intrinsicly. i'm not in need of that kind of approval to just go out into the world on a daily basis to just be me. i'm not downing anyone's opinion and i feel they are free to state it. all i'm saying is there is away to get what you claim you want and a way not to get what you say you want. 

its still a huge mystery to me how insisting on leaving out the fact that fat women are beautiful is such a problem in so many ways in so many places. is it really so controversial? should it be? what is it saying if it is?


----------



## superodalisque (May 13, 2011)

Fox said:


> And I'm sorry if it seems like I'm bashing you, SuperO, but a number of us are convinced that you've got some serious prejudice (Me especially). I've spent my whole life suffering prejudice for a number of different things. I'm sensitive to it. I know what to look for in a prejudice person. I know the symptoms. I know how one would function, think, feel, etc. I KNOW for a fact, that most prejudice people would never just come out and admit they have prejudice against anyone (those who are proud of their hatred aren't that common, but I actually have a little more respect for the ones that admit to it than the ones who don't).
> 
> It seems that you think the FAs here are mad because they're trying to force BBW on the same site to date them, or something like that (Your theory still confuses me a little). That's not what's happening as far as I've seen. It's just that some of the stuff you say tends to come off as offensive sometimes. I just read some of the things you say and it puts me in a subconsciously defensive state. Now, I'm not saying it's a bad thing or something you shouldn't do. You are an American citizen on an internet forum made for people like you. You have the right to say what you want. My only point here is that if you walk into a room of FAs and say "Being a FA isn't really anything more than a physical attraction and I want more than that." you shouldn't be surprised if you get into an argument.



no i'm not prejudiced, just honest. i have no balls in this game so i am truly free to say what i feel. i dont depend on this for friends, lovers or a social life. i just really want people to are fat to have everything they deserve out of life. i'm not the only person who feels as i do. many of my closest friends are FAs. i adore them. because i do i will never lie to them about how i feel about certain things. they get enough lies told to them and then wonder why the public perception of them is not what they want. i'm also close enough friends to know that many of them don't even feel the way that you seem to. they can see it when something important has been left out. you see, a lot of them are not here posting because actually they understand and don't want to be associated with a lot of the guys here because they already know better. thats why people also have a very hard time even creating an FA site because a lot
of guys who like fat women also find the politics uncomfortable. they look at the pix and leave. they don;t come to any event to meet up with other guys. why? because they feel there are folks who are out of touch with teh rest of the world as well.


----------



## The Orange Mage (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its only different since these people claim they are asking for acceptance and some kind of normalcy when it comes to how the public views them. do you really feel its the public standard to go around generally talking about women's body parts as the *sole and only reason* a person can/should be attracted to them? i'm sorry but i just don't live in that world. its okay for a sex site or for locker room talk or kidding around with friends but not for any kind of serious advancement of yoursefl from the land of creeps in the public eye.



In these discussions it's always assumed that FAs don't want a partner with a great, matching personality and all the other things that make a relationship work. This is VERY a bad assumption. :|


----------



## FA Punk (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its not about being PC but knowing when the general public might think something is creepy. you know, its possible to say the exact same things without looking out of touch with reality. and if you are looking for a chance to help other people to relate to its better to darned well figure out what it takes to do that. its all well and good that in someone's own group certain things are fine to say. the trick is to learn what works for people outside of it as well. taste doesn't change with the tide. neither does common sense. you might think it does. but generally speaking among average day to day people there are always things that are deemed for public consumption and things that are not. its okay to do the boys will be boys thing in some places but then there are always times when people have to grow up and recognize how to get what they want out of a situation.


This wasn't a puplic place lady! This was an article for a god damn magazine for crying out loud. THESE DUDES WHERE ASKED WHAT TURNS THEM ON!!!!!!!...Sorry if it makes ya mad they didn't say it the way *YOU* wanted them to say it but this wasn't written to please you was it? Or for that matter anybody, these men like I already said were asked honest questions and they answered them honestly nuff said!

And to assume these dudes don't have enough common sense to know how to act in public place is retarded. I my not agree 100% with everything that was said but I'll be damed to be told what to say when someone asks me a honest question, and you will most likely not agree with that SuperO but as a human being I have a right to say what I feel is right in my heart of hearts.


----------



## Blackjack (May 13, 2011)

The Orange Mage said:


> This is VERY a bad assumption. :|



Would you expect anything else from SuperO?


----------



## Diana_Prince245 (May 13, 2011)

I feel like some folks are assuming the men in this article are interested in their significant others only for the sex, something that is not really backed up in the article. I mean I really love skinny guys, the skinnier the better most of the time, and I could give some pretty blunt reasons that may seem as if I'm merely objectifying the men I've dated if asked. But the fact that they were skinny and I was turned on by it was pretty far from the only reason I was involved with them. If they hadn't had personalities and interests that meshed with mine, I wouldn't have bothered with them, not matter how physically attractive I found them.


----------



## AnnMarie (May 13, 2011)

Diana_Prince245 said:


> I feel like some folks are assuming the men in this article are interested in their significant others only for the sex, something that is not really backed up in the article. I mean I really love skinny guys, the skinnier the better most of the time, and I could give some pretty blunt reasons that may seem as if I'm merely objectifying the men I've dated if asked. But the fact that they were skinny and I was turned on by it was pretty far from the only reason I was involved with them. If they hadn't had personalities and interests that meshed with mine, I wouldn't have bothered with them, not matter how physically attractive I found them.




WHAT??? that's just crazy talk. No one can be turned on by someone AND like all their insides too - no way, no how. You have to appreciate all of a person without specifically being turned on by them to be worthy.... don't let anyone tell ya' different. 

(removes tongue from cheek)

:huh:


----------



## MisticalMisty (May 13, 2011)

AnnMarie said:


> WHAT??? that's just crazy talk. No one can be turned on by someone AND like all their insides too - no way, no how. You have to appreciate all of a person without specifically being turned on by them to be worthy.... don't let anyone tell ya' different.
> 
> (removes tongue from cheek)
> 
> :huh:



I'm out of rep! Crap.


----------



## swordchick (May 13, 2011)

Is this "The Scourge that is FAs" part 2?


----------



## ashmamma84 (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its only different since these people claim they are asking for acceptance and some kind of normalcy when it comes to how the public views them. do you really feel its the public standard to go around generally talking about women's body parts as the sole and only reason a person can/should be attracted to them? i'm sorry but i just don't live in that world. its okay for a sex site or for locker room talk or kidding around with friends but not for any kind of serious advancement of yoursefl from the land of creeps in the public eye.
> 
> as far as myself personally, i'm not asking anyone to accept me. i accept my self. in that sense we are not all so different. however, i'm not the one coming here and claiming that people are stopping me from being black, fat or anything else about who i am intrinsicly. i'm not in need of that kind of approval to just go out into the world on a daily basis to just be me. i'm not downing anyone's opinion and i feel they are free to state it. all i'm saying is there is away to get what you claim you want and a way not to get what you say you want.
> 
> its still a huge mystery to me how insisting on leaving out the fact that fat women are beautiful is such a problem in so many ways in so many places. is it really so controversial? should it be? what is it saying if it is?



Sorry but still, no dice. Blacks wanted and still want to be seen as normal and there are all kinds of examples in the media that seem to say otherwise or may be two steps back for black folks in the eyes of others. Remember the Spike Lee/Tyler Perry controversy? Lots of people feel Perry appeals to the lowest common denominator, others don't. Someone is probably always going to have a negative say or try to put a spin on words and therefore have missing pieces. Anyone who chooses to base their (negative) opinion on a group of people, whether its FAs or black folks, on an article/or other piece of media, isn't really someone I want to spend my time around. Those people should probably "go live in the real world". I don't believe everything I read as the gospel and I'm inclined to believe it isn't just me. Maybe it's a matter of giving the reader more credit? I don't think people are as dense as you might think they are. 




Jes said:


> Super, I understood a lot of the points you were making, but one thing that occurs to me is that the tone of a discussion is already set by who is asking the questions and why. I do think (and we may disagree) there's still a stigma with liking partners who are not considered 'conventionally attractive' (whatever that is) and so it's already seen as an unusual thing, something outside of the mainstream. THAT is why these people are being talked to. That specific issue is the reason they hold any interest for the reporter and the reader. They're not being interviewed b/c they're average everyday people (though, certainly, they are), they're specifically being asked to address fat-related stuff. We may know that functional fat people and functional FAs are just like everyone else, but if you're going to write a specific article about the phenomena of fat people and FAs, then you're setting up a dynamic in which the situation is considered fringe. It's not surprising that the answers to fringe-y questions read as noticeably fringe-y, right? And, WZero's point about what was kept and what was discarded in the writing of the article is a good one as well.



Also, this bears repeating.


----------



## vardon_grip (May 13, 2011)

As long as fat people are seen as freakish and abnormal, FA's will be seen as the same. If you try to "normalize" FA's without "normalizing" fat people first, you are putting the cart before the horse. I thought the article was okay, but not great. Emphasizing the physical and highlighting the weight difference between the couples didnt do much for me. I didnt see myself in or relate to any of the people interviewed. Articles like this aren't for fat people or FA's. Articles like this are for the rest of society. I think that the way it was written will not help in getting the message of normalcy to those who need to hear it.


----------



## hrd (May 13, 2011)

The Orange Mage said:


> In these discussions it's always assumed that FAs don't want a partner with a great, matching personality and all the other things that make a relationship work. This is VERY a bad assumption. :|



I haven't been around this community for very long, but this sort of assumption seems to crop up a lot, and the same arguments (on all sides) are played out over and over again in various forums. I think it's worth saying, as so many others on these boards have, that any one group is for the most part going to proportionally reflect the general population -- as in you're going to get jerks and saints, but there will be a whole lot of average people in between, and, until they prove otherwise, they deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## LalaCity (May 13, 2011)

The whole point of the article was that, contrary to what the media tell us, fat bodies are physically very attractive to some people.

Of course it follows that to be physically attracted to another person opens the door to possible romantic love and deeper connections. But that was not the point of the article.

The point of the article was to make unknowing people aware of a phenomenon (if you want to call it that) of which they were previously unaware -- i.e., that fat is beautiful (at least in th eyes of certain beholders).

We here in our own fat-happy world forget how shocking a concept that still is to much of society.


----------



## LalaCity (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> BBWs are still the height of good taste unless someone is weak minded enough to totally buy into the cheap yellow journalism diet product selling media of today.
> 
> what are people supposed to understand? that most of these guys are attached to specific kinds and sizes of body parts and might even be incapable of other human feelings?
> 
> ...



I don't agree. People who are new to the concept of fat admiration first need to get their heads around the idea that physical attraction to fat people is is a perfectly normal desire felt by a certain percentage of the population, and not the exclusive domain of "freaks and degenerates." Once they realize that "everyday people like themselves" are simply hard-wired in their attraction to plus-size individuals, all the other normative values attached to sex and love will fall into place with regard to their understanding.


----------



## tonynyc (May 13, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its only different since these people claim they are asking for acceptance and some kind of normalcy when it comes to how the public views them. do you really feel its the public standard to go around generally talking about women's body parts as the sole and only reason a person can/should be attracted to them? i'm sorry but i just don't live in that world. its okay for a sex site or for locker room talk or kidding around with friends but not for any kind of serious advancement of yoursefl from the land of creeps in the public eye.
> 
> as far as myself personally, i'm not asking anyone to accept me. i accept my self. in that sense we are not all so different. however, i'm not the one coming here and claiming that people are stopping me from being black, fat or anything else about who i am intrinsicly. i'm not in need of that kind of approval to just go out into the world on a daily basis to just be me. i'm not downing anyone's opinion and i feel they are free to state it. all i'm saying is there is away to get what you claim you want and a way not to get what you say you want.
> 
> its still a huge mystery to me how insisting on leaving out the fact that fat women are beautiful is such a problem in so many ways in so many places. is it really so controversial? should it be? what is it saying if it is?





superodalisque said:


> no i'm not prejudiced, just honest. i have no balls in this game so i am truly free to say what i feel. i dont depend on this for friends, lovers or a social life. i just really want people to are fat to have everything they deserve out of life. i'm not the only person who feels as i do. many of my closest friends are FAs. i adore them. because i do i will never lie to them about how i feel about certain things. they get enough lies told to them and then wonder why the public perception of them is not what they want. i'm also close enough friends to know that many of them don't even feel the way that you seem to. they can see it when something important has been left out. you see, a lot of them are not here posting because actually they understand and don't want to be associated with a lot of the guys here because they already know better. thats why people also have a very hard time even creating an FA site because a lot
> of guys who like fat women also find the politics uncomfortable. they look at the pix and leave. they don;t come to any event to meet up with other guys. why? because they feel there are folks who are out of touch with teh rest of the world as well.



*Well...at the end of the day both Large Folks and their admirers deserve to have everything...that is all anyone wants...

Also, being a resident of the city where the Village Voice is printed- I see many different types of couples in the city of all different ethnic variations and sizes... Folks are too busy wrapped up in their own world/issues as to worry about a Supersized Person and their significant other...(but- I'm sure this could be true in most any other area of the US) 

And myself - being a proud Fat Admirer of SSBBW - I could care less what the public thinks....* 



AnnMarie said:


> WHAT??? that's just crazy talk. No one can be turned on by someone AND like all their insides too - no way, no how. You have to appreciate all of a person without specifically being turned on by them to be worthy.... don't let anyone tell ya' different.
> 
> (removes tongue from cheek)
> 
> :huh:



*Interesting signature... the cuddly part is a given :wubu:... but, how are you terrifying???? * 




ashmamma84 said:


> Sorry but still, no dice. Blacks wanted and still want to be seen as normal and there are all kinds of examples in the media that seem to say otherwise or may be two steps back for black folks in the eyes of others. Remember the Spike Lee/Tyler Perry controversy? Lots of people feel Perry appeals to the lowest common denominator, others don't. *Someone is probably always going to have a negative say or try to put a spin on words and therefore have missing pieces*. Anyone who chooses to base their (negative) opinion on a group of people, whether its FAs or black folks, on an article/or other piece of media, isn't really someone I want to spend my time around. Those people should probably "go live in the real world". I don't believe everything I read as the gospel and I'm inclined to believe it isn't just me. Maybe it's a matter of giving the reader more credit? I don't think people are as dense as you might think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



*
Very true... you could even go to Harvard Law School - Make Law Review - Become a Senator ... well you know the rest of the story 
* 




hrd said:


> I haven't been around this community for very long, but this sort of assumption seems to crop up a lot, and the same arguments (on all sides) are played out over and over again in various forums. I think it's worth saying, as so many others on these boards have, that any one group is for the most part going to proportionally reflect the general population -- as in you're going to get jerks and saints, but there will be a whole lot of average people in between, and, until they prove otherwise, they deserve to be given the benefit of the doubt.



*You will always find doubters -even those that may not give you then benefit of the doubt - at the end of the day - you have to be happy with what you like- *


----------



## J34 (May 14, 2011)

Apparently this article has a attracted an influx of new members to Dimensions, which I think is great for the community


----------



## tonynyc (May 14, 2011)

J34 said:


> Apparently this article has a attracted an influx of new members to Dimensions, which I think is great for the community



*Which is also a very good thing *


----------



## vardon_grip (May 14, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its only different since these people claim they are asking for acceptance and some kind of normalcy when it comes to how the public views them. do you really feel its the public standard to go around generally talking about women's body parts as the sole and only reason a person can/should be attracted to them? i'm sorry but i just don't live in that world. its okay for a sex site or for locker room talk or kidding around with friends but not for any kind of serious advancement of yoursefl from the land of creeps in the public eye.
> 
> as far as myself personally, i'm not asking anyone to accept me. i accept my self. in that sense we are not all so different. however, i'm not the one coming here and claiming that people are stopping me from being black, fat or anything else about who i am intrinsicly. i'm not in need of that kind of approval to just go out into the world on a daily basis to just be me. i'm not downing anyone's opinion and i feel they are free to state it. all i'm saying is there is away to get what you claim you want and a way not to get what you say you want.
> 
> its still a huge mystery to me how insisting on leaving out the fact that fat women are beautiful is such a problem in so many ways in so many places. is it really so controversial? should it be? what is it saying if it is?



I think you speak of a difficult truth.


----------



## olwen (May 14, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> I don't agree. People who are new to the concept of fat admiration first need to get their heads around the idea that physical attraction to fat people is is a perfectly normal desire felt by a certain percentage of the population, and not the exclusive domain of "freaks and degenerates." Once they realize that "everyday people like themselves" are simply hard-wired in their attraction to plus-size individuals, all the other normative values attached to sex and love will fall into place with regard to their understanding.



I agree with you Lala. If young FAs are still in that place where they care a great deal about what other people think and struggle with their attraction for fear of persecution then seeing people who they can identify with who are open about their attraction could help them come to terms with their own. It's a good thing. 

As much as we want to be normal, there are going to be people who just don't see fat folks as normal and if there are people other than fat people who help to normalize fatness (by openly showing love, affection, attraction, and all whatever else) then that will go a long way. 

I liked the article and kudos to everyone who gave interviews.


----------



## swordchick (May 14, 2011)

I agree with you. 

I wonder how many men joined Dimensions because of the article.



vardon_grip said:


> As long as fat people are seen as freakish and abnormal, FA's will be seen as the same. If you try to "normalize" FA's without "normalizing" fat people first, you are putting the cart before the horse. I thought the article was okay, but not great. Emphasizing the physical and highlighting the weight difference between the couples didnt do much for me. I didnt see myself in or relate to any of the people interviewed. Articles like this aren't for fat people or FA's. Articles like this are for the rest of society. I think that the way it was written will not help in getting the message of normalcy to those who need to hear it.


----------



## superodalisque (May 14, 2011)

PeanutButterfly said:


> I agree with this. I think that main point of the article was to show that fat can and IS sexually attractive to a percentage of people. A lot of fat women know they have "beautiful souls" or "beautiful personalities" but if they haven't been exposed to our community they often doubt being taken seriously as a sexual being. I think the article was trying to prove that all those fat women in relationships that SuperO was referring to are probably (or possibly) with men who aren't just in it for the "beautiful soul". Those men aren't saints willing to look past an outer shell or put up with the extra pounds. They think those women are sexy as hell. They're with fat women because that fat women are they're ideal, not just a consulation prize. Many non-Fa's can't fathom a guy actually wanting to be with a fat chick unless she has something really spectacular to offer, then maybe it's ok to put up with her body. I liked that the article dispelled this myth and showed that FAs are not settling. I think that was the purpose of the sexual emphasis.



now this is a good point that i definitely can get with. but on the other side of the coin sexual emphasis ALONE can also deny the beauty of fat women and their true and full desirability because it can also come as the guise of secret sex with the secret fatty under the bleachers in high school. sometimes decriptions can get awfully close to sounding like a long held in guilty confession that comes tumbling out rather than a fact of life. you know what i mean? like when someone finally makes an admission about something and its so freeing that they can't manage to moderate it properly. i understand people wanting to say everything when they finally get a chance but thats not always whats best for the outcome they are trying for. sometimes it can be very easy to get caught up in the enthusiasm to expresss themselves that people forget to think that they also have to communicate with others.


----------



## fuphinator (May 14, 2011)

swordchick said:


> I agree with you.
> 
> I wonder how many men joined Dimensions because of the article.



Hopefully lots, hehe, it brought me and a friend here, so we need some more gents to help even things out.


----------



## mossystate (May 14, 2011)

fuphinator said:


> Hopefully lots, hehe, it brought me and a friend here, so we need some more gents to help even things out.



Lots of men come here.


----------



## superodalisque (May 14, 2011)

Chimpi said:


> Thanks for taking the time to explain your viewpoints, Felecia
> 
> 
> 
> ...



i think is great to be talking but know your audience. i think there should be much more of this. hopefully more actual FAs will be writing for the voice instead of just being its subject matter and they can shape the perspective fully. but before they do maybe they need to review what it is that really may help them and what may work against them. 


of course guys who like fat chicks are real and out there. i've known that all of my life,as long as i have been one. its not a preference IMO but an attraction to a woman who happens to be fat and also attractive, just as attractive as any thin woman who has a certain auroa that an individual man may like. we are NOT a third sex--just women who are fat. thats my point. i don't have a problem with the sexual preferences except that the softer more loving descriptions of fat women were left nearly completely off. if the fat arms thighs etc... had been mentioned along with other things that men often say about the women they go gaga over i would have felt better about it. i don't think you are understanding what i'm getting at. let me use this as an example. one guy in the article mentioned when he first realized he liked fat girls as a boy. it would have been very deft of him to turn it around and talk about his first crush as other men do. but i think maybe either he fell into a trap or he actually was only focused on the fat himself--or at least thats how it sounded. i could not tell from the article if he meant it that way or not. 

i know when my male friends talk about their first crushes they describe them like " this cute lil red headed girl with pigtails" "this girl with great big blue eyes that swallowed me up" "this girl who sang like an angel" " this girl who was my best skateboarding buddy and had a huge fro". then they move on to the things that they felt as a sexual attraction if at all. where is that here? we know nothing about the little girl that squished the guy happily in a corner except that she was fat. was she even a person to him at all or just a feeling of weight pressing? could a simulation have done the same? would it matter if another fat girl had done the same or was there just something about her in particular? why or why not? thats what the outside world really needs to know to understand FAs.

Lawrence started down the road of answering that question for people; are these women being seen as other women are, as a combination of sex, emotion, personal attraction-- human beings? are these guys weird or are they a normal guy who just feels fat women are pretty? i think its very important not to forget to get that across and not spend quite as much time convincing other people its sexually POSSIBLE to be attracted to a fat woman and why. i think society kinda knows that already. just look around at what happens in the real world. what they don't know is if its alright to say that she is beautiful. i'm not sure some guys who admire them are quite sure its okay either and hedge their bets by sticking with the sexual where its safe. even a hogger will try it once out of curiousity because its only sex. the "B" word is loaded with all kinds of attributes sexual stuff isn't. it has a whole lot more power behind it. its a power that an FA has to give if he really wants to. its even bolder and braver to say she is beautiful because it says an FA respects her as well as himself and his desires. its not just another freaky warm place to play hide it. that self respect goes a long way toward people respecting you. as an FA its a gift you give to yourself, not something you have to wait on anyone else to give you. the crowd will eventually follow your lead and give you that respect and acceptance if you don't feel you have to explain why you like every inch of your partner. some of that is fine but too much looks like an apology.

i think i said it before, the title was "Guys who like fat chicks" and not "Guys who would fuck fat chicks".


----------



## superodalisque (May 14, 2011)

The Orange Mage said:


> In these discussions it's always assumed that FAs don't want a partner with a great, matching personality and all the other things that make a relationship work. This is VERY a bad assumption. :|



thats exactly why they shouldn't ever leave that issue up for grabs. don't leave any gaps--especially NOT with the general public. its what anti fat people would like for everyone to believe, particularly fat women. they want them to think that all they have to look forward to is an emotionally detached narcissistic fetishist. it can't be a loving guy who just has particular sexual interests just like any other man might have privately since his sex life is under less scrutiny because he seems to have an "average" partner. they want fat women to think that the only way they can even hope to expect the kind of treatment that all women should get is if they have WLS because they can never get it from FAs. don't give people the opportunity to turn you into something less than what you really are. i don't think most FAs operate piecemeal. they should be very careful about seeming as though they do.


----------



## TraciJo67 (May 15, 2011)

Finally got the chance to read the whole article. Loved what Kevin and Dan said and how they were portrayed. Come on, SuperO. They are young men, no different from other young men their age.
They aren't yet looking for the same things in a relationship that older and more settled men are. Of course they are a bit shallow (though downright mature compared to Lawrence). I love that overall they are just young guys who love fat chicks. They are under no obligation to you or the fat acceptance movement to give lip service to finding beauty in everything and everybody. I hate this need we seem to have to pick everything apart. Sometimes isn't it just good enough to celebrate that some people we know got national press coverage and managed to get a mostly positive message out? I've had my differences with Dan but damn, he did some good. Kudos to everyone who has the courage to put their real names out there. It is something I would struggle with and I have a few decades of life experience on them.


----------



## olwen (May 15, 2011)

> Lawrence started down the road of answering that question for people; are these women being seen as other women are, as a combination of sex, emotion, personal attraction-- human beings? are these guys weird or are they a normal guy who just feels fat women are pretty? i think its very important not to forget to get that across and not spend quite as much time convincing other people its sexually POSSIBLE to be attracted to a fat woman and why. i think society kinda knows that already. just look around at what happens in the real world.



...So, Felicia, what you're saying is that you want FAs to say something like "who I date is none of your business and the topic is not up for discussion?" That's fine, but that doesn't do anything to normalize that attraction. It just shrouds it in mystery. People would be left to form their own conclusions and like as not, they'd think FAs are disgusting weirdos because obviously, fat people are deeply flawed. This article is not for those people because it wouldn't change their minds. This article is for people on the fence. 

And, why would you assume that society as a whole would think that it's possible for fat people to be sexual beings when there is so much rhetoric to the contrary? Should we all just ignore that rhetoric or say something against it? At this point the personal becomes political when our government is trying their damndest to eradicate fatness in kids and adults. IMO, the best way for FAs to be political is to openly date fat people. I guess the keyword here is open. Obviously, you want the same thing (for FAs to be open), but I think the way you insist FAs go about it is too prescriptive. Let them do whatever they need to do to be open whether it's giving interviews in a newspaper or holding their gf's hand in public. Who cares as long as they do it? There isn't a right way and a wrong way to be open. I'd just as soon let them just be about it and step out of the way.


----------



## superodalisque (May 15, 2011)

TraciJo67 said:


> Finally got the chance to read the whole article. Loved what Kevin and Dan said and how they were portrayed. Come on, SuperO. They are young men, no different from other young men their age.
> They aren't yet looking for the same things in a relationship that older and more settled men are. Of course they are a bit shallow (though downright mature compared to Lawrence). I love that overall they are just young guys who love fat chicks. They are under no obligation to you or the fat acceptance movement to give lip service to finding beauty in everything and everybody. I hate this need we seem to have to pick everything apart. Sometimes isn't it just good enough to celebrate that some people we know got national press coverage and managed to get a mostly positive message out? I've had my differences with Dan but damn, he did some good. Kudos to everyone who has the courage to put their real names out there. It is something I would struggle with and I have a few decades of life experience on them.



i do get that. i know they are young men who might not quite get everything yet. thats why there are people around who might be able to open their eyes to a different perspective. hopefully we care enough to give them something to think about so they don't become permanantly immature like some guys can when they are agreed with too much and start believing their own rhetoric a little too much. its great to encourage people but its not so good to retard them.

actually i have/had no problem with Dan. i still don't. i just think he is a young guy the same as most others. he makes mistakes like any other real person--even me. i agree with some things he says and disagree with others and i'm sure its pretty much vice versa. i think he can take a challenge to how he thinks just as well as i can. he and neither are other FAs some emotionally weak people who can't take it. he does not need me to coddle him. i respect his positions and i hope he can respect mine even if we do disagree. this is not about some grudgematch. there isn't one. i think people here can be great about encouraging people but they need to be careful about enabling people in some way thats not constructive for them and what their goals are. there can also be a time to say something that might not seem all that encouraging on its face but might actually be helpful to someone in the longterm.

you make a great point about them not being any different than any other young man. the problem is they often think and act like they are different and that gives them some kind of license. i haven't said anything any different about what was said in the article than i would to a guy saying similar things about any sized woman or gf who was not an FA. you an ask my nephews if they aren't different why treat them as if they are?


----------



## superodalisque (May 15, 2011)

olwen said:


> ...So, Felicia, what you're saying is that you want FAs to say something like "who I date is none of your business and the topic is not up for discussion?" That's fine, but that doesn't do anything to normalize that attraction. It just shrouds it in mystery. People would be left to form their own conclusions and like as not, they'd think FAs are disgusting weirdos because obviously, fat people are deeply flawed. This article is not for those people because it wouldn't change their minds. This article is for people on the fence.
> 
> And, why would you assume that society as a whole would think that it's possible for fat people to be sexual beings when there is so much rhetoric to the contrary? Should we all just ignore that rhetoric or say something against it? At this point the personal becomes political when our government is trying their damndest to eradicate fatness in kids and adults. IMO, the best way for FAs to be political is to openly date fat people. I guess the keyword here is open. Obviously, you want the same thing (for FAs to be open), but I think the way you insist FAs go about it is too prescriptive. Let them do whatever they need to do to be open whether it's giving interviews in a newspaper or holding their gf's hand in public. Who cares as long as they do it? There isn't a right way and a wrong way to be open. I'd just as soon let them just be about it and step out of the way.



you make lot of great points to think about. speaking about myself i just think there was a part of the happy medium missing and i was pointing that out, not prescribing how anyone has to act. we are discussing normalcy and acceptance. i was not talking about stopping anyone from saying anything but starting to say something to get that, not necessarily having to take away but adding to. all i'm saying is that there was a glaring omission. should we be omitting the distinct possibiliy that a man can not only sleep with but love a fat woman. is that possible? the article didn't necessarily hit on that very much in general terms of the ways the guys expressed themselves. 

all i'm saying is that to an outsider it can easily look like there are odd men out there who'd like to play hide the sausage with a fat woman and not have anything else to do with her in public or otherwise. i agree the best thing FAs can do for themselves and each other is to openly date fat women/men. what that dating implies is exactly what i was talking about bringing out in the conversation in the article, like any other woman a fat one is deserving of the whole spectrum of desirability. she isn't just a warm hole. of course she is she is sexy but she is also beautiful, dateable, intelligent, creative,lovable and any other great thing you can think of. a man can also have a lot of pride in her both physically and in a myriad of other ways. she is fully female and not some third asexual sex he has to explain like she is an alien. 

i'm still not finding why there is such an opposition to fat women being talked about as a full spectrum of the desirability quotient unless all they are good for is a quick roll in the hay a nothing more. in that case there would be nothing there to gather acceptance around an FA or a fat woman anymore than there would be for any man that people felt who would sleep with just any old woman with a big chest or whatever other physical attributes he was attracted to. sorry but appearing to be chasing only body parts no matter what they are or what they look like tend to make guys look creepy and be unacceptable.

i assume that society sees fat people as sexual beings because they are. we aren't hermits. we are coupling. we are having children. we are going out on dates in public. society doesn't think of us as not doing any of that but generally speaking we tend to think of ourselves that way more than anyone else even though we know better too. why else are we trying to prove it so much? do you really think they don't see us dating and in relationships? they know better. its just that a lot of fat haters play on our fears of what they might think and unfortunately it works. we all have to have more confidence in ourselves than that. we know who and what we are and we need to start acting like it.


----------



## olwen (May 15, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> you make lot of great points to think about. speaking about myself i just think there was a part of the happy medium missing and i was pointing that out, not prescribing how anyone has to act. we are discussing normalcy and acceptance. i was not talking about stopping anyone from saying anything but starting to say something to get that, not necessarily having to take away but adding to. all i'm saying is that there was a glaring omission. should we be omitting the distinct possibiliy that a man can not only sleep with but love a fat woman. is that possible? the article didn't necessarily hit on that very much in general terms of the ways the guys expressed themselves.
> 
> all i'm saying is that to an outsider it can easily look like there are odd men out there who'd like to play hide the sausage with a fat woman and not have anything else to do with her in public or otherwise. i agree the best thing FAs can do for themselves and each other is to openly date fat women/men. what that dating implies is exactly what i was talking about bringing out in the conversation in the article, like any other woman a fat one is deserving of the whole spectrum of desirability. she isn't just a warm hole. of course she is she is sexy but she is also beautiful, dateable, intelligent, creative,lovable and any other great thing you can think of. a man can also have a lot of pride in her both physically and in a myriad of other ways. she is fully female and not some third asexual sex he has to explain like she is an alien.
> 
> ...



No one is opposed to talking about fat women as full beings sexually or otherwise. Regardless of how and FA phrases their attraction people will still see fetish behavior as long as they believe fat people are subhuman. A guy can offer up sweet poetic words of affection and attraction and still be an asshole. You seem to be stuck on how they express themselves verbally, and all I'm saying is how they behave matters more. 

It's not that society doesn't see us dating, it's that they don't accept it. It's not that we are not visible, it's that society at large is trying really hard to make us invisible. Whether or not fat people want to be invisible is up to each fat person. I'm sure someone like that will still see themselves as less than even if an FA were to be sweet as long as they buy into the idea that fat people are not normal. 

And whether you like it or not, yes, we do have to prove that we are normal. We have to advocate for ourselves all the time because fat haters don't care and if they "know better" they refuse to acknowledge it. 

Look, I'm glad you think so highly of people and like to give them the benefit of doubt when it comes to accepting fat people, but my experience has often been the contrary. If acknowledging that comes off as self-hating or self-defeating to you, I really don't know what to tell you except to wonder why you'd be so willing to give everyone other than fat people the benefit of doubt when it comes to accepting and acknowledging the reality of living in a fat body.


----------



## superodalisque (May 15, 2011)

olwen said:


> No one is opposed to talking about fat women as full beings sexually or otherwise. Regardless of how and FA phrases their attraction people will still see fetish behavior as long as they believe fat people are subhuman. A guy can offer up sweet poetic words of affection and attraction and still be an asshole. You seem to be stuck on how they express themselves verbally, and all I'm saying is how they behave matters more.
> 
> It's not that society doesn't see us dating, it's that they don't accept it. It's not that we are not visible, it's that society at large is trying really hard to make us invisible. Whether or not fat people want to be invisible is up to each fat person. I'm sure someone like that will still see themselves as less than even if an FA were to be sweet as long as they buy into the idea that fat people are not normal.
> 
> ...



i have to respectfully disagree. i have never tried to prove that i am "normal". i love my life and body and over the longterm just being me has been enough to be totally comfy in my life as far as my attitude toward myself and the people i chose to invite in. the reason i give people the benefit of the doubt is because i generally have not been treated badly. and, i chose to surround myself with people who are decent and intelligent and not pander to the ignorant and the hateful. 

i'm also pretty good at marketing. i use the attention my size gets me to my benefit. it makes me memorable. my fat politics makes me memorable. i have managed generally to make lemonade where thats concerned. so maybe that colours my judgment but thats just where my experience has led me. the whole rest of society is not my enemy. i'm part of it, shaping it and changing it one person at a time by not treating myself as if i am a deficit.

my reality of living in my fat body has been that it has been my own personal joy. i can't pretend otherwise no matter what the rest of society may or may not have to say about it. ultimately my happiness is up to me and what i think about myself and what i choose to do and not what people who have no connection and i've chosen not to invite in have to say. i hate to say it but the position that all of society is against a person because of their size attracts a whole lot of negativity that doesn't have to be there. its just not the experience i have had. i respect that other people have a different experience. i would really love for them to have a different one. one reason they might not is that they haven't let enough people in or given them a chance. nothing comes in through a closed door, no one can put anything into a clenched fist. 

i just keep thinking that a lot of people give folks who don't deserve it way too much power and end up making themselves seem inhuman because they don't respect the fact that they are OK and they are equal and as good as, as beautiful as , as wonderful and as exciting as , if not moreso than anyone else. you were put here on this earth for one reason. you have the potential to make it better simply because you are present just the way you are. that alone makes you alright precious and even perfect. i don't know too many people who actually know or believe it and give off that vibe so that others can recognize that but its something that could make us all happier if we can keep trying to get to that place. if we keep downplaying our worth i don't know how we'll ever get there. and i still can't understand how expressing things in such a way that diminishes fat women to just a body part to plug into and portrays FAs as men who only care about that and denies that they are capable of everything else humans have to offer is uplifting for either her or an FA. 

maybe people feel safer if they just have to be that because its something that any old body can do. its much harder to be okay with your self worth as it is right now today. its easier to just pretend to be less than what they really are and that all of the misery a person may have is because of someone else and not because they chose the low path for themselves. we are a damn site more than just acceptable. now if we could just start treating each other that way for a start.


----------



## olwen (May 15, 2011)

Felicia, I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you have never in your life had to stand up to someone and say "I'm sick of your attitude, you're going to have to accept me the way I am," or "Mind your business. My weight is not a topic for discussion," then you're a lucky woman. I've had to say it to my mother, my sister, doctors, teachers, men, random strangers....I've had to say it a lot and I shouldn't have to but such is life. Acknowledging that there are people out in the world who would rather I didn't exist isn't giving other people power, it's dealing with reality.


----------



## tonynyc (May 15, 2011)

olwen said:


> Felicia, I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you have never in your life had to stand up to someone and say "I'm sick of your attitude, you're going to have to accept me the way I am," or "Mind your business. My weight is not a topic for discussion," then you're a lucky woman. I've had to say it to my mother, my sister, doctors, teachers, men, random strangers....I've had to say it a lot and I shouldn't have to but such is life. *Acknowledging that there are people out in the world who would rather I didn't exist isn't giving other people power, it's dealing with reality*.




And also making folks aware that you have every right to choose and live your life as you see fit....

Sad part is that there are situations where Lemonade can't be made- it would be nice ... but it doesn't always turn out that way 

It's interesting that I see many of the observations of BBW on this issue... with BHM it's a whole other matter- for the "most" part folks know better to keep their opnions to themselves


----------



## Gspoon (May 15, 2011)

Wait wait wait, so you're telling me... that there are guys that like fat girls out there? Get out of town!

Very interesting article! I hope to read it again. In fact! I will do just that


----------



## tonynyc (May 15, 2011)

Gspoon said:


> Wait wait wait, so you're telling me... that there are guys that like fat girls out there? Get out of town!
> 
> Very interesting article! I hope to read it again. In fact! I will do just that



*A*nd could also be NFL fans... better yet Charge Fans which is a double "win-win"....


----------



## olwen (May 15, 2011)

tonynyc said:


> And also making folks aware that you have every right to choose and live your life as you see fit....
> 
> Sad part is that there are situations where Lemonade can't be made- it would be nice ... but it doesn't always turn out that way
> 
> It's interesting that I see many of the observations of BBW on this issue... with BHM it's a whole other matter- for the "most" part folks know better to keep their opnions to themselves



Yeah, I don't doubt that FFAs struggle with this too, but I also doubt anyone would ever feel the need to write an article about it either...


----------



## yourhandsonyourhips (May 16, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> its still a huge mystery to me how insisting on leaving out the fact that fat women are beautiful is such a problem in so many ways in so many places. is it really so controversial?



This is one of the things I loved about the article - it was very relatable. I'll share 3 personal stories to make clear why it's... well, not controversial, but socially dangerous.

In high school one teammate's older, heavy sister visited the gym on an occasion. Apparently I was caught looking, and that ONE catch by the guys got me derided first by the COACH, and then endlessly by the team. Quitting a year later didn't end it. Imagine if I looked TWICE!

I went on a date with a girl, on which I told her she was hot. Afterwards she asked to see photos of my exes. She was bi so it wasn't totally weird - I linked her to a couple Facebook photos. She said, "Oh - I was flattered until I found out they were fat. I want to find out I'm the one heavy girl you made an exception for." I never got a second date.

A bunch of my guy friends got talking about hot women and sharing photos. I thought this was a good opportunity to put my toe in the water of "slightly overweight girls are hot too." I didn't even go with heavy... just normal frankly. They blew up. Instead of making any social progress, I just became known as the friend with the crappy taste in women - and to never talk women with. A couple guys asked me if I was gay, which is so confused I can't even think clearly about it.

These aren't SO big of a deal - it's not like I was mugged for liking curves. But a lot of your outlook on life is formed in those awkward high school years, and unfortunately seeming strange is a quick way to cut off any potential friendships except those 2-3 social heroes in the class looking to buck the trend. Thanks heroes, but if I want broader social prospects, I apparently need to hide who I am.

The bit about losing the date is unfortunate primarily because it's literally irrelevant to our compatibility. What if I just made something up and linked her to a bunch of waif models? Would that completely irrelevant piece of information have lead to something good? I mean sure she's got this one dumb metric, but we may have been entirely compatible on the stuff that matters. One date sure wasn't enough to know. And it's unfortunate she was so hung up on being lumped in with a category she isn't in, rather than the hotter category she's a part of.

And above all really these sucked because I just didn't see them coming. Generally... the response is... REALLY??


----------



## swordchick (May 16, 2011)

Have you been on dates before the date you had with the heavy bi girl? You mentioned your exes but you seem really hung up on this particular girl. It looks as if you are still hung up on what your buddies think, instead of putting yourself in the category you belong in.



yourhandsonyourhips said:


> This is one of the things I loved about the article - it was very relatable. I'll share 3 personal stories to make clear why it's... well, not controversial, but socially dangerous.
> 
> In high school one teammate's older, heavy sister visited the gym on an occasion. Apparently I was caught looking, and that ONE catch by the guys got me derided first by the COACH, and then endlessly by the team. Quitting a year later didn't end it. Imagine if I looked TWICE!
> 
> ...


----------



## yourhandsonyourhips (May 16, 2011)

swordchick said:


> Have you been on dates before the date you had with the heavy bi girl? You mentioned your exes but you seem really hung up on this particular girl.



Yes - I date who I want. I'm not about to let other's judging get in the way of being with the right person. I just don't make a frequent habit of pointing out who I find hot. But anyone who knows me well has figured it out easily enough.

It's caveman-ish, but discussing hot women is sometimes how men bond. There are plenty of other ways, but it seems kind of stupid I can't participate in the majority of those conversations.

As for that particular girl, that was several years ago... I've moved on, I just wanted to concretely illustrate how a simple preference can become a much larger wedge between 2 people than it ever should be.


----------



## superodalisque (May 16, 2011)

olwen said:


> Felicia, I've said it before and I'll say it again. If you have never in your life had to stand up to someone and say "I'm sick of your attitude, you're going to have to accept me the way I am," or "Mind your business. My weight is not a topic for discussion," then you're a lucky woman. I've had to say it to my mother, my sister, doctors, teachers, men, random strangers....I've had to say it a lot and I shouldn't have to but such is life. Acknowledging that there are people out in the world who would rather I didn't exist isn't giving other people power, it's dealing with reality.



i have and do but those few instances don't control and shape my entire life and every relationship that i have. i won't let them. i disagree. it is giving them power if you allow those situations to color all of the other situations in your life that haven't or won't be like that. if a perso allows it to change their expectations about what they an have in life its internalizing fat hatred that a whole lot of people absolutely do not have. i won't give anyone that amount of power over me. i save that for the people who truly love and care for me. they don't even have to accept me because really i don't care. i've said that to my mom, my sister etc...not only that i have shown them in no uncertain terms that life can and will go on without their approval. keep giving people the power over you and they'll keep taking it. i don't let them determine the whole flavor of my life when there are so many more people out there who dwarf them because they are decent kind and self aware. actually, now that i am an adult and have been for 30 years i don't put them in the position that they feel they have anything to say to me along that vein. 

the vast majority of people that i meet don't have much if anything to say about my weight generally because its just not on the table either way and i know they have a life. i am no the focus of the world. there are more important things than me to a lot of people. i don't wait to see if they like it that people are fat before i decide to live. i don't discuss it. i don't appear to need their approval and i don't prejudge them as if anyone would have negative weight related negative stuff to say. i don't look or act unhappy so generally no one treats me as though i'm something they need to fix. i'm not perfect at all and sometimes i realize that peple can have a problem with just me, like anyone else. i refuse to make my weight a crutch and the basis for all of the problems i may have in my life. IMO its really not that important and people don't really care all that much if you don't. 

but besides all of that, what does it matter in this case if people have had a tough time being fat? wouldn't it even make more sense for people to bend over backwards to include everything likable loveable and wonderful about fat women if they care as much as they claim they do. i still don't see how leaving those things out somehow makes them better than the same people who would also want to leave those things out. i still can't understand how raising a woman up to a sexual being AND more than just that is somehow so harmful to her or him, especially it would go a long way in helping an FA to find the acceptance from other people many claim they want. if someone is having an extremely hard time in their situation for being fat what in the world could that do to harm them? do you see what i mean? what does reducing a fat woman down to what a fat hater would ( re: he only fucks her because he is freaky and probably thinks she's too ugly to be seen with etc...) somehow help the situation? sorry, but if we go with the idea that every last fat person has had a tremendously traumatic life it still wouldn't hold any water that its acceptable to reduce women down to only body parts when society in general feels thats a sign of disrespect.


----------



## superodalisque (May 16, 2011)

yourhandsonyourhips said:


> This is one of the things I loved about the article - it was very relatable. I'll share 3 personal stories to make clear why it's... well, not controversial, but socially dangerous.
> 
> In high school one teammate's older, heavy sister visited the gym on an occasion. Apparently I was caught looking, and that ONE catch by the guys got me derided first by the COACH, and then endlessly by the team. Quitting a year later didn't end it. Imagine if I looked TWICE!
> 
> ...



yes exactly. i understand what you are talking about. and thats why its sooo important to say that fat women are lovely beautiful etc.. as much as possible. they need to know they are and it helps a lot when men say they are. where i live now most of my housemates are fat women. none of them are in the community. they are not used to men referring to them that way either. they all date. they all sleep with people. but unfortunately they haven't had the experience of being treated like a beautiful woman often. so even if they see a man dating a lot of women of their type they don't see it as a compliment because thats not the kind of culture we have, not even in the community. romantic culture is very important to a woman's feeling of self worth. if its downplayed then in her mind it means she is somehow not worth it and not really beautiful.

even if you say it to women on dims most will say they aren't when its obvious to anyone looking that they are. somehow, they just aren't comfortable with that idea. being a sexual turn on isn't as loaded and it doesn't require so much belief in ones self. it will help a lot of guys could say it often and over and over and over again until it sinks in. until then there is going to be a lot of disbelief from everyone especially if guys are refusing so definitely to say it like its somethng horrible that would degrade them. 

i know it can be difficult. but, you know that things are never going to be any different if you aren't willing to take the hit sometimes. it is a lot for some people to take on. but you have to decide if you are for the change. if you are you have to lay something on the line. and that means being able to say a woman is beautiful no matter what happens. when enough of us start saying it enough the idea will become comon place and a whole lot less obscure for everyone --even the general public.


for the record, i had dinner last night with about 20 other women who read the article who were of various sizes. i asked them to read it before they came and write their opinions down before they arrived so that nothing could influence them. they all slammed it.


----------



## joswitch (May 16, 2011)

yourhandsonyourhips said:


> This is one of the things I loved about the article - it was very relatable. I'll share 3 personal stories to make clear why it's... well, not controversial, but socially dangerous.
> 
> In high school one teammate's older, heavy sister visited the gym on an occasion. Apparently I was caught looking, and that ONE catch by the guys got me derided first by the COACH, and then endlessly by the team. Quitting a year later didn't end it. Imagine if I looked TWICE!
> 
> I went on a date with a girl, on which I told her she was hot. Afterwards she asked to see photos of my exes. She was bi so it wasn't totally weird - I linked her to a couple Facebook photos. She said, *"Oh - I was flattered until I found out they were fat. I want to find out I'm the one heavy girl you made an exception for." *I never got a second date.



Ah, yes, the "_desire me despite my body, not because of it_" girl.

Been there, done that. Trust me, you're better off without. Such a girl is far, FAR more concerned about social status than knowing and desiring you as you truly are. You dodged X months or years of walking on eggshells. Be glad.


----------



## mango (May 16, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> for the record, i had dinner last night with about 20 other women who read the article who were of various sizes. i asked them to read it before they came and write their opinions down before they arrived so that nothing could influence them. they all slammed it.



*I don't know how accurate impromptu poll results in such a small sample size can be. So I therefore question this result.

At least they had the decency to read the article before they came.


*


----------



## Blackjack (May 16, 2011)

mango said:


> *I don't know how accurate impromptu poll results in such a small sample size can be. So I therefore question this result.
> 
> At least they had the decency to read the article before they came.
> 
> ...



I looked at the pictures and then came.


----------



## mossystate (May 16, 2011)

Granted, I am not paying close attention to any of this, but, did supero claim she was doing anything more than inviting 20 or so women to read the thing and then comment?

Sounds like the result was...those women slammed it.


----------



## Tau (May 16, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> yes exactly. i understand what you are talking about. and thats why its sooo important to say that fat women are lovely beautiful etc.. as much as possible. they need to know they are and it helps a lot when men say they are. where i live now most of my housemates are fat women. none of them are in the community. they are not used to men referring to them that way either. they all date. they all sleep with people. but unfortunately they haven't had the experience of being treated like a beautiful woman often. so even if they see a man dating a lot of women of their type they don't see it as a compliment because thats not the kind of culture we have, not even in the community. romantic culture is very important to a woman's feeling of self worth. if its downplayed then in her mind it means she is somehow not worth it and not really beautiful.
> 
> even if you say it to women on dims most will say they aren't when its obvious to anyone looking that they are. somehow, they just aren't comfortable with that idea. being a sexual turn on isn't as loaded and it doesn't require so much belief in ones self. it will help a lot of guys could say it often and over and over and over again until it sinks in. until then there is going to be a lot of disbelief from everyone especially if guys are refusing so definitely to say it like its somethng horrible that would degrade them.
> 
> ...



Why did they slam it?


----------



## CastingPearls (May 16, 2011)

I didn't know DDHFG was doing a road tour!!!!


----------



## FA Punk (May 16, 2011)

mossystate said:


> Granted, I am not paying close attention to any of this, but, did supero claim she was doing anything more than inviting 20 or so women to read the thing and then comment?
> 
> Sounds like the result was...those women slammed it.



Yes thats right, and I fail to see how those women's opinions really matter in this case? How are they so much more unbiased then anybody else's? If they are not a part of this community of course there gonna find the subject matter of the article to be insulting, NO MATTER WHAT THE WORDING IS! The fact is despite what SuperO thinks this acticle is far more positive then it is negative and thats the bottom line!


----------



## tonynyc (May 16, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> yes exactly. i understand what you are talking about. and thats why its sooo important to say that fat women are lovely beautiful etc.. as much as possible. they need to know they are and it helps a lot when men say they are. where i live now most of my housemates are fat women. none of them are in the community. *they are not used to men referring to them that way either. they all date. they all sleep with people. but unfortunately they haven't had the experience of being treated like a beautiful woman often so even if they see a man dating a lot of women of their type they don't see it as a compliment because thats not the kind of culture we have, not even in the community.* romantic culture is very important to a woman's feeling of self worth. if its downplayed then in her mind it means she is somehow not worth it and not really beautiful.
> 
> even if you say it to women on dims most will say they aren't when its obvious to anyone looking that they are. somehow, they just aren't comfortable with that idea. being a sexual turn on isn't as loaded and it doesn't require so much belief in ones self. it will help a lot of guys could say it often and over and over and over again until it sinks in. until then there is going to be a lot of disbelief from everyone especially if guys are refusing so definitely to say it like its somethng horrible that would degrade them.
> 
> ...



*L*ooks like your friends are dating a limited pool of folks....If everyone suddenly cared about culture or public opinion or what some "so called" stranger thinks... they might as well be a recluse..

Also I'm sure if you had dinner with 20 other folks ... you may get a different response to the article


----------



## mossystate (May 16, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> Yes thats right, and I fail to see how those women's opinions really matter in this case? How are they so much more unbiased then anybody else's? If they are not a part of this community of course there gonna find the subject matter of the article to be insulting, NO MATTER WHAT THE WORDING IS! The fact is despite what SuperO thinks this acticle is far more positive then it is negative and thats the bottom line!



And you can think that, Punk. That's groovy and cool. Ain't nobody can take that away from you. :bow:

Now, I think we might have to open yet another can of nightcrawlers if you want to bring up a supposed unanimous mindset on any messageboard.

Most bottom lines have cracks ( butt joke bait! ).:smitten:


----------



## tonynyc (May 16, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> Yes thats right, and I fail to see how those women's opinions really matter in this case? How are they so much more unbiased then anybody else's? If they are not a part of this community of course there gonna find the subject matter of the article to be insulting, NO MATTER WHAT THE WORDING IS! The fact is despite what SuperO thinks this acticle is far more positive then it is negative and thats the bottom line!



Well - it just what it is... the opinions of 20 folks nothing more nothing less...


----------



## FA Punk (May 16, 2011)

mossystate said:


> And you can think that, Punk. That's groovy and cool. Ain't nobody can take that away from you. :bow:
> 
> Now, I think we might have to open yet another can of nightcrawlers if you want to bring up a supposed unanimous mindset on any messageboard.
> 
> Most bottom lines have cracks ( butt joke bait! ).:smitten:



Well I don't see how 20 random people you have over for dinner is any better or worse then a few 100 random people on the internet. Picking apart something like this is a waste of time IMO, it seems most people here on Dims seem to like it so what the hell man? Granted this isn't gonna change the world or nothing but at least we finally see some FAs speak out for once.

P.S. I don't do butt jokes mam*says in Joe Friday's voice*


----------



## ashmamma84 (May 16, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> I didn't know DDHFG was doing a road tour!!!!



You, Casting, are a class act .


----------



## mossystate (May 16, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> Well I don't see how 20 random people you have over for dinner is any better or worse then a few 100 random people on the internet. Picking apart something like this is a waste of time IMO, it seems most people here on Dims seem to like it so what the hell man? Granted this isn't gonna change the world or nothing but at least we finally see some FAs speak out for once.



It's not better or worse. As for the " picking it apart ", that's not a horrible thing, in and of itself...and like I said, I am not paying much mind to what I see as the " soooo amazing ", or the " puuuuure shit " camps.
Do you only want fat people ( well, fat women ) responding if we simply say " great " ? 
It's all conversation.:bow:


----------



## penguin (May 16, 2011)

Blackjack said:


> I looked at the pictures and then came.



Isn't that what you normally do?


----------



## FA Punk (May 16, 2011)

mossystate said:


> It's not better or worse. As for the " picking it apart ", that's not a horrible thing, in and of itself...and like I said, I am not paying much mind to what I see as the " soooo amazing ", or the " puuuuure shit " camps.
> Do you only want fat people ( well, fat women ) responding if we simply say " great " ?
> It's all conversation.:bow:



No, but it does get to the where it all becomes rather pointless, and thats what I feel has happened here. And like you I'm taking this for what it is.


----------



## CastingPearls (May 16, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> No, but it does get to the where it all becomes rather pointless, and thats what I feel has happened here. And like you I'm taking this for what it is.


Technically based on past history, it starts getting pointless when people begin posting gifs and lolcats.


----------



## FA Punk (May 16, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> Technically based on past history, it starts getting pointless when people begin posting gifs and lolcats.



Well I don't do that lol. But I guess your right


----------



## mossystate (May 16, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> No, but it does get to the where it all becomes rather pointless, and thats what I feel has happened here. And like you I'm taking this for what it is.



But that's because you have a strict bottom line. This thread might just make you go craaaaazy if you continue to read it! 

* resists urge to post pictures *


----------



## FA Punk (May 16, 2011)

mossystate said:


> But that's because *you have a strict bottom line*. This thread might just make you go craaaaazy if you continue to read it!
> 
> * resists urge to post pictures *



I told you the first I don't do butt puns lady(Haha..only kidding...not about the butt joke thingy but...BLAST I SAD BUTT! I mean, I was kidding about the angry smile.)


----------



## olwen (May 16, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> i have and do but those few instances don't control and shape my entire life and every relationship that i have. i won't let them. i disagree. it is giving them power if you allow those situations to color all of the other situations in your life that haven't or won't be like that. if a perso allows it to change their expectations about what they an have in life its internalizing fat hatred that a whole lot of people absolutely do not have. i won't give anyone that amount of power over me. i save that for the people who truly love and care for me. they don't even have to accept me because really i don't care. i've said that to my mom, my sister etc...not only that i have shown them in no uncertain terms that life can and will go on without their approval. keep giving people the power over you and they'll keep taking it. i don't let them determine the whole flavor of my life when there are so many more people out there who dwarf them because they are decent kind and self aware. actually, now that i am an adult and have been for 30 years i don't put them in the position that they feel they have anything to say to me along that vein.
> 
> the vast majority of people that i meet don't have much if anything to say about my weight generally because its just not on the table either way and i know they have a life. i am no the focus of the world. there are more important things than me to a lot of people. i don't wait to see if they like it that people are fat before i decide to live. i don't discuss it. i don't appear to need their approval and i don't prejudge them as if anyone would have negative weight related negative stuff to say. i don't look or act unhappy so generally no one treats me as though i'm something they need to fix. i'm not perfect at all and sometimes i realize that peple can have a problem with just me, like anyone else. i refuse to make my weight a crutch and the basis for all of the problems i may have in my life. IMO its really not that important and people don't really care all that much if you don't.
> 
> but besides all of that, what does it matter in this case if people have had a tough time being fat? wouldn't it even make more sense for people to bend over backwards to include everything likable loveable and wonderful about fat women if they care as much as they claim they do. i still don't see how leaving those things out somehow makes them better than the same people who would also want to leave those things out. i still can't understand how raising a woman up to a sexual being AND more than just that is somehow so harmful to her or him, especially it would go a long way in helping an FA to find the acceptance from other people many claim they want. if someone is having an extremely hard time in their situation for being fat what in the world could that do to harm them? do you see what i mean? what does reducing a fat woman down to what a fat hater would ( re: he only fucks her because he is freaky and probably thinks she's too ugly to be seen with etc...) somehow help the situation? sorry, but if we go with the idea that every last fat person has had a tremendously traumatic life it still wouldn't hold any water that its acceptable to reduce women down to only body parts when society in general feels thats a sign of disrespect.



....So, when you say it, you're just living an example of a good fatty, but if anyone else says it, they're giving up their personal power? You can't have it both ways. 

Here's the essential problem, you read "I like fat arms" as objectification, where I read it as one aspect of what an FA likes. Ultimately, a statement like that is without context. I'd have to see how that FA actually treats a girl both inside and outside the bedroom to see if the sum total of his attraction doesn't go beyond fapping to an image of some faceless naked fat girl. You like to insist that FAs are not bad people, yet you insist on reducing them to shapeless balls of naked desire. Stop it. Sexuality is complicated, so stop arguing that any time an FA says "I like fat arms" or "I like fat bellies" that he must just always be reducing women to body parts. That's just not something either of us would know unless we observed them under a microscope. If you really want to interrogate FA sexuality, then why not listen to what they have to say beyond "I like fat arms."


----------



## AnnMarie (May 16, 2011)

olwen said:


> _If you really want to interrogate FA sexuality,_ then why not listen to what they have to say beyond "I like fat arms."




Therein lies the proverbial rub. If it's not salacious and "thought provoking" commentary that runs contrary to whatever the hell is being discussed at the moment, there's no interest. 

It's not academic and thoughtful, it's elementary and one-dimensional.


----------



## Fox (May 16, 2011)

olwen said:


> ....So, when you say it, you're just living an example of a good fatty, but if anyone else says it, they're giving up their personal power? You can't have it both ways.
> 
> Here's the essential problem, you read "I like fat arms" as objectification, where I read it as one aspect of what an FA likes. Ultimately, a statement like that is without context. I'd have to see how that FA actually treats a girl both inside and outside the bedroom to see if the sum total of his attraction doesn't go beyond fapping to an image of some faceless naked fat girl. You like to insist that FAs are not bad people, yet you insist on reducing them to shapeless balls of naked desire. Stop it. Sexuality is complicated, so stop arguing that any time an FA says "I like fat arms" or "I like fat bellies" that he must just always be reducing women to body parts. That's just not something either of us would know unless we observed them under a microscope. If you really want to interrogate FA sexuality, then why not listen to what they have to say beyond "I like fat arms."



It's true. There are multiple sides to each human being rather than what turns them on physically. I think anyone reading it would know that, except for a prejudice person. For real, when I turn to Spike TV, I see Manswers on "WHAT FEMALE BODY PART DO GUYS LIKE THE MOST?!" and they are always using thin women to demonstrate their points. And apparently, it's completely socially acceptable. I'm not saying women should be treated like this. But I am saying that SINCE it's ok to talk that way about thinner women, I think it should be equally ok to talk the same way about fatter women. SuperO says she and BBW deserve to expect the same results that thin women get from men, so I'm not totally sure why she's fighting against it.

Besides, I think that if a person thinks a 20 year old straight male subject is a heartless freak for saying what he finds attractive about the female body, that person wouldn't have thought any differently about the subject no matter what he would have said.




superodalisque said:


> i'm not the only person who feels as i do. many of my closest friends are FAs. i adore them.



Oh, and I'm sure they're just crazy about you..


----------



## Dromond (May 16, 2011)

Fox said:


> It's true. There are multiple sides to each human being rather than what turns them on physically. I think anyone reading it would know that, except for a prejudice person. For real, when I turn to Spike TV, I see Manswers on "WHAT FEMALE BODY PART DO GUYS LIKE THE MOST?!" and they are always using thin women to demonstrate their points. And apparently, it's completely socially acceptable. *I'm not saying women should be treated like this. But I am saying that SINCE it's ok to talk that way about thinner women, I think it should be equally ok to talk the same way about fatter women.* SuperO says she and BBW deserve to expect the same results that thin women get from men, so I'm not totally sure why she's fighting against it.
> 
> Besides, I think that if a person thinks a 20 year old straight male subject is a heartless freak for saying what he finds attractive about the female body, that person wouldn't have thought any differently about the subject no matter what he would have said.
> 
> ...



This is just... I don't even.


----------



## ConnieLynn (May 16, 2011)

Wow, I can't believe all the massively long posts on this topic, and will confess to just skimming after a certain point.

I'm curious, have any of the individuals involved in the article invited the author to check out all the feedback here in Dims?


----------



## Fox (May 16, 2011)

Dromond said:


> This is just... I don't even.



Really? You're really trying to pull that one? I put the word SINCE in caps and you still missed it. Come on, man! Why do you always misinterpret what people say all the time? You shouldn't respond to something someone says until you have at least a basic understanding of what the person said.



ConnieLynn said:


> I'm curious, have any of the individuals involved in the article invited the author to check out all the feedback here in Dims?



Golly, I sure hope not!


----------



## CastingPearls (May 16, 2011)

Fox said:


> Really? You're really trying to pull that one? I put the word SINCE in caps and you still missed it. Come on, man! Why do you always misinterpret what people say all the time? You shouldn't respond to something someone says until you have at least a basic understanding of what the person said.
> 
> 
> 
> Golly, I sure hope not!


He's not the only one and who handed you the crown to Dimensions, Your Majesty? Last thing I heard, Webmaster wasn't looking for successors yet. Someone's trying a little too hard I think.


----------



## Dromond (May 16, 2011)

ConnieLynn said:


> Wow, I can't believe all the massively long posts on this topic, and will confess to just skimming after a certain point.
> 
> I'm curious, have any of the individuals involved in the article invited the author to check out all the feedback here in Dims?



The author is a member of long standing. He could see it if he cared to look, and knowing him he probably doesn't give enough of a care to bother.


----------



## Dromond (May 16, 2011)

Fox said:


> Really? You're really trying to pull that one? I put the word SINCE in caps and you still missed it. Come on, man! Why do you always misinterpret what people say all the time? You shouldn't respond to something someone says until you have at least a basic understanding of what the person said.



I see more than you think I see.


----------



## Fox (May 16, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> who handed you the crown to Dimensions, Your Majesty?



Apparently you did, since you addressed me as your majesty. *Zing* 



Dromond said:


> I see more than you think I see.



I think more than you see I think.


----------



## CastingPearls (May 16, 2011)

Fox said:


> Apparently you did, since you addressed me as your majesty. *Zing*
> 
> 
> 
> I think more than you see I think.


One more way to kill a thread: Allow ignorant children to post in it.      

By the way, it's 'prejudic*ed*'


----------



## olwen (May 16, 2011)

Fox said:


> It's true. There are multiple sides to each human being rather than what turns them on physically. I think anyone reading it would know that, except for a prejudice person. For real, when I turn to Spike TV, I see Manswers on "WHAT FEMALE BODY PART DO GUYS LIKE THE MOST?!" and they are always using thin women to demonstrate their points. And apparently, it's completely socially acceptable. I'm not saying women should be treated like this. But I am saying that SINCE it's ok to talk that way about thinner women, I think it should be equally ok to talk the same way about fatter women. SuperO says she and BBW deserve to expect the same results that thin women get from men, so I'm not totally sure why she's fighting against it.
> 
> Besides, I think that if a person thinks a 20 year old straight male subject is a heartless freak for saying what he finds attractive about the female body, that person wouldn't have thought any differently about the subject no matter what he would have said.
> 
> ...



Okay, I get what you are saying, but you are also missing half the point and I'm just too tired right now to explain what I mean either.


----------



## Alzison (May 16, 2011)

Fox said:


> It's true. There are multiple sides to each human being rather than what turns them on physically. I think anyone reading it would know that, except for a prejudice person. For real, when I turn to Spike TV, I see Manswers on "WHAT FEMALE BODY PART DO GUYS LIKE THE MOST?!" and they are always using thin women to demonstrate their points. And apparently, it's completely socially acceptable. I'm not saying women should be treated like this.* But I am saying that SINCE it's ok to talk that way about thinner women, I think it should be equally ok to talk the same way about fatter women.* SuperO says she and BBW deserve to expect the same results that thin women get from men, so I'm not totally sure why she's fighting against it.



Whoah whoah whoah, I've been checked out of this thread for a while, but your soapbox msg is that fat women should be objectified in the same way thin women should??? Even for arguments' sake, this isn't really the route I would recommend taking... in mixed company and amongst a crop of strong, intelligent women who have no issue fighting back, no less... oy...:doh:


----------



## cinnamitch (May 17, 2011)

Fox said:


> Apparently you did, since you addressed me as your majesty. *Zing*
> 
> 
> 
> I think more than you see I think.



Aren't you up past your bedtime?


----------



## Fox (May 17, 2011)

Alzison said:


> Whoah whoah whoah, I've been checked out of this thread for a while, but your soapbox msg is that fat women should be objectified in the same way thin women should??? Even for arguments' sake, this isn't really the route I would recommend taking... in mixed company and amongst a crop of strong, intelligent women who have no issue fighting back, no less... oy...:doh:



Perhaps it wasn't the best idea to bring it up like that, but I think that big women deserve all the joys in life thinner women get. I know not all women want to be seen as a sexy piece of meat, but there are those that do (I.E. the women on SPIKE TV). I think they have the right to be treated and seen the way they want to be treated and seen. And quite frankly, I'm saying that I don't think it should be seen as a disgusting fetish for a guy to like big girls in the EXACT same manor in which a guy likes thin girls (provided that liking thin girls in that way is not a disgusting fetish).


----------



## Fish (May 17, 2011)

yourhandsonyourhips said:


> These aren't SO big of a deal - it's not like I was mugged for liking curves. But a lot of your outlook on life is formed in those awkward high school years, and unfortunately seeming strange is a quick way to cut off any potential friendships except those 2-3 social heroes in the class looking to buck the trend. Thanks heroes, but if I want broader social prospects, I apparently need to hide who I am.



I really, seriously hope that the lesson you've taken from your experiences isn't to lie about who you are to curry the favor of assholes. I hate to sound like an afterschool special, but anyone willing to treat you like crap for something like your preference in women probably isn't worth the effort of being friendly with.

However, based on this statement, that DOES seem to be the moral of your story:



yourhandsonyourhips said:


> In high school one teammate's older, heavy sister visited the gym on an occasion. Apparently I was caught looking, and that ONE catch by the guys got me derided first by the COACH, and then endlessly by the team. Quitting a year later didn't end it. Imagine if I looked TWICE!



Then maybe your "friends" would know who you really are. 



FA Punk said:


> bisizualism!?...You have got to be kidding me, I've never heard of this term before but I don't like it, just another useless label that we don't need *sigh*.



Maybe I'm off here, but you use a label in your profile name and another label in your signature. Labels are a somewhat slippery slope and generally more trouble then their worth as they rarely do a very good job of encapsulating an idea with any depth or clarity. _(What does "FA" mean anyway? "Fat Admirer"? Fat is just a single part of a person's body. It's a part of a whole and isn't a defining aspect of what makes us individuals worthy of admiration, imo. Are their "Eyelid Admirers"? I get the idea that one may find that aspect attractive, desirable, etc. But Admirable?)_



stevenbbwlvr said:


> And, perhaps, I am not much of a pick up artist. I see y'all in public, give you the 'glad eye'...rarely get a positive response.



What the holy hell is the "glad eye" and why does it sound seriously creepy? It sounds like it should be accompanied by a greasy: _"How YOU Doin'?"_

Are friendly smiles THAT hard to manage when looking at a total stranger?



joswitch said:


> "Creepy" is in the eye of the beholder.



The "GLAD" eye of the beholder?



Fox said:


> For real, when I turn to Spike TV, I see Manswers on "WHAT FEMALE BODY PART DO GUYS LIKE THE MOST?!" and they are always using thin women to demonstrate their points. And apparently, it's completely socially acceptable.



That kind of nonsense is only as socially acceptable as we all allow. Stop tuning in to networks that push the idea that rating woman as body parts, fat or thin, is a-okay. It's not. It hasn't been acceptable outside of shitty beer commercials, MAXIM and so-called "man cave" parties. If someone's walking around, proudly proclaiming how much they love individual body parts as if they're somehow not connected to a human being, then maybe those people need to re-evaluate the way they live their lives. And if you DON'T like that kind of thinking proudly proclaimed by people, then stop hanging around with those people. 

To be perfectly honest, I found the majority of the article to be both painfully predictable and more-often-then-not, really sad. The fearfull anonymity coupled with blatant objectification and shallow physical fixations from both the men AND the women interviewed does little more then re-emphasis the idea that a simple preference is just a creepy fetish. 

We can have a thousand articles with the same theme but they won't mean anything so long as almost everyone is afraid to sign their names to it for fear of what their friends, family or employers think. 

Or maybe I just can't take ANY article seriously that has the quote: _Its like one big boob._


----------



## Blackjack (May 17, 2011)

Fish said:


> We can have a thousand articles with the same theme but they won't mean anything so long as almost everyone is afraid to sign their names to it for fear of what their friends, family or employers think.



Although I feel similarly about the anonymity, I would like to point out that most of the people in the article are _far _from anonymous, with their names, ages, and home states there for anyone to see. I can name four off the top of my head, compared to the two major anonymous contributors.

As for "it's like one big boob"- I do think that kind of sums up in five words what a fat woman feels like well enough to someone who doesn't know. It's silly and puerile, sure, but I find it hard to believe that it's to be taken as anything but that, let alone serious commentary. But if one ridiculous simile is enough for you to dismiss the article, you would've dismissed it anyways.


----------



## FA Punk (May 17, 2011)

Fish said:


> Maybe I'm off here, but you use a label in your profile name and another label in your signature. Labels are a somewhat slippery slope and generally more trouble then their worth as they rarely do a very good job of encapsulating an idea with any depth or clarity. _(What does "FA" mean anyway? "Fat Admirer"? Fat is just a single part of a person's body. It's a part of a whole and isn't a defining aspect of what makes us individuals worthy of admiration, imo. Are their "Eyelid Admirers"? I get the idea that one may find that aspect attractive, desirable, etc. But Admirable?)_



My user name is a gimmick man, It just so happened when I joined this place liked CM Punk so I took out the ''CM'' and put in ''FA'' instead and signature just goes along with the gimmick aswell. If I could go back and change it I would at this point, I'll most likely change the signature sooner or later, anyway I agree with you about lables which is why I don't live by them. I hope I cleared a few things up for you.


----------



## PeanutButterfly (May 17, 2011)

Hmm... I'm not sure how exactly I want to word my thoughts on this. I think the word "objectification" gets thrown around *a lot* on here, and I think theres a big difference between dating someone just because they have a fat belly and saying that people with fat bellies are your preference. The first is objectification. The latter is just a piece of human sexuality. Is it really so terrible to look at another person just solely to see something pretty? I mean it's part of the reason I sat through Love and Other Drugs tonight. Yeah it's a great movie, but I totally lusted after Jake Gyllenhaal the entire time (and luckily that movie makes such lusting very easy ). Was I objectifying him when I noticed his sexy shoulders? Was it wrong to tell my friend that his butt is damn cute and have absolutely no intention of getting to know the man (not that I'd ever get the chance, but you get my point)? To me this seems kind of silly. Was it the best article in the world? No. But I don't think it deserves some of the flack it's getting here of all places. I'm just not getting the difference between calling fat people "beautiful" and saying so and so has a "beautiful butt/boobs/arms/eyebrows you name it". Both are based purely on the physical. I think Jake Gyllenhaal is a beautiful man. I think Jake Gyllenhaal has a beautiful ass. What's the difference between those two statements? I don't know Jake Gyllenhaal anymore in the first statement than I do in the latter. I'm not trying to be a smart ass, I'm just legitimately confused as to how one of those statements is objectfication and the other isn't.

As far as Fox's point about SPIKE, ladies we have many magazines that cater to The World's Sexiest Man or Best Abs or Best Arms. Do those articles stir this kind of response? 

Over all I think men *and* women look at attractive people all the time. I don't think it's wrong. It is wrong to only want someone for sex. It is not wrong to see someone sexy and point out what makes them sexy. I'm not understanding why it's wrong to voice these thoughts. No one in the article ever said they only ask fat women out for sex.


----------



## BigBeautifulMe (May 17, 2011)

Dromond said:


> The author is a member of long standing. He could see it if he cared to look, and knowing him he probably doesn't give enough of a care to bother.



Look at the author's name again, lol. The longstanding member you're thinking of did not write it, he was featured in it.


----------



## Alzison (May 17, 2011)

Fox said:


> Perhaps it wasn't the best idea to bring it up like that, but I think that big women deserve all the joys in life thinner women get. I know not all women want to be seen as a sexy piece of meat, but there are those that do (I.E. the women on SPIKE TV). I think they have the right to be treated and seen the way they want to be treated and seen. And quite frankly, I'm saying that I don't think it should be seen as a disgusting fetish for a guy to like big girls in the EXACT same manor in which a guy likes thin girls (provided that liking thin girls in that way is not a disgusting fetish).



Being thought of as sexy and beautiful is not not NOT the same thing as being viewed in terms of said nameless images of fantasized women on these ridiculous TV shows. I'm certainly not arguing against fat women feeling sexy, nor do I think anyone else on this site would. And not wanting to be treated like a sex object does not mean I am a proponent for the idea that seeing fat women as attractive is a fetish. This is too mixed up to even continue arguing... you're kidding, right? I'm too earnest for this conversation? (I'm not earnest)


----------



## CastingPearls (May 17, 2011)

Just because those magazines and channels exist doesn't mean we subscribe or view them or agree with them. NAMBLA exists too and I don't want to be a member.


----------



## PeanutButterfly (May 17, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> Just because those magazines and channels exist doesn't mean we subscribe or view them or agree with them. NAMBLA exists too and I don't want to be a member.



Point taken


----------



## Dromond (May 17, 2011)

BigBeautifulMe said:


> Look at the author's name again, lol. The longstanding member you're thinking of did not write it, he was featured in it.



Oh, dur. My bad.


----------



## Fox (May 17, 2011)

Alzison said:


> Being thought of as sexy and beautiful is not not NOT the same thing as being viewed in terms of said nameless images of fantasized women on these ridiculous TV shows. I'm certainly not arguing against fat women feeling sexy, nor do I think anyone else on this site would. And not wanting to be treated like a sex object does not mean I am a proponent for the idea that seeing fat women as attractive is a fetish. This is too mixed up to even continue arguing... you're kidding, right? I'm too earnest for this conversation? (I'm not earnest)



Alright, I agree that probably was a pretty bad example for what I am trying to say. Maybe you'll accept a more appropriate example, like a plus sized barbie doll, or a big girl being able to sit with her friends in the front row on American Idol. How about a bigger woman having the same possibility of getting a good job as a thinner woman can (provided they both meet the correct qualifications for the job [Although size discrimination in the job market isn't that common, I've heard of it happening before]) Or how about a chubby Disney Princess?

I think that in order for the FA/BBW community to become equals in society, big women need to be seen as equal to thin women. And how can equality be met when there are exceptions?


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

olwen said:


> ....So, when you say it, you're just living an example of a good fatty, but if anyone else says it, they're giving up their personal power? You can't have it both ways.
> 
> Here's the essential problem, you read "I like fat arms" as objectification, where I read it as one aspect of what an FA likes. Ultimately, a statement like that is without context. I'd have to see how that FA actually treats a girl both inside and outside the bedroom to see if the sum total of his attraction doesn't go beyond fapping to an image of some faceless naked fat girl. You like to insist that FAs are not bad people, yet you insist on reducing them to *shapeless balls of naked desire*. Stop it. Sexuality is complicated, so stop arguing that any time an FA says "I like fat arms" or "I like fat bellies" that he must just always be reducing women to body parts. That's just not something either of us would know unless we observed them under a microscope. If you really want to interrogate FA sexuality, then why not listen to what they have to say beyond "I like fat arms."



ALL YOUR NAKED DESIRE ARE BELONG TO US!!!!

...or something....


----------



## butch (May 17, 2011)

Since I am a literary geek, let me throw in a great quote by the (in)famous literary critic Leslie Fielder:

_All of us have memories of having once been cuddled against the buxom breast and folded into the ample arms of a warm, soft Giantess, whose bulkto our 8-pound, 21-inch infant selvesmust have seemed as mountainous as any 600-pound Fat Lady to our adult selves. And to rediscover in our later lives the superabundance of fat female flesh which we remember from our first is surely a satisfaction we all project in dreams, though we may be unwilling to confess it once we are awake._

As far as I know, he never was a FA, if that makes any difference in how you respond to that quote.


----------



## Surlysomething (May 17, 2011)

I can't believe this thread is still alive.


----------



## J34 (May 17, 2011)

Surlysomething said:


> I can't believe this thread is still alive.



Thread started - 05-04-2011, 12:44 PM 

Its only been around 2 weeks. I have seen threads in these forums survive years of drought! Yes you have heard that one right, there are newbs who resurrect 2yr old threads


----------



## Fish (May 17, 2011)

Blackjack said:


> As for "it's like one big boob"- I do think that kind of sums up in five words what a fat woman feels like well enough to someone who doesn't know. It's silly and puerile, sure, but I find it hard to believe that it's to be taken as anything but that, let alone serious commentary. But if one ridiculous simile is enough for you to dismiss the article, you would've dismissed it anyways.



While my comment on the "it's like one big boob" line was sarcastic, I gave the article plenty of consideration. I read it more then once to give it the benefit of the doubt and make sure my initial reaction was accurate to how I felt upon reflection. 

The comment was silly and puerile and I have no expectations of anything more sincere from it's source. But the more I thought of it, the more I felt that it was actually very indicative of the problem of objectification. It expresses the idea that a woman's body is though of an nothing more then a sex object, fat or thin. It perpetuates the idea that those who find a preference in fat partners see that as nothing more then a fetishistic attraction. That the PERSON isn't as important as the package. 

And considering that the overwhelming majority of humans have at least 1% or above body fat, do we really need some kind of comparison? I don't think the kinds of people that consider fat people repulsive would be swayed into understanding with such a comparison.


----------



## Surlysomething (May 17, 2011)

J34 said:


> Thread started - 05-04-2011, 12:44 PM
> 
> Its only been around 2 weeks. I have seen threads in these forums survive years of drought! Yes you have heard that one right, there are newbs who resurrect 2yr old threads


 
I guess i'm more surprised that people still have opinions on it.

Seems like a no brainer, positive article to me.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

Fox said:


> It's true. There are multiple sides to each human being rather than what turns them on physically. I think anyone reading it would know that, except for a prejudice person. For real, when I turn to Spike TV, I see Manswers on "WHAT FEMALE BODY PART DO GUYS LIKE THE MOST?!" and they are always using thin women to demonstrate their points. And apparently, it's completely socially acceptable. I'm not saying women should be treated like this. But I am saying that SINCE it's ok to talk that way about thinner women, I think it should be equally ok to talk the same way about fatter women. SuperO says she and BBW deserve to expect the same results that thin women get from men, so I'm not totally sure why she's fighting against it.
> 
> Besides, I think that if a person thinks a 20 year old straight male subject is a heartless freak for saying what he finds attractive about the female body, that person wouldn't have thought any differently about the subject no matter what he would have said.
> 
> ...



yes they are. they know me very well, have met me and talk to me a lot. i've made a lot of very close friends here. they've traveled to see me and i've traveled to see them. i've match made for them and vice versa, seen them marry and have children etc... they trust me and love me as a friend and i can say the feeling is definitely mutual. but then you wouldn't know that because you only know about whats on a forum somewhere and seem to only know or care about your own needs. but then i don' really know you either. thats why i am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually want to be something other than an odd strange outsider to the rest of the world when you don't have to be. we know very little about one another since you haven't been here that long and i haven't ever met you at anything either.

the only thing i'm fighting against is the idea that somehow it can't be said that fat women can not or are not beautiful. can you say that they are beautiful? is it a problem for you to say that?

i'm also fighting against the same thing FAs are fighting against--them being perceived as weird and emotionally out of touch fetishist. i'm only trying to help. but if you don't want to listen to what people have to say then maybe you deserve to suffer with the stereotype that you're too stubborn to help disperse.

what is it thats so awfully and subversive to you about saying a fat woman is beautiful along with the fact that you are attracted to her? btw i never said that a guy could never mention body parts only that it shouldn't be done to the exclusion of everything else.

reminder for you: the article was not about what fat body parts guys like. it was about guys who like fat women. if the body parts are the only thing you can ever find to like about fat women then...


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

joswitch said:


> Ah, yes, the "_desire me despite my body, not because of it_" girl.
> 
> Been there, done that. Trust me, you're better off without. Such a girl is far, FAR more concerned about social status than knowing and desiring you as you truly are. You dodged X months or years of walking on eggshells. Be glad.



this is an old dead argument. no one said to desire anyone in spite of their body. when guys talk about Marylin Monroe, even today, they don't have to start end and begin with her body parts alone. they can talk about her in her entirety because she was a beautiful woman. i think a lot of guys need to learn how to do that esopecially if they don't want their attraction diminished to just a fetish--unless it really is one. no one ever leaves out the fact that Marilyn was physically beautiful. its an obvious thing. she had a lot of delicious body parts. but most men don't/didn't spend all of their time disecting her parts out of respect for the entire sexual and sensual auora she had. is just one certain kind of body part enough? if it is then maybe the guy is exactly what the public thinks that he is.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

Tau said:


> Why did they slam it?



in general they were expecting more. they were really disappointed at yet again being reduced to pieces of a woman instead of a whole woman. these are experienced girls from 28 to 48. they've all dated a lot. they know that someone being sexually attracted is not always exactly the same as actually liking you. i don't think liking their pieces is enough for them to be convinced of anything.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> I didn't know DDHFG was doing a road tour!!!!



hehe. nah it had nothing to do with that. actually we were doing volunteeer work for something that had nothing at all to do with any of this stuff. it was just something i wanted an opinion on because lots of people said i was so off base. so i decided to take the temperature of people who had nothing to do with it just to see whatother people thought. we are all from such different backgrounds and experiences so i was sure it would at least be interesting.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> Yes thats right, and I fail to see how those women's opinions really matter in this case? How are they so much more unbiased then anybody else's? If they are not a part of this community of course there gonna find the subject matter of the article to be insulting, NO MATTER WHAT THE WORDING IS! The fact is despite what SuperO thinks this acticle is far more positive then it is negative and thats the bottom line!



the point is that evidently women's opinions don't seem to matter do they? most of the people reading the voice are also not a part of this community. thats your audience. and why do they "of course" have to find the subject matter insulting when they were all set to read something positive about themselves. they wanted that. what they found instead was just another way to get disrespected. thats the bottom line. it wasn't the reference to body parts that bothered them. it was the lack of reference to nearly anything else from the guys that they did not like.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

tonynyc said:


> *L*ooks like your friends are dating a limited pool of folks....If everyone suddenly cared about culture or public opinion or what some "so called" stranger thinks... they might as well be a recluse..
> 
> Also I'm sure if you had dinner with 20 other folks ... you may get a different response to the article



no these women aren't dating in a limited pool of people. 


the only reason i brought this whole issue up is because some of the guys here do feel they want some kind of acceptance. i happen to agree with you. that in and of itself is a problem--the fact anyone feels they have to explain themselves that much. but if you do want to be relatable you have to go whole hog. being relatable for an FA should not exclude things like being able to call a woman beautiful when she is. if an FA can't even say a fat woman is beautiful...


----------



## LovelyLiz (May 17, 2011)

There have been a number of women (and men) who joined this community recently as a result of reading that article, and the vast majority of them reported feeling encouraged as a result of reading it. Regardless of any quibbles I have with some slants of the article, I am also really glad for the encouragement and new sense of self-acceptance some people have found as a result of reading it.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

FA Punk said:


> No, but it does get to the where it all becomes rather pointless, and thats what I feel has happened here. And like you I'm taking this for what it is.



its only pointless when we put walls up. i'm all for guys being able to say what they like. all i'm saying is that you have to be realistic and not expect people to agree with you all of the time or accept what you like if you aren't willing to follow the rules of that game. the outside world is not dims. if you always need to have it totally your way there is generally a price to pay. if its more important to expound only on body parts people are going to look at you in a particular way so its best to get used to it and not whine about it.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

olwen said:


> ....So, when you say it, you're just living an example of a good fatty, but if anyone else says it, they're giving up their personal power? You can't have it both ways.
> 
> Here's the essential problem, you read "I like fat arms" as objectification, where I read it as one aspect of what an FA likes. Ultimately, a statement like that is without context. I'd have to see how that FA actually treats a girl both inside and outside the bedroom to see if the sum total of his attraction doesn't go beyond fapping to an image of some faceless naked fat girl. You like to insist that FAs are not bad people, yet you insist on reducing them to shapeless balls of naked desire. Stop it. Sexuality is complicated, so stop arguing that any time an FA says "I like fat arms" or "I like fat bellies" that he must just always be reducing women to body parts. That's just not something either of us would know unless we observed them under a microscope. If you really want to interrogate FA sexuality, then why not listen to what they have to say beyond "I like fat arms."



i never said that. i don't need to interrogate FA sexuality. i've had it brought to me in buckets bigtime in various ways. all i said was that what was going on in the article generally wasn't going to play well to a general audience and that even if that is what they like they have to be saavy enough to add the other stuff in so they don't appear to be a stereotype. i have heard what FAs have to say. i have a lot of very close FA friends. the guy i'm interested in used to think of himself as an FA at one time. all i'm saying is that a lot of them also thought that leaving that other stuff out of the article was dumb and made them look bad. some have said it right here on this thread. why aren't you listening to them? or maybe those FAs don't exist because they aren't saying the types of things that you agree with and aren't willing to totally objectify fat women 100% wholesale all of the time?

in stating what my life is like i'm not comparing it to yours or anyone else's. its just my personal experiences and thoughts. if someone has to put thier fat existence next to mine and compare then thats their problem. if anyone is the bad fatty its probably me and all of the other women who are here that aren't willing to clap gratefully like blind seals, particularly for pay, every time someone says they like our fat arms alone or that we are just one big tit to them?


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

mcbeth said:


> There have been a number of women (and men) who joined this community recently as a result of reading that article, and the vast majority of them reported feeling encouraged as a result of reading it. Regardless of any quibbles I have with some slants of the article, I am also really glad for the encouragement and new sense of self-acceptance some people have found as a result of reading it.



i'm glad they are here too and hope they read very carefully.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

butch said:


> Since I am a literary geek, let me throw in a great quote by the (in)famous literary critic Leslie Fielder:
> 
> _All of us have memories of having once been cuddled against the buxom breast and folded into the ample arms of a warm, soft Giantess, whose bulk—to our 8-pound, 21-inch infant selves—must have seemed as mountainous as any 600-pound Fat Lady to our adult selves. And to rediscover in our later lives the superabundance of fat female flesh which we remember from our first is surely a satisfaction we all project in dreams, though we may be unwilling to confess it once we are awake._
> 
> As far as I know, he never was a FA, if that makes any difference in how you respond to that quote.



okay so now everyone who likes fat woman is a product of incestuous infantile thoughts?!!

freud and jung would love it


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

ashmamma84 said:


> Sorry but still, no dice. Blacks wanted and still want to be seen as normal and there are all kinds of examples in the media that seem to say otherwise or may be two steps back for black folks in the eyes of others. Remember the Spike Lee/Tyler Perry controversy? Lots of people feel Perry appeals to the lowest common denominator, others don't. Someone is probably always going to have a negative say or try to put a spin on words and therefore have missing pieces. Anyone who chooses to base their (negative) opinion on a group of people, whether its FAs or black folks, on an article/or other piece of media, isn't really someone I want to spend my time around. Those people should probably "go live in the real world". I don't believe everything I read as the gospel and I'm inclined to believe it isn't just me. Maybe it's a matter of giving the reader more credit? I don't think people are as dense as you might think they are.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, this bears repeating.



i don't think people are dense. i just give them the same credit that they would look at fat people as they look at themselves. like the women i asked about this. the ones who were smaller and had been thin before said they'd be insulted if men talked about their thin parts like that in an article in the voice. i mean, if you are black do you really want to show up in a step and fetch it costume if you really care so much that other's might view you as being ignorant and backward? i don't think so. you're right, maybe average sized people do need to be given more credit. maybe even they all don't think fat folks should just leap at any scrap they can get.


----------



## CastingPearls (May 17, 2011)

I think it bears repeating again that not everyone is on the same level on the self-acceptance evolutionary scale and one woman's scraps is another woman's road flare that her body and its parts aren't monstrosities and the amount of new traffic we're seeing from WOMEN ALONE is bearing that out. 

PS--the 'for pay' crack was beneath you Felecia.


----------



## Tina (May 17, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> in general they were expecting more. they were really disappointed at yet again being reduced to pieces of a woman instead of a whole woman. these are experienced girls from 28 to 48. they've all dated a lot. they know that someone being sexually attracted is not always exactly the same as actually liking you. i don't think liking their pieces is enough for them to be convinced of anything.


I understand this. I think it's beyond old that we as women are constantly being told that we need to mold ourselves to what men want -- sexually, in particular. It's always about 'what men want.'

By the same token, I'm not sure what the big deal is here. I mean, we all have our physical preferences and ideals/things that turn us on, no? For instance, I totally dig large calves and thighs on a guy, big hands and nicely-turned forearms (maybe I watched too much Popeye as a kid...). I objectify my husband at any opportunity and want him to do the same with me, with the overriding fact being that objectification and digging his bod is only one of the aspects about him that I love. 

In the final analysis, I'm really in support of an article that goes beyond the whole circus of feederism and daytime talkshows when discussing the 'surprising' desirablility of fat women (and fat people in general).


----------



## AnnMarie (May 17, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> if anyone is the bad fatty its probably me and all of the other women who are here that _aren't willing to clap gratefully like blind seals, particularly for pay, every time someone says they like our fat arms alone or that we are just one big tit to them?_





CastingPearls said:


> PS--the 'for pay' crack was beneath you Felecia.



Actually, it's right on par. It's perfectly fine to show pics of yourself in almost no clothing for titillation ... as long as you're not getting cash (apparently). 

View attachment nki0037l.jpg


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> this is an old dead argument. *no one said to desire anyone in spite of their body. *



^*Wrong.* The girl-that-guy-was-talking-about, whose statement I was commenting on, said EXACTLY that (in so many words). She wanted to be the ONE heavy girl he dated - so she'd be the exception to his normal desires. 

When she found out he regularly dated big girls, she binned him. SHE DID NOT WANT LOVE FROM A MAN WHO REGULARLY DATED BIG GIRLS.



> when guys talk about Marylin Monroe, even today, they don't have to start end and begin with her body parts alone. they can talk about her in her entirety because she was a beautiful woman. i think a lot of guys need to learn how to do that esopecially if they don't want their attraction diminished to just a fetish--unless it really is one. no one ever leaves out the fact that Marilyn was physically beautiful. its an obvious thing. she had a lot of delicious body parts. but most men don't/didn't spend all of their time disecting her parts out of respect for the entire sexual and sensual auora she had. is just one certain kind of body part enough? if it is then maybe the guy is exactly what the public thinks that he is.



wtf, you're still going on about " body *parts*"!!??

It's like you read an article about serial killers who chop people up and store the bits in a fridge. Kinda like someone having a schizoid episode, running through a field of red flowers and seeing only bloody entrails


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> in general they were expecting more. they were really disappointed at yet again being reduced to pieces of a woman instead of a whole woman. these are experienced girls from 28 to 48. they've all dated a lot. they know that someone being sexually attracted is not always exactly the same as actually liking you. i don't think liking their *pieces* is enough for them to be convinced of anything.



Would you drop the "pieces" horseshit already? Please?

Not ONE person interviewed ever suggested that they get off on dismembered parts of someone's body. Liking someone's butt / boobs / dick whatthefuckever does NOT stop you liking all kinds of other things about them too. Nor does it mean you want that part in isolation* FFS.:doh:

(*Well, that applies to men. I get the impression that the sales of things like the Fleshlight are waaaaaay lower than for vibrators and dildos.  )

I strongly suggest that both you and your friends have wildly distorted expectations of an article about "Guys who like fat chicks".

Such an article inevitably will focus on the DIFFERENCES between fat women and oooh, any other women you'd care to mention.

Women in general - fat or thin- may be beautiful or ugly.
Women in general - fat or thin- may be sweet, charming, warm, smart or harsh, crass, cold, stupid.

The only clear difference between fat women and thin women is
physical. So, that's what the article focussed on. 

Why is this so hard for you to understand?

A generalised love sonnet about gauzy, wafty high-ideals of beauty and love would have been completely irrelevant to the subject, and would have told the readers NOTHING new. It would have been meaningless!

"So JimBobFA, why do you like fat chicks?"
- "Oh, they're just so beautiful and wonderful"
"Ok... but why fat chicks rather than... thin chicks..."
- "Errr... fat chicks are beautifuller than thin chicks"
"In what way?"
- "In every way. Their souls glow, like shiny spangly souls."
"So are you saying thin chicks don't have shiny souls"
- "Yes."
"Isn't that a bit thinnist? Why wouldn't they have shiny souls?"
- "They're just shinier to ME"
"Riiiight. Why does being fatter make a girl's soul shinier?"
- "I dunno, I just feel that way"
"Are you on medication?"
- "Yes, would you like some? I have LOTS!"


----------



## CastingPearls (May 17, 2011)

I've never been ashamed of my body. No one made me ashamed of it. I never had a problem with my being fat. Other people did have a problem with my being fat and tried to shame me, as I have posted all over Dimensions. I think the thousands of posts I've made bear that out.

But I am human. And although I will put on a good show and entertain I'm always true to myself and I wasn't comfortable with my upper arms. When Dan mentioned loving upper arms, I didn't see him as objectifying but giving an example of one of the many many things he loves about fat women and IMO there is not enough newsprint or bandwidth to describe the virtues of the beauty of the fat woman, internally and externally and that comment made ME who never had a problem and am probably as comfortable in my own skin as any detractor here, feel good about them.

The article was a start. It wasn't perfect. It was a few words about the experiences and preferences of a few imperfect human beings. There was a lot more good than bad in it and Dan et al should not be responsible for bearing the weight of the FA world because he was fortunate enough to be interviewed in Village Voice.


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

Fish said:


> *snip*
> 
> very indicative of the problem of objectification. It expresses the idea that a woman's body is though of an nothing more then a sex object, fat or thin.
> 
> *snip*



Women objectify men ALL the time, but as women build the mores and manners of society women's objectification is seen as A-OK.

E.g. Do a straw poll of how many women would date SHORT men. Funnily enough I was teaching a TEFL class about "What do you look for in a partner" and I asked all the women would they date a significantly (more than 6") shorter man, and if not why not? Every single one said, NO. 
Men were reduced to: 
- emotional objects: "It makes me feel like his mother".
- accessories: "I couldn't wear high heels then"
- physical prowess objects "I feel protected with a big man".

And this was all light-hearted, non-contentious oh-everybody-agrees with this stuff.

*
^That is IF we choose to dissect love and desire along the lines of PC "objectifying" dogma. *
OR 
we could choose *not* to do that and accept that often men and women have complementary needs. Needs which may sometimes overlap, but not always, and that's natural and OK. *
We could choose to be realistic and understand that there IS a physical component to life and love and not get snippy, blaming and shaming about it.*


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> no these women aren't dating in a limited pool of people.
> 
> 
> the only reason i brought this whole issue up is because some of the guys here do feel they want some kind of acceptance. i happen to agree with you. *that in and of itself is a problem--the fact anyone feels they have to explain themselves that much. *



So FAs that explain themselves = bad.
FAs who do not explain themselves = bad.

FAs who do not agree with SuperO = bad.




> but if you do want to be relatable you have to go whole hog. being relatable for an FA should not exclude things like being able to call a woman beautiful when she is.* if an FA can't even say a fat woman is beautiful..*.



You keep saying this. Over and over. Of course, it's garbage. I am damn sure at least one of the interviewees will have said EXACTLY that, and it got snipped. You know why? Cos it's no different from anyone else's experiences, so it's not NEWS!

*News at Ten:*
BONNNNGGG!!
"JimBobFA thinks his girlfriend is beautiful"
BONNNNGGG!!!
"Sky reported to be a shade closely related to blue"
BONNNNGGG!!!
"Pope is apparently, Catholic"
BONNNNNGGG!!!!
"Bears defecate in woodland areas"
BONNNNNNGGGG!!!!
"SuperO suffers from OCD urge to foist unsolicted advice on FAs everywhere!"


----------



## MisticalMisty (May 17, 2011)

Felecia..if we were face to face I'd seriously tell you to shut the hell up and step away from the computer.


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

butch said:


> Since I am a literary geek, let me throw in a great quote by the (in)famous literary critic Leslie Fielder:
> 
> _All of us have memories of having once been cuddled against the buxom breast and folded into the ample arms of a warm, soft Giantess, whose bulk—to our 8-pound, 21-inch infant selves—must have seemed as mountainous as any 600-pound Fat Lady to our adult selves. And to rediscover in our later lives the superabundance of fat female flesh which we remember from our first is surely a satisfaction we all project in dreams, though we may be unwilling to confess it once we are awake._
> 
> As far as I know, he never was a FA, if that makes any difference in how you respond to that quote.



Nah, I never, ever bought the whole infantilism hypothesis.

I know exactly how my psyche grew to desire big girls and, no, Oedipus doesn't get a look in.


----------



## gangstadawg (May 17, 2011)

one thing i will say about the article is that the comments on the articles page has a few comments that were well messed up and stupid.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

AnnMarie said:


> Actually, it's right on par. It's perfectly fine to show pics of yourself in almost no clothing for titillation ... as long as you're not getting cash (apparently).



there is a big difference between titillation and selling out for for pay and actually feeling you're beautiful


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

Yep, the first one pays your bills and increases your freedom and self-determination in a capitalist society.

The second one makes you feel good.

Amazingly, you can have both at the same time.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

MisticalMisty said:


> Felecia..if we were face to face I'd seriously tell you to shut the hell up and step away from the computer.



why? is there something that scary about asking to be called beautiful?


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

joswitch said:


> Yep, the first one pays your bills and increases your freedom and self-determination in a capitalist society.
> 
> The second one makes you feel good.
> 
> Amazingly, you can have both at the same time.



how many of the former do you know that can even support themselves with it? i don't call that self determination or freedom.


----------



## LalaCity (May 17, 2011)

joswitch said:


> Women objectify men ALL the time, but as women build the mores and manners of society women's objectification is seen as A-OK.
> [/B]



You were doing so well up till this point.


----------



## Tina (May 17, 2011)

Felicia, I guess I'm wondering why you insist on the word "beautiful"? Would it have changed everything for you?


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> You were doing so well up till this point.





C'mon, you can't deny that if it is said women are objectified cos of X then it is equally true that men are objectified cos of Y.

Personally, I chose to disavow the "objectification" dogma completely, as I said above.


----------



## Lamia (May 17, 2011)

joswitch said:


> C'mon, you can't deny that if it is said women are objectified cos of X then it is equally true that men are objectified cos of Y.
> 
> Personally, I chose to disavow the "objectification" dogma completely, as I said above.



Everyone is an object to me which is why I spill so many drinks. The human head isn't flat enough to set them on.


----------



## joswitch (May 17, 2011)

Lamia said:


> Everyone is an object to me which is why I spill so many drinks. The human head isn't flat enough to set them on.



RoflmyLolcatz"!


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

Tina said:


> Felicia, I guess I'm wondering why you insist on the word "beautiful"? Would it have changed everything for you?



yes, i feel it would have made a whole lot of difference. i think it would have put things on a more human level and gotten more respect for the guys and women instead of having people's comments degenerate into the usual arguments about health and size. there will always be a lot of that anyway, but i feel that because its just a distraction from the fact that fat people are beautiful and lovable. we need to start taking the argument in a new direction. 

i think a lot of thin people have a problem because the world has told them that if they look a certain way then they should have an automatic lock on being seen as beautiful and lovable, but they are very often alone. its very threatening for then to have to face the fact that it isn't necessarily true and they don't have a corner on human happiness just because of their size. its easier for them to work on their size rather than their issues and personality flaws so then they can at least appear perfect. they use size as a crutch just as much as anyone else can. they have as much low self esteem as anyone else. 

its easy for them to pretend that its just a fetish if someone doesn't say words like love and beautiful outright. it makes it easier for them to deny the humanity of both BBWs and FAs and pretend what happens between them can't possibly be real and we're all just a bunch of co dependent freaks. it makes their life easier and also makes it easier to justify the prejudice when we keep feeding into the stereotype they want to create for us anyway.


----------



## superodalisque (May 17, 2011)

CastingPearls said:


> I think it bears repeating again that not everyone is on the same level on the self-acceptance evolutionary scale and one woman's scraps is another woman's road flare that her body and its parts aren't monstrosities and the amount of new traffic we're seeing from WOMEN ALONE is bearing that out.
> 
> PS--the 'for pay' crack was beneath you Felecia.



yeah, it was. i apologize for that.

the reason i'm saying this is exactly for those woman who aren't there yet. so when they're ready they'll remember some of what was said on all sides. after they've had a few experiences they'll know they aren't as crazy as people are trying to convince them they are when they figure out that certain things aren't quite working out the way that people said it would. until then they should have fun, enjoy themselves and learn from stuff. but they definitely shouldn't feel bad or like a failure if they realize there is something else they're going to need later and not get caught up in a lot of cognitive dissonance they can't seem to free themselves from.


----------



## NurseVicki (May 17, 2011)

nice to see a bit of positivity thanks for sharing it Got to love a guy who knows what he likes!


----------



## Dromond (May 17, 2011)

Felicia, seriously. You post in tl;dr blocks of text. Please try to find a more succinct way of saying your peace. Your posts are a challenge to the attention span anyway, and when you stack five or six of those sorts of posts together it becomes easier to glide right past rather than read them.


----------



## LalaCity (May 17, 2011)

joswitch said:


> C'mon, you can't deny that if it is said women are objectified cos of X then it is equally true that men are objectified cos of Y.
> 
> Personally, I chose to disavow the "objectification" dogma completely, as I said above.



Yes, women are probably allowed to objectify men and get away with it more -- it's often deemed playful, as opposed to threatening or domineering, when women do it.

What I don't agree with is the notion that my gender exclusively determines society's mores and manners. To that I respond with a long and resounding "bullshitttt!"


----------



## penguin (May 17, 2011)

Dromond said:


> Felicia, seriously. You post in tl;dr blocks of text. Please try to find a more succinct way of saying your peace. Your posts are a challenge to the attention span anyway, and when you stack five or six of those sorts of posts together it becomes easier to glide right past rather than read them.



It's what I've been doing.


----------



## LalaCity (May 17, 2011)

Felecia, I had to go back and look at the article again. The word "beautiful" is used in reference to fat women at least twice. So are the adjectives "pretty" and "gorgeous."

Once again, if people understand that to be genuinely attracted to fat bodies is an inborn preference in a certain percentage of the population, then it follows that the desire for romantic love with such partners (based on all the same values attendant in loving partnerships, generally) is also found between fat people and their admirers, _just like anyone else_.


----------



## TraciJo67 (May 17, 2011)

Felecia, in what world is thin automatically equated with beautiful and if it does exist then where the fuck are my crowds of admirers? I've been fat and I've been thin and I'm smart enough to realize that I'm never going to be considered conventionally beautiful. I'm more than happy with being that for the one person who matters to me. I look around and see I'm in good company with the other plain Janes and Joes... you know, the other 99% of the population. I know what you are meaning to say but its a huge stretch and too much to expect of anyone. Fat is no more beautiful than thin. I see nothing wrong with that being pointed out and in fact would be very suspicious of anyone who equates fat to automatic beauty. That, to me, smacks of the very objectification that you are so adamantly against. What I loved about the article was its very authenticity. Nobody is going to confuse Dan or Kevin or anonymous Lawrence with prince charming but they are real and enthusiastic about their preferences. And for once I am in full agreement with Joswitch. Please stop with the over analsis and with the boilerplate criticism. Its not about the fat parts. I am at least as sensitive as you appear to be towards misogyny and objecifying the fat part over the person. The article was not about this. It was slanted towards fat admirers and why they love fat chicks with some fat chick perspective (which also rocked). We aren't doing ourselves any favors by picking everything apart.


----------



## tonynyc (May 17, 2011)

WWE Superstar John Cena proud admirer of BBW


----------



## bodaciousroxxie (May 18, 2011)

blah, blah, blah, angry fat women, blah, blah, objectification, blah. 

this is what i've taken from this thread. the article, on the other hand, with a few anonymous exceptions, was great.


----------



## bodaciousroxxie (May 18, 2011)

tonynyc said:


> WWE Superstar John Cena proud admirer of BBW




Wrong. The video that circulated the net, and got fat chicks hopes up, clearly stated that he banged a fat girl as a dare from his buddies, but that it wasn't all that bad. All of this does not a BBW admirer make.


----------



## MaxArden (May 18, 2011)

Hmmm Arnold Schwarzenegger, who knew? While by DIMs standards the Mother of Arnold's love child is merely plump but, given Maria Shriver's skeletal frame and Hollywood 's standards she's positively Zaftig...


----------



## joswitch (May 18, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> Yes, women are probably allowed to objectify men and get away with it more -- it's often deemed playful, as opposed to threatening or domineering, when women do it.
> 
> What I don't agree with is the notion that my gender exclusively determines society's mores and manners. To that I respond with a long and resounding "bullshitttt!"



Not exclusively - predominantly.


----------



## vardon_grip (May 18, 2011)

bodaciousroxxie said:


> Wrong. The video that circulated the net, and got fat chicks hopes up, clearly stated that he banged a fat girl as a dare from his buddies, but that it wasn't all that bad. All of this does not a BBW admirer make.



Good information. Thanks!


----------



## LalaCity (May 18, 2011)

bodaciousroxxie said:


> blah, blah, blah, angry fat women, blah, blah, objectification, blah.
> 
> this is what i've taken from this thread. the article, on the other hand, with a few anonymous exceptions, was great.



It would appear you've just joined the ranks of pointlessly blathering fat women by virtue of this contribution.




MaxArden said:


> Hmmm Arnold Schwarzenegger, who knew? While by DIMs standards the Mother of Arnold's love child is merely plump but, given Maria Shriver's skeletal frame and Hollywood 's standards she's positively Zaftig...



Wrong turn at the FA board? :huh:


----------



## LalaCity (May 18, 2011)

joswitch said:


> Not exclusively - predominantly.



Haha, okay. I'm sure you have reams of statistics to prove this but I'll just let it lie.


----------



## mithrandirjn (May 18, 2011)

joswitch said:


> C'mon, you can't deny that if it is said women are objectified cos of X then it is equally true that men are objectified cos of Y.
> 
> Personally, I chose to disavow the "objectification" dogma completely, as I said above.



I def rep'd your post on that, but yeah, the part that women determine morals or whatever is off base.

The rest of the message is spot on, however. Women and men are different in a multitude of ways, but at core principles, we're much more similar than we're ever lead to believe. 

When I was bigger than I am now, I didn't do terribly with women, but I certainly do better now that I'm down to around 200 pounds and more toned. It wasn't that much of a confidence issue: at 240 pounds I still carried myself well and never had a problem initiating conversations with new people. It's simply that a number of women prefer my appearance now.

Should I hold it against these women that they have preferences? We're all human beings, and if we're meeting somebody for the first time, most of us aren't trying to get a sense of that person's soul or whatever, we're trying to perceive if we find them attractive. It's rare that anyone gets to know somebody better until they get a vibe for how attractive them find them on the outside.


----------



## Fox (May 18, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> thats why i am trying to give you the benefit of the doubt that you actually want to be something other than an odd strange outsider to the rest of the world when you don't have to be. we know very little about one another since you haven't been here that long and i haven't ever met you at anything either.



It is probably the reason we think such about each other. Misjudgements can happen when dealing with people over the internet. Off of Dimensions, we seem to be more social, while we come to dimensions looking for debate. I think that's ok, but perhaps I can better explain myself.



superodalisque said:


> the only thing i'm fighting against is the idea that somehow it can't be said that fat women can not or are not beautiful. can you say that they are beautiful? is it a problem for you to say that?



Not at all. In fact, I do it all the time. I call BBW beautiful, lovely, sexy cute, gorgeous, etc. whenever I see fit.

And a lot of the time in my experience, it didn't help people accept my preference. When I first told a group of friends that I liked big girls, they asked why and I said I found them beautiful, attractive, feminine, cuddly, curvy, and the like. They nearly pissed themselves laughing at me (some of them were girls) because they can't believe someone finds big girls attractive or beautiful in any way. You seem to think that if FA would just call a bbw beautiful, that he will be respected by society. This is not often the case.



superodalisque said:


> i'm also fighting against the same thing FAs are fighting against--them being perceived as weird and emotionally out of touch fetishist. i'm only trying to help. but if you don't want to listen to what people have to say then maybe you deserve to suffer with the stereotype that you're too stubborn to help disperse.



I am always listening. I read this whole post a number of times before thinking of a response (as I usually do). And if I do not want to listen to you, I do not respond. And constantly trying to make me out to be someone I'm not really doesn't help anything.



superodalisque said:


> what is it thats so awfully and subversive to you about saying a fat woman is beautiful along with the fact that you are attracted to her? btw i never said that a guy could never mention body parts only that it shouldn't be done to the exclusion of everything else.



Then at this point, you really should have no problem with me. I know that there is more to a woman than just the outside. The only point I was trying to make with the Manswers reference was that guys who like thin girls talk about it too and it isn't considered a fetish, so why should it be interpreted as a fetish for FAs to do the same thing (provided there is more to the attraction than just that)? I only saw a few minutes of an episode of Manswers at a friend's house while I stopped by to take back a movie he borrowed from me (not porn) and that's what I saw. The episode was in a bar setting, and while a number of women were in bikinis, many were fully clothed. And honestly, I see women do worse than that on this site. In my opinion, a skinny girl flaunting herself in a bikini on TV is no different from a big girl flaunting herself in a bikini on the Dims Paysite board. But even then, I do not consider them as choosing to be "objectified" for wanting to be plus/supersized models. I think the models who come to this site are beautiful, attractive, friendly, sweet, and fun to talk to (for the most part). They are mothers, sisters, friends, significant others, and the list goes on.
I also know that they chose to be models, just like women on SPIKE shows chose to be on SPIKE shows. There was no rotten minded man who forced them to do it.



superodalisque said:


> reminder for you: the article was not about what fat body parts guys like. it was about guys who like fat women. if the body parts are the only thing you can ever find to like about fat women then...



Well, it depends. I can like A fat girl for who she is, but I can't say that I like all big women for who they are. I use to think that BBW were much friendlier/nicer than most thin women. I know now that there is just as much chance of meeting a mean and shallow big girl as there is meeting a mean and shallow thin girl. I think that every woman I've seen on this site is beautiful (I haven't seen one who wasn't). But I like to talk to the ones that I feel I have more in common with, or ones I believe I'd get along well with.

Just to wrap things up, my comment about Manswers wasn't intended to say that women should be treated like objects and not people. But if it still seems like I did objectify women with that example, I apologize. However, if you still happen to think I'm a shallow FA who doesn't see more to like in a fat girl than just fat, then I can't help you. Thank you for your time, and have a nice day.


----------



## TraciJo67 (May 18, 2011)

Fox said:


> And a lot of the time in my experience, it didn't help people accept my preference. When I first told a group of friends that I liked big girls, they asked why and I said I found them beautiful, attractive, feminine, cuddly, curvy, and the like. They nearly pissed themselves laughing at me (some of them were girls) because they can't believe someone finds big girls attractive or beautiful in any way. You seem to think that if FA would just call a bbw beautiful, that he will be respected by society. This is not often the case.


 
So if I cringe at the thought of being seen in public with my dark-skinned husband, who speaks with an accent and looks vaguely like one of THOSE dark-skinned people from THAT terrorist-breeding country, who is the asshole? Him, for being dark? Or me, for being a trembling namby-pamby? 
And should my husband be made to understand that his dark skin and accent might make *me* uncomfortable? Hell, people might POINT and STARE or even worse, LAUGH at me because they can't believe that I find my dark, maybe Middle Eastern (!) husband attractive. 

Fuck society and fuck respect by society. The above part of the FA experience I cannot stand. I have vague, luke-warmish empathy for kids struggling to come to terms with what is "different" about them, since the herd mentality is difficult to overcome for people who are just learning about individuality and how much ridicule hurts. I have none, not one shred, for adults. Get over yourself. By now, you should have realized that society is made up of all sorts of people with all manner of ill-informed and ignorance-based biases. You can allow your fear of their judgment to influence how you live your life, or you can figuratively (and quite literally) tell society to go fuck itself and get on with whatever YOU find meaningful. 

And if you've already worked this out for yourself, and you're dating the fat women of your dreams, then I'd like to know why the peanuts gallery is still even a point of discussion for you. Or why you'd expect the fat women of your dreams to be understanding of how poor, pitiful you got teased for liking fat girls because <gasp> "society" says that fat girls aren't beautiful. Substitute "black" for "fat" and then read your own example back to yourself. Maybe, just maybe, you'll get it.


----------



## Tina (May 18, 2011)

Felicia, I feel that you've put things in many of your posts here in a way that has been divisive and insulting where it really needn't have been, but I feel like I get some of what you're saying, even if our requirements are different.

When you take society's messages to people in general and women specifically, it reads out to play that -- just as a starting point -- beauty cannot be attained without thinness, and that thin = beautiful. From there it filters down to large breasts> large lips> large ass (proportionately) but with a small waist> "I just got fucked" fluffy hair> practically hairless twat> basically, women should look like a Hollywood actress/stripper combination. Even if individuals don't see it that way, it's the overall message being internalized by males and females from the youngest of ages. And I think it's pretty much well known by now that even those who are thin and conventionally beautiful still question themselves, their bodies and looks, because it's really never enough, is it. We have been just plain mind-fucked about our looks for generations. So I get your argument that it wouldn't be a bad thing for fat women to be seen as beautiful (as in "fat women are generally more beautiful to me than thin women") and not just fuckable or a viable form to lust after. But rather, something more poetic. I don't need to see that myself in order to think the article is a good thing, though. 

And Jos, I believe that, in generalizing, women are seen more as the sexual vessel and men are more seen as the wallet. We had James Gandolfini on the cover of Details magazine some years ago, being touted as a male sex symbol. No one has ever done that with, say, Camryn Manheim on the cover of Cosmo.

Traci I totally agree re: picking everything apart. It's serving no one, really, IMO.


----------



## Jes (May 18, 2011)

tonynyc said:


> WWE Superstar John Cena proud admirer of BBW



this post is everything that's wrong with this thread.


----------



## Fox (May 18, 2011)

TraciJo67 said:


> So if I cringe at the thought of being seen in public with my dark-skinned husband, who speaks with an accent and looks vaguely like one of THOSE dark-skinned people from THAT terrorist-breeding country, who is the asshole? Him, for being dark? Or me, for being a trembling namby-pamby?
> And should my husband be made to understand that his dark skin and accent might make *me* uncomfortable? Hell, people might POINT and STARE or even worse, LAUGH at me because they can't believe that I find my dark, maybe Middle Eastern (!) husband attractive.
> 
> Fuck society and fuck respect by society. The above part of the FA experience I cannot stand. I have vague, luke-warmish empathy for kids struggling to come to terms with what is "different" about them, since the herd mentality is difficult to overcome for people who are just learning about individuality and how much ridicule hurts. I have none, not one shred, for adults. Get over yourself. By now, you should have realized that society is made up of all sorts of people with all manner of ill-informed and ignorance-based biases. You can allow your fear of their judgment to influence how you live your life, or you can figuratively (and quite literally) tell society to go fuck itself and get on with whatever YOU find meaningful.
> ...



Whoa, whoa whoa! Cool your guns, chika! That was when I was like 14. At that time, I still WAS a kid. If you ask me, I don't care what people think these days. I like to throw ideas around on how our community could be more active in society or accepted, but if nobody ends up accepting me except for one amazing woman, then society can just go suck it.

SuperO implied that I'd be more socially acceptable if I called fat women beautiful. I brought up that example to show her otherwise. It's not just some random sob story to get her to feel sorry for me. It's nothing but a part of my experiences in this life. I had assumed that if I shared an experience of my own (relative to the topic), I'd appear more human to you. If you hadn't noticed, people often come to this site and share their experience with life. Everyone else shares their experience, whether it be positive or negative, and so have I. For real. Look at me. Look at the way I dress. Do you really think I spend my days sobbing about what society thinks about me? Really?


----------



## FA Punk (May 18, 2011)

superodalisque said:


> the point is that evidently women's opinions don't seem to matter do they? most of the people reading the voice are also not a part of this community. thats your audience. and why do they "of course" have to find the subject matter insulting when they were all set to read something positive about themselves. they wanted that. what they found instead was just another way to get disrespected. thats the bottom line. it wasn't the reference to body parts that bothered them. it was the lack of reference to nearly anything else from the guys that they did not like.



I never said once the opinions of wemen don't matter so don't put words in my mouth SuperO, I'm sorry but having a group of your friends over that you know are going to agree with you about this article really isn't all that unbiased. And where are you getting this ''My audience'' from!? I don't read the Village Voice weekly, and in fact this is the first I have ever read it period! So again your off base. And once more what upsets you is that these guys didn't say what you wanted them to say, so there you go.




superodalisque said:


> its only pointless when we put walls up. i'm all for guys being able to say what they like. all i'm saying is that you have to be realistic and not expect people to agree with you all of the time or accept what you like if you aren't willing to follow the rules of that game. the outside world is not dims. if you always need to have it totally your way there is generally a price to pay. if its more important to expound only on body parts people are going to look at you in a particular way so its best to get used to it and not whine about it.



Hahaha, things become pointless on the internet when you start arguing on web fourms like this one, it just turns into one of those ''He said/She said'' type of things. *''i'm all for guys being able to say what they like''*...Yeah, I'll buy that for a dollor, as long as it's worded just the way you like it! Oh and I do live in the real world by the way SuperO, and I more then understand that not everyone is going to agree with me in what I have to say but hearing that coming from you is rather silly IMO since I'll you've been trying to do for the last couple of days in this thread is get people to agree with you and get them to join your side, sorry but that dog just don't hunt.


----------



## bodaciousroxxie (May 18, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> It would appear you've just joined the ranks of pointlessly blathering fat women by virtue of this contribution.


----------



## joswitch (May 18, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> Haha, okay. I'm sure you have reams of statistics to prove this but I'll just let it lie.



It's a deal. *shakeshands*


----------



## superodalisque (May 21, 2011)

i want to apologize to Kevin N. he did describe the little girl who gave him his first squish. his part of the article was really nice. sorry if i painted that part of the article as something it was not. i hope other FAs will follow your lead and not forget to express everything a fat person has to offer


----------



## Sweetie (May 25, 2011)

LalaCity said:


> The whole point of the article was that, contrary to what the media tell us, fat bodies are physically very attractive to some people.
> 
> Of course it follows that to be physically attracted to another person opens the door to possible romantic love and deeper connections. But that was not the point of the article.
> 
> ...



I'm one of those who was SHOCKED...IN A GOOD WAY. I wish that someone had written it 30 years ago so that I wouldn't have spent my entire adult life up til now hating my body and thinking that it was absolutely offensive. The only reason I even found this forum is because someone who means a great deal to me has been calling me "sexy" for the past few months. I thought they were just being kind because I KNOW THEY LOVE ME AS A FRIEND. So totally unaware was I that I actually GOOGLED "DO MEN REALLY LIKE FAT WOMEN?" and was stunned at the amount of FAT PORN there is out there, and the EXISTENCE OF DIMS...and that there are people out there who might consider MY BODY BEAUTIFUL, SEXY, AROUSING, AND ALL THOSE OTHER WORDS I NEVER THOUGHT WOULD APPLY TO ME!!! Sorry for the shouting but this is life-altering knowledge for me.


----------



## krystalltuerme (May 30, 2011)

Sweetie said:


> I'm one of those who was SHOCKED...IN A GOOD WAY. I wish that someone had written it 30 years ago so that I wouldn't have spent my entire adult life up til now hating my body and thinking that it was absolutely offensive. The only reason I even found this forum is because someone who means a great deal to me has been calling me "sexy" for the past few months. I thought they were just being kind because I KNOW THEY LOVE ME AS A FRIEND. So totally unaware was I that I actually GOOGLED "DO MEN REALLY LIKE FAT WOMEN?" and was stunned at the amount of FAT PORN there is out there, and the EXISTENCE OF DIMS...and that there are people out there who might consider MY BODY BEAUTIFUL, SEXY, AROUSING, AND ALL THOSE OTHER WORDS I NEVER THOUGHT WOULD APPLY TO ME!!! Sorry for the shouting but this is life-altering knowledge for me.



We're glad you're here. Hopefully the guy who was calling you "sexy" is worth getting to know on a new level?


----------



## rickydaniels (Jul 21, 2011)

Well it's about damn time! I really liked this article. Finally someone writes about it in the right way. I think that I related to Dan and Lawrence the most. Some guys just have a type. My brother likes curvy(not fat) blondes with tan skin (I tease him that he likes fake and bakes). I tend to like fat brunettes or redheads with fair skin. I've always kinda been like that. Rarely have I dated outside of that since I've openly been "out" as a guy that likes fat girls/women. After reading this article I took a look at some of my own BBW art and noticed most of the girls I drew were fair skinned and dark haired. (not to self: bring more ethicity to my art; that'd be cool!) I often collect bbw pics as reference to draw from and a majority of them were the same. I've been accused of having a "fetish" before and I've explained; much like the article says; Fetish are for things and fat girls are not things, Leather or panties; those is things. Lastly, it was so cool to see that a blog that I followed. "Ask a guy who likes Fat Chicks" in the Village Voice. I was stoked when I read it off his blog and I'm glad that someone posted it up here.


----------



## joswitch (Jul 21, 2011)

rickydaniels said:


> Well it's about damn time! I really liked this article. Finally someone writes about it in the right way. I think that I related to Dan and Lawrence the most. Some guys just have a type. My brother likes curvy(not fat) blondes with tan skin (I tease him that he likes fake and bakes). I tend to like fat brunettes or redheads with fair skin. I've always kinda been like that. Rarely have I dated outside of that since I've openly been "out" as a guy that likes fat girls/women. After reading this article I took a look at some of my own BBW art and noticed most of the girls I drew were fair skinned and dark haired. (not to self: bring more ethicity to my art; that'd be cool!) I often collect bbw pics as reference to draw from and a majority of them were the same. I've been accused of having a "fetish" before and I've explained; much like the article says; *Fetish are for things and fat girls are not things, Leather or panties; those is things.* Lastly, it was so cool to see that a blog that I followed. "Ask a guy who likes Fat Chicks" in the Village Voice. I was stoked when I read it off his blog and I'm glad that someone posted it up here.



^Exactly.


----------

