• Home
  • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Alpha Assessment Submissions
  • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
  • Dating Market Value Test For Men
  • Dating Market Value Test For Women
  • About

Chateau Heartiste

Feeds:
Posts
Comments
« Direct Game Essentials
The Parable Of The Smart Birds »

Not All Bodies Are Good Bodies!

January 26, 2012 by CH

A delusional feminist (but I repeat myself) who started a Facebook group called “Pinup Girl Clothing” (don’t ask, it’s stupid), has uploaded a photo of five women with less than ideal bodies and a helpful caption explaining her reason for doing so:

There’s another one of those “this is sexier than this” photos going viral right now, so we’d like to offer an alternative. ALL women are “real” and there is no wrong way to have a body. ♥ Vanessa

The two things feminists hate most: standards, and men who make no apology for their sexual desire.

Let’s have a look at that photo demonstrating the equivalence in attractiveness between women of… unconventional body shapes:

What we have here, from left to right:

1. dumpy, hipless plain jane tatted up to distract from her prepubescent boy’s body
2. morbidly obese cow
3. thin chick whose torso is stretched too long in proportion to her legs
4. obese behemoth
5. masculinized cougar

What immediately jumps out is that the photographer chose a spindly, weirdly contoured chick to stand in for the conventional hourglass-shaped slender babe that nearly all men love and desire. Had a normally proportioned thin girl like this one…

…been chosen instead, then the other four girls would look so much worse in comparison, and we can’t have that reality upsetting the narrative. Nonetheless, even with her body flaws, the thin, pretty blonde in the middle is the most bangable. Tatboy would barely inspire a half-mast chub, the Jabba twins are right out, and most men don’t want to caress rippling triceps and six pack abs on a woman. Especially a woman cresting the hill and in sight of the wall.

Women who can’t compete with the most desired women, or who fall tantalizingly short of competing, or who once competed by now no longer do, must get some kind of deep, ego-sparing emotional satisfaction by telling themselves blatant lies about the reality of female attractiveness and male attraction standards. If women didn’t have an IQ-lowering herd mentality and an obesity epidemic disfiguring the majority of them that prompted them to sing amens in unison every time a femborg shrieked out another reality-denying whopper, we’d hear far less of this crap blaring from all our media channels. Loser chicks would go back to licking their ego wounds the old-fashioned way — by taking up poetry and staring pensively out a bedroom window.

So, for the short bus regulars (this includes you, ♥Vanessa)…

Beauty is objectively measurable. Slender women are more attractive than fat women to the overwhelming majority of men. There was never a time when men liked fat women. A 0.7 waist-to-hip ratio is the most attractive body shape for a woman. A BMI of 20.85 is the most attractive weight for a woman. A young, healthy woman with clear skin is more attractive than an old, unhealthy woman with blotchy skin. Yes, ♥Vanessa, there is a sexual marketplace, women are just as much a commodity to be bartered in this marketplace as men are, there is no alternative to this reality, and there IS a wrong way to have a body.

Hope this hurts.

But at least some women get it.

Brianna Montana: the girl in the middle is not too skinny by far… Shes just in the middle of 2 fat bitches so it makes her look exxxtra tiny.

Share this:

  • Click to email this to a friend (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Reddit (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Twitter (Opens in new window)
  • Share on Facebook (Opens in new window)
  • Click to share on Tumblr (Opens in new window)

Like this:

Like Loading...

Related

Posted in Girls, Hungry Hungry Hippos, Pretty Lies, Ugly Truths | 501 Comments

501 Responses

  1. on January 26, 2012 at 2:07 pm Alan Pike

    I think are more subtle thing regarding this picture is not just what’s missing but how its attempting it’s own ‘reframe': remove something ideal from your ‘choices’ as presented and let ‘them’ direct the discourse…


  2. on January 26, 2012 at 2:08 pm A.B. Dada

    FRIST!


  3. on January 26, 2012 at 2:14 pm LonerWithABoner

    The one on the right is beautiful for her age.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:41 pm Bobby C489

      But not for her gender.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 11:47 am itsme

        gender is not binary, it’s a continuum.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 3:21 pm pb

        Sex is binary.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:26 am uh

        the only continuum in gender is woman’s stupidity.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 8:28 pm James

      If she were younger I would go her.

      Probably speaks to some deep latent homosexuality in me, but next to the fat sows she looks damn good.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:22 pm Allerious

        Nonsense, it speaks to the good taste in you. And if she were younger she wouldn’t have that body because young wimmin refuse to lift weights and train seriously. It’s well known that most fitness girls with killer bodies are over 30.


  4. on January 26, 2012 at 2:16 pm ve

    Honesty time: I’d definitely bang tattoo girl.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 2:41 pm John Norman Howard

      Feh.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:41 pm fredyetagain

      yuck


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:27 pm Ed the Department Head

      So would I!


    • on January 26, 2012 at 8:30 pm Libertardian

      I’d hit #3. Not that that’s a huge sacrifice.


  5. on January 26, 2012 at 2:27 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

    Are you sure the figure in the second pic is an hourglass one? It seems as if the girl had no waist at all! My waistline has always been a problem for me, but it’s even more distinctive than hers! (Yeah, my dearest darlings, you’ve got me right – I’m five feet four and still hate my 81-58-83.)


    • on January 26, 2012 at 2:45 pm John Norman Howard

      I’m built for big women and small cattle… what’s your number, darlin’?


      • on January 26, 2012 at 2:55 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Unfortunately, there’s no use telling you my number unless you really want to spend all your salary on phone calls. BTW, greetings from Ukraine!
        PS: I meant ‘distinct’, not ‘distinctive’ in my previous comment. The thing is I’m too drowsy now, having spent a trying day at university. However, judging from what I’ve already read in this blog, my WHR could make up even for utter illiteracy, couldn’t it?:)

        [heartiste: yes. at least for a sexy fling.]


      • on January 26, 2012 at 3:11 pm John Norman Howard

        Save the “trying day a university” stuff, babooshka… sure you’ve got a brain… but you’ve got bosom and bum as well, and which is bigger?

        There’s a reason God put our eyes right up front, but our ears way back.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:26 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        ‘Babooshka’? Shut up, I’m 19 and look like a 15-year-old (dammit, always hated my face and my height).


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:31 pm Maya

        Don’t hate your face. If you have a babyface, this is a big advantage.

        (You’ll start to REALLY hate your face when it starts to change … hint: Try to find a boyfriend before your 25th birthday.)


      • on January 28, 2012 at 1:28 am Warrioress of Ultramar

        Maya, a babyface is that with saucer-like eyes and a cute small nose. I have neither.
        By the way, I’m already fed up with all this boyfriend and dating crap. No more guys, no more love. I was betrayed once again not so long ago, and this one was the last straw. Even if my near-perfect ageing rocker version of Haymitch Abernathy comes back (and sure as hell he’ll do it one day!), I won’t even look at him. Wretched old fool.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 3:18 pm uh

        “Ultramar (comic book shit) … spend all your salary … Ukraine … university”

        LOSER


      • on January 26, 2012 at 11:45 pm someguyontheinternet

        Knowing what Ultramar is, even in a vague sense, disqualifies you from ever calling people losers.

        The Emperor Protects


      • on January 27, 2012 at 6:56 pm uh

        I looked it up, faggot.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:30 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        The same for you, mate.
        PS: hell yeah, I’m Ukrainian and proud of it. As well as of being a Warhammer 40k female fan and having a true blue Ultramarine personality (that is actually why I ended up adopting such a nickname).


      • on January 26, 2012 at 8:40 pm Libertardian

        “Unfortunately, there’s no use telling you my number unless you really want to spend all your salary on phone calls.”

        Skype is cheap. Have fun, you two.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 11:03 pm Tyrone

        Do you go to Chevchenko?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:33 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Nay, I just can’t afford it and go to KPI (which is considered even better than Shevchenko university nowadays, though) instead =) Faculty of Love… oh, shit, I meant Faculty of Linguistics.
        Are we compatriots? *tears in the Warrioress’s eyes*


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:01 pm Tyrone

        Perhaps in a spiritual sense, but not nationality. I was in the Wiking Division a few years back, but nothing too hairy. Your English is very good. Maladyetz.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 11:02 pm Tyrone

        Those measurements are in centimeters and she has nice measurements- she’s petite, about a size 2.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:25 am tyrone

        In English American measurements, Ultramar (is that a play on Outremer?) has measurements of 31- 20 -32 and 5’4″.

        Gentlemen, if you seek wife material, go to Ukraine. The worst you will see among the dating age women is the girl in the center in the propaganda photo above. My wife is prettier than the girl in the bottom photo and looks better now than when I married her. She has fleshed out a little and has nice, juicy curves that all of us want. She’s 33 and gets dirty looks all the time from women much younger than her, who think she’s their age. Moreover, she’s fun, kind, and a joy to be with. At this point, I couldn’t find any of these but the center girl in the photo pretty enough to want to be involved with. This is a big reason I don’t cat around much. There is nothing to trade up to.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:47 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Proud to be Ukrainian once again! We are probably the only country to have national and world literature as separate subjects on the school curriculum, our people are still among the most educated and well-read in the world, and our chicks are indisputably the hottest! The last one, however, is more than distressing even for a greater beta:(
        By the way, the girl in the middle of the first pic looks a lot like my former groupmate who won our beauty contest as a fresher. She ruined a nice photo of myself once by standing out in the background. Everyone noticed her first and was constantly asking me who the hell it is. On hearing it was our “Faculty of Brides” beauty queen, they were shocked…
        PS: you may look up the Ultramar thing in the English-language Wiki.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:01 pm uh

        “our people are still among the most educated and well-read in the world,”

        Yes, you’re really crowding the lists of best-selling authors, researchers, theorists, etc. Stop it already, make room for others.

        “and our chicks are indisputably the hottest!”

        I’ve never seen a young woman write this way, nor address a man as “mate”. You seem to be a man having some fun. Just skip the role-play and starting wearing pantyhose now.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:09 pm Tyrone

        All true. Ukrainians are the Welsh of the Russian Empire. They let the Russians control them and can’t seem to imagine a life without Russian control. Nonetheless, I love Ukraine and Ukrainians. The food is great, the people are fun, they are pragmatic and industrious too. Russian men even say Ukrainian women are prettier. Drown me in a sea of long, beautiful legs. Do you like Cerebro?


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:34 am uh

        “They let the Russians control them and can’t seem to imagine a life without Russian control.”

        That’s because they are Russians. Some difference in mtDNA, but their identity is just another example of ad hoc nation-building (“ukraine” means border in Russian), and their language is mutually intelligible with Russian, as is Belarussian dialect. Identity politics is a sham.

        It’s amazing — some foreign tart, probably a dude anyhow, trundles in with measurements and mah’fucks are tripping over each other for “her” favor. Don’t you know that the Natashas are the same as our women now? don’t you know that Russia and Ukraine have two of the highest abortion rates in the entire world?


      • on January 31, 2012 at 3:08 pm Thor

        The distinction between Ukrainian and Russian might not be
        thunderous to an outsider.

        However, after the Soviet (i.e. Russian although yes, Yosef
        Vissarionvitch Dzhugashvili was Georgian [actully, unlike
        Carter, he was “Gruzian”] planned mass starvation of
        Ukraine back in the 1930s [Holodomor aka Golodomor]),
        the Ukrainians (descendents of the minority that survived)
        vigorously maintain their difference and independence from the Russians.

        Thor


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:31 pm Tyrone

        I used 53 cm. I misread the digit. Her waist is 58 cm so its 22″.


      • on February 2, 2012 at 4:14 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Thanx anyway! By the way, I enjoyed the discussion you had conducted for me (unfortunately, I just had no time to come to the Chateau earlier, so I missed out on an awful lot of stuff) =) I remember reading an article about Welsh language back at high school… Things both Ukrainians and Welsh people and our languages had to suffer not so long ago are just amazingly similar (when it comes to the 19th century at least). Anyway, I’ve always respected Russian culture, happen to speak Russian even more often and most books I read are in Russian (usually world literature translated into this language, as originals or Ukrainian translations are often unavailable or hard to get). To top it all, I’m going to take up translating some sci-fi (I study English and German at uni, by the way) into Russian as my first job and see nothing bad about it. It is those who don’t have all that marvellous stuff translated into Ukrainian who should be ashamed! And I think I’m entitled to some material reward for what I’m best at, aren’t I?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:29 pm John Norman Howard

        I realized the use of the metric scale after the fact… sigh… so much for big women and small cattle.

        (cue muted trumpet sound “wah wah wah waaaaaaah”)


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:49 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Did you really think anyone would boast of such measurements in inches here? At least this particular blog is not the best place to do it:)


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:34 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Thanx, but I’d rather call it flat-chested and damn fat X)


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:28 pm Maya

        How can you be fat with 81-58-83?


      • on January 28, 2012 at 1:05 am Warrioress of Ultramar

        Easily. After all, I’m only 5’4”…


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:30 pm Maya

      I think I have seen your comment in one other topic. You seemed like normal … but now this … WTF, why do you need to tell us how amazing your waist is? Are you just trolling? Or I’m just old and jealous … Most likely.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 11:23 pm Neecy

        ahahhaaaa!


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:49 pm Maya

        What?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:53 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        If I had ever been trolling anyone here, it couldn’t have been you! Actually, I don’t think much of my figure at all:
        1) my waist measures are, so to say, constantly fluctuating:
        2) having an S waist and all the rest in the XS category is no bed of roses.
        Plus I have to admit that I no longer consider myself young either:) I really think the best years of a person’s life are 15 to 18 or so, which means my primes are already over and I’ve waisted them in tears and hysterics because of a stupid nerd.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:12 pm Tyrone

        Its a phase you go through in life. I thought the same at 19 because you see your teen years ending. Don’t let 15-18 ever be the best years of your life unless you plan on dying young. If you do it right, life only gets better.


      • on February 2, 2012 at 4:34 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        I know it’s just another goddam phase of mine, but only to some extent. I’ve already experienced loads of crap in my life – health problems and disorders, sometimes almost lethal, sometimes very close to the point of disability, loneliness, people’s constant cheating… Hell yeah, the last one is probably the worst. I’m a freak of nature, seeing all the human lies way too clear, never getting used to it and unable of quality lies of my own. I just can’t help seeing other people’s imperfections and hating them.
        Just lost the only person I loved to a stupid classical or even lesser beta who loves only his money and status and just managed to spread her legs faster than I (if I lived somewhere next to him, I would have already done it – such a romantic fool I was). I thought he was perfect and worth living for. Now I see what he really is – an old fool who’s really into lolis (he’s old enough to be my father!), but afraid of getting into trouble. Don’t say I’m too young to say it – it was the last time indeed. I know some may also say what he’s done is the alpha way, but I don’t think I’m the type of girl a true alpha could be interested in. Really. So it just isn’t the case. Sorry, mates.
        So now I’m 19 and I’m already incapable of love or empathy. It’s like an endless old horror movie. Sorry for another portion of my night raving – just needed to have it out. Thanx again.


      • on February 2, 2012 at 7:19 pm Thor

        “I just can’t help seeing other people’s imperfections and hating them. ”

        Hating the imperfections or hating the people? Makes a HUGE
        difference.

        (While not a believer myself, I will point out that Christian doctrine
        is BIG on that difference.)

        Thor


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:35 pm Student

      this hater phenomenon is quite common. walk down the street with a model and behold the dozens of dirty looks thrust her way. its a classic defence mechanism for a (usually medicore or less) girl who rues the fact shell never attract a genuine alpha and projects that bitterness outward.

      PS: slim waist + womanly hips + C cups = hourglass figure. your playboy centerfold #s might be more extreme than hers, but, based on your post, i seriously doubt you come even close to being in the same world of attractiveness.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:02 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

        Everything is OK. But for one thing. Where’s the goddam waist in the pic in question?


  6. on January 26, 2012 at 2:28 pm GeishaKate

    “There was never a time when men liked fat women.” How do you explain Rubens? ;)

    [heartiste: oh what an exception he waaaaaasssss…. (i’m in a singing mood)]


    • on January 26, 2012 at 2:40 pm John Norman Howard

      Well, I’ll take one for the team, guys… I like the tall behemoth… besides, she’s the only one who looks like mother material.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 3:31 pm uh

        I would tit-fuck two. That’s all my much smaller, middle European frame could accomplish.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 2:58 pm Warrioress of Ultramar

      Rubens wasn’t the only one. Look up in Wikipedia, you lazy sceptical bastards:)

      [heartiste: rubens was the only one who painted women as plump as he did. and in point of fact the majority of his contemporaries painted slender women.
      you should also keep in mind that rubens wasn’t painting masturbation material. had he been doing that, his women would likely have been much thinner.]


      • on January 26, 2012 at 3:46 pm uh

        Must we revisit this nonsense argument forever?

        Plump can be attractive and manageable in amour. Many women exhibit a natural plumpness that is simply their body type and not obesity.

        The women above are a collection of freaks from different racial backgrounds. Three and four are the nearest genetically despite the difference in carriage. They are also the most obviously Nordic.

        The fleshy gals in Rubens’ work are intended to convey the exuberant health associated with nymphs as an archetype, and in real terms reflect the often larger proportions of Nordic women who are taller, have wider hips, and consume more dairy.

        “Besides diversifying European hair and eye color, sexual selection may have accentuated existing sexual dimorphisms. Several studies have found wider hips, narrower waists, and thicker deposition of subcutaneous fat in women of European descent than in women of other origins (Hrdlička, 1898, Meredith & Spurgeon, 1980 and Nelson & Nelson, 1986). Even before birth, Euro-American fetuses show significantly more sexual dimorphism than do African-American fetuses (Choi & Trotter, 1970). The proximal cause may be lower androgen production than in women of sub-Saharan African descent (Falkner et al., 1999) and higher estrogen production and lower fecal excretion of estrogen than in women of north/east Asian descent (Adlercreutz et al., 1994, Coker et al., 1997, Key et al., 1990, Taioli et al., 1996 and Wang et al., 1991). Prenatal exposure to estrogen, as indicated by digit ratio, may also be higher in European women, albeit with much interpopulation variation (Manning et al., 2000; Manning, J. T. (2003). Personal communication). This variation may reflect a maternal-age effect: digit ratio is higher in Catholic countries like Poland and Spain, where mothers generally bear children in their 20s, than in Germany and Finland, where more mothers bear children in their 30s (Manning et al., 2000).”

        http://majorityrights.com/weblog/comments/the_evolution_of_blond_hair_and_blue_eyes_among_nordics/

        Art, when not self-consciously realistic, exaggerates. It always has and always will. “Maternal” proportions suggest precisely that: health and maternal ability. As R points out, these paintings weren’t fap fodder, but idealization.

        Classical and even modern art is replete with slenderer specimens. You can look that up at Wikipedia too, loser.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rokeby_Venus


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:46 am Ian

        Sometimes loser beta-males fetishize unnattractive features because hey, if you can’t get steak you might as well learn to like sausages. Doesn’t make it right.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:21 pm Omega_Dork

        There’s nothing freakish about #3. She’s very attractive.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:33 pm John Norman Howard

        And sometimes the imprinting from our mums just hardwire us a certain way.

        Besides, the mark of a true Viking warrior is to be jolly amidst adversity.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 12:23 pm Phlebas

        >The women above are a collection of freaks from different racial backgrounds.

        #2-5 all look most probably Northern/Central European to me. #1 probably has some ancestry from elsewhere, but one can’t be sure; there’s always a fair amount of individual phenotype variation in ethnic groups even though the differences can be very clear on average.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:08 pm itsme

      he was black.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:39 pm Thor

      The “ideal” figure is _partially_ culturally defined. In times when
      starvation was a constant threat (most of human history),
      fat meant RICH, RESOURCEFUL and, most importantly for
      women ABLE TO CARRY THROUGH A PREGNANCY without
      baby or mother starving.

      An interesting twist is that (despite even more interesting
      racial variations) women rarely get a potbelly, whereas men do.
      Reason: Potbelly makes you look pregnant.
      (OK, with sufficient obesity women can get a potbelly too,
      but hips [whites, mainly] and butts [blacks, mainly] pack fat
      first.)

      Now, we live in a time of caloric plenty, at least in the industrial
      world. So the deal changes.

      FAT = old (it takes TIME to build up true obesity), lack of self control,
      poor (carbs are cheap, meat and veggies more expensive, my
      mother tongue has a word that translates “breadswollen” for
      the high carb fat and poor sorts).

      THIN = young, self control, rich (meat and veggies).

      A complicating factor is that the fashion industry wants ultra-thin
      women, for several reasons, among which
      a) Shows of clothes better (they are selling clothes, to women not men)
      b) Fashion designers are often gay and want their women to look
      like young boys.

      As a result, most Western men, if they have a choice, want
      women with just a LITTLE plumpness. Think PlayMate,
      not the fashion ads. But individual preferences vary.

      Thor


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:12 am tyrone

        Come down to the local Walmart sometime. You’ll see lots of women with pot bellies. I’ll even buy the beer.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:40 pm Thor

        I know. Compare WalMart, which is a reverse fashion show (including the men) and compare with Bristol Farms (specialty groceries, I go there
        only for stuff I cannot get elsewhere, everything including everyday items
        is expensive, think Harrods, but just groceries).

        At Bristol Farms, no woman under 50 is fat. (And not very many men).

        This illustrates the class distinctions. BUT, there are plenty of individual
        exceptions – rotundity in men is socially acceptable. Life is not fair to
        anybody.

        Thor


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:16 pm Tyrone

        I agree. I see hot women at Target or Publix every time I go. Walmart can get dangerous, however. A stampede would cause an earthquake.


      • on January 29, 2012 at 2:05 am old guy, lower case

        I used to be a fashion photographer. Another reason why Art Directors want very skinny women is the camera adds 10 to 20 pounds in the process of rendering three dimensions into two.

        Oh, yeah, all Art Directors are gay, or should be so they don’t breed and make more Art Directors.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:48 pm King A

      Ahh, Rubens. Every deluded scale-buster’s highfalutin excuse for their undiscipline. I’m surprised there hasn’t been reference to how hot paleolithic man considered the Venus of Willendorf to be.

      Do we really have to talk about this? Do we really have to constantly reassert that water is wet and salt is salty? I suppose we do.

      Cherubic baby fat is attractive in a neotonic way, but not sexually. He’s fat and gentle and jolly, like a big ol’ baby! When displayed on large adults undulating heft is more the emblem of an unhealthy life than it can ever be a trigger of our impulse to protect children.

      Similarly, a tightly formed layer of unsagging thickness can be a shapely, sexually attractive sign of soft femininity (NSFW and NSFW) compared to counting the bones on the shriveled chest of a bulimic. But as usual, feminists take a solid principle and rocket it off into stratospheric preposterousness. The moderating constant is youth and health.

      Heartiste says Rubens didn’t paint jerk-off material. That’s a blunt way of saying the painter idealized heft into an expression of fecundity and healthiness in a way that only oil on canvas can achieve. I can look at a figure of Rubens and not be repulsed because I know it was conjured from a figment of the artist’s creativity, whereas when I see that weight attached to a real body frame I know it is the consequence of gluttony and possibly a hatred for life.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 4:56 pm JG

        Such a good post.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 5:43 pm Harkat

        That girl in the first link is incredible…

        And yeah, youth+health is what it’s about.

        Oh, and the “natural plumpness” some people talk about has nothing to do with this. That kind of so-called plumpness is not present in the picture above. Women are very seldom born so fat as to be unattractive. There are slight variations in shape, sure, but calling the fatness seen in the picture natural is ridiculous.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 7:19 pm Matador

        NSFW #1 is my girl right there.
        12 body, 8 face. That’s a full 10.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 7:32 pm uh

        Damned well done. Funny that it mirrors mine exactly, though of course, yours is more eloquent. Deluded scale-buster ought to be in every man’s vocabulary.

        “I’m surprised there hasn’t been reference to how hot paleolithic man considered the Venus of Willendorf to be.”

        That’s precisely what I had in mind when I said art has always exaggerated, above.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 8:53 pm James

        Rubens large women are mostly inspired by his second wife. She was16 when he married her at the age of 53 and was better looking than his first wife, even after Ruben pumped 5 kids out of her.

        First wife

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isabella_Brant

        Supposed image of second wife [central figure of Venus]:

        Rubens chubbiest women were based on models of mothers who had delivered many children and were STILL thinner than many of the women who today prance around claiming to be “Big boned”.

        Says it all really.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:51 am Ian

        He may well have been attracted to that however. As I said above, without better options, men and women will begin to fetishize all kinds of weird shit. If all you can get are land-whales, then some people begin to truly believe that that’s attractive. Their preferences won’t shift until high value women become available, and sometimes not even then.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:17 pm Tyrone

        Are you Catholic, King A?


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:31 pm King A

        Yes.

        My Catholicism is apparent even in my comments on fatties? THE POPE IS SMILING.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:41 pm Student

      they couldn’t erase paint then. probably just fixed errors by widening the margins until he got it to perfection. either that, or the fact he was a master at depicting wild beasts other violently unnatural scenes.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 1:29 pm King A

        Ha! Much more plausible explanation than “men love fat.”


    • on January 26, 2012 at 9:22 pm john

      Pee Wee Herman? Likes WOMEN??


    • on January 26, 2012 at 11:56 pm someguyontheinternet

      Makes me wonder how the rise of feminism correlates with the rise of obesity in western women. Pretty closely, I’d wager.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 9:55 am Nicole

        Rise of obesity in women, rise of depression in men…two sides of the same mass enslavement coin.

        I have personally seen men collapse while in the military from being off feed. They were fed properly in their parents’ house, and were happy and healthy, and then had to switch to industrial food and were after a few months on the edge of a breakdown even in fields that weren’t labor intense or combat.

        If just the “food” can do that, then certainly this combined with social upheaval and gender role confusion can.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 3:38 pm Stuki

      Postulating some universally attractive BMI, and Wasit/Hip ratio (WHR) is silly even on the surface,

      [heartiste: the truth often sounds silly to those unwilling to hear it. you may not like it, but studies have indeed shown a fairly universal BMI and WHR attractiveness standard among men, at least among the major racial groups. intraracially, there are a few minor differences in preference, but nothing of the sort that would fill a fattie’s heart with joy that some fatopia exists somewhere in timbuktu where she can wallow in the love of high value men.]

      as each of the two influence the other, and to different degrees for different women. The whole “studies have shown” shtick smacks of a public education, with it’s attendant indoctrination into uncritical acceptance of pseudo scientific statistical claims, if you ask me.

      My take is, WHR is BY FAR the most important of the two. And while .7 is nice (and tough enough for most women to achieve), .6 is better still, and .5 better than that. Good luck finding many women without obvious deformities with those proportions, though. Beyond .5 I really don’t know, as I’ve never seen one, and at some point there must logically be some end, as even the nicest ass and tits would look a bit freaky without a waist connecting the two :)

      Women should strive to maximize some measure closely related to the WHR. Keep eating (while exercising to pack on tail weight) as long as doing so increases WHR. But not beyond that (well, perhaps a tiny bit further, as breast and thigh size have some value in and of itself.)

      Depending on genetics, the BMI this happens at, varies wildly. Most women cannot achieve even .7 at any weight, but basically get closer the thinner they are (typical of East Asians and most Caucasians). While for others, all extra weight goes straight to the juicy parts, until their rears are big enough to make a rap star hot and bothered. For the latter, slimming down is, while perhaps healthy from a longevity standpoint (even that is doubtful with that kind of fat deposits), an insult aesthetically.


      • on February 18, 2012 at 9:24 pm GeishaKate

        I was really only teasing, but much interesting info. here! And the second NSFW, KingA? Urm, an eyefull.


  7. on January 26, 2012 at 2:30 pm Rutherfor B Hayes

    What’s wrong with #5 again? Id blow her back ouuuuuuut.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:43 pm fredyetagain

      Her ass is okay and her thighs are good, but her abs and upper body are way too muscular.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 6:47 pm Bobby C489

        Interesting. I think her legs and ass look rather manly.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 8:48 pm Aurini

        Francine, defend the brood!

        In all seriousness, if she had a non-cunty, non-androgen personality, I’d go for it. Achieving that body mass is a noteworthy accomplishment (unlike having a subsidized career), and if she were feminine it would suggest an ability for loyalty.

        Plus I’d like my wife to be able to help me defend the compound when the fuzz finally raid it.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:18 pm Tyrone

        She looks like she can handle a rifle too.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:43 pm flyfreshandyoung

      Before or after she rammed you with her python?


    • on January 27, 2012 at 8:59 am e.p.

      if you are a legs and ass kinda guy, absolutely nothing…


  8. on January 26, 2012 at 2:32 pm Jericho

    The middle thin one’s body language says she is afraid of catching fat. Good for her.


  9. on January 26, 2012 at 2:34 pm itsme

    #4 isn’t obese. she’s average in america.

    [heartiste: it’s sad cause it’s true.]


  10. on January 26, 2012 at 2:36 pm GeishaKate

    I thought there might be a joke about reubens in there…This reminds me of the Dove campaign about real beauty, which I thought was good, but I feel this one is stretching marking the truth.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 2:38 pm GeishaKate

      er, that should read “stretch marking the truth.”


      • on February 18, 2012 at 9:26 pm GeishaKate

        final answer: “stretch marketing the truth.”


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:45 pm Student

      its actually brilliant. they realized north america had a a rapidly fattening population and by accepting this grotesque state of affairs they appealed to a market of hundreds of millions who were otherwise ostracized by marketing that featured attractive (fit) models.

      its hamster-wheel marketing at its finest, and ill bet its effective as hell.


  11. on January 26, 2012 at 2:39 pm Lara

    I don’t think your ideal model is any prettier than the thin blonde in the first photo.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:14 pm itsme

      because you’re a girl. you don’t perceive feminine beauty in exactly the same way men do.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:32 pm Anton

      Seriously? Come on!


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:54 pm missfu

      What? The brunette model is definitely more beautiful than the blonde, although, her beauty is supported by Photoshop and favorable lighting. Certainly my dream physique if I can finally put on the pounds.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 4:37 pm Diomedes

      If anyone needed evidence of women being bad judges of looks, this is it. Females can give you a vague picture of another woman’s beauty, a man can hone in and present you with a photo realistic picture within a second.

      I would also suggest that she rates the blonde higher than she should because of a point CH made: visually her torso looks longer than her legs. This is a key attribute that seperates men and women (women, the attractive, have squat torsos and lengthly legs.) She rates the blonde because it is kicking off attraction triggers that she has for men.

      The same reasoning applies as to why lesbians like big bull dykes. Even though their sexuality is skewed, they cannot shake the innate attraction triggers they have that are wired to men.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 6:22 pm Dan Fletcher

        A+


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:01 pm chi-town

        …attraction triggers that she has for men.

        A rather common occasion. Had a dispute about the modeling industry. It was explained to me that the clothing looks better as displayed on a human hanger, rather than proportionally delightful models more appealing to men. This would of course explain their boyish faces….not.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:22 pm Tyrone

        I think in Lesbianworld, there is supposed to be a shortage of attractive women and as such, the manly ones will go to great lengths to either indulge the fems or control them.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:47 pm Student

      “i have a friend you *must* meet! she is sooo so so gorgeous!”

      how often is this true (or even close). never.

      whenever they introduce you to someone genuinely attractive, the only thing theyll mention is personality compatibility.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 8:55 pm James

      Lara you must be joking.

      I quite like thin girls but hips, boobs and a thin waist lead a mans eye every time.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:28 pm Lara

        On second thought, she is not as attractive as the model. Even so, she isn’t bad. Not every woman is born with great curves, and she is doing the right thing by staying thin.


  12. on January 26, 2012 at 2:39 pm Anonymous

    And there has never been a time when most men liked extremely skinny bony rail-thin women with no breasts, no hips, and no softness, *including now*.

    The tendency towards overly thin supermodels comes from the fashion industry, which industry is largely created for women. And to a large extent by women (And gay men).

    Accusing straight men of liking anorexic girls is a strawman tactic.

    [heartiste: also, the definition of anorexia has been expanded (heh) by fat fuck femcunts to include what would have in the past been normal-weight thin girls. anything to normalize fatness as an acceptable body shape.]


    • on January 26, 2012 at 2:57 pm John Norman Howard

      Gay men like boys… and Jews like to save money on fabric… voila, the fashion industry.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:54 am Ian

        Fucking hell dude, give the Jewish thing a rest. 33% of Nobel Prize winners and 50% of Fields medal winners are European Jews, we’ve got a lot to thank them for. Read The 10,000 Year Explosion.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:43 pm John Norman Howard

        Jews do tend to pat themselves on the back…

        They also made/make up a hefty percentage of fields of endeavor not quite so noble… which you conveniently ignore.

        But onward… the ‘fabric’ thing was just a joke about stick-figure super models being touted by their media.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:21 pm Ollie

      And all those millions of dudes buy millions of dollars worth of XXX magazines with nothing but thin ladies inside just for the articles…AMIRITE???


      • on January 26, 2012 at 4:12 pm Anonymous

        The women in porn are thin compared to the obese average American woman but they are not the walking sticks that feminists accuse men of trying to turn women into.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 4:29 pm Thor

        I agree. As I noted elsewhere in this thread, the ultrathin
        is a product of the fashion industry, homo designers and
        women, including some who could have been hot, outdoing
        each other in the thinner-than-thou contest. As with men
        (and their 100K cars and 10K stereos) many women spend
        more time and money trying to impress each other than
        trying to attract men.

        Thor


      • on January 26, 2012 at 5:03 pm peckerwood

        the girls in porn are fit or natural but never fat, but the older they are, the fitter they are. That is, the 18 yo bitches are completely natural, toned or not. But a 25 y.o. porn star has fake boobs and works out every day to compete in the business. The younger girls fresh off the streets don’t need to compensate.That is, the youth (i.e., vitality and pertness (and not the pervy side of what the prudes would imply)) are the most important things, and none of these five bitches can really claim that they have that, can they?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:54 pm Stuki

        As he said.

        Throughout civilized history, girls generally married between 12 and 17. That’s when the pre pregnant body needed to look it’s best. It quickly goes downhill from there.

        From then on out, I suspect attractiveness benefits from a bit more extra plumpness (maternal look), rather than overcompensating by trying to look as skinny as 13 year old, the way most “high achieving” SWPLS seem to believe is the goal.

        But still, the only truly universal beauty advice to women is to stay 15 until marriage. Or, failing that, have kids shortly thereafter, as they will find you beautiful regardless of how old you are.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 9:16 pm Ellie

        I’m sorry, but there’s nothing that makes marrying at 12-13 right. Until fairly recently, most women were not even getting their periods until age 15. How the hell would they be perfect for pregnancy if they can’t even get pregnant?!


      • on January 26, 2012 at 6:01 pm John Norman Howard

        Dudes still buy XXX mags? :confused:

        Thin ladies of the catwalk < thin ladies of porn… fail more.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:50 pm Student

      the actual reason for this is that high fashion models (the only type that are “extremely skinny/rail-thin” as you put it) are essentially clothes hangers and high fashion looks best on a bony frame (draping effect).

      its not an attempt to create a new paradigm of beauty. its straight up marketing.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:25 pm chi-town

        Which again, explains their boyish faces too eh?

        AND it looks like shit.

        http://www.lilith-ezine.com/articles/fashion/Stick-Figure-Models.html


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:26 pm Tyrone

        That’s pretty much true. its easiest to design for as well.


  13. on January 26, 2012 at 2:41 pm Anonymous

    The tattoo girl would be ok looking without all the ink.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:03 pm John Norman Howard

      The ink, and more important, the <i<mentality to get all that ink, is what now defines the girl.

      Might as well say a skunk would have a tolerable scent, were it not for the odor.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:12 pm itsme

      #2 would look ok with fgas, professional photoshopping, and beer goggles.


  14. on January 26, 2012 at 2:45 pm Alan Pike

    Notice how Rubens legacy was short lived?


  15. on January 26, 2012 at 2:52 pm Anonymous

    I should like to see a male version of “when did this, become hotter than this?” that compares feminized modern males with men of the mid 20th century.

    [heartiste: try this. this. and this.]


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:07 pm Tmason

      Also, what to do with the feminization of men?

      Game, etc. can’t take hold with weak ass men.

      I believe in the fact that when men lead, women follow. However, the feminization of men means to me that so few men are trying to lead so the “soft man ” will now be the new expectation for all men to follow, thus exacerbating the problems we face.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:03 am Ian

        It’s not just fashion or culture, it’s genetic. In fact, it’s linked to the rise of autism through assortative mating pressures. ie, increasingly beta nerds can gain economic power in society, giving them the confidence to get laid, and thus creating an evolutionary pressure towards betaness. Low social skills and beta are linked (alphas rarely have autistic kids), and also because betas pair-bond, they’re more likely to have kids.

        End result? Massive increases in both autism *and* betaness, as well as a resurgence in young 20-something’s getting married. The genes drive the culture, which then amplifies the genetic signal even further.

        The point is, increased beta-ness in society is not some conspiracy, it’s an organic process driven by the rise of knowledge-workers and decline of traditional alpha-male professions. Game can help to change this balance, maybe.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 6:21 pm anoniface

        Not to sound like an old fart, but I think it’s environmental as much as it is genetic. It used to be that if you had a car, some wine coolers, and a shopping mall full of girls, even the nerdier guys would eventually get their dick wet. Now you have internet ‘community’, video games, and unlimited porn and the natural result is basement-dwelling spergs who have no idea how to ask girls out.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:11 am Ian

        Actually, game only accelerates that process by allowing said beta males more opportunities to use their general-purpose intelligence to become more attractive. With game, many beta males who otherwise would struggle to reproduce are now able to increase their SMV.

        End result? More beta males genes in the gene pool.


      • on January 29, 2012 at 1:43 pm J.M.

        You are discussing like a girl. Autism has been proved to be a by.-product of civilization (pollution of our genes with chemicals never before been present in our bodies, e.g. you have plastics and aluminium in your blood, something your great-grandpa never had in his veins) and women postponing motherhood more than ever before http://www.naturalnews.com/026953_thimerosal_autism_mercury.html, http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=autism-rise-driven-by-environment, http://www.naturalnews.com/028508_autism_children.html, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/08/19/genes-are-not-the-main-cause-of-autism.aspx, http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/09/20/autism-statistics-alarm-african-children.aspx (Somalies in US developing autism at higher rates than in their homeland).

        Nothing to do with betaness or some other boogieman. Sources for feminization of men: TV and single mothers.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:09 pm Stingray

      Here you go.


  16. on January 26, 2012 at 2:52 pm Redleg

    I would do 1, 3 and 5 without an issue. Are they typical W/H ratio? No. But I’d still enjoy them. Perhaps their atypical proportions have made them more … ah … adventurous. ;)


  17. on January 26, 2012 at 3:01 pm Nyk

    #5 looks like Sam Carter from Stargate, but with extra muscles.

    #3 and #5 are in a different league compared with the cows and the tatooine.

    #3 – 6
    #5 – 5
    #1 – 2 (I hate extreme tatoos, the make healthy skin look sickly)
    #2,#4 – 1


  18. on January 26, 2012 at 3:01 pm King A

    OT: In another thread, corvinus led off the commentary with this doozy: “Personally, being religious, I’d have to get married since extra-marital fornication would doom me to hellfire….”

    I regret not being around to respond to this sophistic canard (but mostly I blame the Chateau’s weak forum functionality). White-knuckled worrywarts like Pastor Corvinus of the Quaker-Puritan-Calvinist ilk are their own worst enemies. They speak for the “religious” and they give us all a bad name.

    “The glory of God is man fully alive.” — St. Irenaeus

    The circle has been squared. Marriage, and all those stages defined against it like pre-marital and extra-marital, is about perfectibility, not about the “eternal hellfire” caused by incidental imperfections. Marriage has lately been reconstructed into the dungeon of beta-male torture, and that has everything to do with our modern but still very faithful approach to the sacrament. Corvinus and his Protestant presumptions of total depravity and sola this and sola that are fine concepts run amok.

    Relax, my brothers in Christ. And to war.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:42 am corvinus

      I don’t quite understand how my comments in particular got your knickers in such a twist, but I do find it rather amusing. Thanks for the chuckle.


    • on January 29, 2012 at 8:57 pm Ecce Hetero

      “The glory of God is man fully alive.”

      Fuck yeah.


  19. on January 26, 2012 at 3:03 pm Tmason

    Thanks for this post.

    I have been looking at the “fat acceptance” movement for some time now and seeing how it is gaining steam. We see now plenty of “plus-size” models, talk, etc. etc.

    Do you see the trend reversing? I am sorry to say I don’t. It’s seems that the women like in the photo you posted are growing and thus here to stay for the next 50-75 years.

    Very depressing for the younger generation.


    • on January 29, 2012 at 3:45 pm Glengarry

      “Acceptance” is the last of the Kubler-Ross stages of grief.

      “It’s going to be okay.”; “I can’t fight it, I may as well prepare for it.”
      In this last stage, individuals begin to come to terms with their [weight], or that of a loved one, or [the availability of Haagen-Dazs].
      – El Wik


  20. on January 26, 2012 at 3:04 pm askjoe

    Another thing, look at the dumbass expressions on their dumbass faces. I recognize that look as saying “we’re a bunch of women who are doing things to create a false consensus, aren’t we just a bunch of super-enlightened gals. Grrrl power!” Host is right about women lowering the collective IQ, they’ll go along with whatever they’re told to do. How about this scenario, what conditions does it take for an otherwise normal girl to jump on to a bar and start dancing, or to start unbuttoning that blouse? One other girl, two other girls? Or a single hot bartender bitch doing it first? We’ve all seen bars in which this happens. Hell, take your girl to a strip club and see how long it is before she’s fake-lezzing up a stripper.

    [heartiste: yeah, and, btw, the thin girl in the middle is definitely thinking “i’m so glad i don’t look like these two fatsos standing next to me”. there goes the grrlpower alliance.]


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:16 pm Maya

      “… the thin girl in the middle is definitely thinking “i’m so glad i don’t look like these two fatsos standing next to me”. there goes the grrlpower alliance.”

      So true. I hate this hypocrisy …

      But what do these obese women around her think? “I’m glad I don’t look like this anorexic standing next to me!”?

      [heartiste: nope. more like “i’m crying on the inside.”]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:13 am Primecut

        Seriously Maya? A woman can be too skinny, sure, but it beats being obese. C’mon.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:23 pm Maya

      askjoe,

      “How about this scenario, what conditions does it take for an otherwise normal girl to jump on to a bar and start dancing, or to start unbuttoning that blouse? One other girl, two other girls? Or a single hot bartender bitch doing it first? We’ve all seen bars in which this happens. Hell, take your girl to a strip club and see how long it is before she’s fake-lezzing up a stripper.”

      And what exactly is so wrong with anyone doing this? If they have fun … I don’t see anything wrong.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 6:35 pm askjoe

        no, most bitches would dismiss those girls as bar skanks. The point was the follow the leader, social collective brain melting going on up in here.


  21. on January 26, 2012 at 3:06 pm Firepower

    The UGLY one
    has GOT to be
    gbfm’s moms
    but with her blackened
    eye photoshopped out


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:06 am Ian

      Will you kids quit fighting like little bitches? You’re making the whole forum look bad.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 11:59 am itsme

        cain and able 2.0


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:47 pm John Norman Howard

        Your hall monitoring isn’t creating much cache either.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:54 pm Ian

        You’re not wrong.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:42 pm Firepower

        Ian

        Will you kids quit fighting like little bitches?

        With a name like “ian” …I can actually hear
        you lisping
        when you type


  22. on January 26, 2012 at 3:07 pm random dude

    I’m sorry to offend, but any man who finds the girl on the right even slightly attractive has some issues to work through. There is nothing sexy about a woman who could crush your skull. Just the way she is posing grosses me out.

    That woman wants a penis…. not inside her, but dangling between her 36 inch quads.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:18 pm Firepower

      random dude

      There is nothing sexy about a woman who could crush your skull.

      Dude – don’t venture down there: alphas don’t eat pussy; THAT’S for betas.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 4:47 pm Diomedes

        There’s jest in what your saying, but what is everyone’s stance on this?

        From a personal perspective, I have rarely gone down there and couldn’t think of nothing worse than doing so during a SNL. (Sperm can last three days within a vagina. The girl you picked up Saturday could have had a load blown up there on Friday.) Obviously, it has caused problems with girls who are used to chumps chowing down daily in the hope that by sexually servicing them they’ll stick around and love them long time; but the ever handy “If you don’t like it, go” saves a man from many problems.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 5:51 pm n/a

        She better be 18 and fresh as a daisy. I’m almost never in the mood for raw clams.–


      • on January 26, 2012 at 7:47 pm uh

        uh’s conditions:

        No going down on anything over 20 years of age and 110 pounds. Best under 19 and closer to 100lb. There must be no stench or anything out of the ordinary. Not too hairy, but no razor burn if shaven. As near to a teenage body as possible in short.

        Must be so beautiful that one is moved to the act by overwhelming desire to possess the creature in every fashion. Otherwise it is a favor or concession, and a cunt is no place for that.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:11 am Ian

        In an LTR I enjoy the power-trip of making a girl cum. But many girls interpret too-early head as supplication and they’re probably right.

        If you want a position that’ll make a girl cum hard and give you that same power-trip, flip her on her stomach and fuck her from behind with her whole body lying flat on the bed.

        This position has two effects: one, it stimulates the g-spot hard, so if she’s warmed up she’ll be out of her mind. And two, if you can’t manage deep penetration from this position, you know she’s too fat and you’ve had a fuck-up.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:01 pm itsme

        i generally screen for fatness way before that point.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 8:02 pm Ian

        Come on now, you never pick up girls when you’re too drunk to even be sure what they look like? Y’all take this shit too seriously.

        The whole “I don’t drink so I’m better at game and I keep my rock hard abs” thing is fucking gay.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:45 pm Firepower

        Ian Ianstructed:

        if you can’t manage deep penetration from this position, you know she’s too fat and you’ve had a fuck-up.

        If you’re waiting THAT long
        to use your cock as some sort of depth gauge
        best use it as a divining rod to check
        for a prostate first


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:00 pm Matador

        I am more and more willing to go down since I watched the old porn castings of pierre woodman. That guy is a bald, hairy, ugly, probably smelly motherfucker but he’s a goddamn pro. I was like “whatever” at the beginning of his stuff and a few minutes later I went “holy sh***t”.

        He’s got a little rep in the pua forums:
        http://www.rsdnation.com/node/145602

        I tried his style (he’s like so secretive about his technique, I think it’s just the old A-spot, back deep spot from the a’hole stuff…). And there’s something about giving a girl powerful orgasms, providing one is not doing it dutifully like a beta sycophant. If you maintain your uber alpha frame, there’s nothing wrong in giving chicks pleasure, if you feel like it.

        So yeah fuck it, if a girl meets my hygiene standards and is not a notorious filthy slut, I just do it. Only because I like the total submissiveness that usually follows spine-shattering sex.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:53 pm chi-town

        If you can’t eat off the floor, then what’s been jumping on the table? My dick isn’t going anywhere not good enough for my tongue.

        I like a good face to face with a baby powder smelling, exclusive gash. I count better to 99 when I start at 69.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:30 pm John Norman Howard

      I hate to admit it, but you could be right… I’m sensing strap-on action between her and my darling behemoth.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:35 pm singlewhitealcoholicseekssame

      While she’s certainly no 10, she’s not near as bad as you make her out to be. She’s about a 7. I’ll take a toned body over a flabby one any day.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 3:49 pm Lara

      I doubt that. She is probably just athletic and has overdone it with the weights.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 4:09 pm Firepower

        ru saying
        she’s your type


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:23 pm AnotherCommenter

      Any dude who is turned off because he thinks a girl could beat him has some much more serious issues to work through, preferably at the gym.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 7:24 pm random dude

        I’m 6’2″ 220 and simply prefer feminine women. She could not beat me, nor did I say she could, but please note the description our host provided: masculinized. Do you agree that this 150+ plus pound woman has compromised her femininity?

        She has the abs of a male power-lifter, and her thighs are so overbuilt that they stick out more than her ass. If she stayed away from the gym for 4 months, ate salads instead of muscle milk, and hit some Yoga classes, she might be the 7 claimed earlier.

        I’ll work through my issues, but I guarantee putting on another 20 pounds of muscle isn’t going to make me want to fuck a shemale.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 7:22 pm David

      I am not bothered by #5’s hard body but I am more muscular than she is so I don’t have to worry about having my skull crushed. I also admit there is the novelty factor, as I have never dated a bodybuilder.

      On the other hand I am reminded of the comment made by Guy Ritchie that making love to Madonna was like cuddling up with a piece of gristle. Ugh. I don’t think #5 is quite there thankfully, I see a little bit of curve.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:46 am corvinus

      She’d be just fine for Paul Lüth.


  23. on January 26, 2012 at 3:08 pm Firepower

    Firepower
    LURVS how
    the tall blonde
    touches the fatty
    as though, she had
    leprosy


  24. on January 26, 2012 at 3:09 pm askjoe

    And I love the femthink (subsection of groupthink, directed speech) “all bodies are good bodies,” sort of like the same group of tards would say “there’s no such thing as an illegal person,” or anything posted on the walls in your average USSR factory. Scratch a lefty and find a totalitarian, they hate the truth and things that can’t be controlled.


  25. on January 26, 2012 at 3:15 pm Southern Man

    At my age, I’d do three and five in a heartbeat. But especially three.


  26. on January 26, 2012 at 3:16 pm rgoltn

    None of those bodies appeal to me. However, Vanessa does have a point.

    If porn is any indication of what men like and want, then all of those bodies ARE good bodies. Websites and video stores are loaded with porn featuring all of those women. So, there must be a demand for it since the supply is a plenty. Right?

    [heartiste: wrong. the vast majority of porn marketed to straight men features slender, BMI and WHR appropriate babes. that there exist fatty and fetish niche markets in porn in no way invalidates this point.]

    is right about women hating the fact that we compare them and “stack rank” them all. The thing is, we choose who we choose and what we want. Somewhere out there, a dude is looking at #2 and #4 and rockin’ a hard one.

    [so what? there’s always a weirdo in every population. what good does it do a fat chick if one thousand men like thin girls and one man likes her gross corpulence? since fat chicks outnumber thin chicks, the odds are very high she will wind up alone and unloved.]

    While not for me, it is hard to argue with Vanessa.

    [nice troll job. not only is it not hard to argue with vanessa, it is ridiculously easy to discredit her argument.]


    • on January 26, 2012 at 4:58 pm Days of Broken Arrows

      “If porn is any indication of what men like and want, then all of those bodies ARE good bodies.”

      No. Ten minutes of fantasy doesn’t mean anyone would want that in reality. And the most popular porn stars are not heavy, just the fetish actresses (and I wouldn’t call them stars).

      By the way, men fantasize about a lot of things they’d never do in reality. I often dream about buying up all the ice cream cakes in my local supermarket and eating them but don’t do it. Hey, there’s a lesson there!


      • on January 28, 2012 at 4:09 pm Nicole

        Again, you guys are stretching, and end up lending validity to Vanessa and other women who want to co opt fat acceptance into feminism when just 10 years ago they were denouncing us as “breeders” and default mentally ill due to sex abuse by men, who they have to blame for everything.

        Please do not feed that monster.

        Aside of it being inaccurate, I believe that is is insulting to men to suggest that a man will avoid acting out a sexual fantasy, given the opportunity in relative safety, simply because it is socially inconvenient. One should also, when arguing with women, avoid too much actual and not just relative beta moral panic about epidemics that are more accurately widespread results of social, industrial, and environmental conditions.

        It is stooping to their level.

        When one of them points out that there is deviant porn or porn that is non mainstream, your answer should be that it is statistically irrelevant and not reflective of mainstream standards. The fact that it is labelled by category of deviance only highlights this. Nobody labels porn with skinny women, “Skinny porn” unless the women are truly boney.

        People will act out their fantasies if they have the chance to. It’s just how people work. Just because you wish it weren’t so doesn’t make it so. If fat chicks were uniquely deprived of alpha cock, there would be no fat chicks. As it is, many alphas have enough to go around for everybody.

        Even to say they don’t marry the fat chicks is kind of iffy since most of them don’t marry anybody, at least not for very long. When they do marry a woman, no matter how skinny she may be, they’re cheating on her, and often with a fat chick.

        I think it’s best to stay away from those kinds of arguments and stick to the fact that since it isn’t an ad saying that all these women went Paleo or some kind of natural and have lost 50 lbs. even though some still have a ways to go, they are essentially saying that it’s okay your government, the food industry, and your parents’ ignorance has screwed you. “Let’s celebrate the extra weight you’re carrying because you eat like a USDA certified cow! Yay!”

        Women are being told not to pay attention to the man behind the curtain, and this is just morally wrong. The fat is the side effect. The real wrong is the stuff that led up to it, and that we’re being told that it’s an accident or just fate or something.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 7:08 pm Anonymous

      There’s scat porn too, but that doesn’t mean I’m making a dash towards the shit-covered redhead at the bar like a bug towards a bug light.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 9:36 am rgoltn

      Counter points well made. I agree on the ratio of porn geared towards straight guys wanting slender women and I understand that the fetish/niche market may be small.

      I am only saying that while women may try hard to justify being fat and fool themselves into believing that they “all are beautfiul,” there are some men out there that not only believe them, but get off on them.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:48 pm Nicole

        Great, but even a guy who prefers big women doesn’t have to be a tool and celebrate pollution and industrial phood.

        Most guys who like them big like “sturdy”, not one donut from a wheelchair.


  27. on January 26, 2012 at 3:16 pm Sam Spade

    All incomes are good incomes!

    $7/hour is just as good as $100k per year. Cornbread tastes just as good as filet mignon.

    Women who can’t see the beauty in living and raising children under the poverty level are just superficial misandrists. They don’t appreciate TRUE wealth – the kind you can’t count with bills.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 4:59 pm Days of Broken Arrows

      Yes, and all heights are good heights. I’m sure these women would be totally accepting to guys as tall as Prince. He’s big on the inside and that’s all the should count to them.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 8:37 pm Rick Derris

        Your comment takes the (fat-free) cake IMHO!

        I wish I had a dollar for every time I heard a woman say that the short guy would be a “great friend.” Or that the hard worker in accounting is a “good guy to know.” Or that the guy with no muscles or no education is a “nice guy.”

        The double standard of chicks is f-ing insane.


  28. on January 26, 2012 at 3:19 pm John Norman Howard

    I think the worst thing about that picture is how the short, fat one looks waaaaaayyy to pleased with herself.

    But that reflects upon us men… I knew a woman even more of a land whale than the girl in the picture who got remarried within a few months after her first husband dumped her… geez, she even had two kids in tow.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 7:04 am tyrone

      They don’t call it the Celibate States of America for nothing.


  29. on January 26, 2012 at 3:20 pm Gutts

    Ladies, you can argue all day about what is attractive, but ultimately it comes down to this:
    Do you give the guy a boner?


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:19 pm Maya

      +1

      [heartiste: and some bodies are better than other bodies at inspiring boners.]


      • on January 26, 2012 at 5:47 pm Maya

        Yes, I know.


  30. on January 26, 2012 at 3:23 pm GBS

    That attempt by the femborg collective is a FAIL that borders on epic.


  31. on January 26, 2012 at 3:24 pm Ollie

    There’s only one way to handle #2:

    http://www.whalecraft.net/Harpoons.html


  32. on January 26, 2012 at 3:40 pm Bronan the Barbarian!

    Way to pick a bunch of fugmos. Fembot propaganda at it’s finest.

    I know a couple of dudes who’d stick it to the human Rorschach test on the left, but really the only remotely bangable one in the whole lineup is the blonde stork in the middle. Even though she’s a 5.5 at best, at least she isn’t a total fucking hog. It was considerate of the photographer to dress at least one of the the mammoth fatties in somewhat fupa-concealing underwear. I only puked up half my lunch instead of the whole thing.

    I am kind of wondering why that steroids guy on the right got breast implants, though. If he wants bigger pecs that bad, he should just hit the incline bench.


  33. on January 26, 2012 at 3:46 pm theta male

    Muscular women can be attractive, although the woman on the right isn’t really. For example:

    http://www.girlswithmuscle.com/115426/

    http://bodyspace.bodybuilding.com/photos/view-user-photo/9478752
    http://www.girlswithmuscle.com/142044/

    Would they be more attractive without prominent muscles? I’m not sure (for most women yes, but perhaps not in every case), but it’s certainly not an unattractive body shape if at a moderate and natural level as shown above.

    Obviously I don’t extend this admiration to huge roided-up “FBB”s, who are disgusting.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:23 pm random dude

      I would call her more of a figure model than a body builder. When the shoulders get broad, the abs get defined, and the boobs turn into pecs, no thanks.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 5:44 pm theta male

        If you’re referring to the girl in the video, she does have defined abs as seen here:

        Obviously the distinction between figure model and body builder is subjective, but she’s clearly got “surprising” muscles for a woman, yet imo has a very attractive body and probably looks better than she would with any other body type. Most women are however more attractive with a somewhat softer-looking body than that.

        It’s a shame that bodybuilding is associated with disgusting and ridiculous over-bulkiness in both men and women – ideallly, female bodybuilders would all aspire to look like the above.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 10:39 pm The Real Vince

      Agreed.

      http://www.girlswithmuscle.com/131835/


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:48 am corvinus

      Agreed, girls with some muscle on them, which makes them curvier and brings out their figure, are great. It’s a nice antithesis to blobby rolls of fat. Moderation, of course, is key.


  34. on January 26, 2012 at 3:48 pm AnotherCommenter

    As some of the facebook commenters have suggested, the *ultimate* response to this would be a picture of 5 dudes of totally different appearances with the same caption. Women may be able to be irrationally optimistic about female body image, but put the fat dude with a beer belly next to a skinny dude and a buff dude and they’ll get the point.

    That said, I’d prefer far right, then far left, then middle. Middle has neither T nor A and looks to have a weird face.

    From a long-term perspective, far right is a lot less likely than middle to turn into middle-right, since she clearly cares about fitness. But the point of this isn’t the long-term perspective.

    [heartiste: 9 out of 10 men agree: the woman in the pic under the five is the hottest of them all.]


    • on January 26, 2012 at 4:28 pm Tmason

      [heartiste: 9 out of 10 men agree: the woman in the pic under the five is the hottest of them all.]

      Also, becoming extremely rare. And I live in the DC area where there is a nice ratio of thin chicks but nothing like that pic.


      • on January 26, 2012 at 4:53 pm theta male

        >Also, becoming extremely rare

        In what sense? Why, if there are lots of slim women?


      • on January 26, 2012 at 5:21 pm Tmason

        Slim but don’t take care of themselves, so they end up looking actually a little worse than the thin chick in the first photo.

        They don’t exercise and depend on natural metabolism which means that, yes, they are thin, but they are the ugly thin kind.

        All women, regardless of their overall rates of metabolism, need to be taught from birth at the earliest stage in life to exercise regularly and eat a paleo-diet to maintain a healthy and high quality of life.

        Otherwise, you get chicks slightly worse than #3 in the photo as standard, AT BEST.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:09 pm itsme

      some might get the point, but many will find ways to reframe the comparison as not being the same thing.

      never underestimate the power of the hamster.


  35. on January 26, 2012 at 3:57 pm Woof

    Girl in the middle has big feet which usually means small tits


  36. on January 26, 2012 at 4:03 pm itsme

    ha ha!

    ‘all bodies are good bodies’, yet when you click on the other photo albums on the facebook page, most of the girls are at least ok looking. no #2s or #4s to be found.


  37. on January 26, 2012 at 4:10 pm Firepower

    Feminists ARE OPPRESSORS
    and Discriminationists

    There are no
    Octogenarian undies
    or Amputees
    (with tats)


  38. on January 26, 2012 at 4:17 pm whorefinder

    Fat chicks need lovin’ too…
    ‘Cept they gotta pay.
    —Quagmire

    I’d fuck the cougar and middle girl.

    I likey milf porn a lot, but the milf is too butched up for more than cursory fuck and run—her vagina probably isn’t that lubricated, due to her old age and increased testosterone from working out/juicing.

    Middle girl has pretty face but is standing awkwardly—she should take some pages from Stacy Keibler, another long-legged, skinny girl with a smaller rack, who accents her legs over torso and looks red-hot for doing it. Sticking middle girl in high heels and short skirt with a thigh-high-slit would really do wonders for her.

    The other three should be burned at the stake.


  39. on January 26, 2012 at 4:38 pm whiskey

    Let’s be honest. That pic was created by the “League of Celibacy.” I mean, come on!


  40. on January 26, 2012 at 4:45 pm evilalpha

    This photo may be worse than the cervix pic.


  41. on January 26, 2012 at 4:47 pm Opus

    Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo


  42. on January 26, 2012 at 4:54 pm Days of Broken Arrows

    Who the fuck are women kidding? Get on a dating sight and look at the preferences of virtually all “heavyset” women. There, you’ll find both height and income requirements in the upper 10 percentile. This especially goes for black women, for some reason.

    The message is: You don’t get to have standards, but I do. I long for the days fatties knew their place.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 8:41 pm Rick Derris

      >>>I long for the days fatties knew their place.

      Do you mean their place in line at the cupcake shop??? Seriously, WTF is up with the cupcake shops now? (I wish Jerry Seinfeld would comment on this).


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:13 pm carolyn

        they should be immediately banned as a threat to the public health. the premises should be burned to the ground and the soil plowed under with salt.

        yes, i feel that strongly.


  43. on January 26, 2012 at 5:01 pm carolyn

    er…i got the sense that this message was sent w/o guys or sexual desirability in mind. that is, it was all between us girls. get some perspective, stop obsessing about your physical selves for a moment. i understood it that way.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 5:55 pm n/a

      Their “physical selves” reflect their — what’s your chosen word, carolyn — perhaps — souls —

      An obese pig and a tatted-up slattern tell you all you need to know at a glance.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 11:46 am carolyn

        ‘An obese pig and a tatted-up slattern tell you all you need to know at a glance.’

        well, that’s you. maybe being a women i’m just less judgemental, at least about other women’s looks. constantly obsessing about my own weight w/o much success until recently makes me more empathetic to others with the same trouble. walk a mile in another’s shoes and all that. (having said that, i do wonder what on earth the tatted one was thinking.)

        again i took this to be a message to women to get some perspective and not about appeal to the opposite sex.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 10:47 pm Ballsdeep

        Taking your post one step further, there have been forces that have been pushing less than ideal diets on the American public for the last…. say… 40 years?

        My friend got back from South Korea, and (like many places in the world that aren’t the US of A or Australia) it is RARE for girls to be chubby! Obese women basically don’t exist. Granted he was in Seoul, so maybe if you get out into the boondocks, that might change, but I doubt it.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 3:22 pm carolyn

        ‘there have been forces that have been pushing less than ideal diets on the American public for the last…. say… 40 years?’

        we’ve all been misinformed. read gary taubes’ ‘why we get fat’ and feel the outrage. low carb was the key all along.

        ‘My friend got back from South Korea, and it is RARE for girls to be chubb’

        i live in flushing ny which has a large korean community and it’s interesting to see how much taller and heavier the kids born here are than their parents. some are even getting fat on an american diet. _something_ is happening here that is absent there. and it isn’t because there’s something in the water or because the young’uns all became gluttons.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:44 pm uh

        As a man, when I walk a mile in anyone’s shoes, I burn calories. I am sorry yours stay on you.

        Women are unfit to judge everything past when to feed & change baby.

        Fatties above are not eating low-carb. They have never fully given up grains and saccharine additives. I know this because I consider myself above average in strength of will, and quitting bread for me was a titanic struggle.

        Those women don’t strike me as the struggling type. Not their fault they are pampered by the system though.

        When I was in Afghanistan I saw no fat women under 50, and those 50 & over were not obese, merely squat after birthing half a dozen children.

        What’s wrong — as far as obesity — is easy abundant calories, urbanism and the bloated tertiary sector it has generated (sedentary work for women). Nothing “more”.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 9:15 pm carolyn

        ‘As a man, when I walk a mile in anyone’s shoes, I burn calories. I am sorry yours stay on you.’

        some of us have no luck.

        ‘Women are unfit to judge everything past when to feed & change baby.’

        come now, uh. you’re throwing bombs. admit it. you’re in denial if you say you’ve never met at least a couple women who were the smartest in any number of rooms. it’s true that at the extreme right side of the bell curve men predominate, but that doesn’t preclude the existence of some very bright women. that’s not to say some are too smart for their own good.

        ‘Fatties above are not eating low-carb.’

        you’re right. they’ve been shamefully lied to by our own usda.

        ‘They have never fully given up grains and saccharine additives.’

        grains are hopeless. the low carb pasta and bread i experimented with taste like sawdust. best to give it up altogether. and sugar substitutes should be treated as a harm reduction tactic at best. splenda et al. rev up insulin production, fooling the body and encouraging the deposition of fat. i just may have to give up my much looked forward to 2 gin and diet tonics a night for that reason. dammit.

        ‘I know this because I consider myself above average in strength of will, and quitting bread for me was a titanic struggle.’

        good for you. for me too bread’s a rare treat.

        ‘Those women don’t strike me as the struggling type. Not their fault they are pampered by the system though.’

        maybe they haven’t heard the word or doubt its truth, brainwashed by the low-fat conventional wisdom.

        ‘What’s wrong — as far as obesity — is easy abundant calories, urbanism and the bloated tertiary sector it has generated (sedentary work for women)’

        likely factors but not the major one.

        Nothing “more”.

        hmmm…has moral character really declined in the last hundred or so years?


      • on January 31, 2012 at 7:30 am uh

        “you’re in denial if you say you’ve never met at least a couple women who were the smartest in any number of rooms.”

        depends on context. women are usually just good at duckspeak, not independent thought. then again, i always see female names at the top of research papers, and could name a few (anne campbell, deirdre barrett, leda cosmides) who consistently impress and are by far smarter, in that way, than many men. i bet one could even have a beer with each of those women and talk fairly freely about how lame-brained women can be. i don’t know if that’s modernity or the more equal status of men and women in northwest european society, or when that really began (~500ad i’ve seen). then again, it’s men who set these paradigm shifts in motion — buss, wilson, haldane, hamilton, et al., so here again it’s white men leading the way, with white women able to catch up and do supplemental work.

        this doesn’t vitiate the empirical fact that most women just quack quack. now you might say, well that’s what most people do; but that isn’t so. women will less often accede to the plain truth of “things” than men. as another good woman psychologist found, probably building on a man’s earlier research, women lie most about each other while men lie about themselves. you will perceive the logic at once: women conspire, men aspire. women are concerned for / threatened by others’ status, men are concerned for their own status. this introduces a truth differential: when two men are having a beer, they will admit socially uncomfortable or taboo truths; whereas a man out for a drink with a woman will lie about himself, and feel obliged to observe some taboo likely to be observed by the woman; whereas two or a group of women will simply enforce the taboo as it is powerful leverage in status-control, whence arose orwell’s classic observation that it was always the women among the communists and anarchists who were the professional nosers-out of unorthodoxy, etc.

        now this tendency to use social protocols (taboos) as leverage in status-control means, in the end, that they are not as concerned with truth values of any matter. women lie about themselves too, naturally, but they do this by augmenting their physical appearance; and this may relate to their attempt to bring down other women for perceived flaws or lack of care. but from this arises that uniquely female narcissism which prevents them from being truly objective, which is why they are not inventors, leaders, blah blah blah. originally it was merely that they took no risks; then female adornment, almost unparalleled in other species, made them narcissistic; and the fact of conspiring to keep order in the group to ensure maximal safety to her nest and offspring.

        this is why most women write about women, or even just their twats. it is a kind of omphaloskepsis they can never escape. lately feminism had the brilliant idea of pretending that they are obsessed with themselves only because of men, which echoes sartre’s silly philo-semitic line that if the jews didn’t exist we violent irrational goyim would have to invent them to vent our spleen (echoing voltaire re: god; implied moral: jews r god); this led quickly to the notion that “bodies are gendered” and so on. in reality they are obsessed because of sexual dimorphism itself, which is sharpest among eurasian races, and why european females are a world commodity. this sexual dimorphism, basically a congenital naked vulnerability to the elements and especially the male gaze (lozozozoz), eventually selected for greater variability in feminine attire, and voila, the beauty cult was born and with it woman’s narcissism was set to full-tilt forever.

        then came the post-christian renegades — the ugly jewesses and frenchwomen who were hell-bent on denying the whole evolution of sexual dimorphism to assuage their low SMV. this not only produced second-wave feminism but nearly the entire cosmetics industry. the popularity of hair dye is due entirely to the efforts of brooklyn jewesses, for example, which you can read about in gladwell’s what the dog saw. hate to cite that douche but he gives some good info unintentionally.

        but of course this massive denial complex is only affirmation of the precedent, which is high sexual dimorphism and the “pathologies” that grew up around it. the feminist lie that bodies are “gendered”, then, is an anachronic rendering of the body (in their rhetoric it is always referred to blandly, but with a hint of underfucked tingling, as “the body”) divorced from the evolutionary causal nexus which produced both of its forms. in other words third-wave feminism is not only anti-evolution, but anti-historical, which is a purely religious delusion psychologically speaking.

        so the point i am trying to make is that women have this massive built in block to their thought processes which results not from being “forced” to dwell on being female by men, as you probably would not opine, but from sexual dimorphism itself … which of course cannot be undone. division of labor means one sex will specialize in x and the other in y. in humans, x remained at the level of animal care (and indeed precedes the innovative i.e. originally parasite-avoidant chromosome determining male sex) while y became more and more abstract. y in man might be anything from building a trap to advanced mathematics and biology, almost uniformly male territory, though it’s important to note that the rural papuans, the opposite end of the spectrum in sexual dimorphism, build their homes in a respectable clan effort, i.e. much division division of labor; but y in a male bower bird is still erecting or arranging a love-nest of suitable character to attract the female, even, as a bbc article recently reported, building in such a way that the nest creates an optical illusion wherein the male appears larger (perhaps shinier? i didn’t finish it, was boring loozozoz) than it is. but x in the female bower bird is obviously just responding to the machinations of this y going so far out of its natural-born way to capture its momentary affection.

        this ramifies all the way up to female intelligence. i was recently driven off one of my familiar blogs by a weirdo christian type who has it in his head that studies showing cognitive differences in men and women are shots fired in a jewish misinformation campaign. used as i am to obsessing about just those, this type sees it everywhere it isn’t, misinterpreting this theater of the culture war — in fact a fiercely defended redoubt of those warring against their propaganda — for a case of discrete agency by the same misinformation agents who originally made their names touting certain disastrous lies we are still shoring up, and by ch in truly sisyphean fashion.

        his purpose was to prove that the cognitive difference is much smaller than such studies make it out to be. well, depending on perspective and the variables involved, blah blah blah egghead disclaimers, that can be true and false. at the end of the day we know that women excel at verbiage, usually empty, obfuscating, unoriginal, truculent or uninspired, or some combination thereof, while men excel at technics — which from the standpoint of logical procedure includes the truth content of propositions. (i prefer to call this “truth content”, following adorno, which to my mind suggests the validity of intuition — hence it was used to describe what of the real world was salvageable in a work of art — but that isn’t the terminology.) and this is why, as you might anticipate, feminists have had also to attack logic, and indeed, what it calls “linear thought” itself; and their writings abound with terms intended to convey ambiguity like non-linear, flow, continuum (cf. above), naturally feeding into the now generalized leftist rhetoric obsessively emphasizing everything open (“liberal” having morphed into a term of abuse), etc. the purpose, then, is to enforce ambiguity, amorphousness, formal abstraction (e.g. all modern art and music, esp. “experimental”) in a stylized rebellion against all identified with the male.

        you know all of that i suppose. but there’s the crux of it: that women could produce this grisly, disturbingly weird pathology of denial — when, with all their freedom, as with kaffirs and the rest of you natural subordinates, one might naively have expected them to “take up your place” in the hallowed halls of innovation and achievement: but which was an idealistic delusion promoted by post-Christian universalism, as these are reflexes of masculine being, i.e. “evolutionary strategy” — is almost clinical proof that women, while cognitively as able as men, being of “roughly the same species”, fall short of the full range of cognition and especially in the domain of the truth itself. understand that: truth is a function of logic, which is a reflex of sexual dimorphism, i.e. natural division of labor: males with things (objects, abstract values), women with other people (relationships). and who are the people with whom women are, in a normal environment, properly concerned? the children. and that is precisely the extent of the famed “women’s intuition” — QED: when to change and feed baby. otherwise you exhibit no intuition at all, or you would all know when to quit. you are actually as dimwitted as ashkenazi jews: very poor social intelligence, ironically for two groups exhibiting “high verbal intelligence”. i don’t know how women gained the reputation for being perceptive. perhaps because for so long you were obliged to keep quiet and observe, and men projected their own perspicacity onto you. i promise you more understanding (abstract intelligence: “meaning” as a quantum of truth-value) can pass between two men, full of “the world” as “the totality of facts” (wittgenstein), in a mere glance than the average woman could ever speak to another woman.

        which is why we all have so much goddamn trouble with you. there are standards; men, concerned for their own status, develop in their efforts to secure reproductive rights; women, concerned for others’ status, tear them down.

        here’s another take on that: http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/mf.pdf

        “Murder in Families”

        By John M. Dawson
        and Patrick A. Langan, Ph.D.
        BJS Statisticians

        A survey of murder cases disposed
        in 1988 in the courts of large urban
        counties indicated that 16% of murder
        victims were members of the defendant’s
        family. The remainder were murdered by
        friends or acquaintances (64%) or by
        strangers (20%).

        A third of family murders involved
        a female as the killer. In sibling murders,
        females were 15% of killers, and in
        murders of parents, 18%. But in spouse
        murders, women represented 41% of
        killers. In murders of their offspring,
        women predominated, accounting for 55%
        of killers.

        When a mother killed her own child, the
        offspring she killed was more likely to be a
        son than a daughter: 64% sons versus
        36% daughters. But when a father killed
        his own child, the offspring he killed was
        about as likely to be a daughter as a son:
        52% daughters versus 48% sons.

        • When a son killed a parent, his victim
        was about as likely to be the mother as the
        father: 47% mothers versus 53% fathers.
        But when a daughter killed a parent, her
        victim was more likely to be the father than
        the mother: 81% fathers versus 19%
        mothers.”

        what you see here is precise empirical confirmation of the above. won’t seem that way at first, but let’s connect the dots.

        taking the male killers, fathers and sons, we see that they killed in a nearly even spread, confirming the insight from evolutionary psychology that stepfathers are more likely to abuse their adopted children because they are not related, which may relate to males of other species eliminating a female’s current offspring the moment he enters the picture to ensure all subsequent offspring are his own (even those adorable tarsiers do it); anyhow a man will exercise more restraint with a child known to be his own than one that is not, and that has evolutionary depth as only such concern would ensure genetic continuity.

        taking the female killers, mothers and daughters, we see that they killed mostly their male counterparts, confirming what one sees everywhere in the animal world — females resisting male aggression (PUA has an acronym for this: LMR, last minute resistance), which is what the sexual act is to an unthinking animal after all, but in humans can become anything from petty acts of everyday defiance (which game purposes to circumvent) to the extreme acts tallied above. a son might also be perceived as a threat to the pairbond itself, which would be costlier for the mother to lose than a single son who can be replaced (one might find that those 55% of women who killed their sons were pre-menopausal).

        but the greatest disparity of course is daughters having killed their fathers. now it says “large urban counties”, so we’re probably dealing with kaffirs here, yet this is actually an advantage — regression to the primitive avoids a lot of “noise” that results from high IQ races. so 81% patricide by daughter. that is huge, but all it represents is an extreme female response to male (sexual aggression).

        now let’s bring this back into perspective.

        i said above that men create standards in their competition to secure reproductive rights (much as war produces technology with extra-war applications), and that women tear them down; that this agrees with the axiom that men are thing-oriented, women people-oriented; which of course agrees with the biology, i.e. sexual dimorphism (musculature, height, blah blah). in consequence of this men tend to “pathology” like autism / asperger’s while women are more often “pathological” liars and obnoxious social activists. in a crisis where fight is impossible, men withdraw, women befriend.

        all of this points to one thing, in an expression provided by feminists themselves: “breaking down barriers”. barriers = standards. my friend told me today that down in berkeley, and where else, the schools had to eliminate “gifted” programs because they were filled with white children. of course these school boards and teachers’ associations are, if not entirely, than overwhelmingly female, with whatever males sure to be the most feminized beta sycophants imaginable.

        this is one anecdote in a sea of them, and this hostility to barriers, to standards, to walls and ceilings, to judgements and differences, to preferences and allegiances and just apportionment not by oxytocin highs but by merit, all of which women enforce betimes because they must as living, halfway intelligent beings pursuing a distinct sexual strategy to further their genetic complement … reduces to one variable, one cruel finesse that shoots through all that we do as humans: women have a horror of objective (i.e. extra-household) facts, and their commitment to the denial thereof will vary with their SMV.

        in summary: highly intelligent — yes! highly truthful / relevant — no.

        women did not write the encyclopedia. please vote taliban, 2012.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 2:51 pm Thor

        The longest post I have not read in a long time.

        But there are some good nuggets there.

        Leda Cosmides, yeah! I have met her and heard her give a
        presentation. Great stuff. Read “The Adaptive Mind”,
        a collection of essays!

        Among her nuggets:

        People are hardwired to detect “cheating”. Too long
        to explain.

        People will indulge in charity/altruism i.e. helping others
        at a cost to themselves, but usually only under
        at least one of the following conditions:

        1) Kin
        2) Reciprocal (you owe me one, pal). Even vampire bats do this.
        3) The misfortune appears undeserved (to the donor)

        Etc. Good stuff.

        Thor


      • on January 31, 2012 at 8:06 am uh

        “maybe they haven’t heard the word or doubt its truth, ”

        as women, we may be certain that they this and every truth.

        “likely factors but not the major one.”

        well those are the factors invoked by authorities i have read and the hundreds of news hubs that crib from them. unless you are going to add “it’s the jews, stupid”, i probably won’t be inclined to take you seriously, but welcome emendation of my ignorance.

        “has moral character really declined in the last hundred or so years?”

        yes. technology + urbanism + advertising = propinquity / ubiquity = greed, lasciviousness, short attention spans, loss of racial coherence and memory.

        moral character is not a universal. it is a reflection of local breed stability (life pre-multicult) and relatedness (highly out-bred northwest europeans). a society with its morality is a racial construct. “bowling alone” is the sequel to “mein kampf”, for both hammer down the facts of excessive comingling of races: an alienation stage (’90s—early 00s), dispossession (2010—?), then replacement (2050). from a.h.’s perspective: alienation (massive influx of slavs & jews from successive epidemics into german raum and vienna, ~1800—1914), dispossession (pre-war vienna, volksdeutsch movement, formation of national socialist party in bohemia, wwi), and replacement (Slavic nations after 1918).

        anyway, i don’t know that you’ve paid attention in your span of years. have you never been to ybor city, fl? there was no “spring break” a hundred years ago, you know. wake up.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 9:32 pm carolyn

        uh– thank you for replying to my comment with such care.

        i don’t agree with everything you say, but i must admit you were thorough and provided much food for thought.

        to be sure, i’m sympathetic to camille paglia’s (and yours) stance that culture was a male initiative–woman more or less along for the ride. it’s impossible to imagine a woman for instance founding any of the abrahamic religions, or any religion at all come to think of it. women, charged as they are with birthing and rearing children, have little energy left for such niceties.

        your opinion on female cognition and lack of perceptiveness. well…lets agree to disagree. the problem is men can’t get into women’s heads and vice versa. maybe only during sex and then it’s probably a delusion, however delightful. that was my thinking then if memory serves; finally i’ll know what makes these alien creatures (men) tick through my poor sweet husband’s actions, he a proxy for the entire sex. then i do know but only for a couple of seconds. that wondeful apprehension slips away. anyways, probably false, but perhaps nature’s way of motivating us to accidently engender the next generation.

        having said all that you may be right. neither of us have any way of knowing, imprisoned as we are in our own heads. yours truly though must admit that the installation of the software encoding female biology and socialization was less than successful in my case. thus my alienation from most women other than those who more or less share my condition.


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:08 pm Harkat

      I’m curious about what CH visitors will think about this. I don’t hate women for being unattractive. But I still would not want to engage romantically or sexually with unattractive women.

      I have a friend, a girl, who is a 3-4. I think of her platonically. She’s moderately funny, she’s fun to talk to, she shares many of my interests.
      I wish her well. Live and let live.
      But I would not tap dat.

      I don’t disapprove of her. Why would I?


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:19 am loveiseasy

      While the message may come off well-intentioned to some, it’s mostly just a trojan horse for the self-serving feminist agenda to subvert ancient beauty standards as per usual.

      It’s patently ridiculous that all female bodies are somehow to an equal extent “good.” From this photograph, clearly some are in major need of a medical intervention as there is nothing healthy nor “good” about suffocating yourself from the inside.

      I’m all for people having a basal level of self-respect, but lying to people like this only further divorces them from reality


    • on January 27, 2012 at 7:27 am tyrone

      Actually, you’re right. Women obsess about their bodies, but mostly when its too late. Fortunately every pot has a lid.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 9:07 am passingby

      Please, stop. Don’t try to pretend something occurs here other that what is occuring: the attempt is to try and tell women that they are vibrant and attractive, not matter their body shape.

      That is a lie told to people too often. Beauty to the opposite sex is a relative measure where the standard is your attractiveness as compared to alternatives.

      Much like how we tell every 103 IQ kid, “You too could be president!”, when that is simply not true, we need to stop telling people that everyone is beautiful. While a human body is, like most other creations of nature, a pretty interesting and facsinating thing, that does not make every human body sexually attractive. This picture’s message is just an attempt to tell the people on the left hand side of the bell curve that they are not really on the left hand side of the bell curve.

      But they are. We all get there eventually, if we live long enough.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:10 pm carolyn

        ‘This picture’s message is just an attempt to tell the people on the left hand side of the bell curve that they are not really on the left hand side of the bell curve’

        not really. implicit in the poster is the message that, yeah, you’ll never be ‘hot’, but that’s not a reason for hating yourself. just deal with it and move on and do what you can do. accepting reality is psychologically healthier. it may even slow down the ‘hampster’ everyone refers to around here.

        ralph waldo emerson left americans a legacy that one must pursue constant self-improvement. it’s ingrained in the culture and while it’s lead to american optimism and success, it is rather unforgiving. the poster is only trying to mitigate its worst side effects.

        ‘We all get there eventually, if we live long enough.’

        that’s for sure. so it’s wise to take the long view.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:34 pm L

        Hilarious that you bring WRE into a commentary on being fat.

        The only fat people in his time were the very wealthy or the very old.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 8:05 pm carolyn

        oh for chrisakes.

        this isn’t just about fat people, it’s about the imperative to self-improvement in general. do try not to be so fucking literal.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 7:57 pm uh

        “ralph waldo emerson left americans a legacy that one must pursue constant self-improvement. it’s ingrained in the culture and while it’s lead to american optimism and success, it is rather unforgiving.”

        lol. you need to read more population genetics.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:56 pm Thor

        I rarely comment just to agree. But this is on point. Before I read
        the para about IQ above, I was thinking about the policy that
        EVERYBODY should pass the exam on EVERYTHING.

        Now there is a good side to this kind of propaganda, as
        long as it stays within bounds. I would summarize by
        saying

        1) Make the best of what you have got
        2) Realize that, despite your best efforts, you may in
        some respects remain average, or even below average.
        3) Some children are best left behind. Sorry.

        This applies to most of llfe’s endeavors, not just mating behavior.

        Thor


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:32 pm carolyn

        spot on. i was trying to say more or less the same thing in my disappeared comment.:(


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:31 pm L

        I’m sure you would comment summarily on the bodies of these women again. It would have no relevance.

        These women are not fat because of nature, they are fat because of nurture, specifically because they nurture their wounded egos with food far too much.

        No one forces these women to be fat. No one forces them to eat. No one forces them to avoid physical activity. A gym membership is about 30-40 bucks a month. Purchasing one and attending it for 30-45 minutes a day will decrease your insurance premium substantially. You’ll be at a lesser risk for heart attack, diabetes, and cancer, just by doing so. You’ll increase the quality of mates you can attract, or if you choose to go solo, the quality of sexual partners you can attract.

        Stop being a fat apologist.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 10:25 pm carolyn

        ‘Stop being a fat apologist.’

        have you read through this thread or is this just a knee jerk accusation of fat apology to anything more nuanced than a blanket condemnation of the obese?

        please pay closer attention.

        idiot.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:38 pm carolyn

        i replied to your comment but it seems to have disappeared into the ether. maybe it’ll surface. who knows?

        but to add to it, the understanding of what’s a ‘good body’ can be interpreted 2 ways; one to be sexually judged and pitilessly categorized in the hb hierarchy. most comments here are made with that sense in mind and are understandable as well as inevitable. that’s biomechanics for ya.

        another is a woman’s use of her own body. her legs get her around. her body gives her sexual and other pleasures. whatever else that could be said about it, it’s hers and hers alone to do with what she wants. in that sense any body is a good one, irrespective of its sexual charisma. this was implicit in the poster, i feel. note i didn’t go to the fb page and interpreted the pix w/o referring to anything else.

        enough…off to make lunch for my underemployed son.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 11:43 am Nicole

        Please don’t take this too harshly, but men really do not give a crap.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:38 pm carolyn

        you’re right they don’t. dammit.

        but they’ve got no right obviously to dictate how well your body serves _you_, not others.

        in that respect my own has never let me down.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 4:57 pm Nicole

        Well, technically, they do have the right to dictate. You just don’t have to care that they do.

        The stupid ad promoters who couldn’t even be arsed to get #2 properly fitting undergarments though, do care, and want to change the dictates. They don’t want freedom, just a different kind of bondage.

        Especially with the what 44DD that ought to be a 46G or H and 2x drawers that ought to be 4x, this ad insults the people they are supposed to be glorifying…not that any of the sheep dying for validation will notice.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 10:13 pm carolyn

        well, i think that wasn’t uppermost the advertisers’ mind. more like ‘screw them if they can’t take a joke’.

        i didn’t notice their ill-fitting underclothes until you pointed them out. my thought was that they were their own.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:55 pm uh

        in that sense any body is a good one, irrespective of its sexual charisma.

        rah rah rah rah i’m fat and crave approval rah rah rah rah rah

        irrespective of sexual charisma, a waddling scale-buster body is not as good at walking down the street, and a well-known effect of obesity, in fact what encourages the overweight to become obese, is depression … which inhibits them from moving too much.

        obese women are depressed women. obesity and depression are not optimal states of being for the human organism. i am unaware of any organism which thrives in a morbid state, or a species in which a morbid organism is “as good as” another in a more efficient state, i.e. health.

        only a woman would interpret a morbid state as “good”. oh, i’m wrong, also a yid, lolzlz. well those two have been in bed for nearly a century.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 10:06 pm carolyn

        ‘rah rah rah rah i’m fat and crave approval rah rah rah rah rah’

        you miss my point. she’s not at the point of thinking of others’ approval. it’s what _she_ thinks. it applies to men as well. do you think yours is a ‘good body’? it gives you delight and does what it’s told, does it not? do you honestly at that very elementary level give a damn what others think of it?

        ‘irrespective of sexual charisma, a waddling scale-buster body is not as good at walking down the street.’

        fair enough. i was considering bodies too chubby to have much sexual appeal but not so heavy as to incur mobility issues. none of the 5 portrayed except possibly the 2nd fit the bill. what you speak of is at the upper end; headcase territory, OCD land. here you find patients undergoing the most radical gastric bypass surgery with a sobering mortality rate, undertaken out of desperation since the alternatives are worse.(these cases often become substance abusers post surgery, which indicates their underlying problem was OCD). this is not the garden variety obesity everyone here deplores.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 3:24 pm uh

        carolyn,

        the trouble is this:

        “whatever else that could be said about it, it’s hers and hers alone to do with what she wants.”

        which reaffirms the false distance between what a woman is (a reproductive unit; as a man is the labor unit) and what she is “free” to do in liberal society. it is in fact not hers “alone”, for sex did not evolve for either males or females in isolation; therefore what she wants to do with her body is less important from the evolutionary perspective than what she is born to do.

        in your defense, you have done that a few times over. i can only hope that you have no put your boys in dresses and subjected them to some sort of blue-eyed treatment.

        this is a “discursive space” “opened” by feminism that you must correct in your own thinking. there is no “female” apart from the sexual dynamic itself. there is deviance (obesity, bad haircuts, defiant attitudes) and obsolescence (declining looks, menopause, old age). a fat woman satisfied with the basic functions of her body is deviant. she might be fuckable — i love extra flesh if it looks natural — but she isn’t a woman in full acceptance of her womanhood. individualism is not for women.

        “here you find patients undergoing the most radical gastric bypass surgery with a sobering mortality rate,”

        true, but it begins well before that. feminists and fatties lie to themselves that it’s men or patriarchy or anti-woman advertising that “shames” them with the sight of more attractive women. this is wrong. in fact is the result of existing in the very pluralistic modern society they defend with their votes and their own shaming language whenever, wherever men dissent. in other words the sexual marketplace under hyperliberal, hypercapitalist consumer society has become so acute that deficits are earlier and more keenly felt, to the point that one has a narcissistic crisis if one can’t afford this or that phone, or incurs an extra pound or two of fat from holiday celebrations. (read lasch’s the culture of narcissism or flavia’s excellent blog on “peak narcissism).

        now of course that extra pound does not negate a woman’s reproductive value. takes away from it perhaps, but she is still a viable specimen. that isn’t how it is felt however. psychologically it plunges these overwrought (overbought? lozoz) consumers into a frenzy of narcissistic worry, which is just pathological status anxiety, and there’s the reduction to an evolutionary value (fitness).

        this is what giovanni dannato over at hereticsway calls the “social participation tax”, basically all the costs associated with merely participating in modern society. maybe he got this from a real sociologist, i don’t know, but it’s enormously helpful in understanding this sort of thing. when it becomes too much, i.e. neurotic, it can look like what you call “OCD”. but it is only the structure of modern society which forces us into this narcissistic worry over minutiae upon which our whole status has come to hang.

        personal example: i despise shoes. my feet are simply not made for them. i am happy to go almost anywhere barefoot and have developed in the past impressive callousing on my soles walking bare over hot blacktop in summer, over rocks and through snow. but of course “no shoes no service”. more, one is obliged to have different shoes for different social functions, etc., which means more money, etc.

        all right then, we’re discussing not a scale-buster perhaps, but a woman of say 23, 5’5″, and overweight, maybe 140 pounds. unless she has self-esteem of steel, which probably comes from stable family / hormonal difference, she will feel those extra pounds in every step she takes, each time she squeezes on that sexy pair of jeans, each time she slips on her little mary janes and sees the surplus flesh fluffing over the edge. she will feel herself jiggle and she will hate herself. this is a state of functional low-level depression that nonetheless can have profound and long-range consequences. it is sub-optimal. and it is not independent of what she is: a reproductive unit in a sub-optimal state. there would be no “optimum” scale if at either end stood the values “FIT—UNFIT”, and this exchange would be entirely meaningless.

        what are you carrying by the way? now i am curious.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:20 pm L

        Number 2 is clearly on the way to number 4, she just needs another few years.

        An Oxford study from 2007 estimated that American Adults will be 70%+ overweight and 40%+ obese by 2015.

        We are a percentage points away in the beginning of 2012 in each category, and I can guarantee that none of them are going to slow down their eating.habits.

        [more women than men are currently obese by the way, 36% compared to 31%.]


      • on January 31, 2012 at 10:04 pm carolyn

        ‘there is no “female” apart from the sexual dynamic itself. there is deviance (obesity, bad haircuts, defiant attitudes) and obsolescence (declining looks, menopause, old age). a fat woman satisfied with the basic functions of her body is deviant. she might be fuckable – but she isn’t a woman in full acceptance of her womanhood. individualism is not for women.’

        i hope you’re not saying that but for her suitability for reproduction, a woman may as well not exist. i myself find post menopause that i’ve psychologically returned to my tomboy pre-teen sexually irrelevant existence. delightfully so. but i admit to being an outlier, freak even. my days of being a public service are over (i was once considered pretty, though fat).

        but whatever. maybe individualism isn’t for women, but i’m not feeling it.

        my last comment replying to yours has apparently fallen into a black hole. frustrating given its careful composition. with any luck this one won’t suffer the same fate.


  44. on January 26, 2012 at 5:18 pm Burn it down

    I find all those women repulsive except for five who would still have to rape me and no doubt would. Speaking of rape and also of extreme stupid behavior. I see some excuses made for rapists by this fucking breathtakingly retarded woman.

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2010/02/21/calgary-lindhout.html


    • on January 26, 2012 at 6:48 pm Flavia

      There’s a hierarchy of grievances you know…

      Women < Minorities < Gays < Blacks < Blacks from Africa < Chosen Ones < Black Lesbians < Chaz Bono

      So she had to bow down and defend her rapists….i mean, she doesn't want to seem like a RACIST for being against her own rape. That'd be so like, ethnocentric.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:59 pm John Norman Howard

        Exactly… somehow my earlier comment got lost in the shuffle, but I had remarked that, in her taking great pains to say she doesn’t “condone” what they did to her, she then does exactly that by making excuses for the shitskinned baboons.

        In her world, it’s better to take it up the ass for 15 months by a pack of strange niggers that to evince the slightest hint of racism by denouncing those untermenschen for the garbage that they are.

        Feh.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:20 pm Lara

      In her defense, some Somalians were kind to her. I think acknowledging that is okay.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 5:02 pm evilalpha

      Secretly
      she
      desired
      to be
      taken


      • on January 30, 2012 at 7:38 pm itsme

        they all do.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:01 pm uh

      .ca

      I don’t even bother. News from that SWPL wasteland is too much like a politically correct issue of Pravda to take without a serious cortisol spike in my blood serum.


  45. on January 26, 2012 at 5:34 pm AlphaBeta

    The fatal flaw with this feminist tripe is a presupposition of tabula rasa humanity. Nature has a physically ideal body type for women that maximizes fertility and childbirth. By basic natural selection, the guys who were attracted to that body type had the most kids. Hence the near objective standard of beauty among men.

    People who pontificate while assuming uncomfortable biological truths don’t exist are enemies of reality. They need to be corrected, ridiculed, or shunned at every turn.

    It might be politically correct for every body type to be beautiful, if life were fair that’s what ought to be true. But, to channel a little Hume, you can’t go from an ought to an is without some sort of legwork. Legwork doesn’t include repeated naked assertion.


  46. on January 26, 2012 at 5:51 pm Black Rebel

    This post (and many of your other posts) really illustrates the problems with how women look at the world, and why giving them power is a bad idea; if something isn’t this, it’s that.

    Dislike fatties? Well you must hate women!
    Not in favor of gay marriage? Well you must be a homophobe!
    Going to travel the world, get laid and write books? Well you must not be able to get laid in the US!

    I would definitely fuck the girl in the middle, too.


  47. on January 26, 2012 at 5:51 pm Arturo de Gheaube

    At least they’re all white. Zero erecti.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:02 pm John Norman Howard

      THAT was a shocker… the diversity oversight board must have been out on a coffee break.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 3:43 am wayway@outoftown.com

        Nahh, the one with the tats is some kind of vibrant.


  48. on January 26, 2012 at 6:08 pm Sad B

    This shit was started by a Dove skincare ad campaign. The ads were created (surprise) by a woman.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 5:14 pm Nicole

      When Dove started their campaign, they selected women who weren’t model ideal, but obviously took good care of themselves. They were women who could easily be someone’s healthy mom or grandma…ladies who looked how we would want to look in real life. These were examples of the kind of real women who told us to make sure to moisturize and stay active because then we’d still look okay when we were old.

      This okay to look like you eat pcb’s for breakfast, drink industrial lubricant for lunch, and graze a quarter acre of grain for dinner thing is not how it started. It started with older and a bit bigger but still fit.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:44 pm Sad B

        Not in the Brazilian campaign. Here they were mostly fat young women.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 7:08 pm Nicole

        Well, as I understand it, y’all are being ideologically invaded by feminists and prohibitionists all around.

        Fat chicks in the Dove ads are just the cheerleaders.


  49. on January 26, 2012 at 6:11 pm John Norman Howard

    Her hamster spins about “not condoning” whilst she proceeds to condone.

    In their world, it’s better to take it up the ass for fifteen months by a pack of strange niggers than it is to evince the slightest hint of racism.

    Feh.


  50. on January 26, 2012 at 6:17 pm SnogHaw

    Some of my favorite Heartiste posts are when he responds to some Fem. BS. I really wish I could see the author’s reaction to the Heartiste post. I hope someone emails the Heartiste post to the people who put out the thing he’s responding to. It would make their heads explode in anger and denial.


  51. on January 26, 2012 at 6:18 pm slumlord

    This reminds me of the Dove “Real Women” campaign.

    Still, ignore what women say and watch what they do.


  52. on January 26, 2012 at 6:43 pm Flavia

    This was a really empowering message to all women everywhere that when you just make an arbitrary statement, it magically becomes truth. As long as you’re a woman or some sort of colored.

    The Walmart shelf stocker making $10 an hour is equal to the CEO making $100 million!!! The cross eyed cow is just as desirable as the 22 year old with the 25 inch waist. Why? Because we say so. If you have a value judgement then you’re probably just a sociopath or an oppressor.

    Nothing means anything anymore. Everyone is everything!!! Leave your value judgements at the door h8ters.

    In the timeless words of Homer Simpson: “Bart, there’s nothing wrong with anything.”

    I hate this world. When can we leave it?


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:07 pm uh

      “I hate this world. When can we leave it?”

      That clock isn’t ticking fast enough. However, I am told that shoving a shotgun barrel into my throat would be symbolic fulfillment of a secret bisexual leaning we all harbor, and this gives me pause.

      I like your comments, Flavia. Often feel this way myself. “Everyone is everything!!!”

      Endless slave revolt in morals — more: reality seen entirely through the lens of former subordinates, the world as interpreted by ressentiment all over again.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 1:18 am Flavia

        Thanks! I am thinking becoming a wino to take the edge off.


  53. on January 26, 2012 at 6:57 pm Richard

    So in the interest of equality (which is of course a feminist’s lifelong obsession), are they going to come out with a picture captioned “No Guy Is Undateable” featuring various schlubby dudes wearing D&D shirts and holding X-box controls?


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:08 pm uh

      And we have a winner.


  54. on January 26, 2012 at 6:57 pm Chuck Rudd

    the bruising on the hefty ones thigh and lower legs. bad circulation and/or diabetes. also, the stretch marks on the stomach. boner-makers aside, how is this a “good body” in terms of health? and if it is a bad body on these terms, don’t you think that men would have something inside their brain that signaled to the lower deck how it should respond?


  55. on January 26, 2012 at 7:28 pm Fubsy

    I’d bang the hardbody on the right, ideally after wrestling 3 out of 5 falls :))))


  56. on January 26, 2012 at 7:43 pm Mr. C

    I would like to see the correlation of Tattoos with IQ.

    I strongly suspect there is a strong correlation of tattoos with low IQ.


  57. on January 26, 2012 at 7:51 pm tom

    these women are revolting. I am actually pissed off looking at this picture. they should not be smiling. they must not have a mirror to look into. barf


  58. on January 26, 2012 at 8:05 pm Trimegistus

    When is the stupid fucking tattoo fad going to end? Seems like half the women I see now are inked up like Yakuza gangsters. It’s not attractive, it never was attractive, and it never will be attractive. They seem to think it says “uninhibited free spirit” but when I see them it just screams “attention whore with daddy issues and possible heroin habit.”

    Worse still are the early adopters who did it when it first became cool in the 1990s, and now are pushing 40 years old. You know what’s uglier than a tattoo? A tattoon on wrinkly, sagging skin.

    And don’t get me started on piercings. What was presented as the ultimate degradation a woman could submit herself to in “The Story of O” is now something high-schoolers have done at the mall.


    • on January 31, 2012 at 5:48 pm Thor

      Ah yes. In most cultures, most people try to appear at least
      a little above what they objectively are in terms of any social ladder.
      Not laudable or noble, but true and normal.

      These days, many people, especially young people, go to great
      lengths to appear to be much BELOW where they would belong
      by some – granted somewhat subjective – scale. This is a sign
      of a decaying culture. I once talked to a Russian (from Omsk no
      less) what he thought. His answer (not sure if he is right):
      When times are getting tough, people are attracted to raw
      strength.

      Thor


  59. on January 26, 2012 at 8:30 pm danielj

    *The two things feminists hate most: standards, and men who make no apology for their sexual desire.*

    Correction: the two things *women*


  60. on January 26, 2012 at 8:56 pm Gilbert

    I love how she says that “all bodies are good bodies” – and the only bodies on display are white ones! Didn’t she “unpack the racist assumptions” of _anything_ at her expensive liberal arts college? Sheesh!


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:11 pm uh

      lolzlzlzlzlzlzllzzlzz

      BEING WHITE IS RACIST

      THE LAW OF GRAVITY IS RACIST: IT KEEPS DA BLACK MAN DOWN!!!


  61. on January 26, 2012 at 9:07 pm Horace

    Sad thing is the one on the extreme left would be the best looking of the lot, if she hadn’t tatooed her self like a maori warrior.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:17 pm itsme

      disagree. look closely at her proportions – her waist/hip ratio is off for a female, and her legs are spindly compared to her upper body. she looks like a troll, and not the maya kind. plus her face is evocative of sarah silverman.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:06 pm John Norman Howard

        ^^^ THIS ^^^, this, and This.


  62. on January 26, 2012 at 9:33 pm Gil

    Only downside is women could find an equivalent picture of loser guys who would complain that they’re just as good as Alpha man but that’s wishful thinking too.


  63. on January 26, 2012 at 10:23 pm Matador

    “Fugshot line-up”

    LOL. I’ll remember to put my cursor on all the posts’ pictures.


  64. on January 26, 2012 at 10:28 pm Hung One on You

    I fucked a british girl for a few months that looked exactly like girl #3. Chick was a wild boar in the sack. Just loved to fuck…..

    Memories


  65. on January 26, 2012 at 10:36 pm nugganu

    I wouldn’t touch either of the fatties, the two thin ones, no problem. The tattooed one I would definitely give her a hot karl.


  66. on January 26, 2012 at 10:43 pm x2d4d

    Historically, some (many?) cultures did not value beauty as much as we do. That doesn’t mean they had a different concept of beauty. That just meant men were willing to sacrifice beauty for other things.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:25 pm anon

      yeah, you see those culture invading America these days with their ugly fucking wives. It’s called high testosterone, you may remember how horny you were when you were 13, imagine needing that sex drive to fuck your red potato of a wife…as an adult…forever. No wonder the, ah, newer immigrants in places like Sweden commit 100% of the forceable rapes.


  67. on January 26, 2012 at 11:07 pm James

    Alpha of the year?

    http://www.dbtechno.com/us/2012/01/26/wisconsin-man-says-ghost-beat-his-wife/


  68. on January 26, 2012 at 11:17 pm Anonymous

    Thinner wives make happier marriages…
    http://news.discovery.com/human/thinner-wife-happier-marriage-110725.html


  69. on January 26, 2012 at 11:22 pm Neecy

    Uh OH! White girl #5 got booty!
    :lol:

    And I am LMAO at the red “NOT” caption in the photo.

    heartiste you are soo bad!


  70. on January 26, 2012 at 11:24 pm Neecy

    Uh OH White girl number 5 gots booty!!
    :lol:

    And I love the bra – really cute!


  71. on January 26, 2012 at 11:49 pm JP

    To all the people who keep insisting fat chicks are attractive, ask yourself this, how many fat sexual assault victims have you heard of?


  72. on January 27, 2012 at 12:09 am loveiseasy

    God feminists are bloody hopeless.


  73. on January 27, 2012 at 12:27 am Harland

    The middle girl is also exhibiting horrible posture, which limits her beauty. Confident girls are more attractive, and besides putting the shoulder blades together and standing up straight thrusts the breasts out.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:16 pm Matador

      “Confident girls are more attractive”

      Nope. That’s the kind of mantras that create the monstruous loud-mouthed urban females.
      Fuck confidence in a girl. A girl is sweeter when she seems vulnerable. Confidence is a male quality.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:10 pm John Norman Howard

        Exactly… look at chubbo in the picture second from the left… she just exudes confidence.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 10:14 pm Gil

        Yes – disproportionate confidence.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:32 pm Thor

        As with most things, there is a happy medium. A quiet little mouse
        does not even get noticed. A brash howler is a turnoff.

        Thor


      • on January 27, 2012 at 6:59 pm AlphaBeta


      • on January 28, 2012 at 3:43 pm Emma the Emo

        Being too shy and quiet makes a girl unnoticeable, and sometimes it makes her look gloomy and uninterested/aloof. It’s one of the types of female bad game… It doesn’t always look like vulnerability.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 5:12 pm L

        Only if she’s ugly.

        If she is not more than 10-15 lbs overweight, and she knows how to do her hair/makeup, its always a good move. A 5 can become a 7, a 7 can become an 8, and 8 can become a 9 for that moment.

        You also might be confusing being socially inept, with being coquettish. We aren’t talking about the actual psychological characteristics of people, we’re talking ways in which you act, at a certain time, in order to attract a mate.


  74. on January 27, 2012 at 1:04 am uh

    If heartiste goes down, you ought to rise again as VAGICIAN:

    http://www.fox.com/familyguy/full-episodes/6023448/meg-and-quagmire (8:35)


  75. on January 27, 2012 at 1:37 am soupgamespace

    Why isn’t the thin girl grossed out by having to touch the Jaba?

    This is proof that women have an entirely different sense of priorities than men.


  76. on January 27, 2012 at 1:40 am corvinus

    I’ll be lazy and ask for the one with the purple plaid undies.


  77. on January 27, 2012 at 1:41 am soupgamespace

    Fatness and feminism go hand-in-hand because both prefer from the promotion of androgyny.

    The fatter you get, the hardest it is to tell what sex you are. It is a form of hiding/homogenization.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 7:19 pm Days of Broken Arrows

      There’s a lot of truth here. I was talking with a gay friend of mine about why closeted gay guys date and/or marry fat chicks and this was his answer.


    • on January 28, 2012 at 4:22 pm Nicole

      Fatness and feminism only started going hand in hand when fatness could be twisted into a marker of victimhood. The began promoting the idea in the 80’s that if a woman was fat, she must have been a victim of childhood sexual abuse, even if she had no memory of it.

      Then started the mass accusations of fathers and daycare workers and teachers who were prosecuted based on “repressed memories” that were brought out during what passed for therapy back then and hypnosis.

      Most of you guys really have no idea how all this got started.

      During this time, in the background, the supposedly better nourished, equally fed and trying to be equally athletic new generation of feminist Amazons was supposed to be coming of age. They didn’t get that. Instead what they got was a bunch of fat chicks who never learned how to limit their calorie intake, and were raised on near synthetic fats, grains, and soy.

      So now they have to justify that somehow, so their tune has changed from fat being pure patriarchal evil that every woman should shun, to it being “natural”.


      • on February 2, 2012 at 2:38 pm attractionreaction

        “The began promoting the idea in the 80′s that if a woman was fat, she must have been a victim of childhood sexual abuse, even if she had no memory of it… Instead what they got was a bunch of fat chicks who never learned how to limit their calorie intake, and were raised on near synthetic fats, grains, and soy.”

        Once again, we see that Feminism serves Capitalism.


  78. on January 27, 2012 at 1:51 am anon

    I’m going 5, 3, 1, 4, 2. I think “masculine cougar” looks pretty good and not that masculine at all.


  79. on January 27, 2012 at 2:21 am JCclimber

    If #5 could slim her thighs and grew her hair a few more inches, she’d do okay. The definition that she’s displaying quickly disappears if the woman isn’t severely dieting and taking diuretics.

    And I think they deliberately posed skinny chick in an unflattering position.

    I expect #4 was done in by age and a few pregnancies and perhaps genes, unlike #2. Still unattractive.


  80. on January 27, 2012 at 3:19 am Planty McPlant

    The two women on the left are hideous. The tatoos completely ruined an otherwise attractive body. The second woman on the left is the least attractive by far.

    The middle woman is way too anorexic looking for my taste. Her male opposite would be a 90 pound, nerdy weakling. To me she doesn’t look healthy or capable of any sort of physical strain. The heavier girls could probably outlast her, seeing as how they are used to moving more weight around (ie their bodies).

    The two women on the right are the only ones who look decent.

    The second woman from the right isn’t that bad, she has a normal appearance and a pleasant enough face. Maybe a better pair of underwear would help.

    The woman on the far right, the bodybuilder, is the only one who looks normal to me. Therefore, she is the mos attractive to me. Some might say she looks masculine, but oh well. Maybe she’s really sweet in person, but also has a tight ass body.

    The tatoo girl is just plain crazy though. And the huge fat chick should go on a diet.


  81. on January 27, 2012 at 3:26 am Anonymous

    Is it weird that the fat girl second from left i find oddly/mildly attractive?
    If her face were prettier i could almost go for it for one time as a ‘just to try…’


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:13 pm John Norman Howard

      It’s because her confidence makes her more sexy…. ::bwaaaa haaaaa haaaaa:


  82. on January 27, 2012 at 3:29 am uh

    Henry Rollins when his mind wasn’t cluttered with kaffir-love, on women:

    “If they don’t work out I’m not interested.

    Their mind is lazy, their body is lazy, then who cares?

    They’re not in shape. Hey, go be fat on someone else’s time.”


  83. on January 27, 2012 at 5:03 am Anonymous

    The elephant in the room is that the picture was created not only to say that body type shouldn’t matter in general but that the appearance of aging shouldn’t matter.


  84. on January 27, 2012 at 6:47 am C

    I’d dump a fuck in 4 before 5. there’s nothing more repulsive than muscle women. Fucking a manjawed weightlifter makes you a closet homo.

    Not a fatapologist, but high-t chicks with toned bodies might be even worse, jus’ sayin’.

    Now carry on with the deliscious shaming.


  85. on January 27, 2012 at 8:39 am Anonymous

    The ironic thing about the ad campaign is that it will partly achieve its aim but in a manner not truly understood by the older feminists who propagate it:

    Just as most men and non-feminist women will laugh at this openly, hot young feminist women will, at least subconsciously, not be fooled even a bit into believing their SMV is more on a level with the older women who run the campaign.

    On the contrary, the younger women will use the concept to do more shit tests, by telling more men “Why aren’t you attracted to her and her? Why me? Go try to meet someone your own age. My friend here is your type”, etc.

    In the same vein, it would completely take away any guilt a hot young woman would have in rejecting a man or flaking. If a hot woman doesn’t recognize the concept that men have (and should have) standards that exclude most women as sex partners, she can easily rationalize that the man she’s rejecting will be perfectly happy with a sea cow that might walk around the corner in ten minutes. Sympathy for the male’s interest disappears.

    That’s the true danger from having this type of propaganda propagated in any given culture.

    The ad campaign will work indirectly this way, so it’s in the interest of every PUA to cut the government funding of this kind of nonsense.


  86. on January 27, 2012 at 9:03 am passingby

    All bodies are good bodies? Good for what?

    Because not all bodies are good for all things. And some of the bodies shown in that picture are not good for inspiring lust in most men, at least not relative to other things. In fact, some of those bodies will inspire revulsion in most men.

    If women want to argue this is not true, there is no point debating them; they do not wish to learn the truth.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:19 pm uh

      A woman arguing is never about truth, friend. Women did not invent “truth”.


  87. on January 27, 2012 at 9:41 am Leigh

    It has been shown men like a better waist to hip ratio that being said you missed the point. The point was that women should be able to love themselves and their bodies at any size it’s also ok for them to be loved.

    [heartiste: bad advice. women with unattractive bodies should hate themselves so that they are motivated to fix what they can.]

    Everyone isn’t going to be a size 2 or 22, btw I’m a size 10 and this is one of the rudest shallow things I’ve ever seen.

    [if rudeness inspires the world’s fatties to push away from the table, then bring on the torment.]


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:00 pm Maya

      “[heartiste: bad advice. women with unattractive bodies should hate themselves so that they are motivated to fix what they can.]”

      Maybe this makes sense in your country where girls are really too fat and have no style. On the other hand, it’s wrong to make old or uglier women to feel bad because without plastic surgeons they/we can’t fix anything.


  88. on January 27, 2012 at 10:23 am Anonymous

    You are way misinfomed. That’s so sad :/ ….


  89. on January 27, 2012 at 10:27 am Vanessa

    Whew, well you told me!

    [heartiste: i got you to listen.]

    Now we all know that the key to life and happiness is making sure you find us attractive.

    [the key to a happy life is to make yourself as attractive as you can to the most men so that you maximize your options in mate choice. now, since i am a man, and men basically share the same standard of female attractiveness barring a small minority of weirdo outliers, i am representative of what most men find attracive in women, so if i think you look repulsive, odds are good that the majority of men you meet every day feel the same way about you.
    so, yes, it is in your interest to be the kind of woman a guy like me would want to fuck.]

    Too bad you missed the real message here, which is that women should stop bashing other women to battle their own insecurities.

    [if all bodies are good bodies, why would other women’s “bashing” have any effect on any woman’s feelings of self-worth?]

    How each of us, men and women, choose to navigate the world is a personal decision. Don’t find someone attractive? Mind your business and don’t fuck them. <3 Vanessa

    [personal decisions have consequences. if, for example, you choose to eat until you bloat up into a shambling mound you will find your choice in men severely restricted and the amount of male attention you receive, particularly from high value men who have plenty of choices among slender pretty girls, fading to zero. now you may make this decision for the christ feminist and proudly wave your flag of individual empowerment and mighty grrlpower, but you will not be able to do so without suffering the penalties. and no ego-soothing propaganda is gonna save you from that harsh reality, or change reality so that it fits your predilection for how the world should work.]


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:04 pm corvinus

      “Now we all know that the key to life and happiness is making sure you find us attractive.”
      On Facebook, the fat women that have I have been acquainted with are very often going on about their man troubles, are much less likely to be in a relationship, and if so, are usually with a less than attractive guy, and for a short period of time. One snorlax I know of did manage to marry a really dweeby mouse-like guy. Another fatso, whom my brother had rejected, quickly turned around and got engaged to some really weird emo-type.

      I’m not saying that women have to have a man to be happy. But in the real world, it sure seems like it. And being fat makes it much less likely that a woman will get anything but the bottom of the barrel.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:16 pm Vanessa

      Okay, gotcha.

      [heartiste: u sure?]

      Gotta stay fuckable so I can land mate.

      [a sexy mate.]

      Because without a mate I’ll…not be able to live or something??

      [you’ll live. just not very happily.]

      Whatevs, not important.

      [judging by the tormented cries of the celibate losers, the ability to find love with an attractive mate is very important.]

      You do realize that we’re a clothing company, right?

      [who cares. it’s your message i’m eviscerating. not your product.]

      That the facebook page you got this from is not a Feminist Agenda collective, but a marketing tool to sell dresses?

      [the feminist meme has infected everything. thanks for the springboard.]

      Differently sized dresses?

      [what does that mean? thin, fat and fattest?]

      Troll moar.

      [roar.]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 12:59 pm Vanessa

        Gonna start a clothing line that ONLY sells sizes S and M. I’m gonna make a fortune! Writing up my bizzness plan, brb.

        [heartiste: so you admit you are lying to fat and misshapen women to push your product? got ya.]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:07 pm Vanessa

        LOL – nice try.

        [heartiste: there is no try. only do or do not.]

        But no, I’m saying that humans come in many different shapes and sizes,

        [and some of those shapes and sizes are better than other shapes and sizes.]

        and we’re doing our job over here at Pinup Girl by making them look good.

        [so in other words, you’re lying to them.
        not that there’s anything wrong with that… when you’re looking to turn a buck.]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:49 pm Maya

        With this? http://www.pinupgirlclothing.com/shapewear-shorts-tan.html

        Would be better if your costumers would lose weight instead …


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:51 pm Maya

        i mean customers … can you correct that? please


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:11 pm itsme

        ‘costumers’ was more accurate.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 3:54 pm Emma the Emo

        Be fair, they have to wear SOMETHING, even if they are on their way to weightloss. And looking presentable while you’re fat is still rather important. If not for finding men, then for work and other things. I’m glad clothes for fat people are made, too.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:06 pm Vanessa

        “there is no try. only do or do not.” ??

        You seem to fancy yourself a witty spinner of words, but retorts like this must sound much funnier in your brain than they read here.

        [heartiste: vagina.]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:14 pm chi-town

        He needles loons which is more than a subtle difference to your statement. You on the other hand are stretching the yarn, but not nearly enough. But then again your business is beyond the subtle solution to the point(or LZ?) of heavy industry.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:16 pm Crimson

        They sound way better to pepole with minimum understanding of cinema of the last 50 years.


      • on January 29, 2012 at 6:39 pm John Norman Howard

        eh, Vanessa… that’s a popular culture reference… Yoda from the Empire Strikes Back, if memory serves… fail more.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:17 pm John Norman Howard

        Game, set, and match.

        Vanessa, your lances are but straws.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:29 pm Maya

        Vanessa,

        the clothes you sell are pretty but some of the models are too fat. Like this one: http://www.pinupgirlclothing.com/the-bombshell-swimsuit-in-royal-blue-by-pinup-couture-plus-size.html

        Why do you promote obesity?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:52 pm itsme

        because they can make money off it.

        ‘follow the money’.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:00 pm Vanessa

        One person has commented that we are hypocrites because our models are too hot while we say we like everyone, someone else says we’re promoting obesity because our models are too fat. Which is it?

        [heartiste: no, you promote obesity via your insipid feminist-derived message. but i understand you do that to maximize profit. just so long as we’re clear why you engage in lying.]

        We sell clothing from size XS to 3X. We use models to show said clothing from size XS to 3X. Our clothes make women look hot – and dare I say it, might even land them sexy mates!! We don’t tell anyone what size they should be. Apparently that sounds CRAAAAZZYYYY to some of you, but I think I’ll still sleep nights.

        [your clothes do not make fat shits look hot. the only thing that will help them land sexy mates is losing weight down to slender proportions.]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:17 pm chi-town

        “your clothes do not make fat shits look hot. the only thing that will help them land sexy mates is losing weight down to slender proportions.”

        You go too far. A burial shroud does make the best out of social death.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:07 pm uh

        “But no, I’m saying that humans come in many different shapes and sizes,”

        AND RACE IS A SOCIAL CONSTRUCT, AMIRITE??? lzozozozoozzozoozozzoozozozozozozzozoozzozozzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


      • on January 28, 2012 at 3:06 pm Nicole

        “your clothes do not make fat shits look hot. the only thing that will help them land sexy mates is losing weight down to slender proportions.”

        Okay, now we’re in BetaMaleRevengeFantasyville.

        For women, masculinity is sexy. You cannot convince a fat chick who is getting a good dicking down from a man with rough hands and legs like tree trunks that she needed to be thinner to get that.

        I think maybe you meant “pretty” or “rich”.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 3:16 pm Nicole

        By the way, that was not to defend the rather tasteless propaganda ad. I’m just saying that it’s fine if you point out that fatties are not most guys’ cup of tea, but let’s avoid lying about fat women’s options. It weakens your point rather than strengthens it, and makes this about feelings instead of facts.

        You *wish* fat women had a low chance of landing a sexy mate, but the fact is that is merely lowers her chance of attracting any mate, including the sexy, because of a lack of overall mass appeal.

        However, it definitely does not mean that she will not find a masculine, sexy mate, especially when you’re talking about women who are just chubby or fatter than a porn actress.

        Women are generally serial monogamists, and there are definitely enough men to go around when one is only interested in shagging one at a time.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:20 pm Uncle Joe

        Because if at the end, she gets paid, its all good in her mind. Her clients could all keel over and die (which they eventually will, thanks to the magic of atherosclerosis) and it doesn’t matter because she still got the cash. At the very least, she might rationalize it by pointing out how deal whole briefly made her marks feel better by entertaining their delusions. Nevertheless, she knows, deep down, she is lying and getting well paid for it.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:00 pm Uncle Joe

        *how the whole deal*


      • on January 30, 2012 at 7:22 pm uh

        it sounds like women traffic in narcissistic delusions to make it through the barrenness they cultivate around themselves

        lozozozozozlzlzlz


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:01 pm attractionreaction

        @Vanessa

        you are an enabler. you should be telling the fat women to cut way down on flour and sugar, and get some animal fat and animal protein each day.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 2:31 pm Student

        “You do realize that we’re a clothing company, right?

        That the facebook page you got this from is not a Feminist Agenda collective, but a marketing tool to sell dresses?”

        This is awesome. shes admitting pandering to beached whales to make a buck. that its not a matter of principle; she does not genuinely believe that physically unhealthy women are to be celebrated-just that they are to be manipulated to make money.

        manipulating the laws of nature to make money; are you a goldman sachs alum?


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:41 pm Wrecked 'Em

      PWND.


  90. on January 27, 2012 at 10:43 am NOYB

    It’s narrow minded men such as yourselves that beautiful women find repulsive.

    [heartiste: nah. chicks dig chauvinistic jerks.]

    All women are beautiful in their own way.

    [saying it won’t make it so.]

    Just because they do not have the ideally perfect body (which might I point out does NOT exsist, simply because all women have their own flaws and areas of their bodies they hate).

    [if an ideal female body doesn’t exist, why do all swimsuit issue models generally share the same physical proportions? there’s not a fat fuck among them!]

    Let’s see some of you men stand half naked infront of a camera, and have the picture go viral on the internet, to be judged by millions.

    [the existence of a male standard of female attractiveness isn’t altered or discredited by the looks of the person pointing it out.]

    I bet some of the responses from both men and women would surprise you.

    [does this hateful thought make you feel better inside? that’s good. i can feel your hate consume you.]

    Perfect bodies NEVER have exsisted, and quite frankly your attitudes make you all very ugly.

    [sure they do. monica bellucci in her prime was damn close to a perfect body. but your argument is squid ink. perfection is the enemy of the good. we can argue all day about the fine-tuned measurements of the perfect female body, but the fact remains that there is an ideal and the closer a woman gets to the ideal, the more attractive she is to the greatest number of men.]

    It’s people such as yourselves, that make this world unbearable,cause more women to hurt themselves and eating disorders to sky rocket out of control.

    [if i have made the world unbearable for fatties and obnoxious uglies who don’t know their place in the pecking order, then i have done some good. yay me!]

    I’m happy with my body as it is after having four children,

    [translation: thar she blows!]

    and years ago being a swimsuit model and forever trying to keep myself “perfect” for the camera (which made me miserable) ,

    [the troll is strong in this statement.]

    I AM beautiful, so is my body and there are men who find me attractive.

    [fat chicks love to say there are men who find them beautiful, conveniently leaving out the relevant fact that the men who usually date fatsos are desperate losers who have chosen to settle rather than suffer alone. 99% of the time, these men who are so in love with their cherished fat girlfriends would jump at the chance to upgrade to a hot babe if they had the opportunity to do so.]

    So with this said, I support Vanessa, and yes you are all entitled to your own opinions,

    [entitled’s got nothin’ to do with it. neither, for that matter, does opinion.]

    however, with your post, you just made yourself look and sound like a completely shallow, narrow minded and extremely repulsive person to millions, so a high five to you!

    [shallow = any man who is not attracted to my bulbosity.]

    All women, any shape any size, tattoo’s or not, deserve to feel beautiful, and ARE

    [women, and men, don’t “deserve” to feel anything. if a fat or ugly woman feels unattractive, that is because her feelings are bypassing her reality-bending ego to deliver the cold truth to her conscious mind. rah-rah feminist cheerleading from an amen chorus of losers wouldn’t be necessary if those feelings weren’t a true reflection of reality.]


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:26 pm itsme

      http://www.fatgirljihad.com


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:59 pm Uncle Joe

        @NOYB:

        “It’s people such as yourselves, that make this world unbearable,cause more women to hurt themselves and eating disorders to sky rocket out of control.”

        Sky rocket out of control, you say?
        According to the WHO, eating disorders (including anorexia and bulimia) were responsible for a whopping 218 US deaths in 2004.

        http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/mor_eat_dis-mortality-eating-disorders

        Other sources and studies put the rate of yearly anorexia deaths at well under 1,000 total deaths each year, or at worst, a rate of 20 dead per 100,000 sufferers per year.
        http://fathersforlife.org/health/anorexia1.htm
        http://www.femininebeauty.info/naomi-wolf-eating-disorders-lies
        http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_many_people_die_a_year_because_of_anorexia

        Meanwhile, ” 267,000 women die each year from heart attacks, which kill six times as many women as breast cancer. Another 31, 837 women die each year of congestive heart failure, representing 62.6% of all heart failure deaths. ”
        and there are 8.1 million women with diabetes, the seventh leading cause of death for women in this country (heart disease is first).

        http://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/07_all_females.pdf
        http://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pubs/women/
        http://www.womensheart.org/content/HeartDisease/heart_disease_facts.asp

        NOYB, do you hear that thumping sound? That’s the sound of hundreds of thousands of innocent ladies dropping dead because of your lies and dogma. That’s a huge, mountainous, pile of cadavers that people like you helped create.

        Thanks for nothing.

        [heartiste: brutal, delicious ownage. i choked up a bit.]


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:13 pm itsme

        dude, she’s a girl. numbers only confuse her.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:23 pm Days of Broken Arrows

        That was brilliant. Uncle Joe gets the prize.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 12:35 pm Flavia

      “All women are beautiful in their own way. ”

      All men are rich in their own way.

      “I’m happy with my body as it is after having four children, and years ago being a swimsuit model …”

      Right. Body doesn’t matter so much you felt compelled to throw out that you were model thin? Why did you do that?

      You did it to inform us of your thinness and to qualify yourself as objectively attractive and not fat. Because thinness matters and being fat is disgusting. You just proved everyone here right.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:01 pm Lara

        Good comment. You’re totally right about her wanting everyone to know that while she thinks CH shouldn’t pick on fat women, she is not fat herself.


      • on January 29, 2012 at 1:11 pm Maya

        Yeah. It’s always like that. Let’s lie to fat girls how hot they are – we don’t want them to lose weight become our competition, isn’t it like that? ;)


      • on January 29, 2012 at 1:13 pm Maya

        sorry, I forgot an ‘and’ between ‘weight’ and ‘become’ …


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:14 pm Maya

      NOYB,

      “I’m happy with my body as it is after having four children …”

      Look, you already have children and I’m sure your husband loves your body the way it is (it’s normal to become less sexy when we age and have babies) but everything else you wrote is a complete nonsense. Men really do prefer girls who can bear healthy babies.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:28 am Anna

        This. One of the reasons her husband loves her is because of their time together, and her investment in him (including giving him children.) If he died in a car accident, and she were to attempt to start over, the picture would probably be different.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:14 pm corvinus

      The uber-mamas I have met in my life (7+ kids) are all of normal weight, oftentimes on the slender side. The fat women who are their age are all either childless or maybe had one. If you had 4 kids and are a lard-bucket, it’s not because of the 4 kids, I guarantee you.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:21 pm John Norman Howard

      NOYB, you too are entitled to your own opinion… but not your own facts.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 2:39 pm itsme

      however, with your post, you just made yourself look and sound like a completely shallow, narrow minded and extremely repulsive person to millions, so a high five to you!

      quit being so judgmental.

      all people are good people.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 7:27 pm uh

        ALL PEOPLE, PEOPLE!!!
        LOZLZLZO IS LOLZLZLZOZOZZ~!!

        WHITE BLACKK BLAKVWHITES LPOXZOZOPPZOPOZPOZPZP

        everyone is alike, no one is different, race does not exist except when it does, sex is social except when wimmin hurt, up is down, down is sideways, nothng is turueew,,e,e,e,e,e,e,e,e,e

        hey, i really fucking hate that people agree with comments this way:

        “this.”

        that’s wot overemotional white cunts with far too much time on their hands say on their fucking facebook and tumblr pages to every fucking dew-drop photo and “deep” quote out of context they happen upon

        “this.”

        THIS IS NOT A COMPLETE MOTHERFUCKING SENTENCE YOU TWAT

        lozlzlzlzllzlzlzlzlzlz grammar is anti-woman!!!!! lzolzlzlz

        FOUR LEGS GOOD : TWO LEGS BAD


    • on January 27, 2012 at 3:32 pm William

      If you believe every woman is equally beautiful, why do you use the term “Shallow” ?

      If a man is shallow that shouldn’t be a problem because in your words every woman is equally beautiful.

      Is it because you don’t really believe this is true ?


    • on January 27, 2012 at 4:20 pm loveiseasy

      “It’s people such as yourselves, that make this world unbearable,cause more women to hurt themselves and eating disorders to sky rocket out of control.”

      American “women” are certainly suffering from an eating disorder of sorts, but it ain’t anorexia or bulimia.

      Btw, I love how you try and qualify yourself the whole time to this ever so shallow man. As far as I’m concerned, he’s doing a service for humanity.


  91. on January 27, 2012 at 10:59 am Anonymous

    How much of an insecure whiner do you have to be to write this post?

    [heartiste: how much of an insecure victim do you have to be to pretend your gleeful attackers are whining?]

    Pin Up Girl Clothing will appreciate and clothe whoever they want as a brand, and will make mad bank

    [i don’t doubt it. there are a lot of deluded fatties in the world.]

    while you sit in your basement

    [skyline loft.]

    and insist you’re sooo alpha

    [alpha doesn’t insist.]

    for going out of your way to get your panties in a knot about what other people think of themselves.

    [it’s fun to mock the deluded.]

    Why don’t you show off your Adonis body for the rest of us then, eh?

    [perv.]


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:44 pm John Norman Howard

      Why don’t you show off your Adonis body for the rest of us then, eh?

      Champing at the bit to hurl the same sort of mockery that you’re attempting to castigate us for, Madame Hypocrite?


    • on January 27, 2012 at 2:36 pm O-face

      Owned!!! I’ve taken Chateua like responses to text game…I feel like a God.


  92. on January 27, 2012 at 11:25 am Anonymous

    you bein’ trolled yall


  93. on January 27, 2012 at 11:27 am Roark

    I’ve thought before that someone should do a poll: find the most attractive 300 pound woman you can, and the most buck-toothed, ance-infested, cross-eyed, dirty-haired girl with an hourglass figure. Post their pictures side-by-side and have men vote on which one they prefer. I submit that it would be a challenge to find two such pictures which would get more than a 50% vote from the heavy one. Heck, replace the ugly hourglass with a skinny girl, and dress them both as flatteringly as possible, and it’d still be difficult.

    Waist-hip ratio is that important. It really does almost trump everything else. Heck, just look at the comments here, like #3 having an odd face. I bet most guys didn’t even look at the faces of #2 and #4. No need to. Waist-to-hip is the first filter, which leaves only three worth considering further. I mean, I *hate* tattoos, and yet I considered #1 longer than #2 or #4, even though you’d think her tattoos are a lot more obvious than anyone’s size. But my hatred of tattoos is my opinion; it requires at least a split-second of thought. Attraction for the right shape is hard-wired, no thinking time necessary.


  94. on January 27, 2012 at 12:00 pm chi-town

    That poster couldn’t be held up with rail road spikes.

    No doubt the one in the middle suffers in the stamped that tramples over the eye.


  95. on January 27, 2012 at 12:39 pm a girl

    i have nothing against white bras. i own a few pairs myself. here somehow, I find them jarring. they add to the oddness of the scene. I try to imagine the white bras replaced by different size pairs of coconut shells, and immediately find all girls more attractive.

    just a random thought.


  96. on January 27, 2012 at 12:40 pm Flavia

    The irony is that this Pin up girl clothing site seems to choose models with very defined WTH ratios. All the girls are thin and well proportioned. It doesn’t even matter they’re a little butterfacey. This is such hypocrisy. http://www.pinupgirlclothing.com/swimwear.html?p=1


    • on January 29, 2012 at 5:44 am Arawn

      Many of the models there clearly wear corsets under the clothes, especially heavier models. Nothing wrong with a corsets, I like them a lot, but the whole point of a corset is to create this huge WTH ratio…


  97. on January 27, 2012 at 12:51 pm Just Some Canadian

    As a photographer, I’d opine that the middle girl’s problem is stance and posture. She is in that odd ‘Oh, I’m being photographed, so I should be doing something’ frame of mind. You’ll see the same problem with inexperienced actors who need to be told to stand perfectly still. Just because you’re on camera doesn’t mean you need to be doing stuff.

    (For a good comparison, look at the end of The Longest Day when Richard Burton, a downed airman, is found by Paul Anka. Burton keeps perfectly still and Anka, the young army ranger, twitches through the scene like he has piles.)

    If the middle girl were standing normally, say in the ballet basic pose, with a big grin on her face, there’d be fewer comments about her. That being said, the lighting’s problematic for the whole shot because it’s not flattering. Individual key lights and specific fils would have helped but if that was the budget, that was the budget.


  98. on January 27, 2012 at 12:54 pm Maya

    Off topic … I was wondering about something that has always made me very anxious when reading this blog (until I realized how stupid it is) and this is the idea that unlovable (old, unattractive etc.) women should settle for an unsuitable mate. This is an extremely wrong idea that has never been explained here. It’s much better to be alone your whole life than to force yourself to be with someone who you feel is unlovable/unfuckable.

    This blog really puts too much emphasis on romantic love (which is only attainable to maybe 60% of the population) and instead of feeling some empathy towards omega males and old/unattractive girls all we can read here are some weird ideas about how much better it would be if “loser chicks would go back to licking their ego wounds the old-fashioned way — by taking up poetry and staring pensively out a bedroom window.”


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:13 pm Just Some Canadian

      Why settle, because it’s easier to get someone a notch or two below you, than above.

      Time marches on and eventuality the eggs go off so settling for a decent but unremarkable bloke rather is easier than a higher risk strategy of going for someone above your value level and risking being left with the dregs.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 1:54 pm Maya

        Yeah, but it’s difficult (if not impossible) to have sex with someone who is not sexy enough … Don’t you agree? I’m sure you couldn’t sleep with a girl who you consider unfuckable … ?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:05 pm Neecy

        I think what she’s saying is its better to be alone than with someone you are not attracted to. And she is right.

        Why do men always tell women to “settle” yet they would have a shit fit if any woman told them to ‘settle” for a woman they are not attarcted to. That is beyond annoying.

        Men never are made to feel guilty or “BAD” for not wanting a particular woman they are not into. yet women are told to be with men we don’t feel attracted to all the time.

        Imagine me telling Heartiste to “go out with a fat or overweight girl” b/c its better than being alone. Yet men tell women to do this ALL.THE.TIME.

        [heartiste: men don’t do it as often or as intensely as women do. but it’s true that betas can’t expect the hot babes and simultaneously tell women to settle for betas without being hypocritical. my line has always been that the average woman has a choice between settling for the average man or living out her years alone. at least beta males can improve their lot, should they choose to.]

        What makes you think we wanna be with a man we are not attracted to when you as men would never even consider being (and make no apologies about it either) with a woman youa re not attracted to?


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:50 pm Maya

        Agree with you, Neecy, 100%. I hope people here will read your comment. Nobody seems to understand that it’s impossible to force yourself to be with someone you can’t imagine sleeping with.

        [heartiste: prostitutes do it all the time.]

        “but it’s true that betas can’t expect the hot babes and simultaneously tell women to settle for betas without being hypocritical.”

        I don’t agree. We know that guys have very high standards for female beauty. They believe that everything below an HB 8 is settling.

        [strawwoman. there are plenty of betas who would love to hook up with 6s and 7s but can’t because those girls chase after the same alphas the 8s and 9s chase.]

        But this is not true. A girl who is, idk, 7 or 6 is still fuckable, so this should not be called settling …
        Men, on the other hand, believe that women should settle for guys who are entirely unfuckable (e.g. men who are childish, lazy, emasculated etc.)

        “my line has always been that the average woman has a choice between settling for the average man or living out her years alone.”

        This doesn’t always work. Example: I’m looking for someone who is as pretty and successful as I am (so someone just as average as me) – but I realized that these men can easily find a girl who is much prettier and younger than me and who will admire them more than I could. So these guys are out of my league. And what is even more funny, they are not alpha enough for me! Isn’t that ridiculous? Men who I consider too beta can find chicks who are prettier and younger than I am! And now I should settle for someone who is even more beta? … It’s IMPOSSIBLE to settle. Like you claim that you are physically unable to sleep with a woman who is less than a 6 it’s PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for women to settle for a guy we don’t find attractive.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:42 pm Neecy

        Heartoiste I agree that a lot of average women in the 5-6 range are out chasing Alpha types. i did a post on this about how beautiful Alpha women and beta males lose out in the SMP b/c of beta ugly and/or average looking women who lower the value of the SMP b/c they are chasing dudes out of their league and doing any and everything to keep this Alpha guy (usually sexing them) b/c that is the only way they can actually compete for an Alpha man is through being sexually lose.

        Also, the Alpha males REWARD these average chicks by even entertaining them.

        Alpha and truly good looking women do not have to lower their value to get an Alpha male. But the problem is when Alpha men have so much access to less than steller average women, it puts higher good looking Alpha women in a bind who need Alpha men and it also puts beta men in a bind b/c beta men should be with beta women and alpha men and women should be together.

        Its a SMP booty buffet for Alpha males b/c of the beta and average looking women who feel they are deserving of Alpha men and who leave beta men in the dust.

        I know too many average chicks who actualy believe they are deserving of really highly good looking men – and these women don’t often really have much going for themselves. yet the average looking (but not ugly) guy who is trying to get with them (and who may have a lot of things going for him) is ignored or friend zoned.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 3:40 pm Maya the Projector

        so I have to write this once again …

        “[prostitutes do it all the time.]”

        We were talking about settling btw.

        [heartiste: this is what you wrote:

        Nobody seems to understand that it’s impossible to force yourself to be with someone you can’t imagine sleeping with.

        this is what i replied:

        [heartiste: prostitutes do it all the time.]

        i proved that your assertion is wrong with a simple counterfactual; namely, that hookers have sex with men all the time whom they don’t particularly like to have sex with.

        now, if by “be with someone” you mean “be in a long-term relationship”, then even with that broader stipulation you are wrong to assert that it is impossible for women to force themselves into LTRs with men they can’t imagine fucking. a simple and true observation that the world is filled with women in loveless, sexless marriages and with women who settle for marriage to men they don’t really like to fuck is all it takes to discredit you.

        really, maya, this is getting to be like shooting fat fish in a cramped barrel. save yourself some dignity and think before you write.]

        Staying single is thousands of times better than settling.

        [maybe for women and men with clinically low libidos, (which is something you have in common with the androgynous celibate male losers who occasionally stop by here to pepper the comments with their alien inanity), but for most people, settling beats grinding sexless solitude. the world is filled with uglies bumping uglies and populating the next generation. so again your assertion is proven false and exceedingly dumb.]

        I hope you will soon stop talking about this stupid settling because it just makes you sound stupid.

        [i think i will start calling you the Projector, because all you do is project your insecurities and stupidity onto others.]


      • on January 31, 2012 at 4:00 am Maya

        “for most people, settling beats grinding sexless solitude.”

        so you think that I would also be happier if i decided for a relationship with someone I don’t love and can’t imagine sleeping with? (I consider myself average and normal in every aspect and I don’t have clinically low libido)

        sorry again for the previous comment. I read it again and realized that you are probably right about me projecting my insecurities onto others. i will now think before i write!


      • on January 28, 2012 at 1:09 pm Nicole

        “at least beta males can improve their lot, should they choose to.”

        Here you betray your optimism in human nature.

        I do not share it.

        A man who is afraid of women can overcome that fear only if he has the potential. Not everybody, regardless of how well they are trained, can overcome a fear of insects or snakes. Not every guy can overcome a fear of women.

        Some guys have a passive nature, and will require more dominant women in order to mate. Since submissive women are more common, a good proportion of them are just going to be left behind.

        Some men dream of conquering a woman. Some men dream of a woman conquering them. These dreams do not change with game. At best for the latter, game can give them a temporary reprieve while they wait for their dream harpy.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:20 pm Neecy

        I agree that people in general need to be realistic about what they can “get” or attract in the SMP. I find its a problem with both men AND women when it comes to this. IMO its not just the average woman that has to realistically look at her options but many average men also need to do it too. Its best for like to stay with like or within the same range of attractiveness. just my opinion. but then again if people are measuring their attractiveness much higher than what it is, that too can create the problem.

        Yes a beta guy can improve his lot, but if he’s shooting way too high and lands a mate that he deep down believes he has to work overtime just to keep, then he’ll never really be internally happy b/c the higher up in looks an average person goes for a partner, the more “worry” and insecurity comes in. they can never comfotably enjoy their mate without worrying about how to keep going above and beyond to keep them.

        Too many people don’t take stock into what it is they are actually bringing to the table and often feel they should just swoop up the best of a man or woman even without being the best themselves or lookign at the reality of things in the SMP.

        The majority of men and women are average looking and can be a bit above average if they make some improvements in dress, mannerisms, looks etc. So any average man or woman who is all around average and expects to land a high value highly good looking mate better really be bringing something more to the table. Beacuse in instances where this is not obvious (where the lower value or less good looking mate doesn’t have obvious outward things that would explain the imbalance) people will think something is wrong with the better looking or higher value partner if they are dating someone way beneath them in looks.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:15 pm Neecy

        Are you a guy? Would you settle for a woman “a notch or two below you” and be happy about it? Would you tell another man the same thing? I never see guys on here telling each other that. that is b/c men have no qualms whatsoever saying they will NEVER be with a woman they are not attracted to. Yet they will tell women to do it like its nothing. LOL


      • on January 27, 2012 at 3:56 pm John Norman Howard

        Men settle all the time… indeed, the usual expression is “settling down” for a man when he marries.

        No matter how hot the girl starts out as, she invariably hits the wall… and more often, with her attitude… which only exacerbates the decline in looks.

        So give the hamsters a rest, ladies… men have always “settled”.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:24 pm Neecy

        men may settle in other ways (moreso on a woman’s character flaws or if she is BATSHIT) but honestly if a man ends up with a woman, its b/c she actually was attractive to *HIM* and not b/c other people told him he should be with her b/c “she’s a great girl with a great personality”. Bascially what i am saying is men end up with women they are actualy physically attracted to in some way regardless of how others see the woman’s attractiveness. A man will NEVER (no matter his attractiveness level) be with a woman he’s not physically attracted to in some way.

        OTOH women do it all the time b/c they are made to feel guilty for not doing so.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 4:01 pm Sturm

        Loneliness and lack of options do take a toll on a man’s mind and he subconsciously starts to accomodate his sexual preferences. And when that man’s options increase, when he looks back he’ll feel embarassed about his previous “conquests” that weren’t up to measure.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 4:55 pm Lara

        “I married beneath me, all women do.”

        -Nancy Astor

        [heartiste: by the broad definition implied in that statement, so do all men.]


      • on January 31, 2012 at 4:52 pm John Norman Howard

        Oh, fie… fie, Ms. Astor… all I ever hear from your ilk is NAWALT… can’t have it both ways, toots.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 6:17 pm Thor

        Going back:
        “I married beneath me, all women do.” -Nancy Astor [heartiste: by the broad definition implied in that statement, so do all men.]

        Yes, right. And everybody is above average (or is it below?).

        This kind of illogic keeps rearing its stupid head.

        There are a number of variations. One of my favorites is
        “Over a life time, do women have more sexual partners than
        men or vice versa? Or is it about equal. Count only heterosexual
        encounters.” Most people go with the second answer, men
        having more sexual partners. But it is impossible. Since there
        are about an equal amount of boys and girls born, you can
        divide the total number of actual different hookups by the
        number of men and women respectively. This gives a current
        average, and must be roughly equal. (There are shadings here
        depending on who is alive, who lives how long etc but in the
        end, they are all dead).

        Another variation, shown in this blog some years ago, show
        college women interviewed in the NYTimes, complaining
        about the lack of eligible men. Problem is, the women
        consider all the college girls eligible, but only half the men.
        Thus, they complain about a horribly skewed sex ratio.
        The reporter from the NYTimes did not catch this, the
        hallowed crowd is way to stupid for that.

        A friend of mine told me that black men with a steady
        income and no criminal record are sui generis hot,
        since the women outnumber them. Maybe this is true.
        He told me to search the web to verify. But, my point is,
        all I got was that most articles argued that all women
        “deserve” a man in the top 50%, regardless of race.
        A few articles were similar with the gender roles reversed.

        While there is plenty of variation in taste and priorities,
        typically stable relationships will be between people who
        are in ROUGHLY the same percentile. There is a little
        slack here since more men at the bottom are left out
        of the system than women. (And, occasionally, at the
        top very high-achieving women have a hard time
        finding a mate).

        Thor


      • on January 31, 2012 at 4:54 pm John Norman Howard

        Neecy doesn’t understand a man’s needs:

        1) Food
        2) Sex
        3) Clothing
        4) Shelter

        None of which really have to be all that good.


      • on February 1, 2012 at 7:37 am tyrone

        I’ve heard this exact advice given to men or heard it in the form of a rationalization for taking that course of action.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 2:20 pm Neecy

        I also forgot to add. Not “settling” for a person you are unnattracted to does not MEAN you are trying to go for someone above you in looks either. It just means some people would rather go without than be with a person they are not attracted to.

        People need to learn the concept of previous generations who dated and mated with LIKE (in terms of attractiveness). All this imbalance in looks with couplings is crazy and is one of the main problems in the SMP.

        People trying to go way above their own attractivness, people going waay below thier own attractiveness – its just ridiculous.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 4:21 pm corvinus

        My dear Neecy, you wouldn’t have to settle if you put down the donuts and try some exercise.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 4:27 pm Thor

        To a large extent, and applying to both sexes but more to women,
        we are trained to expect more. The average schlub of either gender
        is SURROUNDED by members of the opposite sex with movie-star
        looks – mainly because those ARE moviestars or equivalent, including
        women on FOX – much as approve of FOX, one of their insights is to
        hire or interview scads of women who are BOTH smart AND sexy.
        If we assume those properties are roughly independent, you can get
        the top 2% in both categories by picking the one in 2500 who qualifies.
        With a good enough budget, that is easy.

        Meanwhile, women are surrounded by great-looking, rich and smart
        dudes, on TV, in Cosmo and plenty of other places.

        And, actually, vice versa.

        Thor


      • on January 30, 2012 at 4:01 pm Neecy

        I agree Thor and great observation.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:54 pm Tyrone

        Women are looking for a man who gives them a certain feeling.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:26 pm Neecy

        BINGO! And if that man doesn’t give her that “stirring” she should *NOT* be with him. But when a woman tries to explain this to people pushing her to a guy like this, she will often simply be with him and try to force that “stirring” when it was never there.

        What ends up happening is disaterous to both her and the poor guy in the situation b/c she will eventually hurt him in some way or resent him.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 5:31 pm evilalpha

        People push women to settle for 2 reasons.

        1. Women lie about liking nice guys.
        2. Women are overly picky.

        People don’t push men to settle because

        1. Men don’t lie about loving beauty.
        2. Men are not as picky.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:57 pm Tyrone

        Men don’t have such complex needs in most cases. They want a few basic drives and selfish needs met, whereas women are always looking for self actualization through a relationship. It makes our needs easier to meet.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 10:05 am evilalpha

        Wrong!

        “Not settling” to the modern women DOES mean going after someone above you. Really above you too.

        That’s why women catch hell .

        You lie about wanting “nice guys”
        Then you starfuck like groupies.

        There is no male equivalent sense of entitlement.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:29 pm Neecy

        Men settle, but not when it comes to a woman;s looks – that’s b/c a man will NEVER go out or be with or sleep with a woman he is not physically attracted to in some way. THIS regardless of how others rate the woman’s attractiveness. However a man *WILL* date a woman who is BATSHIT, a loser, a bitch and with other character flaws, SIMPLY b/c she looks good. That is the way the average man settles.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 1:51 pm Flavia

      I don’t think the author is trying to push women to marry someone they deem unsuitable – I think the advice is that if you waited too long to get married and now WANT to get married, you should lower your standards. Same as if a 40 year old fat guy with a 45k income new to game probably WANTS to bang a bunch of tens, but maybe should settle for a few 5s. He is just trying to help people be realistic since the media is so deceptive and pushes both men and women towards actions that are not in their best interest.

      If you are older and want to find someone, I’d say learn to be attracted to short guys. You don’t deserve a prince. You’re not a princess.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 2:13 pm Neecy

      It’s much better to be alone your whole life than to force yourself to be with someone who you feel is unlovable/unfuckable.

      Totaly agree!

      Oddly enough a lot of men feel this only applies to WOMEN and not them. They are free to feel (and make no apologies whatsoever) they should always be with a woman they are attracted to no matter what while women should “settle” and be with a person they are not attracted to.

      Tell a guy to “settle” for being with a fat or unnattractive woman and you better be wearing a bullet proof vest! YET they will tell women to do it ALL.THE.TIME.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 5:58 pm NoQuarterForCatLadies

        Each gender has three choices if they aren’t satisfied with the quality of people they can attract. Pick one.

        WOMEN:

        1) If still under 35, improve looks as much as possible, hope improvement is sufficient to attract the men you want.

        2) Settle.

        3) Die alone.

        MEN:

        1) Improve looks / income / game / status as much as possible, hope improvement is sufficient to attract the women you want.

        2) Settle.

        3) Die alone.


      • on January 27, 2012 at 7:52 pm Tyrone

        But it sure sort of happens a lot. Moreover, men are less selective in what they consider attractive. Women don’t budge from those standards very often unless they meet a man who can sway them, if even only temporarily through some other means.


      • on January 28, 2012 at 3:33 pm Nicole

        It’s called self interest. If you’re going to be commenting around the net, it’s best to steel yourself and filter anything anybody says through the lense of, “why would they…”

        Men don’t care what is rattling around in a hot woman’s head. It just doesn’t matter. This is why prostitution and porn are thriving businesses.

        Many if not most women would care what was rattling around in a man’s head either if he was paying them a hefty allowance, keeping them in a mansion, and turned a blind eye while they shagged the pool boy.

        Most women, though we supposedly bond through sex, would probably completely override or lose this impulse and not even fall in love with the pool boy…might even hire more just for that, so long as she didn’t have to work and was getting paid regardless.

        At least men are easier to please. We just have to keep fit or fit his fetish, open our legs and make him a sammich.

        How much brain power does that take? Okay, it takes a bit more on an unnatural diet, but you know what I’m saying.

        They don’t care what we are thinking. You might be horrified, but for me, this understanding was very freeing.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 2:34 pm Neecy

        Nicole I understand CLEARLY that men don’t really care about what goes on in a woman’s head as long as she is hot. And that is why so many are left burned, angry and bitter b/c they ignored all the other signs that a chick was bad news b/c she simply looked good. OH WELL they are entitled to go after what it is that attracts them. Just don’t complain later when you get burned and the chick’s batshitness rears its ugly head and leaves you standing dumbfounded at why she did you wrong.

        Like i said both men and women settle – but in different ways. Women settle for looks and men settle for batshitness in a good looking woman. LOL


      • on January 30, 2012 at 9:00 pm Nicole

        That’s natural selection. You have a problem with that?


      • on January 31, 2012 at 12:00 am Neecy

        What do you mean “thats natural selection”? Men loving batshit women? Uh no, not in my eyes. No sane man wants a batshit woman unless he’s willing to settle or unless he’s damaged himself. And anyone who places that much emphasis on looks that they would put up with a psycho woman is crazy himself. As I say water will always seek its own level.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 6:01 pm Thor

        Uh, Neecy, NO. People seeking their own level would be normal
        and reasonable and even healthy.

        Much of the writing in this blog deals with women (more so than
        men) who simply DON’T GET THIS, and keep going for men
        who outrank them if you divvy up people in percentile rankings.
        The men at the same rank lose out, except at the highest level.
        The women lose out, they go from one alpha pump and dump
        to the next, unable to figure out why no man will “commit”.

        This has several reasons, among which (some is from Devlin)

        o No shaming any more
        o No friendly mothers or grandmothers able to exercise a
        restraining influence on young women
        o TV and movies constantly showing a parade of super-looking
        men (and women, but men are or are forced to be more
        realistic). The movie star look gets confused into being
        consider “normal” and what every girl “deserves”.

        Check a copy of Cosmo for guidance, mostly about
        “how to get HIM to COMMIT”. Dream on.

        Thor


      • on January 29, 2012 at 7:47 am ky bam

        You missed the point. Men don’t have to say this. Because men often do. The lowest married betas often find just one woman in their lives who will tolerate them and find them attractive. This is such a strong feeling that lesser men will often become attracted to these women simply because she seems to care. That’s how thundercows get married. Do you really think the morbidly obese married to the morbidly obese are loved because fat men PREFER fat women to more classical body types?

        So yes. Men settle. All the time. In fact, some men would gladly settle but can’t even find the courage to ask a girl out.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 8:21 pm Matt

      When a woman is told to “settle”, its usually (delicately) saying “You’re expectations of, and requirements for, a mate are FAR OUT-OF-LINE with what you are worth. Rethink what you offer to a mate and start again”.

      Men don’t usually have ridiculous expectations of what they’re worth. Hell, with the exception of the top 10% – 20% of men, most think they’re worth far less than they actually are. So, men rarely get told to “settle” since they almost always do by default.

      Somebody that’s alone because they genuinely want to be is fine. Somebody that’s alone because they turned away suitors that were … “level appropriate” is tragic. Hence, “settle”.


  99. on January 27, 2012 at 12:58 pm Wrecked 'Em

    It takes a while of reading comments on this blog to truly begin to appreciate the pathos of the trolls. I think one has to see the repetition a few times to construct a full measure of remembrance for what life was like before one took the Red Pill.

    I’m not even amused by it anymore. To watch them come in, shrieking against the sunlight, denying it with tropes that have been so thoroughly debunked by logic, experience, and science that every syllable they utter is instantly transmogrified into a hamster squeak for help.

    I suppose I still feel empathy for them, but I’ve lost all sympathy.


  100. on January 27, 2012 at 1:04 pm Colin Bowel

    Fatty Defense Force is stampeding to the rescue.


  101. on January 27, 2012 at 1:06 pm itsme

    #3 has her hands on the fatties because she suddenly imagined herself on the costa concordia as it capsized. reaching for flotation devices is reflexive.

    #1 can be used as a locating beacon and #5 can be bait meat to distract the sharks, thus saving lives.


  102. on January 27, 2012 at 1:35 pm Vagabond

    The self-esteem movement has done great damage by demonizing self-loathing. The moments when one realizes one’s shortcomings, are moments which fuel growth. The worst part is not that these women are fat – but that they choose to wallow in their failure, even going as far as celebrating their mediocrity, instead of putting an effort.

    One can choose to ignore reality, but one cannot escape the consequences of ignoring reality. One day or the other it realization is going to come, and no amount of rationalization is going to help. The smart thing to do is to wake up and start making necessary changes.

    The human body is a marvel of nature – it is only one’s lifestyle and choices that make one ugly. The fault lies not in our genes, but in ourselves.


  103. on January 27, 2012 at 2:02 pm Barbara Rae Gollubier

    …Yeah. And most women prefer 12 inch cocks. On men with 50″ shoulders and a 34″-36″ waist.
    …. How you adding up there, stud?

    [heartiste: so you admit there are female attraction standards in men? good. now let’s see if you can draw the line from point A to point B.]


    • on January 27, 2012 at 3:58 pm John Norman Howard

      FWIW, I was measuring up pretty good… ’til your pic sent me to Lake Flaccid.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 4:09 pm Flavia

      Women do NOT prefer 12 inch cocks because most women don’t have giant long cavernous vaginas. But I guess you’re special!


      • on January 30, 2012 at 4:03 pm Neecy

        Flavia,

        I agree most women don’t even need anything more than 6-6.5 inches (which is what the average guy is). What women like is WIDTH of a penis moreso than length. its the width that matters. . Its the things that a man does in the bedroom to make you excited and his pumping/pounding action.
        if a man knows how to pump/pound it right, most women wouldn’t know the difference in whether he had a larger than average penis or just an average one. (LOL I know TMI) Well the difference would be is that a man with a larger than normal penis would have to be much more careful than an average sized guy as to not create a painful experience if he pumps or pounds too hard.

        And you are right, women do not need huge penises b/c our vaginas are made to be satisfied with just enough and that is why the average man has a 6″ penis b/c that is all that is really needed.

        Women obsessed with huge penis size is something more psychological making them think a huger penis automatically attributes to great sex. I had a b/f who was larger than average and a couple others who were average. No difference in pleasure AT ALL.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 1:21 am Flavia

        I don’t know why but your comment made my day. You’ve given a lot of thought to cocks, lol.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 6:56 pm attractionreaction

      most women do prefer no more than 36″ waist on man, and most attractive young white women prefer no more than 34″.

      also – and despite cries of “size doesn’t matter” – most women strongly prefer 6″ to 5″, with a much smaller percentage strongly preferring 7″ to 6″; a much, much smaller percentage of women prefer more than 7″. only a rare freak of a women wants 12.

      broad shoulders are worth one point out of 10.


    • on January 28, 2012 at 10:09 am evilalpha

      I have 34 inch cock, a 50 inch waist, and 12 inch shoulders. Wanna fuck? All bodies are good bodies right?


    • on January 31, 2012 at 11:13 am King A

      Who asked women what they (think they) prefer? Why does this matter again? Enough of the cock talk.

      You will be lurking on this site for awhile, Miss Gollubier. Ask yourself why. Say hello now and again. I will give you fair treatment.

      You don’t have to loathe yourself for your fatness, but you should loathe the fatness. And if you can’t manage that, at least stop making inane excuses for it.

      I commend your bravery for returning here. I can see under the layers and layers of deception, both physical and mental, to the real you, and I love you. That’s why I tell you the truth.

      “If I have prophetic powers, and understand all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.”

      Really, I love you.


  104. on January 27, 2012 at 2:15 pm Barbara Rae Gollubier

    Oh, and in case you’re interested– Vanessa’s post inspired me to write a blog on this topic as well. Here ya go: http://www.barbararaesrants.blogspot.com/


    • on January 27, 2012 at 3:59 pm John Norman Howard

      Wow, another bloviating fem with a blog… go figure. :rolleyes:


    • on January 27, 2012 at 4:23 pm Tmason

      Blah blah blah there are standards in beauty blah blah blah I’ll skip over other things like BMI and stick to WHR so I can say my fat ass is good looking blah blah blah I’ll put up a strawman about woman’s standards in men to knock it down blah blah blah.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 5:15 pm itsme

      funny how it’s never the hot girls who say things like ‘all bodies are good bodies’ and ‘i think it really sucks that women are still objectified to the degree that we are in society’.


    • on January 29, 2012 at 9:17 pm King A's Bastard Son

      ….and a particularly flatulent and aimless blog it was.

      I wish I could get back the time I spent reading it.

      I hope you fuck better than you write.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 7:38 pm uh

        All of these fembots blow like pros. “Sex-positive”, don’t you know. And they aaaaaall love to be choked, smacked, and jizzed on.

        A girl who doesn’t — is a girl who grew up in rural Montana with a strong father at home.


  105. on January 27, 2012 at 2:33 pm O-face

    Sometimes I wish I never learnt game, no Mystery Method, never stumbled upon the Chateau..Now as a single 32 year old, I feel I am picky. I can see the declining sexual value in girls my age. So when my friends jump at the opportunity to settle with an ageing hottie, I see them as having hit the wall. As a 5’6” guy from India in the US with average looks (very slight accent) and moderate to good game I am unable to settle for anything less than a 7.

    The only way out of this is amping my fashion sense & getting really fit, which might give me a point or two in the dating market value chart.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 7:32 pm H

      I feel you bro, I see hot women as young as 25 and can’t stop myself from imagining her in 3-5 years.


    • on January 28, 2012 at 10:43 am evilalpha

      I think the only way out of this is to admit you’re a sock puppet.


    • on January 28, 2012 at 4:09 pm Emma the Emo

      You mean you used to be less picky before? What changed it? Getting hot women repeatedly?


      • on January 31, 2012 at 10:33 am O-face

        Yes.


    • on January 28, 2012 at 7:45 pm Phoenix

      Health, weath, and relationships are what determine a guy’s value.

      You’re on track. Get some good clothes that are stylish. If you need help with that, I would personally get a girl’s phone number and ask her to come along with you to the mall. I went to the mall with 2 girls a week ago, and they helped me immensely with their opinions. No joke. If I went myself, I’d be troubled on picking up a good outfit.

      2nd, yeah, hit the gym. If you’re scrawny, it’s time to build your muscles up. You need to look and feel more masculine. That will boost your confidence to the point that you’ll get cocky-funny.

      Make the money. Keep working on increasing your skills for the workplace.

      Don’t be a loser – be a winner.


    • on January 29, 2012 at 12:26 am Dani

      Sorry, at 5’6 you better have good game


  106. on January 27, 2012 at 2:39 pm Adam

    Of course, the funny part is that Vanessa couldn’t put this picture together unless she herself believes that these women are ugly and is trying to fight against own beliefs.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:41 pm uh

      That’s what it reduces to — the rearrangement of reality to assuage cognitive dissonance. And that is the fundamental equation of all Leftism, a secular religion of resentment.

      If all bodies are good bodies, her models would not be thinner bodies, and she would have used the fatties to begin with.


  107. on January 27, 2012 at 2:50 pm Orion

    Got to point out some minor issues with the autism thing. First, it is the dismantling of the patriarchy in the west by Femininsm that caused betas to lose out in the dating game. There use to be societal restraints on the hamseters (single-mothers were ostracized to some extent, being called a bastard meant something) unlike the present situation. So by your infeence, there should have been rising levels of autism through out the prior millenia or so and falling recently (more hamsters unleased to jump on the alpha-cock parade for reproduction) as betas lost out. Just doesn’t add up.


  108. on January 27, 2012 at 2:53 pm Patr333x

    Slogans such as “All Bodies are Good Bodies” are just a way for unattractive women to say that they hate beta males as much as hot women do. If all women had the same SMV regardless of weight and looks ,they would just chase after the same small number of alpha males. It is funny, I don’t think men can get away with saying, “Every income is a big income.”


    • on January 27, 2012 at 3:22 pm chi-town

      when its too big, I duck and yell “incoming!”.


    • on January 27, 2012 at 4:04 pm John Norman Howard

      It’s been mentioned already, but bears repeating… put up five average schlub guys in a pic and make the same claim, and the harpies bizarre chorus of giggles, guffaws, and “eeeewwwwww!” will roll like thunder over the plains.

      And then they wonder why most of them are good for nothing but pump and dump… if that.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 7:47 pm uh

        Speaking of the plains.

        ‘Twas that cold morning when I first milked a goat and drank her milk, and then smoked a cigarette, that I realized it was all an endless done-up lie in the interests of those who would enslave me.

        My Irish friend and I had manly maniacal laughs about the system later as we went along pulling nails from the old tangled fence, green grass below, blue sky above.

        There is no shame in turning one’s back on this farce of civilization. If one can manage to do it ….


    • on January 28, 2012 at 3:19 pm Nicole

      Men could post a lineup of masculine, sexy firemen, cops, and officially unemployed thugs and rightly say, “Sexy is not about income.”


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:48 pm John Norman Howard

        As usual, Hattie misses the point.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 8:31 pm Nicole

        No, it just went over your head.

        Not difficult when you’re bent.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 9:00 am John Norman Howard

        Your lances are but straws… mammy.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 6:30 pm Nicole

        Mainly because I understand that I’m a girl in a boys’ club. I would advise you though, not to get too happy with the attempts at racial slurs.

        Unless you prove that you are my superior, you are merely riding the coattails of your betters who could give no more a rat’s arse about your wellbeing as about the price of generic mac and cheese at Walmart.

        I can stand on my own. I don’t need a herd to be or to feel special. So I don’t need to reduce others to their herd’s label to “put them in their place”. However, if you insist on reducing yourself to a mere beast of burden, there is little that calling me “mammy” can do to raise your status. It is the mere bleating of a sheep on its way to the slaughter.

        …and I personally have come to relish the sound.

        It is my hope though, that regardless of your preferred shade of intimate company, you unlatch your pretty pink lips from their anuses. Your attempts at insulting me to prove your fervency in worship of them will not make them love you. You may see yourself as the white knight, but you are merely the alphas’ harem eunuch.


      • on February 1, 2012 at 1:22 pm John Norman Howard

        More bloviating nigger-babble from the resident rotund Negress… meh.


  109. on January 27, 2012 at 3:11 pm Barbara Rae Gollubier

    Oh and one more thing… You’re ignorance is showing.
    At one point you mentioned something about how the two fatties would automatically be out because of their waist to hip ratio.

    Umm… the “fatty” on the right has a very similar WHR as the thin lady (in fact it’s probably smaller). Read my blog on this subject if you’d like to be educated.

    [heartiste: there’s a point at which a normal WHR is swamped by a grossly flabby BMI, and attractiveness takes a nosedive off a high cliff.]

    I have so many things that I could say to you,

    [i bet you do.]

    so many ways that I would like to lash out and tell you what an ass you are.

    [your journey to the fatty side is almost complete.]

    But, you know– in the end it doesn’t matter.

    [in the beginning, it doesn’t matter either.]

    Because not only is your ignorance showing, so is your lack of personality, class, and character.

    [funny how wound up you get writing to someone with no personality, class or character.]

    So– far be it from me to take the one thing that you have left in this world– degrading women.

    [correction: degrading fat apologist women like yourself.]

    Enjoy your life.

    [hate yours.]


  110. on January 27, 2012 at 3:31 pm Gentsworth

    It’s funny. As a young, well to do guy, I notice that the more I work out and improve my own physique, the more I notice the women around me are not doing the same.


  111. on January 27, 2012 at 5:58 pm bellasu

    I love all the excuses for why #3 doesn’t look attractive. “It’s her posture” “It’s because she is in between two fatties”. Maybe a body that skinny just doesn’t look great objectively.

    I don’t apologize for fat. And I actually agree that the most attractive BMI is probably around 21. But Heartiste has a terrible concept of what a 21 BMI would look like because neither the middle girl in pic #1 or even pic #2 embody this.

    [heartiste: i didn’t say the middle girl in pic #1 has a 21 BMI. she is most likely around 17 or 18. and the girl in pic #2 is much closer to 21 BMI.]

    Ideal= full boobs and butt/thighs, extremely thin waist, toned thighs. Putting pics of girls with man-like waist to hip ratios does not support this.


  112. on January 27, 2012 at 7:08 pm uh

    BIG CHIMPIN’
    TO DEFEND THE ROTUND
    LOZOZOZOZZZ


  113. on January 27, 2012 at 7:14 pm sidewinder

    I like them all. Which is not to say that there is not a clear and objective hierarchy.

    1. I’d like to date a heavily tattooed chick. Tattoos don’t look good on a naked body, but if she wears cool clothes and had a bolder hairstyle and sunglasses then it would be fun to hang around with her in public.
    2. The fat one has big boobs and thick thighs, which compensate for a lot of things (but only in bed). It is always possible to ignore certain bodyparts, such as the big tummy, or the double chin, during intercourse. I would do nasty, raunchy things to her.
    3. The middle one is someone who I could show to my family. Long term relationship material. The safest pick socially.
    4. The tall redhead is a sexy milf next door. I like her face. She may actually be the most bangable of the bunch. I would ram a hole in her granny panties with my cock and make her keep them on during fucking (not just because I like them as such but also because of their constricting effect on her tummy).
    5. Great ass and legs. I don’t mind muscles, especially on an older woman, as long as she still looks recognizably female.

    What can I say? I love women. Period.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 1:55 pm Neecy

      What can I say? I love women. Period.

      This is honestly a very refreshing POV (especially on here). And i think a real *man’s man* often feels this way. I just don’t think there are many men left who just love women “period” like you. men like you are so refreshing. And its not in a supplicating to women kind of way that you feel this way.

      once in vegas I was sitting next to a man who was just taking in all the “views”. he looked at the dealer with this satisfying grin and said “I’ve *NEVER* seen an ugly woman. God knew what he was doing when he made the female”. i thought that was a cool way to see things. of course I understood the depth of what he was saying – not that there weren’t any unnattractive women, but that he just loves a woman.

      There are also women like this who just love men. ;)

      Frankly, I think people are too judgemental about other people’s looks. And i find its the most unnattractive people who tend to be the most judgemental and obsessed with looks.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 2:26 pm NoQuarterForCatLadies

      What causes someone to have absolutely no standards? Are you a guy in a wheelchair, twitching uncontrollably and typing things about science in your robot voice?


    • on January 30, 2012 at 3:25 pm Anonymous

      Nobody is talking about the willingness to be friends with them or even love them. The bottom line is that, if one has read this blog carefully, none of the women in that photo would be suitable because others would be available.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 3:27 pm Anonymous

        Suitable for sex. Suitable for friendship is another matter.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 5:41 pm evilalpha

      You are one dirty bastard!

      I could fuck the skinny#3 and maybe let #4 blow me if she put some clothes on, but that’s the best I could manage.


  114. on January 27, 2012 at 10:59 pm Barbara Rae Gollubier

    [snip happens…]

    I don’t know why, but I read some of your other posts.

    [heartiste: who knows why we are drawn to that which enraptures us?]

    You need to work on your writing– your grammar is particularly shameful.

    [schoolmarm: “if you don’t eat your meat, you can’t have any pudding.”
    fattie: “too late.”]

    Don’t bother replying– I won’t be back to this page.

    [one can only hope.]

    Your 15 minutes (or seconds as the case may be) are over. Hope you enjoyed them.

    [my fame is not yours to give.]


    • on January 30, 2012 at 2:59 pm Student

      CH, for your enjoyment, here is her bf’s facebook profile:

      http://www.facebook.com/bgollubier#!/yehoshuah.young

      i always knew that some guys (usually from a certain demographic) liked the bigger girls. but this profile pic/timeline pic combo is so gold i might have to make it into a t-shirt.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 3:01 pm Student

        this is referring to this crazy BRG chick. in case he changes his FB, its a pic of a black dude superimposed on a painting of a beached whale.

        heh


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:41 pm John Norman Howard

        Figures… a nigger’s slut… and then she thinks she can come here and talk amongst men.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 6:43 pm John Norman Howard

        Or what was I thinking? She looks like a high yellow herself… in which case she’s with her own kind, and more power to her..


      • on January 31, 2012 at 7:47 am uh

        More … humorously, observe that this blog has attracted three [?] possibly permanent black female trolls: Neecy, Maya, now Nicole.

        In fairness, the white women who comment here aren’t true trolls; carolyn, Emma, Lara, each have some native store of reason, in Burke’s phrase, however warped.

        So why this attention from the brown sugar? It has to do with those older posts on black women not receiving initial messages, nor even responses, on OkCupid and the like. In short, they’re desperate because they’re physically unlovable and constitute a small “outlier” group that can hack it here, at least in their own minds.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 3:30 pm Emma the Emo

        ..Maya is black??


      • on January 31, 2012 at 6:54 pm Nicole

        Wow…

        Way to rewrite history and ignore reality.

        Maya’s issues revolve around being traumatized. Neecy is picky. I’m an expat whose second husband aged out and needed to adapt to a dating scene in which I was the outsider rather than the girl every degreed Black man’s mom wanted him to marry.

        I was so spoiled I didn’t know it wasn’t normal for guys to cuddle, sleep, and unless they had to work early, stay for breakfast. I even have a recipe for refrigerator waffles (where you mix the batter and put it in the refrigerator so the next morning, you can make them even though your knees are wobbly). My epiphany came with realizing that I was getting a whole lot better than a whole lot of women, especially at my level of looks, and took that for granted.

        I’m here because I had a good dad, and I prefer men who have that “back in the day” taking no crap vibe, and think there should be more of that. So when I have the extra time, I pay attention, and post when I think it’ll be helpful in that.

        You don’t have to like me, but don’t tell lies about me.


      • on February 1, 2012 at 4:47 am Anonymous

        True. There aren’t hostile female regulars on this blog anymore.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 5:51 pm itsme

        oh shit, ain’t that darryl from ‘the office’?!?


      • on January 30, 2012 at 5:52 pm itsme

        ^^ in response to student’s post:

        CH, for your enjoyment, here is her bf’s facebook profile:

        http://www.facebook.com/bgollubier#!/yehoshuah.young


    • on January 30, 2012 at 5:14 pm John Norman Howard

      Notice how the cunt changed her pic after I mentioned Lake Flaccid?

      But of course, she went in the wrong direction, thinking skanky was sexy… as most of her skeeve ilk is wont to do.

      Feh, good riddance.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 5:52 pm Neecy

      Barbara Heartiste is guilty of many things, but bad writing isn’t one of them. I think he has a great writing style and extensive vocabulary. This is not to say that I agree with most of what he writes or his ideas, say what you will but he’s a pretty darn good writer.

      I even learned the word “encapsulate” here! :lol:


      • on January 31, 2012 at 3:52 pm Maya

        True. H. has a great style and is probably very smart. Every time I read this blog I wonder who is the lucky girl that can call H. her boyfriend.


      • on February 1, 2012 at 8:46 am Nicole

        I don’t know about lucky. People with this level of perspective are usually a bit broken…not broken like beaten down, but broken as in a little nutty from having seen too much.

        If he has a girlfriend, she has to worry about competition from other women less than she has to worry about competing with his self containment. This can be even worse.

        It certainly beats dating a dude with nothing important to do with his brain though.


      • on February 1, 2012 at 11:26 am Maya

        I don’t know, Nicole … I have a feeling that he’s a faithful boyfriend … despite of what he writes here. He seems to be a very romantic person and I believe he does everything to avoid hurting his loved ones.


      • on February 1, 2012 at 4:02 pm Nicole

        Faithful and romantic, perhaps, but sometimes a guy can’t avoid hurting people who don’t and probably shouldn’t see the world through his eyes.

        I’ve been around exceptional men all my life, and this is a common problem for them. They can’t un-know what they know, and not feel what they feel about it.

        Some girls do get hurt by the simple facts of life with a man who isn’t normal, as the norm is nowadays. They mostly choose to be hurt by things that aren’t meant to hurt them but that just don’t come up with the average guy.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 6:50 pm King A's Bastard Son

      “I won’t be back to this page.”

      That sounds eerily similar to something Neecy wrote some time ago.

      Yet we still have to listen to her hippo snortings nearly every day.

      Please be true to your word and disappear forever.


  115. on January 27, 2012 at 11:13 pm Burton

    It takes a while of reading comments on this blog to truly begin to appreciate the pathos of the trolls.

    Here’s another thought for consideration: how many feminists recognize by reading this website that they have been “had” by guys with game? i.e., that sector of physically attractive feminists who have fallen for PUAs, only at the time they did not realize whom they were shagging. Do they wake up the morning after trolling and think (or feeeeeel), “Omygawd! That guy I met over chi who I thought was a sensitive new age guy and brought over to my place for hawt sex was really a PUA? Was I really responding to his alphaness? Is that why I was tingling? How can I ever face my womyn’s victumhood group?”

    Think about it.


  116. on January 27, 2012 at 11:57 pm JP

    Vanessa, do your outfits come with blood glucose meters? You could probably increase sales with some cross promotional work.

    @NOYB

    You are obviously not a beautiful woman. You can’t imagine a jerk or asshole being attractive because they have never shown any interest in you.


  117. on January 28, 2012 at 2:44 am Karen

    *sigh* I have a wonderful boyfriend whom I love, and who I think loves me. When we started dating a year ago, he told me that he always thought I was pretty. However (although he was too tactful to say it out loud), he did not actually come after me until I lost about 40 pounds through crossfit and paleo. When I want to stay home and cook, or go someplace I can eat steak, or I just dont drink, he does not raise an issue. Because he prefers me the way I am now ( and I am on the thick side at a 8-10).
    And that’s that, ladies.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 3:45 pm William

      Your Boyfriend likes you the way you are, because you’ve lost those 40 pound that made you unattractive to him.

      There would be no boyfriend to brag about if you didn’t lose those 40 pounds.


      • on January 30, 2012 at 5:43 pm evilalpha

        He likes a size 8 then stay a size 8 and you won’t have problems.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 7:31 pm passingby

      No doubt you will loved him as deeply when his income was lower, his job status plummeted, and he veered towards passive acceptance of aggression by strangers, because of his pacifism.

      We all have our criteria, dear.


  118. on January 28, 2012 at 6:15 am Dr Van Nostrand

    Ive heard so many broads channel Brigitte Bardot(“There is a Venus within every woman…There is no such thing as an ugly woman” or some such PC shibboleth) when I criticize a womans looks by calling me cruel and mean.

    I then retorted …ok ladies, I will compromise ……”That shoggoth there is as attractive as you .Go forth and spread the word”
    They were usually too dumbstruck to respond.

    Caution:This technique works with chicks who themselves are not unattractive!
    So in order to discourage these types of incredibly silly stunts one has to seriously neg #3 by telling her that yes indeed she is as attractive as the Yakuza biker chick or Jabba The Hut.Throw that shit back in their face and watch for how long borderline attractive chicks will keep up the charade!


  119. on January 28, 2012 at 11:32 am Just Some Canadian

    In related news, someone discovered that not everyone gets to cross the finish line in first place:

    http://www.barbararaesrants.blogspot.com/2012/01/big-butt-blog.html#comment-form


  120. on January 28, 2012 at 3:58 pm Girl

    I’m surprised by all the hate on #5. At least she’s demonstrated a willingness to keep herself thin and take care of her body. My guess is that she’s probably too short to carry that much muscle, so it’s probably just a matter of finding a better type of exercise for her body type. Also, the way she’s posed is intended to highlight her muscles, but if you saw her standing straight on or in clothes it probably wouldn’t be as dramatic. Moreover, she probably DOES have a .7 WHR, which would also be more apparent from the front. Regardless, it would be a lot easier for her to switch from weightlifting to yoga than for #2 or #4 to lose 50 pounds, or #3 to put on curves without getting saddlebags (common with that body type), or #1 to get all those tattoos removed.


    • on January 30, 2012 at 5:47 pm itsme

      she went way beyond keeping herself thin and taking care of her body, that’s the point. she’s built like he-man and has a manjaw to match. not feminine.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 1:27 am Flavia

        It also shows a very high degree of testosterone to even get in that shape. Most women just can’t get that built without juicing. I lift pretty heavy weights and don’t have any visible upper body muscles.

        BTW fat ladies, if you want to lose weight go deadlift and squat. And don’t eat that much.


  121. on January 29, 2012 at 6:11 pm Vanessa

    Well, this was super fun,

    [heartiste: funny, you don’t sound like you had fun.]

    but I need to take my leave of your 570-ish followers to get back to my 280k+ followers.

    [aren’t all blogs good blogs?]

    See you on the internets, bitch!!!!!!

    [can the internets fit your clients?]


  122. on January 30, 2012 at 9:08 pm Ellie

    When women feel bad about their bodies, they are more likely to engage in unhealthy eating patterns (be that binge eating, starving or even purging). Posts like this exacerbate this type of problem.

    When I was 18, I had the “dumpy, plain jane” look that you describe on female number 1 (without all the tats). I felt horrible about my appearance and decided to go on a diet. This quickly spiraled out of control into a full-blown eating disorder. I got down to 120 pounds (on a 5’5 frame) by age 19 and was getting a fair amount of attention from the guys. But I was miserable and my health was definitely not where it should have been.

    I went into treatment and began eating healthy, balanced meals. My weight eventually rounded out at 135-138 (BMI approx 23). I might not get the attention of as many guys, but I am a lot better off with my “dumpy plain jane” appearance than I was when I was killing myself with an eating disorder.

    Posts like this perpetuate problems such as eating disorders.

    [heartiste: the whole weight of cultural pressure, when the issue is addressed directly, is tilted toward excusing fatness and pumping up fat women’s esteems. and not surprisingly, obesity is at epidemic levels, thanks to all that self-esteem boosting. maybe what this country needs are more guys like me telling it like it is.]

    Years of therapy have made it so that I can look at something like this without immediately feeling like puking out my dinner. Yes, it is true that there is an ideal female appearance. But did you really need to bash a bunch of (probably perfectly nice) women to make your point?

    [the people i’m bashing are the ones perpetuating the “all bodies are good” myth, which, insidiously, encourages women to believe their out of shape flabby husks are just as great as being thin and sexy. i don’t care if they’re nice; they spread lies. they are merchants of ugliness, and that makes the world a less pleasurable place to live in.]


    • on January 31, 2012 at 10:38 am Emma the Emo

      I don’t see any widespread fat acceptance. It seems the fatter the people get, the stronger the self-loathing and also disdain for fat in society. The “fat acceptance” seems to be just denial, it doesn’t look like real tolerance to me. Fat people desperately trying to feel normal and live their lives without everyone telling them how fat and disgusting they are. It seems countries who tolerate fat more also have less fat people. I don’t think shaming works in general. On some people it does, but many just get fatter (comfort eating, yo yo dieting..) or emotionally sicker (eating disorders). With all that hate, you’d think USA would get less obese already… but no. A solution would probably involve figuring out why people in USA are so much fatter than people in other countries with abundant food, and going from there. I think “fat acceptance” is a consequence of widespread obesity, not its cause.


      • on January 31, 2012 at 2:35 pm Thor

        @Emma
        “I think “fat acceptance” is a consequence of widespread obesity, not its cause.”

        Probably both. But I see particularly the US, and to a lesser extent the
        Western world in general, splitting off into three corners, in effect

        a) Bodybuilders/exercise nuts
        b) Couch potatoes/obese people
        c) Anorexics or near anorexics, like Nancy Reagan.

        This applies to both men and women, but women dominate
        among anorexics.

        The new normal is to become abnormal and end up in either
        of these three categories.

        Thor


  123. on January 31, 2012 at 2:22 am Allerious

    “most men don’t want to caress rippling triceps and six pack abs on a woman.”

    That’s their loss, because fitness girls are A-number one. They are the holy grail of pussy.


  124. on February 1, 2012 at 1:16 am ken

    We’ve all heard the story of how in different times, “curves” were considered more attractive because it represented wealth by way of having enough (read: too much) to eat. I have my doubts about these types of stories, but could the Chateau make a blog post about it? Or, if ya’ll have already, just point me to it. I’m curious about where this meme came from, though not so curious about why it persists; that’s obvious.


    • on February 1, 2012 at 12:21 pm Thor

      As I have noted earlier, when starvation is a threat
      (most of human history and prehistory), some “curves”
      in the right place not only bespeaks femininity and the
      right kind of hormones, but is a good predictor for
      the woman having enough resources (that is in the
      physical sense) to carry through a pregnancy.

      Thor


    • on February 1, 2012 at 8:05 pm Girl

      What Thor said below. Malnourishment isn’t attractive. Women (and men) who didn’t get enough to eat or adequate nutrients may have suffered from diseases like scurvy and problems like hair loss, teeth loss, sallow skin, premature aging, even lack of fertility. A well-fed woman undoubtably looked good in comparison, even if she was plump by today’s standards.

      But I don’t even think that’s the case; more like standards have changed and “curvy” 500 years ago would be considered normal or thin today. Even if you look at Ruben’s paintings where the women are undeniable bigger than today’s ideal, they’re still within the range of “normal” body types. Whereas someone from Ancient Greece or the Middle Ages encountered the 300 pound people you see waddling around Wal-Mart they probably would be awestruck and horrified, because human beings aren’t meant to get that big and never were.


  125. on February 1, 2012 at 4:41 am Anonymous

    Pourquoi il faut soutenir Ron Paul:

    http://ronpaulflix.com/2011/10/intelligence-beauty-for-ron-paul-2012-oct-5-2011/

    This is the answer to Vanessa’s ad campaign.


    • on February 1, 2012 at 12:31 pm Thor

      Fun. But not serious. If you want women in the top 10% in beauty and
      in the top 10% in smarts (except how can you tell in the clip?), then,
      assuming no strong correlation, 1% of the RP supporters would
      qualify. You put them in front of a camera and Voilà…

      Thor


  126. on February 1, 2012 at 6:52 pm Maya

    everyone gets hurt by the facts of life sometimes … you don’t really choose that. but in my experience, people who accept the life the way it is are still better of in long term compared to those who keep lying to themselves.



Comments are closed.

  • Copyright © 2015. Chateau Heartiste. All rights reserved. Comments are a lunchroom food fight and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Chateau Heartiste proprietors or contributors.
  • Visit the Goodbye, America photojournal website.
  • Pages

    • About
    • Alpha Assessment Submissions
    • Beta Of The Year Contest Submissions
    • Dating Market Value Test For Men
    • Dating Market Value Test For Women
    • The Sixteen Commandments Of Poon
  • Twitter Updates

    Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.

  • Recent Comments

    pulsotic on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    cheesetrader on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    Sarapod on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    Sarapod on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    ragingindependent on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    Putin on Literal Cuckservatives
    Regular John on Literal Cuckservatives
    Coldwarvet on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    Coldwarvet on A Test Of Your Game: A Condom…
    corvinus on Literal Cuckservatives
  • Top Posts

    • Literal Cuckservatives
    • How To Get A Girl To Send Nudes Of Herself
    • Field Test: The MAXIMUM ALPHA MALE MODE Walk
    • Bottom-Of-The-Barrel Cuckold Fetishist, Or Spinster Hoax?
    • Why Is Randi Lee Harper, Fat, Drug-Addicted, Mentally Unhinged Liar, Still Working At Twitter?
    • Lindy "Immense" West Got Married...
    • Newsflash! Talented Tenth Ingrate Doesn't Like White People
    • A Test Of Your Game: A Condom Conundrum
    • The Measure Of A Man By The Women He Keeps
    • How To Walk Like An Alpha Male
  • Categories

  • Chaos

    • People of Walmart
    • PostSecret
    • Stuff White People Like
    • The Daily Sarge
    • Things My Boyfriend Says
    • xkcd
  • Game

    • 60 Years of Challenge
    • Alpha Game
    • Cajun
    • Krauser PUA
    • Rational Male
    • Roosh V
    • Tenmagnet
    • The G Manifesto
    • The Rookie
    • Treatise of Love
    • VKs empire of dirt
  • Syllogism and Synthesis

    • Alternative Right
    • AmRen
    • Anonymous Conservative
    • Arts & Letters Daily
    • Deconstructing Leftism
    • Education Realist
    • Evo and Proud
    • Gene Expression
    • Hail To You
    • hbd chick
    • Human Biological Diversity
    • Information Processing
    • Lion of the Blogosphere
    • Mangans Miscellany
    • OneSTDV
    • Page For Men
    • Parapundit
    • Rogue Health and Fitness
    • Steve Sailer
    • The Anti-Gnostic
    • The Kakistocracy
    • The Red Pill Review
    • The Spearhead
    • Unqualified Reservations
    • Vox Popoli
    • West Hunter
    • Whiskey's Place
  • The Harem and Mongol Hordes

    • Alias Clio
    • Dusk in Autumn
    • Elysium Revisited
    • Feminine Beauty
    • Gucci Little Piggy
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • Hyperbole and a Half
    • In Mala Fide
    • Jack Goes Forth
    • Overcoming Bias
    • The Fourth Checkraise
    • The Rawness
    • Udolpho

Blog at WordPress.com.

The MistyLook Theme.


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,285 other followers

Build a website with WordPress.com
loading Cancel
Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
Email check failed, please try again
Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.
%d bloggers like this: