Bitter, Delusional Fattie Thinks Sluttiness Is An Accomplishment

A bitter, delusional fattie (BDF) with disfiguring tattoos plastered all over her porcine hide has a blue spruce up her pancake batter butt about the normal people who are claiming 26 year old Lena Dunham’s character Hannah on her show Girls (said show cribbing liberally from this blog, and the proprietors know it) is not hot enough nor skinny enough to entice the sexual attentions of a 42 year old handsome doctor. (Speaking of Hannah and BDFs: Why the hell is it always the grossest women who are the biggest exhibitionists? Wait, we all know why. Because you have to give it away for free when no one is interested in buying it. This explains the phenomenon of aging, Hollywood ex-starlets dropping their moral compunctions against nudity and eagerly stripping down for the cameras. Thanks, ladies, for the day-late, dollop-short consolation prize.)

The normal people are, as per usual, right as rain. In real life, no doctor who isn’t a total dweeb will bother with a frumpy, dumpy, plumpy formless flesh entity like Hannah, even if she’s fifteen years younger. Men with high status and thus plenty of options in the dating market will choose pretty women with discernible hourglass figures. They will choose younger pretty girls over older attractive women, but if the choice is between an older (pre-wall) attractive woman with a nice body and a younger, uglier woman with a bratwurst impersonating a body, the red-blooded man will opt for the former.

The BDF under the Chateau laserscope for this go-round is truly an exemplar of her foul genus. To wit, here is a quote from the gelatinous beast:

Aside from being sexist and sizeist and just plain fucking rude, this idea that you have to have a thin, perfect body and the face of a model in order to be sexually attractive is just patently untrue. Sexual attraction is oozing and amorphous and refuses to live in boxes. Regular women, women who look like Lena Dunham, or me, get laid easily and often. Some men who look like Patrick Wilson are attracted exclusively to women 3 times Dunham’s size. Men who look like Patrick Wilson get rejected by women who look like Lena Dunham.

Couples are “mismatched” because these boundaries, these “leagues” are made up by society and easily crossed. Anybody can have sex with anybody else!

Friends, that is a hamster triple bank shotting on roids, ECA stacks, and crack cocaine. CH is in a Christmas mood, so let’s unwrap this rationalization rodent offal.

Aside from being sexist and sizeist

If the -ist fits…

and just plain fucking rude

BDF complains about rudeness while squeezing the word fucking in every sentence.

this idea that you have to have a thin, perfect body and the face of a model in order to be sexually attractive is just patently untrue.

Forget the science, forget clear-eyed observation, forget the reality that swims all around us… she said it, so it must be true. Rejoice, repulsive fatties! BDF says that men actually want to have sex with you even though the millions of decisions that men make every hour of every day, the preference for sex and love with thin women they attempt to satisfy, and the cruel mockery of fatties they indulge, demonstrate the exact opposite.

Sexual attraction is oozing and amorphous and refuses to live in boxes.

Well, it’s definitely oozing on her.

Regular women, women who look like Lena Dunham, or me, get laid easily and often.

Proof by assertion. But for the sake of further evisceration, let’s assume she’s not telling a bald-faced lie, and that she does manage to get a fuck dumped in her when the planets align. For the typical BDF, getting unceremoniously and absent-mindedly banged out by a desperate omega loser whose closest companion is normally a couch crease is not a trophy to place on the mantel. There are enough degenerates who will spelunk a convenient flabby hole when no other more attractive alternative is available that it is possible for a fat chick to sustain a belief in her marginal desirability, however threadbare that belief. Men are, on the whole, less discriminating about whom they will penetrate than are women about whom they will allow to penetrate. This is because for each egg that a woman produces, a man produces billions of sperm. Each sexual congress is therefore of far lesser biological, and thus emotional, importance to a man than it is to a woman, even to a BDF simulacrum of a woman. A woman who makes herself readily available to every wanton horndog who can’t afford adherence to standards is a woman who essentially announces to the world that her eggs are worthless mass market crap. Emphasis on mass.

Some men who look like Patrick Wilson are attracted exclusively to women 3 times Dunham’s size.

But most men aren’t. And in the zero-sum arena known as the sexual market, it’s the mate preferences of the majority that will most impact how much happiness any individual will extract from it.

Men who look like Patrick Wilson get rejected by women who look like Lena Dunham.

But most men don’t. It’s more often the case that alpha males are doing the prompt rejecting of women who resemble Lena Dunham. Remember, BDFs, male rejection usually takes the form of emotional rejection, and that’s the rejection that hurts you most.

Couples are “mismatched” because these boundaries, these “leagues” are made up by society and easily crossed.

Hugo Schwyzer agrees! Losers of a feather…

Anybody can have sex with anybody else!

Only if you count forcible rape.

There are some egregious BDFs out there, but this one takes the cake and inhales it. You can distill her crass self-motivational to two points, and neither one casts her in a flattering light:

1. She says she has had sex with “movie-star hot men with chiseled Adonis bodies”*, some of whom were “wealthy and successful”.

Try-hard. If you have to say it, it’s less true than true. If you have to say it so hyperbolically, it’s likely not true. If you have to say it so hyperbolically while looking like a propellor-scarred manatee, it most definitely is not true. But you keep telling us pigs can fly, BDF, and we’ll keep pointing and laughing at your ego-pricked obtuseness.

Here’s the deal whenever one of these asinine BDFs or her close kin rumbles into view to claim they have wonderful sex with high value men: they are almost always lying.

Nearly every instance when a low value woman claims she dates high value men, it will invariably reveal itself upon closer examination that the men she dates are supplicating, socially awkward, dull beta males, unreliable drunkards, or fly-by-night players who couldn’t give a shit about her beyond a late night booty call and who are clearly embarrassed to be seen with her in public. This is Rationalization Hamster 101, wherein the compulsion to assuage one’s BDF-riddled ego by declaiming the handsomeness, charm, high status and virility of sex partners overrides all consideration of truth value.

2. She implies that amassing a notch count of sex partners is an achievement for women like it would be for men.

Self-deluded fattie gonna self-delude. Spreading as far as two hamhocks can spread for a loser to stick his dick in and jab a few tepid spurts into sea cucumber labia is not an accomplishment. There will always be a contingent of wretched, loveless omega males roaming the wilderness like zombies to occasionally service the land whale through three seconds of love, for no other woman remotely attractive will have them, and sheep aren’t always as receptive as fat chicks. Now multiply the relative ease of convincing a loser to participate in greasy pig rutting by ten million to get an approximation of how effortless it is for the typical good-looking girl to entice a whole battalion of higher value men to line up for a free blast inside her exquisite heart-shaped pussy, and you’ll have an idea of just how inconsequential is sex itself as a measure of a woman’s romantic worth.

The crux of the cunt is this: a woman’s sexual worth is measured by the ease with which she can convince a worthwhile man to commit to her and stick around for the long haul. It is not measured by the accessibility of her sperm receptacle. You’ll note that the BDF under discussion refers in the past tense to these “Adonises” whose intimate company she allegedly enjoyed over the years. Presumably, they all fled before the last jizz stream swirled down her belly button drain. Who could’ve guessed a noxious, fat, ugly, hallucinatory, tatted freak would have trouble getting any of them to fall in love with her? Rhetorical.

Some of you kinder, gentler, naive readers ask, “Why flay this poor fattie’s soul? What has she done that’s so bad? She’s just masticating on the internet, giving girls a self-esteem boost.”

If she were gloomily masticating in her bedroom, alone and out of earshot of impressionable darlings, she would escape the torture. But she shouts her rampant idiocy from the rooftops, sliming the minds of thousands (millions?) of young women who teeter at the precipice between unhappy fatness and happy slimness. Thankfully, most thin babes know in their lovely bones that getting fat will hurt their chances at finding love, so a whole goon platoon of bellowing fatties would do nothing to dissuade them from following the right and true path in life. But some girls are emotional basket cases, and in their weakened conditions are susceptible to infectious mind disease.

If this BDF propagandist can potentially convince even one slim girl that she would suffer no romantic consequences were she to bloat up and ruin her desirability, ruin the scenery, and ruin the attitudes of hotter girls who relax self-constraints on their bitchiness when their competition is reduced, then the BDF is a legitimate enemy of the natural state. She has earned her designation as a prime target. The incalculable cruelty of the breaking wheel wrenching screams of agony from her blubbery carcass will serve as an example for the others thinking that it’s a wise life decision to dedicate oneself to spreading lies and destroying the looks of pretty girls.

*PS: The cynics will interpret this BDF’s outrageous claim — “movie-star hot men with chiseled Adonis bodies” — as a fat white girl euphemism for black guys. They are onto something. You brothers won’t like to hear this, but too many of you are willing to drop your standards, however temporarily or conveniently, and plow white fatties with finger-wagging ‘tude to spare. While proof is lacking, it’s a strong possibility that this particular BDF is another data point in favor of the African Megafauna Size, Shape, Color and Texture Theory of Conditionally Flexible Black Male Mating Preference.

CH is on record stating that black men, when they are free to choose high value women, will, like men of other races, generally choose thin, pretty women, especially if the choice is for a woman who will be a long-term relationship lover. C.f., Will Smith. And yet, there is also plenty of evidence, observational and analytical, confirming the stereotype that black men, when they date or screw around interracially, slum it with the refuse of white womanhood.

Two things ought to be said about this: One, most white girls prefer sex and relationships with white guys, if online dating statistics are to be believed. So a fat white chick transcending earthly bonds on wings of passion with a vibrant black dude is likely feeling a powerful discomfort on a subconscious level that she is settling. Two, it’s a good bet none of these black lovers are staying around to cuddle and raise a nuclear family with their BDF gory holes.

It’s fair to surmise, then, that a fat white chick who brags about snagging indiscriminate black guys with chiseled abs is not feeling the winner vibe those abs are supposed to make her feel. In the morning, she is left confused about what the fuck is happening to her life. This is what is happening to the BDF: You are a loser, you will continue to be a loser, and you will die a loser. And no amount of pain-addled transparently ego-massaging insistence to the contrary on a feminist website will change that. Only pushing away from the table will help.

Read Full Post »

Fat Kills… Marriages Dead

CH, what is best in life?

To mock your enemies, see them driven to hysterics before you, and to hear the mooing of the fatties.

That is good!

You’re damn right that is good. This post will continue a proud tradition.

***

If someone told me, “Hey, did you know fat women married to in-shape men have worse marriages?”, I would reply “Who doesn’t know that? A man married to a fat sow will be unhappy, and if he has options he’ll start looking elsewhere. Common sense.”

Well, unfortunately for those who are inclined to give the masses the benefit of the doubt, the world isn’t filled with sane people who trust their lying eyes or who grasp rudimentary logic. The world, especially the Western world currently 5,000 feet from terminal velocity impact, is filled with delusional dregs, ego-assuaging equalists, fantasy world feminists, and puling porkers. Great fun if you’re a psyche-smashing sadist; not so much fun for normal people living in post-sanity secular societies who inevitably wind up footing the bills for these loudmouthed  losers.

Hot on the heels of, oh… ballpark estimate… one million previous CH posts about the penalties fat chicks suffer in the dating market and the personal health market (and now, the marriage durability market and happiness market), comes a new study which finds that fat wives of healthy-weight husbands have worse marriages.

Using dyadic models, we found that mixed-weight couples, specifically couples including overweight women and healthy weight men, reported greater conflict both generally and on a daily basis, compared to matched-weight couples; however, general conflict was reduced with greater perceived support from the partner. Mixed-weight couples who reported eating together more frequently also reported greater general conflict. These findings suggest that mixed-weight couples may experience more conflict than matched-weight couples, but perceived support from the partner can buffer this conflict. This research suggests that interpersonal dynamics associated with mixed-weight status might be important for romantic partners’ relational and personal health.

The researchers veer a bit into PC territory in their conclusion, so it will require a truly malevolent force to spell out the take-home lessons of this study in flashing neon lights that no one, not even hare-brained hogs, can possibly misinterpret.

Lesson Number One

Men are repulsed by the sight and feel (and smell) of fat chicks. All further lessons flow from this basic premise.

Lesson Number Two

A man with options to do so will choose a slender babe over a fat chick, EVERY TIME. (Rare exceptions prove the rule. Or: Don’t count on miracles, fatties.)

Lesson Number Three

A man married to a woman who has bloated into Hogzilla proportions will become increasingly unhappy, frustrated and resentful, and will express his displeasure with his fat wife in both passive and active ways.

Lesson Number Four

A fat wife is more harmful than is a fat husband to marital health and happiness. Fatness exacts a bigger toll on a woman’s sexual market value (and, therefore, marital market value) than it does on a man’s sexual and marital market value. Men are more visually oriented than women, and a fat man can compensate for his fatness by being attractive in other ways that women love. Fat women cannot compensate for their fatness except by losing weight and slimming down to a sexy, hourglass shape.

Lesson Number Five

Fat wives increase the odds of spousal adultery and marital dissolution. A wife who lets herself go on piles of cakes and cheesy poofs is primarily responsible for any infidelity her husband commits. Harsh, but true.

Lesson Number Six

A husband will be more likely to love, cherish and support his wife if she is thin. Life is conditional. Stop crying, and deal with it.

Lesson Number Seven

The cure for marital unhappiness and a lowering of the high risk of divorce among fat wife-healthy man couples is the fat wife losing weight until she has regained her attractive, slender, feminine shape. Marriage counselors will invariably bleat tired platitudes about “interpersonal dynamics”, “increasing perceived support”, and “unresolved masculinity issues”, and none of their solutions will work except to line their filthy pockets and turn wives against their husbands. They are worse than useless, because they lead women away from the one tried-and-true solution that *will* fix their marriages: losing weight.

Any questions? Or would you stubborn fatties and fatty apologists prefer the whistling lash upon your stuccoed hides a few more hundred thousand times?

I can already hear the trolls and transparently bad-faith skeptics.

“So fat women should marry fat men. Then all will be good!”

All will be good if you don’t mind living like the walking dead.

Mutually fat couples have no reason to rejoice. While thin husbands are more apt to distance themselves from fat wives, emotionally and sexually, fat husbands feel just as much frustration and resentment. Fat dudes are just as disgusted by fat chicks as are thin dudes. The difference is that fat husbands are less able to act out their frustrations without risking divorce rape and subsequent involuntary celibacy. A man who is forced by his lack of options to settle for a low quality woman will quickly acclimate himself to his dour circumstances, or suffer daily blows to his ego no man could withstand for long without the assistance of soothing psychological contrivances. The Acclimated Man (a subspecies of The Manipulated Man) will then become a simulacrum of the fox who cried sour grapes because he couldn’t grab the juicy fruit dangling just out of reach.

“I’m a thin woman reading CH for the rapturous tingles it inspires in my vaginal core, and all my (carefully screened) girl friends are thin, so how bad could this problem be?”

The Walking Fed

See here for an animated map going back to 1985. Gripping (gimping?) stuff.

“Fatness is genetic. Fat chicks can’t do anything about it.”

Bullshit on stilts. See above graph. There’s no way fat crappery can increase that much in a population of hundreds of millions in the span of 25 years by genetic selection alone. The best the “fat gene” crowd can argue is that most humans are wired to put on excess weight in an environment of plentiful sugar-rich, high glycemic index carb food and sedentary lifestyles. That isn’t the same as saying fat people have fat genes rendering them immune to efforts at long-term weight loss. What it means is that fatsos have to stop eating pastries and pasta, and start getting off their double wide asses and moving their limbs more than they do when reaching like an obese infant for a cookie on the kitchen countertop. The worst of them could begin their training by discarding the Walmart scooters for walking.

No fat gene hypothesis is needed to explain the growing army of lardbuckets and the shitty marriages they leave in their battle cruiser wakes. The answer is staring everyone in the face. The reason there are so many fat chicks in the world, and particularly in America, is because THEY CHOOSE THE PLEASURES OF FOOD AND IDLENESS OVER THE PLEASURES OF PLEASING MEN. That’s it, fatties. You choose… poorly. And you *will* pay the consequences. Forever. Or at least until you push away from the table.

“Thin, attractive wives sometimes suffer spousal infidelity and emotional coldness, too. So how can you say fat is the problem?”

This is the mirror image of the MGTOW false dichotomy fallacy (“If you hit on women, you are a beta because you have to put in effort to meet them.”) Feminists often employ this tactical fallacy when confronted by bleedingly obvious facts of human nature that remind them of their low status in the sexual value hierarchy. Just as MGTOWs, handicapped by their shut-in, stunted understanding of the innate differences between men and women, can’t fathom how a man can be both alpha and happy to approach and seduce women he desires, so too do feminists and their ilk betray a studied lack of comprehension about the effects that women’s degree of desirability has on men’s motivations.

A feminist sees a slender girl get cheated on by her asshole boyfriend, and the feminist’s stretch garment, Möbius strip mind promptly infers that being thin and sexy offers no more protection from infidelity than does being fat and gross. The feminist does not explore other, more likely, possibilities, such as the idea that hot babes are more likely to hook up with alpha males who have more temptations to suppress, or that the thin wife who suffered her husband’s infidelity probably would have suffered a lot more of his infidelities, and a lot earlier in the marriage, had she been overweight instead.

“But I read somewhere that fat people live longer than thin people?”

Not so fast. One dubious meta-analysis that contradicts literally thousands of individual studies showing the deleterious effects of fatness on health should not inspire confidence that being fat is A-Ok. However, let’s assume for the purposes of troll patronizing that overweight people really do “””live””” longer than thin people. Suffice to say, such extended longevity would come at a cost. There are the healthcare expenditures to treat all the illnesses that arise from being fat, of course. Then there’s the fact that most people would prefer a quality life as a thin person that ends, at last, rather peacefully in deep sleep, rather than a stricken life as a fatso waddling out an extra year or two on one diabetic foot and aching joints, wheezing and puffing and pants-pissing recklessly because any visible signs of graspable genitalia were lost long ago.

There is furthermore the obvious point that none of this feeble protesting about the supposed lack of health consequences of fatness has anything to do with the topic under discussion, which is that fat women repulse and drive away their husbands. Even if fat women are the healthiest people in the world and will all live to 110, that doesn’t change the fact that they are aesthetically repulsive to nearly all men. Thin people outcompete fat people in the dating market in the ways that matter because people, all kinds of people at all kinds of weights, prefer to gaze upon the lithe contours of slender bodies (for women) or V-shaped fit bodies (for men) rather than the undulating rolls of blubber on fat people. If fat craps don’t want to lose weight for their health, then they should lose weight for the better impression they’ll leave with others, and especially with those of the opposite sex whom they desire as romantic possibilities.

“Shaming fat women won’t work.”

Oh, really?

A leading health academic has called for fat people to be ‘shamed and beat upon socially’ in order to halt the obesity crisis.

In a controversial article, Daniel Callahan, the 82-year-old president emeritus of The Hastings Center a New York think-tank specializing in health policy ethics, calls for increased stigmatization of obese people to try spur weight-loss across America.

The senior research scholar says fat people should be treated like smokers who have become increasingly demonized in recent years and thus ‘nudged’ by negative attitudes of those around them into giving up the unhealthy habit. […]

‘The obvious target would be the large number of people who are unaware that they are overweight,’ he writes in the paper printed in the center’s first periodical volume of the year.

‘They need, to use an old phrase, a shock of recognition. Only a carefully calibrated effort of public social pressure is likely to awaken them to the reality of their condition.

Get this hero a free copy of the forthcoming CH book!

Shaming works. If it worked on smokers and “””racists”””, it will work on fatties. Shaming isn’t the sole solution to the obesity epidemic, but it is a powerful weapon against the marching manatees. Shaming fat women to lose weight will bring increased happiness to the world, and that’s a utilitarian argument men can spring to life for!

The shaming stick coupled with the encouragement carrot is a potent combo. Be genuinely helpful and complimentary to women who are sincerely making efforts to lose weight. Remind her, in nuanced language as necessary, that a reward of feeling better about herself and having a more exciting (read: more pleasurably orgasmic) dating life await her on the other side where thin women take their desirability for granted. But the carrot should always follow the stick, like you might give a dog a treat only after it has done what you commanded of it. Too little shame, and the carrot becomes an excuse to avoid the hard choices, or to delude oneself that no improvement is needed.

Let’s end on a positive, uplifting note of encouragement: Shame on you, fatties! Shame! Shame! Look at yourselves. You’re all a bunch of triple decker sauerkraut and toadstool sandwiches wrapped in a casing of subhuman sausage flesh. Blue whales sonically laugh at you. Your smegma hiding stomach folds have spawned a new species of armored crevice mice who nibble on your mouth droppings. Your pets eagerly await the feast that will accompany your untimely sofa-bound death. You are the reason a cottage industry of ass-wiping implements exists. The sight of your dumpy hind quarters can reduce a porn star’s viagra- and yohimbe-fueled hard-on to an inverted micropenis in less than a second. Whole villages of gnomes have been found ‘twixt your enormous buttocks. When you pinch a loaf, sewage treatment plants go code red. Your clitorii can fill hot dog buns. Your manboobs can spray milk from ten yards. You sicken me. You sicken everyone. Admit it, you even sicken yourselves. For shaaaaaaaaaaaame.

PS Since lower class women are fatter than upper class women, (smart ladies know what matters in the big picture), it behooves all men of taste who care about preserving pleasing female forms to engage in noblesse oblige, before the habits of the lessers percolate upward and become the habits of the betters, or what zee French call noblesse obese. There used to be a grand Iron Junk tradition where higher class men would scavenge lower class women for their pretty secretaries and nurses, because upper class women tend also to be battle-axes and egregious status whores. And the lower class women, for their part, loved that system. What cute, economically depressed girl wouldn’t relish an opportunity for love with a charming Gatsbian? But now, these men have nowhere to turn for tender female company; the lower classes have become untouchable, in the strictest sense of the word. So this is why the CH anti-fatass campaign is both pro-man *and* pro-woman… and pro-egalitarian! Making lower class women attractive again will help break down class divisions. Never let it be said the Oracles of the House of Heartiste aren’t generous of heart and willing to share their bounty with the rabble.

Read Full Post »

We’re Gonna Need A Bigger Hamster

Sometimes, in moments of deep reflection, I wonder… just what delusional depths can the typical American woman plumb? I thought I’ve seen it all… attack lawyers bitching off the shoulder of sensitive niceguys… I watched cockblocks glower in the bar near the target babe. All those delusions will be spun in time, like hamsters on wheels. Time to self-deceive.

But now I see there is more out there. A bigger, better, faster hamster. A rodent so enormous on a wheel spinning so violently it creates its own black hole of irrationality, sucking in logic, reason and common sense to an event horizon doom.

Behold: The Hamster of Hamsters. The Mother of All Rodents. The MOAR you know… the more you despair that America is in the grips of a virulent, and wholly undeserved, narcissism determined to sink the nation ship with the utmost alacrity.

The beast hungers:

In that sense, vanity is yet another stick with which people are beaten — because women are told, constantly and without any real deviation from the message, that they have to look a certain way to be worthwhile, to be of value. To be REAL, in some sense.

This is, of course, utter bullshit. Because any woman who identifies as a woman is a real woman. There’s a lot of different ways that can look and they are all valid.

“Because any woman who identifies as a woman is a real woman.” Is this the ur-tautology? Or just the usual gibberish from the usual losers unable to cope with the revelations from clear thinking?

Leaving aside for the moment any presumption this particular breed of hamster vessel knows what she means by the word “valid”, it is absolute falsehood that all women have value no matter what they look like. A morbidly obese land whale has almost zero romantic value to nearly all men. A woman who is so disgustingly fat she ceases to retain even the merest shimmer of womanly shape is a female of very low physical value.

Her post seems melancholy to me in some ways, caught and struggling in the web of the social expectations that are thrust upon women.

Expectations exist because we are biological machines with biologically-based desires that react to specific body types. When those body types deviate from the desirous norm, we recoil as if we have seen a monstrous creature of the nightmare world.

if you are fat and you accept your body as it is, you are often bombarded with “Your fat!” (they never get the “you’re” right)  [ed: female humor] in email and comments and sometimes in person, as though you need the reminder because you’ve risen above your station.

If you accept your fatness, then you wouldn’t be bothered by people calling you fat. Is Donald Trump bothered when people say to him “You’re rich!”?

One of the best things I ever did for myself was to consciously make an effort not to judge people’s bodies.

Here comes the patented feminist self-contradiction within two sentences…

I do not care if your hipbones stick out.

But you noticed, didn’t you, Judgy McJudgemytwoextrabeefpattiesonasesameseedbunfueledwideloadass? The “hipbones stick out” descriptive excess is classic fatgirl speak for healthy weight, slender women, hidden under an obfuscating layer of plausible deniability that she “does not care” about those skinny girls and their jutting hipbones. Fat shits just love their propaganda that the world is about to be overrun with thin women on the verge of mortal anorexia.

Your body is awesome.

Yes it is.

I do not care how many chins you are packing.

Men do. And that’s what matters.

Your body is awesome.

No it’s not.

So is mine.

I’ll be the judge of that.

Awesome, indeed. Awesomely rotund.

“So is mine.”

It’s like listening to a small child argue. The mind on display here is underdeveloped like a child’s, but at least children have the excuse that their brains are still a work in progress. This is an adult woman talking like this. Acting out like a petulant brat that reality is what she says it is, and so there!

“There’s no place like my body. There’s no place like my body. There’s no place like my body. Yay, I’m happy with myself again!”

If you wish for it hard enough… well, you’re still a fat crap.

My vanity — when I am not compromised by my own intrinsic self-doubt (two days before my period, like CLOCKWORK) — is of the traditional form. My vanity is in thinking that I am absolutely worth being looked at, absolutely worth being seen. Absolutely worth thinking of myself as talented.

Correction: You’re not worth being looked at, you’re not worth being seen, and goshdarnit, you’re absolutely not worth thinking of yourself as an alternative and equally worthy female form. And this fact will not change no matter how much you lie to yourself otherwise. It will never change until you change the fact itself, by losing weight and slimming down to a reasonable facsimile of a sexy woman. In your case, the fact itself looks to weigh about 100 unnecessary pounds.

Vanity is distasteful in people who at least can claim some justification for feeling vain; we may not like it but we understand. In contrast, vanity is farcical delusion in people who don’t possess a scintilla of real world evidence to justify their bloated self-regard. The vanity untethered from reality is a joke; it’s Generation Lookatme! on uppers, their heaving bulk held aloft by a helium-filled entitlement complex. The best thing for society would be to have these BubbleBoars disabused of their fanciful self-delusions. Of course, it might take more than a few stabs with the soulkilling shiv until they get the message. There’s a lot of ego blubber to cut through.

I wouldn’t call that inflated. I wouldn’t call that undue. I’d call that actually having a pretty good grasp on being confident that I am, in fact, a worthwhile human being.

A person’s actual worth is inversely proportional to the efforts she takes to convince herself of her worth.

Other than the death fatness and the blue hair, I’m actually pretty conventional in my appearance, according to the social beauty imperative: I am white, I have a clear complexion (mostly), I have thick curly hair on my head but little body hair. I have an hourglassy shape.

You’d have to be sober-ish to think she’s hourglassy. Hey, I thought all body types are worthwhile? She shouldn’t preen about her clear complexion and hourglassy shape. Is there something wrong with hirsute women?

I am still going to advocate for everyone being at least a little vain though. Because “pretty” should not be the sole criterion for “worth being seen.” Because “pretty” is actually kind of a bullshit narrow construct.

The hamster has gone suborbital.

In fact, when people who do not fit into the effing oppressive beauty standard that is going on in America are vain as hell, I love it.

“I am a beautiful, healthy woman. Fuck you, dad!”

I think it’s powerful and subversive and political and awesome.

No, it’s just retarded and transparent and silly and self-defeating.

Because fuck those folks who think you don’t deserve to be seen.

The problem is that there’s too much of you to see.

It’s worth clarifying as well — not only is no one required to participate in beauty culture,

No one is required to participate in breathing oxygen, either, but there are consequences if you choose non-participation.

you are still awesome and worth being seen [for the degenerate freak show you are] if you reject beauty culture entirely.

ftfy.

If vanity is about excessive pride in our appearance, well, let’s just say I’ll be damned before I look in a mirror and hate what I see just to avoid being vain.

Interesting reasoning. I didn’t know the opposite of vanity was self-hatred.

My only caveat regarding the awesomeness of vanity? Your intense and concentrated awesomeness does not mean other people are not also awesome.

I bet she doesn’t think Todd Akin is awesome.

Jane and the xoEditors actually have a whole new project in the works that will celebrate all things VAIN. It’s pretty hella exciting.

I used to think that setting these insipid behemoths straight would require nothing more than ignoring them. The sexual market is cruelly indifferent to one’s constructed vanity, and fat shits would find in short order how unloved they were by men with options. But now, I dunno… cold indifference doesn’t seem to be doing the trick. Pointing and ridiculing is the next step in the campaign against raging American female egotism, and if that doesn’t work, well, there’s always diabetes, chopped feet, and early death.

Why do I put crazed egomaniacs like this woman on the breaking wheel? What’s the point of being so mean to someone who is probably nice to puppies when she isn’t eating them? I do it to set an example for the others. To push back against evil ideologies that infect innocent minds. And make no mistake, this woman’s message is evil. If other women who had not yet ruined their bodies by blowing up to her repulsive dimensions took her words to heart, they might feel entitled to let themselves go, figuring that their body is beautiful no matter what it looks like, and shame on you for saying differently.

And then the world would be a little bit sadder, a lotta bit uglier, and a hella lot fatter. And that would be decidedly un-awesome.

Read Full Post »

Fat Women And Fat Men Aren’t Equally Repulsive

Marriage is more satisfying when the wife is thinner than her husband.

[M]en who had a higher Body Mass Index than their wives (calculated from a person’s height and weight) were a little happier at the outset than those who had the same or a lower BMI. This advantage was maintained throughout the period.

What is more it appears it’s not just the husband who is happier if his wife is thinner.

How heavy the husband was didn’t play a role in happiness at the start of the study for the wives.

However, by the end of year four, the wives whose BMI was lower than that of their husbands were significantly happier than those who had the same BMI, or a higher one.

These finds held true even when other factors such as depression and income level were ruled out.

The researchers from the University of Tennessee speculated that physical attractiveness was a more important quality in a partner to younger men.

This is yet more evidence that physical appearance in a potential mate is less important a criterion for women than it is for men. Fat chicks suffer a graver penalty in the sexual marketplace than do fat men. And slender babes who fulfill the sexual polarity directive — that is, women who are more naturally feminine and relish their roles as such within relationships — are happier than women who look and act more like their men.

Is there anything feminism ISN’T wrong about?

Read Full Post »

Spot The Fatty

Courtesy of a contribution from GLPiggy’s comment section, here’s a photo of an office Christmas party circa 1925. Can you spot the fatties in this picture?

You’ve gotta strain a bit to find her (second row, seated, in front of tree), because she’s squeezed between a roomful of thin women (and thin men for that matter).

That’s right folks, there is exactly ONE bona fide fatty in this office party from 1925. One.

Now let’s look at the typical American office party circa 2012.

Where is everybody? The dark side of the fat chick’s moon?

Most of the women in the 1925 pic are dogs (except that cute one sitting next to the desk in the striped blouse and flirty smile), but at least they’re thin. Can the same be said for the modern American office party? Not if the overweight and obese percentages are any indication. You’re more likely, based on the numbers, to have to navigate around 70% of your female co-workers to get to the 30% who aren’t biodiesel dirigibles.

And people wonder why the (white) fertility rate is dropping like a stone. Would you want to have regular sex with a shambling mound? Stick around to help her raise the fat brat? Didn’t think so.

In the spirit of the holiday season, her’e some dietary advice from the NIH:

Read Full Post »

Why So Many Vegetarians Are Dumpy

I’m not surprised by how many out-of-shape vegetarians waddle among us. Since most vegetarians are women, this means I’m not surprised by how many self-declared vegetarian women are dumpy. The media-pushed image of the slender vegetarian woman is far from the reailty.

Is it because fat women are more likely to adopt vegetarianism to lose weight? No. Fat women are more likely to continue eating whatever is put in front of them. The real reason so many self-righteous and putatively health-conscious vegetarian women are chubby is because they substitute their hated meat with a much worse food-based product: sugar.

You may as well call vegetarians “sugartarians”, or “pastatarians”. Spend any amount of time eating with a vegetarian and you’ll see that they don’t actually eat all that many vegetables. What they eat in place of meat is a lot of pasta, chips, noodles, rice, beans, cereal (oh lord, do they eat a lot of cereal), bread and pretzels. In other words, they have replaced an under-appreciated fat and protein source with an inordinate amount of simple, high glycemic carbs. Result: bloat.

Vegetarians should get off their high horses and realize that the pasta they shovel down their gullets is worse for their health and looks than the T-bone steak they claim is the root of evil and the gender pay gap. A healthy meat-eater like a paleo dieter probably eats more real veggies than a zealous vegetarian. And they look better, too. That suggests one tactic for moving the lemming sex away from a stupid status whoring trend: impress upon women how their sanctimonious diet is ruining their looks. They’ll stampede for the exits.

Read Full Post »

Comment Of The Week: One-Way Judgment

Hugh G. Rection correctly notes:

Women basically want a monopoly on judgement. She can judge reject men as she chooses, but men are not free to reject/judge her or her choices, ever.

This is eau de feminism. The very essence of the grievance whore industry. The animating lifeblood of the degenerate freak mafia and crass SWPL status whores.

Freedom to judge for me, but not for thee.

And as if right on cue, here’s an indignant fat anchorwoman (meme alert!) spending four minutes of televised air time complaining about being bullied for her big beautiful womanliness by a viewer who wrote her a rather innocuous letter lightly chastising her for not trying to lose weight. (“There’re no bones in the ass, lady!”) Spot the irony: she judges the letter writer for being a “bully” while she herself should remain exempt from all judgment. I’ve got real news for ya, lady. You are a bad role model for young girls. Fatness is a character defect, and your inability to lose weight after years of television exposure is a stretch mark on your soul.

(I do like how the femcunt foot soldierettes tried to “out” the letter writer and discovered he is a muscular athletic bicyclist. Immediately they were robbed of hours of joyous but totally irrelevant ego assuaging snark.)

Runner-up comment winner award goes to Matt Parrott:

Before civilization added multiple layers of complexity, there were essentially two super-categories of humans:

Environmentally Selected Humans: These are populations which survived in low population deserts, rainforests, tundra, remote islands, and such. For them, the greatest obstacles to mating were freezing to death, dying of thirst, being eaten by a tiger, or whatever. They had relatively high testosterone levels, robust skeletal structures, and long penises. Why our common ancestor had a long penis is an important question which I’m going to set aside for now.

Sexually Selected Humans: These are populations which survived in the fertile temperate habitats, especially the major river valleys and deltas. For them, the greatest obstacles to mating were other males, increasingly intelligent and vicious males hellbent on killing you and taking your wife, mom, sisters, and daughters for themselves.

The human brain isn’t large enough to decipher differential calculus and program Facebook apps because that’s environmentally adaptive. It’s not. It’s environmentally maladaptive…a massive calorie sink, a nightmare for child delivery, and a huge vulnerability in terms of instincts becoming secondary to whichever abstractions are dumped into it.

It’s our anthropocentric vanity that lulls us into seeing environmental selection for intelligence as natural…despite common sense and the record clearly demonstrating otherwise. The only (and I do mean only) reason human intelligence exists as it does is as an instrument of male territorial aggression. The human male brain is designed by and for war. And human females have massive brains for the same reason human males have nipples.

Don’t worry, I haven’t forgotten about penises. I’m merely sketching up the background hypothesis so that the answer makes sense.

Male territorial aggression in the most fertile (and therefore populous) regions was ubiquitous before the transition to sedentary civilization, resulting in a chronic gender imbalance. While polygyny ensured that all fertile females would be mated with, neoteny and attractiveness determined whether a female would manage to mate with the most powerful (intelligent and therefore militarily successful) males.

The acute selection for neoteny and feminine attractiveness selects against testosterone and other “manliness factors”, including, incidentally and accidentally, male penis size. It’s one of those gender selection trade-offs, like how women who are busty have brothers with bitch tits.

1. The greater the percentage of temperate zone ancestry, the smaller the penis.

2. The more recent the temperate zone ancestry, the smaller the penis.

The final wrinkle with this is that Caucasians have rather recently stumbled across a series of adaptations which serve as misleading indicators of neoteny: white skin, blue eyes, and blonde hair. This changed the equation, easing the selective pressure on the “master switch” of testosterone which was evolution’s only option for making Asian females more attractive. White females could retain the lantern jaws, broad shoulders, and other less feminine features because they had cheat codes which made them appear more feminized than they actually are.

The comment section on this renegade outpost of the internet may be more like a lunchroom food fight than a roundtable of erudite punditry, but one thing you can say about CH commenters is their willingness to tackle tough, impolite subjects with truly open minds. You won’t find gems like this one illuminating the pages of the Washington Trope or the NewYorkBetaTImes. Or National Review.

Read Full Post »