Spot The Manatee

An American woman in Florida was cited for riding a manatee, which is illegal.

😯 Poor woman. She’ll drown with that sea cow on top of her.

One of those two is an endangered species. The other is an invasive species. Either way, naturalists lose.

Read Full Post »

Beta Males Settle For Fat Chicks

Beta males are more anxious, fidgety, alert and quicker to react to local disturbances than are alpha males. We know this from observing it in the field, and now from various scientific studies examining the phenomenon. The short of it is, if you’re an alpha male, you don’t need as wide a margin of safety as beta males do, for you are less likely than they are to get cold-cocked, challenged or to lose a fight or dominance contest should one erupt. This lower need for safety precautions allows the alpha male to relax in his environment and to assume open, welcoming postures that are alluring to women. It follows that beta males, by practicing and adopting the cool, aloof mannerisms of the alpha male, can attract more and better women. Body language improvement is a fundamental tenet of game, and it works so effectively at heating up interest from women that some men might be tempted to call it magic.

Beta males, then, are in a constant state of heightened anxiety; also known as being stressed out. The world is a dangerous place, especially for beta males. If you feel stressed out all the time, like you’re losing control of your life or your surroundings, odds are good you are a beta male.

Now science comes along, trotting in like a merry prankster, to prove, albeit for those with a keen eye for reading between the lines, that beta males — i.e., stressed males — are more likely than relaxed, confident, self-satisfied alpha males to settle for the losers of womanhood.

Increased stress in men is associated with a preference for heavier women, according to research published Aug. 8 in the open access journal PLOS ONE.

The researchers, led by Viren Swami of the University of Westminster in London, compared how stressed versus non-stressed men responded to pictures of female bodies varying from emaciated to obese.

They found that the stressed group gave significantly higher ratings to the normal weight and overweight figures than the non-stressed group did, and that the stressed group generally had a broader range of figures they found attractive than the non-stressed group did.

These results, the authors write, are consistent with the idea that people idealize mature morphological traits like heavier body size when they experience an environmental threat such as stress.

The researchers go on to speculate that stressed men gravitate (heh) to fat chicks because those women are perceived as being better able to survive periodic famines, and to have higher social status that allows them to afford more food.

Tidy speculation that toes the feminist line, but I’ll tell you the powerhouse knockout punch this study really delivers:

Stressed men are beta males with limited mating market options who learn to increase their chances of getting laid by widening their field of view (double-wide heh) to include fatter chicks who themselves have limited options and are thus easier to bed.

Why are stressed men gimped in the sexual market? Women don’t want to be around anxious, stressed men. Women prefer the company of relaxed, self-assured men; these men are signaling that they have the resources, and the ability to get more resources should the need arise, that women value in potential mates. Thin, beautiful women have the highest value, and the most options, of all women, so they are the ones most likely to adhere to very tough standards and to act on their preference for large and in-charge alpha males.

Are beta males *constitutionally* more attracted to fat chicks when they’re stressed? Probably not. What men find attractive in women — which doesn’t deviate much from the universal preference for a 17-23 BMI and a 0.7 waist-hip ratio — is pretty much set by conception, and then later by that first thermonuclear blast of hindbrain hormones that floods our systems at puberty. Recall back to that time you got a surprise “what the hell is this?” boner from staring at the teenage red-headed girl’s tight tush and narrow waist. Was that boner preprogrammed by cultural cues to rise on command? Or did it just happen on its own, intrinsic to your being, immune to external suasion, summoned from the depths of your primordial subconscious to lurch your body into spasms of delight?

Stressed out betas don’t prefer fat chicks to thinner chicks; (as the study showed but the researchers… ahem… chose to paper over in their conclusion, stressed betas actually gave the same high scores as relaxed alphas gave to the thin chicks. The difference is that alpha males did not over-inflate (triple bank shot heh) the attractiveness of the fatter chicks). What stressed beta males prefer is the inclusion of a larger (fourth heh?) pool of lower value women rightly perceived by these betas as being easier for them to get than hotter, thinner chicks.

Once you remove the stressor from the lives of these beta males, they go right back to preferring slender babes. You could say that a happy man is a man who hates the sight of fat chicks. I’m sure fat chicks will be pleased to learn that they can clean up with unhappy, neurotic men.

So that is the brutal truth this study confirms for those of us who have lived a day in our lives and witnessed happening over and over among real human beings instead of the opposite that is claimed to happen by internet shut-ins and cocooned, deluded feminists:

Maxim # 23: Limited options = looser standards.

When life is going well for a man, he demands the best for himself. The best will always be slim, pretty, young women. When life is shitting on a man, he reaches out to fellow losers with whom he can share his lonely love. The losers will always be fat, ugly, and/or older women. His ego then does the job of convincing his higher order brain functions that the fat chick he’s plowing kinda has a cute face in the right light: total darkness.

Read Full Post »

Fat Chicks Flaunt It, Expose Themselves To Everlasting Torment

Fat chicks are getting uppity lately. You’ve got your NAAFA (National Association for the Advancement of Fat Assery). Your fatkinis. Your slut pride parades aka fat slut pride parades. Your proud fatties wearing clothes made for thin girls. And pretty much an entire media industrial complex allied, in word if not in deed, with the fat pride/acceptance/delusion movement.

I, for one, welcome our new fat flaunting underlords. Putting themselves out there in showy, ritualistic displays of unmerited pride, their bulbous folds cresting like wind-whipped seas and their triple chins held aloft like war banners, makes for a tempting array of overinflated egos. Proud and loud fat chicks are the morbidly obese equivalent of the Iraqi soldiers fleeing from Kuwait: plump targets for my GPS-guided jeering.

As long as I’m here to protect the earth from the assault against beauty by the horde army of gaping pieholes, the fattie who dares to stand tall and jiggle her blubber indignantly will face the point blank precision of my cruelest ridicule. Sweep the cankle.

Exhibit A: This monster formerly known as a human being, who happily informs the world of her “sexercise” program for shedding imaginary fractions of a pound off her 600 pound frame.

Why is this Jabba given media airtime? Why does it feel comfortable talking about its disgusting sex life with the general public? In a saner time, beasts like it had a sense of humility, and self-preservation, even an understanding that they were frightening to children and had a duty to keep out of the public eye. They sequestered themselves in steel reinforced bedrooms, blinds drawn, until they either died alone or dieted down to a reasonably presentable weight. Now we get this:

“I sweat off loads of calories,” 600-pound Pauline Potter revealed in an interview with UK magazine Closer this month. “I call it ‘sexercise.’”

Potter, 47, became the Guiness World Record holder for heaviest woman last year when she weighed in at 700 pounds, but she’s managed to lose nearly 100 pounds in the last year by rekindling her romance with her ex-husband Alex.

Fucking ugh. You read this stuff and try as you might, your brain can’t help meandering to visualizing what shoggoth sex must look like. Is the fupa lifted and propped with a cane before penetration? Does the stank from cheesy crevices cause temporary blindness and retching? Does a hobbit make its home in her vagina? Just HOW BIG must this guy’s dick be to plow through feet of blubber to reach the wet spot? Speaking of him, how does he get it up? At sufficient levels of grossness, a man’s penis will actually retract into a protective shell behind the pubic bone. A male porn star jacked on viagra and yohimbe and fluffed by a team of sugar-lipped supermodels would shrivel to the size of a speck at the first sight of this gelatinous cube.

“I hadn’t had sex in three years, but we did it six times!” she told the magazine, adding they now make love between two and seven times per day. “He took charge as I couldn’t move much, but he was so attentive.”

He took charge. “Honey, be a dear and roll to your right so I can dislodge this pot roast from your thighs.”

“My bed is strengthened and, although I can’t buy sexy lingerie, I drape a nice sheet over me.”

😆

Though she already weighed 400 pounds by the time she gave birth to her son, Potter said she binge ate when she and her husband divorced and ended up packing on the pounds.

Her son:

But Alex still thought her size was sexy – despite the occasional logistical issue.

“It’s hard to position her and find her pleasure spots as she has a lot of fat in the pelvic area,” he told the magazine. “But it turns me on knowing she’s satisfied. Although once, when she got on top, I couldn’t breathe.”

😆 😆

What kind of “man” would find this sexy?

A middle-aged lesbian!

Exhibit B: A blog by two fat chicks who videotape themselves eating mass quantities of food to ostensibly piss off healthy thin people.

You’d be mad at the world too, if everyone vomited when they saw you naked.

Exhibit C: Fat chick wails about, get this, “thin privilege”. The yuks just keep on coming.

Thin privilege is turning down the air conditioning without ever thinking of the fatter people in the room who aren’t nearly as cold as you are.

Thin privilege is assuming yours is the default body: your comforts and discomforts are default; your width and weight are the defaults.

Dear fattie,

There’s a reason why thin, healthy people are privileged over disgusting fat fucks like yourself.

Yours in rendering soap from your lard,

Tyler Durden

ps would you like a wafer thin mint to go with your bison on a stick?

Fatties, like their loser feminist cousins, are stuck in a matrix of pure, distilled self-delusion. They know how people look at them with derision and disgust. They know how men ignore them and thin women pity them. They know how unhealthy they are and how gross they look, even to other fatties. But instead of doing what it takes to slim down and become normal, they choose to rail against normalcy, to elevate the ugly and denigrate the beautiful, and to try to retrofit reality and human nature to accommodate their weakness and repulsiveness.

You see, fatties, your pain is self-inflicted. Your sloth and gluttony, vices which are within your control to tame, are your ruin. You have no one else to blame for your miserable existences than yourselves. Concocting feelgood fantasies of overbearing patriarchies and thin privilege isn’t gonna save you from your real enemy — your own disfigured souls.

And, FYI, plastering your porcine carcasses with tattoos, piercings, and Sharpie ink isn’t going to distract people from your ugliness, an ugliness that is objective and real because it violates ancient evolutionary preferences for healthy, slender, fertile women. Fat is the physical embodiment of a flawed character, and your twisted, self-annihilating mentality is on display to be gawked at by the whole world. A gawking which I will assist with incalculable sadism, until you and your false pride skulk ignominiously back to the hovel from whence you erupted.

Think I’m exaggerating? Or that I’m a demon who doesn’t speak for the majority of humanity? Think again. Those polite commuters you see avoiding your gaze very day on the train are thinking this:

Strangers on a bus: Study reveals lengths commuters go to avoid each other

Kim found that race, class, gender and other background characteristics were not key concerns for commuters when they discovered someone had to sit next them. They all just wanted to avoid the ‘crazy person.’

“One rider told me the objective is just ‘getting through the ride’, and that I should avoid fat people who may sweat more and so may be more likely to smell,” said Kim. “Motivating this nonsocial behavior is the fact that one’s own comfort level is the rider’s key concern, rather than the backgrounds of fellow passengers.”

No one cares about your feelings, fatties. They just want to get away, far away, from your undulating rolls of blubber and your smell. Your campaigns and blogs and tumblrs and pride walks will never…

ever…

no, not even a tiny little bit…

alter this universal fact of human nature.

The only choice you have to win acceptance, real acceptance, is to put down the pride and push away from the table. That means living not by lies. But if lies are your stock in trade and your cultural weapon leading others down your benighted path of ugliness, then don’t be surprised when a stone cold bastard calls you out on them. The battlefield is total war and the frontline is everywhere. Whose side will you be on? Truth and beauty? Or lies and ugliness?

It’s funny, but I sometimes get neophytes ambling in this happy hunting ground wondering why I’m so relentlessly cruel to the losers in our midst. They never see the precipitating events. My sadism is not haphazard. The fattie who makes real efforts to lose weight, who doesn’t make excuses for her condition, and who doesn’t advocate for acceptance of her less than ideal shape, gets no shit from me. I gladly give words of encouragement to those who are making real efforts to slim down and better themselves.

It’s the liars and the deliberately delusional that I hate with a passion. The lords of lies. The traffickers of untruths. The propagandizers of poison. The ones who would take the beauty and truth that makes life worth living, and shit on it out of spite. If an equalist or a feminist or a fattie wants to come here and engage this proprietorship in good faith, with an open mind, she will earn my two minutes of mercy and polite indulgence. But if she comes in here, screeching and screaming and slandering in her first comment, like so many have done before, because she can’t believe what she is reading it so violates the PC norm she’s used to regurgitating, she should not be surprised when I unleash the wrath of a thousand hellhounds to tear at the tatters of her misshapen soul.

At the very least, she is made example of for the others. Plus, it amuses me.

Fat pride advocates would be wise to reflect on the sympathies that normal people give them when they know their place. The fattie who doesn’t flaunt her monstrousness and demand approval from her betters earns a measure of tolerance. People don’t hound fatties who keep their mouths shut and their bodies tastefully covered until dieting and exercise make them presentable again for public viewing. Humility, a virtue understood well by a much better people than our current crop of loser pride degenerates, is a lost art in the modern West. It’s high time it was rediscovered, and the waddles of the ululating tormented humbled as befits their decrepit station. A dose of humility might even motivate these sick freaks to improve their lives and rejoin the community of happy people.

ps:

Read Full Post »

Liberal Men And Fat Chicks

I’ve been meaning to read Jonathan Haidt’s new book “The Righteous Mind“, on the recommendation of many readers who say it is an epic synthesis of human morality that merges Darwinism with political ideology.

From a customer review at Amazon:

[A]ccording to Haidt’s and others’ research, there are at least six mental ‘modules’ that go into moral and poltical decisions, and it is difficult to argue that any one (or two or three) are more important than others. And they are: care/harm, fairness/cheating, loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, sanctity/degradation and liberty/oppression. Some people (often of the political left) care most about care/harm and fairness/cheating in their emphasis on egalitarian politics that aim to provide care for those in need and create fair rules in the sense that everyone, relatively speaking, starts on an ‘even playing field.’ Others (usually conservatives) have tempermants that focus on authority/suversion and loyalty/betrayal, focusing on maintaining or promoting institutions that foster some level of deference to authority (in legitimate hierarchies), and loyalty (whether to country, God, family, etc).

One point Haidt makes is that conservatives score stronger than liberals on the disgust (sanctity/degradation) module of morality. (Interestingly, liberals appear to have no ability to even relate to this aspect of human morality, whereas conservatives can relate, albeit with a weaker degree of intensity, to putatively liberal moral modules such as fairness and care.)

Conservatives feel stronger revulsion toward disgusting things than do liberals, who, apparently, like to wallow in shit, (or to reframe it in a nicer way: like to experience unique vistas). So when the conservative thinks about gay sex and the penis pushing hard into another man’s anus, he recoils with revulsion. The liberal merely shrugs his shoulders. Not a sermon, just a naughty thought.

Which brings me to pondering something critical to the maintenance of our nation’s infrastructure: do liberal men, with their higher threshold for disgusting things, tend to fuck fat chicks more often than conservative men fuck fat chicks? Is the liberal male more open than the conservative male to slumming it?

Have any of you readers noticed differences in the strictness or laxity with which your liberal and conservative friends hold their standards for opposite sex partners? Have you noticed if the libs you know like to dumpster dive with dirigibles more than you’d be comfortable doing? Have you noticed if the conservative men you know are more judgmental of fat chicks? Do your con or lib male friends date skinnier, hotter women?

This post is purely speculative, because personally, I have not noticed much of a difference between men of differing political persuasions in their willingness to tumble with a landfaring tanker that couldn’t be more parsimoniously explained by differences in sexual market value, rather than liberal comfort with or conservative distaste for the dung heap of humanity. Some leftie men I know, while they preach a good bit about beauty being subjective, are quite the unforgiving judgmental pricks when it comes down to decision time, and they make their choice for 0.7 waist-hip ratio slender babes (when they can).

On the other hand, the flabby swingers and dirty scenesters I’ve met were all, to a tee, left wing cranks. As are the postmodern aka smear menstrual blood on a canvas “””artists”””.

I wonder if Haidt addressed this pressing question in his book? If he did, his may be the best book ever written in the PC era. Kudos would go to him.

Now I can already hear the liberals who read this blog whining that disgust is a weak moral module that should have no impact on public policy or personal choice. Consenting adults, and all that. But the utility of disgust is underrated by the neckbeard crowd. Disgust helps uphold lofty norms, and demands the best of society’s members. Disgust makes lebensraum liveable, and raises the beauty aesthetic. Disgust protects a tribe against being overrun by beastly invaders.

Disgust, it could even be plausibly argued, created female beauty. Generations of men over the eons, sufficiently disgusted by ugly chicks and fat cows, have done their part to bang and reproduce with the best looking women, and that gift is bequeathed this day to us, their descendants, in the form of barely legal porn and hot Russian tennis minxes. If our ancestors had all been live-and-let-live liberals with a weak disgust reflex, we modern men might be hitting on hairy cavewomen with long, dangly breasts and anvil-shaped jaws that could shell walnuts.

I mean, if you can pick up a steaming shit without flinching, maybe you shouldn’t have too much say in local zoning laws.

I have a very strong disgust reflex, for those of you wondering. If I see even a tiny superfluous fold on a chick’s belly, I get my whiteboard pointer and poke the offensive fatty deposit a few times, until she takes the hint. Protractors and tape measures are often utilized to emphasize the teachable moment.

Related, here’s a good discussion on the morality of disgust, over at Mangan’s.

Read Full Post »

Chubby Chaser Olympics: The Most Special

A reader, whom I will assume for purposes of this post is not a troll, wrote:

I wanted to run a theory by you and get your thoughts, since a lot of what is said on your blog resonates with me. Awhile back you posted in “Do Fat Girls Get More Sex?” that 99 out of 100 men would choose a non-fatty over a fatty any day of the week. Now, don’t get me wrong – hogbeasts are a huge bonerkill for me – but (and I know this is anecdotal) I’ve known a LOT of men who profusely claim left and right that they prefer fatties. Your argument was that these guys are losers – and in the general case, I’d agree. But some of these guys have appeared, at least to me, to have a lot of game – they’ll flirt around with skinnier girls and the women will seem very interested. They’ll proceed to leave the hot girl and go home with some chubster.

First, I’d have a problem accepting your premise. I have not known a few men, let alone a lot of men, who claimed to prefer fatties. This sounds like feminist fantasy-speak, which is like Newspeak, except more implausible. Now, of the tiny number of men who I’ve come across who did claim they preferred fatties, all of them were nerdy, fat or possessed some other charmless personality flaw that would sufficiently account for their claimed preference. A classic case of inverted sour grapes as ever existed.

(Sour grapes is when a loser pretends that an unattainable hot chick is undesirable in some ridiculously unbelievable way to salve his ego. Inverted sour grapes is when a loser pretends that the ugly, fat chicks he can realistically get are the bees’ knees of beauty.)

As for these chubby chasers you “know” who supposedly “have game”, taking your word at face value, I have a few explanations:

1. They’re black men.

I don’t care who’s bothered by me mentioning this, if you’ve spent any time in mixed company or at da clubs, you can’t help but notice that black men, especially during end-of-night garbage hour, are the least discriminating race and will hump a fucking dirigible farting explosive helium gas if it meant getting their rocks off. For whatever reason — name your bogeyman: culture, genes, hormones — black dudes can seemingly get it up for the nastiest land whales a white or asian guy wouldn’t shake his flaccid dick at from ten meters. Does this mean black men *prefer* fat chicks? No. The mate choices of elite black men like actors and athletes attest to the fact that they will choose hot slender (dusky-white) babes when they can. But it does mean that, absent the choice, black men are more willing to spelunk belly folds and then rationalize it as a love for BBW, excuse me, curvy women.

(I do think, btw, that black men prefer a somewhat rounder, heftier rump on women. Baby got back, and all that. This is not the same as preferring a grotesque cottage cheese rippled fat rump roast.)

2. They’re men who missed out on the hottie and still have a leftover boner.

Let’s say these guys you know have game, and spent the night delighting slim girls with their charms. Sometimes, they aren’t going to close the deal. But their interactions with all those cute, thin chicks have left them with half-mast bonies, and now they are horny *and* halfway to ejaculating. In that state of groin, some men will be tempted to relieve themselves in chubsters who are 20 pounds overweight with egos which are 20 pounds underweight, and, more relevantly, who are easier to seduce. The men are already on an emotional high, so it’s a hop skip and jump away from positive nonsexual rapport with slender babes to negative sexual rapport with chubby chalupas. Younger men who have no state control are usually the worst perpetrators of the backup biggun bang.

3. They’re insecure men who lack the inner game to believe they really deserve the hotties.

This is my favorite explanation, because I have known men like this, and witnessed them in action. These are the guys who have great outer game, who can jive with the cute girls, get them pumped and laughing, and then….

booop booooop boooooooop

fizzle.

They lack the one necessary ingredient that separates the players from the poseurs: a rock solid belief in their value. They can’t close the deal when it matters. They know the tricks, and are socially savvy, and are probably pretty funny too, but when push comes to shove they balk and retreat to the demilitarized zone where they can practice their target shooting on 4s, 5s and 6s with no fear of territory loss. Why fat chicks? Think about this: One ONE-HUNDREDTH of the outer AND inner game you use on a hard 10 would be overkill on a chubby 4. The path of least resistance is an evil that some men will abide, and in doing so contribute to the plague of fat chicks thinking they will suffer no SMV consequences for their gluttony and sloth.

So my theory is that, evolutionarily, there might be something else going on here. What if this is an evolved response to cuckoldry? Fat women are, I’d wager, less likely to stray because they are inherently aware that they are sitting smack at the bottom of the SMV scale – and, of course, they get approached less. So, while it isn’t ideal to throw your seed into a fatty receptacle, it might be more likely to result in a child that is the product of your own genes. Perhaps some men have evolved to take advantage of this “benefit” in lieu of a different strategy?

Thoughts?

Your theory is interesting but I think my psychological (and biological) diagnoses above are more directly applicable. For your theory to have traction in the real world, we would have to presume the men who chubby chase are not, in fact, winners with game. Because winners with game would not be afraid of their women cuckolding them. Nor would they resort to fucking fat chicks when they have the goods to fuck hot thin chicks.

Losers, otoh, would be afraid of cuckoldry, at least subconsciously. So for your theory to hold water, chubby chasers would need to be low value men who correctly identify fat chicks as “sure things” from their gene’s-eye view. If anything, the greater likelihood of fat chicks to “accidentally” forget to use contraceptives (because they might not get the chance at sex again for a long while) mitigates against high value men risking a night of sloppy, ham-smashing passion with them.

Read Full Post »

Feminism Is Making Americans Fat

Yes, not only is feminism drawing mustachios on our women, turning them into pale facsimiles of men, the grimy loser ideology is also fattening Americans up for the pig roast. How so, you ask?

The obvious mechanism is through the concerted propaganda effort to elevate deviancy to a sainted virtue, and taint normalcy by reducing it to just another lifestyle choice. The growing (heh) fat acceptance movement is one such example of this emergent social experiment. Platitudes (“we’re all beautiful in our own way”) and shibboleths (“real women have curves!”) and outright lies (“men are culturally conditioned to prefer thin women”) are the feminist’s tools of the trade. All delivered in the dulcet tones of a screeching hyena.

But there’s another, more insidious, reason why feminism bears a heavy debt of responsibility for the American obesity epidemic: by haranguing women to enter the workforce, they encouraged them to leave the homeforce in droves. This mass exodus from the home resulted in fewer healthy, home-cooked meals for the family and more processed, high sugar, high GI insta-feed from the supermarket shelves and fast food reheateries as a substitute.

Mangan details this in his excellent post about supernormal stimuli:

And why do we eat fast food and sugar-laden food more now? The causes are complex, but do concern our political and social environment. I think that feminism, with all its attendant fallout, especially the entrance of women into the workplace, is one of the main social causes of the obesity epidemic. Because so many women work outside the home, the substitution of restaurant and convenience food for home-cooked meals has come to seem necessary for many people. These foods are precisely those that have greater reward value, and that is precisely because modern industrial food manufacturers have designed them to be so.

You want to reframe the national discourse so that feminism is killed dead before it has a chance to infect the next generation of hosts? Just tell a woman about to embark on a contorted feminist line of reasoning that feminism makes people fat. If you want to win hearts and minds, you’ve gotta hit ’em where it matters. And for women, it matters most in the size of their figures.

Read Full Post »

Do Fat Girls Get More Sex?

A reader whose contributions carry more weight than the offerings from the rabble emailed the following about fat chicks and the amount of sex they do, or do not, get:

[I]t is a consistent finding that fat women tend to have more, not less, sexual partners than thinner women.  Poor impulse control etc. So, that explanation for late female virginity seems totally implausible.

The reader is referring to a speculation I made in this post that higher virginity rates among educated women may be skewed by the ENLARGING population of fat chicks who have a harder time convincing men to rut with them. The study he links to finds evidence that fat girls have more “sexual encounters with men than [do] normal-weight women.”

I find this interesting because it contradicts other studies I have read that concluded the opposite. For instance, here’s one that found obese French women were 30% less likely than thin women to have had a sexual partner in the last year. (Maybe French men have more dignity? Or fat French women more shame? Either way, it proves the French are superior to Americans on at least one moral metric.)

So, are fat chicks getting laid more or less than sexier slender babes? Evolutionary theory regarding the evolved mating preferences of the sexes actually offers plausible explanations for both assertions to be true. On the one hand, we have plenty of evidence that men prefer fucking and dating young, slim, BMI 17-23, 0.7 waste-hip ratio women because these attributes signal that the women are maximally fertile, and thus more likely to pass on a man’s genes. Since men prefer these kinds of women, it stands to reason that fat chicks would attract less sexual interest from men, and experience greater rates of involuntary celibacy.

On the other hand, we can presuppose, using evo-psych theory, that fat women are more likely to put out quickly and to offer more sexual access (read: orifices) to men because that’s the only way they can compete with the better-looking thin women who tend to leverage their beauty by making men demonstrate more signs of investment before being permitted to tap that ass.

Of course, both mating market dynamics could be at work, but one more efficiently than the other. If, say, there are more fat women willing to go all the way right away than there are men unwilling to ever bang a fat chick, the overall trend will be towards fat chicks getting laid more than thin chicks. Plus, throw in the fact that the obese population of American women is nearing 50%, at which point the planet earth begins to wobble out of its orbit, and you could make a strong case that American men have highly constrained choices in the sexual market and are thus forced to choose between masturbation with their height-weight proportionate hands and dumping a shameful fuck in a smegma-ringed porkhole.

Another way a skewed desirable female market could affect the sexual encounter ratio between fat women and thin women is by making thin women so spectacularly high value that they are able to pretty much command the price at which they reward their sex. In practice, this means the few thin chicks will hold out for a long time until they find the alpha male willing to wait and buy and wait for a life-giving gulp from the oasis of their sexiness. In a roomful of slutty fat chicks, the cockteasing hourglass-shaped girl is queen.

Finally, a sexual market that is filled with fatties will tend to lessen the shame that each individual fatty feels about her grossness; c.f. the fatkini “revolution”. When you are one fatty in a sea of hotties, you will know the excruciating feeling of being an outcast and, at best, invisible to men; at worst, cruelly mocked by them. But when you are one fatty amongst many fatties, and the sexy chicks are in the minority, you won’t be an outcast. Your friends and those around you will be just like you. Strength in numbers means you will hold your triple chin high, and your gorilla gut out proudly, giving desperate men who, in a normal functioning market, wouldn’t deign to speak to you for a second, an unreasonable amount of shitty, entitled attitude. You will imagine your blubber is attractive to men because Cleon the methhead got really drunk and horny one night and wooed you with a compliment about your “big, beautiful titties.” You will feel no shame undressing before a man with the lights on.

None of this says anything about the *quality* of the relationships that fat chicks get. As the first study states:

“These are very objective measures,” she said of the current data. “It probably begs for more qualitative studies … to better understand the quality of relationships.”

That’s a nice way of putting it. Fat chicks might be getting a lot of sex, but they are probably not getting a lot of love, if we measure love by signs of male investment and length and intensity of commitment. And for women, happiness and a feeling of success at life is found in love, not sex, the latter of which holds hardly any value for women because it is so easy for them to get, relative to the hoops men have to jump through to get laid.

The question of whether fat chicks get more or less sex than slim chicks remains an open one. Unfortunately, I cannot contribute much in the way of anecdotal support for either hypothesis, because my interactions with fat chicks have been extremely limited. By choice. And isn’t that the crux of the whole debate? In a world of real options — real, attainable choice — 99 out of 100 men are going to choose the slender babe over the shambling she-hog

EVERY

TIME.

That’s how you put a self-professed, proud fatty fucker to the test. Forget what he says. If he is approached for sex by two girls, one fat and one thin, and no one’s watching him, he’ll bang the thin one. Naturally, in real life, he won’t have that choice, because most fatty fuckers are losers who have no chance with slender girls. The exceedingly few men who would choose the fatty over the slim girl are freak outliers that serve to prove the rule rather than discredit it.

What does this all have to do with game? In countries with more fat women, your game will have to be very tight indeed, if you don’t want to be put in a position of choosing between porn and beast mounting.

Read Full Post »