Why is physical apperance such an issue

You are such the jokester! Thanks for the good laugh.

One of the reasons is cultural. Larger bodies are believed to indicate better health/heartiness and, in particular, that one is not suffering from AIDS, which is killing thousands of people in some areas of Africa.

wow... didn't know so many ppl would find my little rant interesting... for me it was a combination of lifestyle, genetics, and alot more deeper issues... I'm now fit healthy and within the accepted "standards" of not being labelled "fat" .... but my point is... I still have the same personality... that for so long many didn't want to know about... I apologize if i have offended anyone

of the fact that excessive consumption of food and lack of exercise causes obesity and that it's everything else under the sun...did you ever study Physics in school,if so what does it have to say about energy(calories) does energy have to have a source ? can energy be created from nothing ? The estimates are that about 3 % of the obese population can attribute even a small portion of their weight to any"medical condition"...have you ever wondered why it seems as if 100% claim memebership in that 3%

I can't help myself...

Intentional inflammatory remark... read only if you have any sense of humour.

Perhaps those people with larger bodies don't have aids because they're not as desirable to men over there and thus are not having sex with those who could give them aids?



On that note, I'm going to bed, 6:30am is late (early) enough for me, besides I'm three posts in this thread in a row, it's like I'm talking to myself now.

You expect that early human beings would notice on a large scale that women with smaller breasts, medium breasts, large breasts produce all kinds of different amounts of milk and different nutritional values? You think that humans throughout history until the more recent modern day kept records of any of this stuff? Perhaps taking an anthropology course will enlighten you as to how little we know of history by the simple fact that most of history was passed down verbally, and much of what was actually written has been destroyed by time, war, and various other factors. I think it's more than reasonable to think "Bigger boobs, more milk." The simple male mind equates "Bigger = More"

A bigger bag, carries more things.
A bigger bucket, carries more water.
A bigger breast, must have more milk.

If "contemporary" man as our respected poster NathanCM is referred to, believed that bigger breasts = more milk why would historic or pre-historic man think differently? And before you come back with an argument of "Society has taught him to think that way." May I point out that our learned friend NathanCM did not seem to know that bigger breasts didn't necessarily mean more milk. I highly doubt that society stuck that in his head. Perhaps society (being North American society) has put an emphasis on larger breasts = better (I blame Texas, where bigger is better hah) and perhaps our learned friend has been influenced by society towards that disposition but society has not told him that early man did or did not think that bigger breasts meant a better chance of successfully raising offspring. Thus you cannot state with any degree of certainty that men throughout the ages have not thought in the way described by NathanCM.

Of note, I actually prefer smaller breasted women to some extent. I'm happy with A or B cups generally, that is normally the size of breast that most of the women have who's overall body type I prefer. Perhaps I have broken the mold somewhat. That said, I am still attracted to larger breasts to some extent, which makes one wonder if there isn't something biological going on in my head.

The research being referred to neardc are tests where infants were tested for the amount of time their gaze would linger on different faces and the length of time they stared at "attractive" faces was higher than the amount of time on less attractive faces. Ugly faces caused negative responses such as turning away or crying. These were newborns who had never even gone home with their parents yet. Still in the hospital....

....The ratio, which is actually based on the "golden ratio," is found throughout nature and was first analyzed by Greek philosophers (although other cultures noticed it as well but didn't work it out mathematically as far as I know). And there really isn't much in the way of variation between cultures. A woman could be 5'6", 200 lbs., and still maintain that ratio with enough muscle mass and exercise. It's not the weight that men are looking at. It's the shape. We have thousands of years of art from thousands of cultures which all confirm this basic "ideal" of beauty. It wasn't something the artists were taught at some global art school.....

....There are certainly aspects of attraction that are learned, this is true....There are, however, attraction mechanisms that are completely inborn. There are biological components to how we see the world.

You expect that early human beings would notice on a large scale that women with smaller breasts, medium breasts, large breasts produce all kinds of different amounts of milk and different nutritional values? You think that humans throughout history until the more recent modern day kept records of any of this stuff? Perhaps taking an anthropology course will enlighten you as to how little we know of history by the simple fact that most of history was passed down verbally, and much of what was actually written has been destroyed by time, war, and various other factors. I think it's more than reasonable to think "Bigger boobs, more milk." The simple male mind equates "Bigger = More" [snipped for brevity....]

I can always hit them over the head with a rolling pin if the need should arise later!