Tuesday, February 21, 2012

Is Ultra-Thin Ultra-Sexy?

                   All right, so I've met some girls who eat ridiculously low amounts of food so they can get thinner than they already are. Many of these girls were already thin and were eating something like a yogurt a day and that sort of shit. They get the feeling that being skeletal like many current hollywood movie stars are right now will make them more beautiful. Well, I'd beg to differ, and here's why. 

WE DO NOT LIKE THIS SHIT.
                  First and foremost, when a girl loses weight, she doesn't only lose stomach fat (which is the first thing they lose), but when they've lost all that, the boobs and derriere start to go too. THAT SUCKS. Why? Because they're the reason we men live. All right, maybe not so much, but still, they're stuff that we're not willing for you to lose. 

Some sideboob would rock, but as you can see, THERE ARE NO BOOBS.
                   Also, weight isn't everything. If your BMI says you're obese, and people tell you you look fine, well, it's because you look fine. Especially if you work out. You're going to be heavier because of muscle mass. I'll give you an easy example. Let's compare Keira Knightley and Sofía Vergara. Now, both of them are beautiful. Damn it, if any of them asked anybody out they wouldn't say no (a damn girl wouldn't say no). Still, after looking at Keira's body, and Sofía's, you'll quickly realize who would be a better baby bearer (if you know what I mean). Why? EVOLUTION, BABY!

This here's what we men call a suitable mate.
                    We men, of course, look for the most fertile women with the best genes. Sure, you can be the strongest, most handsome bastard, but you risk the baby being a skinny a fucker as the mother (say Keira) would be. But, if you had him with Vergara, you'd know that the baby wouldn't be skinny, and you'd know it. It'd be fucking beautiful! Why? Sofía has better genes. Besides, she has wider hips, which is something we notice. That lets us know the baby will come out all right. 

What I'm implying is that the hourglass figure is sexier than a plank-shape figure.

                      Of course, we don't think about evolutionary shit when we're looking for a mate. We think about her face, the boobs and the ass. Because, like I said, those are beautiful. I mean, seriously, we men wouldn't have it any other way. Also, if you want proof that curvier women are more successful, then, how about some examples? Marilyn Monroe was a size 12, and was still one of America's most beautiful women. You've got Sofía, Kim's not so bad either. Jennifer Lopez got her fame because of her big, voluptuous behind.

Why? BECAUSE IT'S BEAUTIFUL, SO SHUT UP!

                      Now, don't take going curvy as far as Adele does. You don't want to become one single curve. You want to be a big lump followed by a small curve or flat and then followed by another bump from behind. Men don't care how big your abs are, as long as they're not too big and the rest is in good proportion. Take Kat Dennings for example. She's got a great body. She's about 1.65 and weighs almost 90 kilograms (that's my weight, and I'm a dude), so as you can see, weight is not the problem. It's simply being healthy enough. 

Short, heavy, and still goddamn beautiful.
                       So, I hope this proves a point. Girls, don't worry about how much you weight, you have to care about how good you look. The way to look good is to be healthy, so be healthy. That'll give you the figure you want. Just, don't overdo it.