asd
The reason NeverDie is getting flamed is because he is stating his "opinion" as fact, and that opinion happens to be very objectionable, especially in this community.awp wrote:
NeverDie's opinion of "fat people are not attractive" is his opinion of what isn't an appealing body figure or preference. That's on topic, and people don't really have any business telling him otherwise.
Hahaha, I don't think of it as a bad thing, absolutely not.mathexpert9981 wrote:
inb4 plastic surgery.
That assumes that getting plastic surgery is an insecure behavior. I don't see how that is the case. But you are entitled to your biases.mathexpert9981 wrote:
I find that someone insecure enough to get plastic surgery is very unattractive, even if it doesn't look horribly artificial.
NEVERDIE ALWAYS LIESVext wrote:
Plastic surgery? "Those aren't boobs! THEY'RE LIES!!!!"
As long as you're smart enough to realize "looking good" is relative to each individual's preferences, then yeah I'd say soB12ad wrote:
Just like NeverDie, I think only a moron would disregard the attractive qualities of looking good.
strictly trolling without at least wrapping your post in a thin disguise of an argument is NOT ACCEPTABLED33d wrote:
NEVERDIE ALWAYS LIESVext wrote:
Plastic surgery? "Those aren't boobs! THEY'RE LIES!!!!"
Major consensus is that a well toned and fit body is the ideal look. There's people who even have sex with dogs, pigs, monkeys, and yes, fat people. Those people are not the norm and have obvious mental defects to certain extents.awp wrote:
As long as you're smart enough to realize "looking good" is relative to each individual's preferences, then yeah I'd say soB12ad wrote:
Just like NeverDie, I think only a moron would disregard the attractive qualities of looking good.
Yeah it does. You think evolution made it so that fat people are the ones with superior genetics? Of course not. There's a reason why everyone likes what they like, because it serves an evolutionary purpose. Anyone who's fat would have not been able to escape predators back in the day, hence why we have a preference for someone that's fit because that means they have higher survival value. Anyone that doesn't prefer that is going against their evolutionary programming, hence they're a defect. Simple as that. Either a defect or really desperate.awp wrote:
yeah but pop music is also popular/always on the radio etc and if you break its structure down, it's shit
just because the majority of people like something, it doesn't mean everyone who doesn't is "wrong" or "defective"
That may have been more relevant a couple hundred thousand years ago than it is now, but predators have kind of gone to the wayside. Fat people store heat better, so that has its own survival value, since some parts of the world are still cold.NeverDie wrote:
Anyone who's fat would have not been able to escape predators back in the day, hence why we have a preference for someone that's fit because that means they have higher survival value.
I'm pretty sure being a homosexual falls under going against evolutionary programming, and I'm pretty sure you're calling homosexuals defective. That makes your beliefs appear rooted in intolerance more than anything else, and that's going to make it hard for myself (and probably a few others) to take your words seriously. Like, not just the ones in this thread. Any of 'em.NeverDie wrote:
Anyone that doesn't prefer that is going against their evolutionary programming, hence they're a defect. Simple as that. Either a defect or really desperate.
Homosexuals ARE defective rofl. They wouldn't be here if their parents were homos too. Another thing you're also forgetting is that evolution takes course through millions of years. We are still the same biological entity that was here 100,000 years ago, we haven't changed at all. I just think everyone that's disagreeing with me is retarded and in plain denial, but in the end, I really don't care rofl. I'm not the one going to be screwing fatties and keep living in self-denial that, that's what I really want, it's everyone else in this thread with that mentality. Pretty sad one if you ask me, but hey to each his own. There's a good reason why people like that are the minority.awp wrote:
That may have been more relevant a couple hundred thousand years ago than it is now, but predators have kind of gone to the wayside. Fat people store heat better, so that has its own survival value, since some parts of the world are still cold.NeverDie wrote:
Anyone who's fat would have not been able to escape predators back in the day, hence why we have a preference for someone that's fit because that means they have higher survival value.I'm pretty sure being a homosexual falls under going against evolutionary programming, and I'm pretty sure you're calling homosexuals defective. That makes your beliefs appear rooted in intolerance more than anything else, and that's going to make it hard for myself (and probably a few others) to take your words seriously. Like, not just the ones in this thread. Any of 'em.NeverDie wrote:
Anyone that doesn't prefer that is going against their evolutionary programming, hence they're a defect. Simple as that. Either a defect or really desperate.
Don't even bother. NeverDie has no fucking idea what he's talking about.Pokebis wrote:
I still don't get how me getting a boner for a fat bitch and me not-getting a boner for a skinny bitch is denial.
Also, with all this talk of evolution, I think I'm going to pull creationism into the mix and say your entire backup argument is bullshit.
And, as you say, being fat isn't hereditary, and while habits and some features may follow in with children the child isn't necessarily inferior genetically than if the mother was skinny.
Come at me bro.
genetic evolutionNeverDie wrote:
evolution takes course through millions of years
I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with you on any of your points, I am just here to be a pedantic and mention wisdom teeth.NeverDie wrote:
We are still the same biological entity that was here 100,000 years ago, we haven't changed at all.
Jakes on you, I have superior genetics. I'm never getting fat haha. I'll be slim till the day I die no matter how much I eat, all the men on my father's and mother's side are like that. Not to mention I won't start getting gray hair till I'm over 65 and even then it won't be much either rofl. But we can't all be so lucky in the genetic pool, such is life.Vext wrote:
\:D/ I can't wait to see how NeverDie feels when he gets old, fat, and wrinkly.
NeverDie wrote:
I have superior genetics. I'm never getting fat haha. I'll be slim till the day I die no matter how much I eat, all the men on my father's and mother's side are like that.
NeverDie wrote:
My point is, it's a CHOICE that people are fat.
For most people yeah, but for people like me that are ectomorphs (google that if you don't know what it is), we don't have to worry about what we eat. We eat what ever, and as much as we want, and we can't get fat. And although most of them do end up getting overweight once past the age of 50, if my family's history is any indicator, I won't have that problem ever, till the day I die.Jarby wrote:
NeverDie wrote:
I have superior genetics. I'm never getting fat haha. I'll be slim till the day I die no matter how much I eat, all the men on my father's and mother's side are like that.NeverDie wrote:
My point is, it's a CHOICE that people are fat.
Sheldon's theories enjoyed a vogue as the "pop-psych flavor of the month" through the 1950s.[3] Modern scientists, however, generally (with occasional exceptions[4][5], some relying on outdated - 1978 or prior - studies) dismiss his claims as outdated, if not outright quackery."Nude Photos Are Sealed At Smithsonian". New York Times. January 21, 1995. Retrieved December 1, 2011. "Later, other photographs were taken by W. H. Sheldon, a researcher who believed that there was a relationship between body shape and intelligence and other traits. Mr. Sheldon has since died, and his work has long been dismissed by most scientists as quackery. ..."</ref>It doesn't make sense for someone to consume literally any amount of food and gain nothing anyway.
Jarby wrote:
Sheldon's theories enjoyed a vogue as the "pop-psych flavor of the month" through the 1950s.[3] Modern scientists, however, generally (with occasional exceptions[4][5], some relying on outdated - 1978 or prior - studies) dismiss his claims as outdated, if not outright quackery."Nude Photos Are Sealed At Smithsonian". New York Times. January 21, 1995. Retrieved December 1, 2011. "Later, other photographs were taken by W. H. Sheldon, a researcher who believed that there was a relationship between body shape and intelligence and other traits. Mr. Sheldon has since died, and his work has long been dismissed by most scientists as quackery. ..."</ref>It doesn't make sense for someone to consume literally any amount of food and gain nothing anyway.
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAfoulcoon wrote:
so wait, you've been trying to bulk up to get even bigger tits?