Conference turris::womannotes-v2

    Joyce, I haven't had the honor of meeting you, so I don't know how
    overweight you were before or how thin or stocky you might
    still be, but you mention 30 pounds.  
    
    You use the word obese.
    
    You say obesity is a sickness.
    
    All of this adds up to saying that someone who weighs 30 pounds
    more than -- than what?  You don't say -- is sick.
    
    I hope you didn't mean to imply this.  
    
    I hope you aren't saying that because two kids added something
    more than 30 pounds to my figure, I'm sick because I don't care to
    deny myself the enjoyment of food and drink?  My weight is steady,
    my blood pressure is normal, my aerobic condition is good, and I
    feel as though I have more important things to do with my life
    than worry about whether every mouthful of food is going to add
    unwanted pounds. 
    
    --bonnie

    I have participated in a study by Dr. Judith Wurtmann at MIT that
    substantiates that individuals who eat more than required to maintain
    their health thereby gaining weight lack a certain chemical in their
    brain.
    
    Other researchers have completed studies on other aspects of overeating
    and their findings are similar.
    
    The point I was trying to make is that people who are overweight
    are so because of a malfunction of their body or their body chemistry
    and any prejudice against them is directed toward an illness...similar
    in some respects to alcoholism and epilepsy.  
    
    In epilepsy for instance the brain reacts strangely and the patient
    has seizures.  In obesity the brain reacts strangely and the individual
    feels compulsion to overeat.  In alcoholism an individual cannot
    limit themselves to a reasonable amount of liquor they are compelled
    to indulge...and the overeater can not eat one cookie.
    
    I hope this has clarified my statement about obesity and sickness
    or illness.

    re .2:
    
    > ...that individuals who eat more than required to maintain
    > their health thereby gaining weight lack a certain chemical in their
    > brain.  
    
    This is not really a response to this statement, just pointing out
    what brought to mind the following information.
    
    It has also been shown that it is not necessary to "overeat" to
    become (or be) obese. Obesity in some cases is a genetic trait.
    Rats have been bred for this "obesity gene" and fed exactly the
    same diet as a "normal" rat. The obese rat as an adult was more
    than twice the weight of the normal rat.
    
    It is not necessarily compulsive eating that produces obesity, it
    could just be the person's metabolism.
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
    

    I will be the first to admit that, for whatever reasons, the bodily
    reactions of an obese person are not the same as that for the average
    weight individual. I am what you would define as obese. I eat no
    more than many of my slender friends, and MUCH LESS than some of
    them. Obviously, my body processes food differently.
    
    However, we only know what is "average". I maintain that we cannot
    make decisions on what is "normal" because of the societal sanctions
    against those who do not fit the mold. 
    
    We live in a time when certain numbers equal "health". However,
    if we lived in other times, and in fact in other places than the
    U.S., large bodies would be preferable....even sexy. I'm not convinced
    that my body processing food differently than yours necessarily
    means you are healthier, simply because you meet the norm and I
    exceed it.
    
    There are many other issues about weight (I could go on and on!)
    but I will repeat what I've said in this conference before: 
    
    I've experienced more problems from society's treatment of me as
    a fat person, than from the weight itself. 
    
    [Make that fat *woman*, come to think of it]
    
    Given the fact that exercise is a good thing to do for anyone, but
    especially an overweight person - imagine a 23-year-old fat male
    jogging down the street. The reaction will most probably be "Gee,
    he must be a line backer on his football team!"
    
    Imagine a young woman doing the same thing. Now imagine the catcalls,
    the comments about her breasts bobbing as she runs, the snickers,
    the outright verbal insults. How dare she blot the landscape with
    her less-than-perfect female body?!  
    
    Fooey.  Ah well, I could go on and on. Lucky you....I won't.
    
    --DE
    

    Since I'm neither continuing to gain weight nor "overeating" in
    any sense connected to the study Joyce cited, I doubt very much
    that I suffer from the disease of obesity.  I probably fall under
    the category Dawn talks about -- that nobody knows what normal is.
    If you looked at all cultures and times, do you think you'd find
    that gaining 20 pounds per child was unusual?  I doubt it. 
    
    I have never noticed any shortage of men who seem to find me
    sexually attractive.  Most of the negative remarks I've had have
    been from other women.  I've been accused variously of not really
    loving my husband (because I don't keep myself beautiful for him),
    of hating myself (because I don't keep myself beautiful for
    myself), of needing psychological help to overcome childhood
    trauma, and of being just plain lazy.
    
    [The woman who said I didn't love myself was probably jealous --
    we were showering at the health club after working out and she had
    just seen me leg press twice what she could . . .] 
    
    I figure the men who make catcalls at fat women are probably
    the same ones who make suggestive remarks at attractive women,
    and I ignore those.
    
    --bonnie

    RE: .6 - please check .4 for one example.
    
    I'm not sure exactly *what* category to file this one under, but
    a male friend of mine was once told by his buddies at work (in the
    military) that he wasn't a "real man" because he had a fat wife.
    Bizarre.
    
    Dawn
    

    re .8:
    
    *You* don't have to agree with it for it to be the truth,
    which it is.  However, I cannot prove to you that it the truth.
    
    But it is true that lots of things that are true cannot be proven
    Axioms, in mathematics, for example.

    re .8:
    
    Mike, it is true because I say it is true. No I can't prove that
    it is true, but it is true. I say it is true. Just because I can't
    prove it is true doesn't mean that it is not true. There are lots
    of things that are true that can't be proven true. So therefore,
    it must be true because I can't prove that it is true.
                                                   
                  /
                 (  ___
                  ) ///
                 /
    

    Now, stop it, boys! (Oops - "Stop it, men"? "Stop it, sirs"? Oh,
    bother.)
    
    The statistics that I've read on this subject (eek! statistics)
    indicate that appearance is a factor in a higher percentage of jobs
    traditionally held by women than it is for those held by men.
    (Following me so far?) That is, in general, receptionists, waitresses,
    sales clerks, etc. would tend to be hired with an eye to their
    appearance, and someone who was considered unattractive for any reason,
    including obesity, would be discriminated against. 
        
    This appears to be less of a factor in, say, executive board rooms,
    where the man in power can be overweight if he wants to, or on
    construction sites, where (one assumes) the workers are not chosen for
    their appearance but for their ability to hold down a pneumatic drill
    with their stomachs. Hence, in general, for the most part, at least
    until recently [am I being vague enough?], more women are discriminated
    against for being overweight than men are. 
    
    As the role of women in business is seen less as decorative objects
    (we hope), presumably this will change, at which point overweight
    men and women will be discriminated against equally.
    
    I suppose it's progress, of a sort...

    -b

    
    
    About different treatment of obese men and women...
    
    I suspect that there is some cutoff point where a very obese man
    or a very obese woman is likely to be mistreated.  But I think
    the issue of being overweight is handled differently depending
    on the gender of the overweight person.  I think the standard of
    beauty for women is very narrow.  The women we consider pretty
    look young, are thin (often to the point of malnourishment), don't
    have grey hair.  For men the standards are much wider and more varied.
    Men can be old young, thin or "burly."  I don't hear many people
    talking about "burly" women.
                            
    Justine
    
    ps  I have a special fondness for Holly Near's Song that goes...
    
    	Wouldn't you rather love a great big woman than watch your
        lover starve herself to death?!!!!!!

    While both large men and large women must shop for clothes in
    speciality stores, the differences in those clothes which are
    manufactured for large people are <ahem> huge.
    
    Most large women's clothing is made of polyester knit, or cotton/poly
    knit -it is almost impossible to find natural fibers. Not so with
    men's large size clothing. 
    
    Men's large size clothing has a large variety of athletic wear
    available; for women - almost nothing.
    
    Large women have many, many more jokes told about them than large
    men. "The Refigerator" Perry has been a highly-respected football
    player. The man is *fat*. 
    
    On the other hand, while Kate Smith was alive, there were more fat
    jokes about her than you could count.
    
    Certainly, fat men are not generally treated as well as their thinner
    counterparts; but fat *women* take much more abuse. After all, we're
    supposed to be decorative and not take up too much space. 
    
    If we don't keep our part of the bargain, we're actually fair game
    for obnoxious comments simply walking down the street.
    
    [Of course, to some extent, that's true for all women]
    
    --DE
    

There is a difference between obesity and being plump.  Obesity by definition
is unhealthy, being plump is not.

I have had the honor of meeting Joyce, and I have never known her to be obese.
I have known obese women, and they are not appealing; Joyce does not fit
into that category.

I feel as turned off by obese males just as much, but with males it is not as
likely to become an issue.  I have never been obese, so I can't say how women
treat obese men.

Bonnie, if you can press twice the weight, that's healthy, that's not obese!

I can't imagine a "burly" woman.  I can think of woman body builders, but I find
them appalling, and I don't consider them "burly".  I guess that I think of
"burly" as some fat, some muscle, whereas woman bodybuilders seem to be all
muscle, and no normal fat. 

Then again, there is the difference that women naturally have a much thicker
layer of fat under their skin then men...  perhaps any addition of more fat
makes it easy to cross over the line to "fat"?  maybe a woman that I might
equate with "burly" merely looks normal to me???

What do you mean about "women are not supposed to take up space"? 

JMB

    What I've observed is that there is a continuum from anorexic to
    extremely obese.  Women have a very, very narrow bandwidth within that
    continuum that is considered attractive and healthy.  Men have a much
    wider bandwidth along that continuum that is considered attractive and
    healthy.
    
    People of either sex who look like concentration camp survivors
    or who are 100+ pounds overweight are consistently discriminated
    against. 

    re:.11
    
    �Now, stop it, boys! (Oops - "Stop it, men"? "Stop it, sirs"? Oh,
    bother.)�
    
    I think the word you're groping for is "clowns". :-)
    
    ------
    
    There's no question that overweight men are discriminated against.
    But there's also no question (in my mind) that overweight women
    are discriminated against far more. It's an ugly truth that in
    our society, men in general tend to deal with women according to
    their appearance. At any random party, the men will more likely
    want to talk to a strange thin woman than a strange fat woman,
    for example.
    
    What can be done about it? Not much, I'd say. Any given individual
    is attracted to whatever he or she is attracted to, and that's
    life. So often what a person thinks is a preference tends to be
    so only in the mind. Aesthetically speaking, I prefer thinner
    (though certainly not anorexic) women, though I've noticed that
    over the years, a large number of women that I've found myself
    attracted to have been overweight.
    
    --- jerry

    I have seen a certain amount of discrimination against obese women
    I have know, because they were not aethetically pleasing.  But
    something I haven't seen mentioned here is a different type of
    prejudice, one that I encounter a lot - I am not obese, but am
    definately "over-weight".  That prejudice is that people assume
    that you are over-weight because of something wrong with your
    personality. I have heard more times than I care to think about
    "If you were strong-willed/determined/cared about yourself/etc you
    wouldn't be over-weight."  A lot of the prejudice against overweight
    women (or people, I dunno, having only been one sex) stems not from
    the persons unattractiveness per se, but from people's assumptions
    about *why* that person is fat.  ("Mary seems to be qualified for
    the position, but if she can't control her own weight, how do we
    know she is strong enough to influence a customer?")
    
    Did anyone see the L.A. law episode where a woman lawyer sued her
    former employee for discrimination, because they fired her cause
    she was "too fat"?
    
    Diana
      !
    

Ah, obesity, a subject near and dear to my heart (literally).

I used to weigh 200 pounds.  I don't anymore.  It took a LOT of hard work.
 And it will take still more to reach whatever goal I am
physically/mentally/emotionally comfortable with.

Yes, all three are involved in the struggle with weight.  Physically, I am
healthier when I weigh less - even I know that.  But it's the other two
that have made the trip difficult.

Emotionally - I was addicted to food.  Food soothed, food pleased, food
satisfied, food was always there and available.  Food fed the emotions that
weren't being fed by others - and I did not have a positive enough self
image to give myself the caring I deserved.  I hated my body, and in doing
so, I hated myself - because there is a strong tie between the self-image
of women and the body image (read OBSESSION: The Tyranny of Slenderness, by
Kim Chernin if you want to know more about this).  Also, tied in with this,
is a strong desire to be thin, and yet a feeling that people should like me
as I am, not as they would like me to be.  Thin people have problems too.
I know this.  And yet, in my mind, the be-all and end-all success in life
was to be thin, as if all my problems would magically disappear.  Weight
loss, I  have found, is no panacea.

Perhaps obesity (which, clinically, means that you are more than 40% over
your desireable weight, as charted by life insurance companies, etc.) is
frowned upon as scandalous by society because it seems to signify the
person is out of control.  However, fat men are more acceptable than fat
women, simply because less of their personhood (less of their value as a
person) lies in how they look (read Susie Oerbach's FAT IS A FEMINIST ISSUE
(I and II) to learn more about this).  Fat is, in my mind, a sign of
addiction to food (although there may well be other (physical) factors
which help to keep the overweight person fat, it would be much less
difficult to lose weight if it were "just food" - many overweight people
"live to eat", rather than "eating to live".  And this addiction, unlike
alcohol and drug abuse in many cases, is highly visible.  However, drug and
alcohol (and nicotene) addicts can walk around in public and people may not
know they are addicted to anything - they also have the option to quit cold
turkey and not touch the stuff again.  It is very difficult to quit food
cold turkey, because if you do, you die.  Behavior modification in a world
where every advertisement, every form of media, every social situation,
throws food at you is well nigh unto impossible.  We taunt these people
with temptation and expect them to have the will power (or is that won't
power) to resist.  Then we treat them like dirt because they cannot.
No wonder they are addicted to food (read Geneen Roth's "Feeding the
Hungry Heart for more on this kind of thing).

Another problem I have found with losing weight is that my mind plays
tricks on me.  I may be thinner, and the scales and tape measure may tell
me I'm thinner, but I sometimes still feel grotesquely huge.  My body image
is all off-balance.  I cannot see straight because of all the hues and
shades of self-recrimination I still feel over being fat/having been fat.
It is very difficult to stick to a regimen of diet and exercise when you
see no improvement.  Often I still need others to buoy me, bolster
my self-confidence, in order for me to feel I am getting anywhere at all.
I know somewhere deep inside it was terriffic to go from a size 18+ to just
over a size 12 - but all I can see is the long way I feel I have to go.

I found a book recently called "Transforming Body Image" (can't remember
the author's name).  It was originally a workshop, and it is boiled down
into written parts and exercises that you do on your own - flexing your
mental and imaginal muscles in order to reshape the way you think about
yourself.  I am looking forward in the next few months to becoming more
comfortable with myself.  I often still feel unlikeable because of what I
feel I once was - and sometimes I backslide into old patterns of thought.
I am trying very hard.

I have come a long way from being barked at in the street...but that should
never happen to anyone - regardless of their weight.  It is obscene how
this culture often treats the obese, blames them and taunts them and calls them
spineless.  They are human beings - human beings that may or may not want
help losing weight.  Whether they weigh seventy pounds or seven hundred,
whether they are seven years old or seventy, they deserve common human
decency to help them be the best people they can be.  They deserve
friendship and caring, but most of all - as all human beings - they deserve
RESPECT. 

-Jody

    re.13
    
    It is not true that all the clothes for larger women are polyester
    knits. I work part time in Jordan Marsh in the larger womens dept.,and
    we have almost no polyester knits. There is at least 50% of the
    merchandise  made in  natural fibers, silk, cotton, wool and linen.
    Polyester is blended with other fabrics to make clothes easier to
    care for. 
    
    Many over weight women request polyester knits for several reasons,
    one, there is a lot of stretch in that fabric and they don't have
    to change sizes as there weight fluctuates, two they swear they
    wear a smaller size, and three, there is a small percent with various
    health problems that need the ease of pull on, easy care fabric.
    
    I do agree that men have fewer problems with clothing but the womens
    problems are lessening. Because I wear larger sizes, I have a tendancy
    to be very vocal at Jordan Marsh. I personaly take credit for some
    of the changes that have taken place in the past few years at Jordan
    Marsh. I record requests and complaints from customers and pass
    it on to the buyers and store managers. In the ten years that I
    have worked for JM, I have worked in two stores Bedford, NH and
    Worcester, MA. and I have helped open to new stores, Albany,NY and
    Nashua,NH. Things are improveing all the time.
    
    The dictionary says that obese is extremely fat, I don't consider
    fleshy folks obese.  I am overweight but I would never call my self
    obese.  I am extremely active and have had a significent number
    of male admirers. My doctor does not consider me unhealthy. If some
    one finds me unattractive, it's their problem, I don't find men
    with flat bottoms attractive, and that's my problem. Would I hire
    a man with a flat bottom to do a job he was qualified to do, you
    bet, would a man hire an overweight woman as a receptionist if she
    were qualified, probably not.

    
    	RE: .12
    
    	Not true, I am close to 6 foot tall and only weigh 113 pounds!
    	You should hear some of the remarks I face each and every day!!
	So it's not just to obese, it's also anyone that is far above
    	or below the "norm".
    
    	G_B
    
    	BTW, I can eat anything and as much as I want without gaining
    	a pound. Also when I get sick with flu or something and can't
    	eat much for a week or so I don't loose any! Been this way for
    	over 20 years.

I have started to, and stopped myself from replying to this note for some time.
I have something to say, but I'm not sure just how to say it.  I guess I just
don't want to be misunderstood.  I also don't want to sound like I am putting
blame on the "Bigger Than Average" person, since I feel that is done all too
often because of ignorance.  What is really bugging me about the way some BTA
people _react_ to this discrimination.  Sure, it's true that when some people
come into contact with a BTA person, they assume (note spelling) many things
about the BTA person.  This is because BTA people have been stereotyped in
certain ways and therefore a BTA profile conjures up that stereotype as a
FIRST IMPRESSION.  As with most stereotyped first impressions, many people 
will never come to know you well enough to find out if the stereotype holds
true in your case or not.  And, yes, it is true that some people will _choose_
not to know you better _because_ of that stereotype.  Is that fair?  No.
Nobody said things would always be fair.  But what about the people who, for
one reason or another, do (or have to) have contact with you for some period
of time.  How long do you figure it takes to shatter that stereotype?  "Not
very long" is the answer to that question!  That is a fact!  Yet I often
hear BTA people say things like "some of my friends at work think that I have
very low self esteem just because I am fat".  It may be true that the first
day you worked with these people, they believed that to be true, but everything
you have said and done since that time has done one of two things: it has 
either supported, or disproved that first impression.  Sometimes these stereo-
types become a self fulfilling prophecy, and that only happens because many
BTA people are so darn _stuck_ on the unfairness, and the stereotype.  Let me
show some examples.

"I know you think that I exercise little or no personal control over myself
just because I am fat.  That concept Pi**es me of so f*c*ing bad that I'm going
to prove you wrong by completely loosing my temper over it!!!"

"Boss, I know you think that I would not work well with customers just because 
I am fat.  But, honestly I can work with them - er - see, there's one now.  I'll
just go up to them (gulp) and show you (gee, is the boss _really_ watching?)
and (>trip<>stumble<) OH NO!  Mr. customer, sir!  Did I spill that coffee on
you?"

"I know that you think my body is ugly and I look unfashionable just because I
am fat.  _I_ don't think so, but just in case I will wear clothes that seem to
sort of cover me up.  That way you'll only dislike the way I look in general.
You won't be able to see anything specific about me except my head, arms, and
legs."

"Boss, I know that you feel I shouldn't get this promotion because I am fat and
therefore would not pose an authoritative figure (?) to subordinates, but you're
wrong.  Honest, I'll be real nice to them, and I just _know_ that if they like
me they'll work extra hard for me.  It'll be hard for them to like me 'cause
I'm fat, but you'll see.  I'll crack plenty of jokes at team meetings."


Can you see how sometimes we are our own worst enemies?  I also saw the LA Law
episode where the BTA woman (lawyer) was fired from her job for being fat -
and therefore ineffective in her position.  The ending to the show proves my
point well.  She overcame each and every obstacle in front of her by the
simple act of proving the stereotype WRONG.  AND it only took her 5 minutes!
LA Law is only a TV show, and that episode was only telling a story, but it
brought up _that_very_point_!  In real life, if that woman had exhibited as
much competence in her every day life as she did when she was giving her
summary to the jury, there is no way she would ever have been fired for being
fat in the first place.

My point is that, though there is plenty of first impression stereotyping of
BTA people, the stereotype can be proven totally wrong in your case in very 
short order never to be recalled again.  If you do not believe that fact, 
however, then it cannot be true for you!

Marion (a woman of substance)

    re .18 :
    
�    Another problem I have found with losing weight is that my mind plays
�    tricks on me.  I may be thinner, and the scales and tape measure may
�    tell me I'm thinner, but I sometimes still feel grotesquely huge. 
    
    I read something which said that a person's image of themselves
    (faces, bodies) takes about three months to update.  That means
    that when I look in the mirror a couple weeks after a haircut, I
    may not recognize what I see as my self.  That also means that I
    have to be underweight for quite sometime before I notice that I
    look awfully skinny and really ought to eat a little more.  Makes
    sense that you would still see yourself as "grotesquely huge" (despite
    a weight loss that looks lovely, by the way Jody, and you _don't_
    need to lose any more weight!) if your brain hasn't yet updated your 
    self-image from heavy to svelte.
    
    Re Dawn:
    
    Anyone who finds you unattractive has got a screw loose in my opinion.
    Your haircut does well with your face, and your hugs are like pure
    ambrosia.  Give me the choice of embracing a skinny person or a
    "fat" person, and I will _always_ pick the fat person.
    
    Lee

    re: .22
    
    I propose we have Lee bronzed.  She's an invaluable resource to
    the community (mentally, emotionally, and visually ;-)
    
    -Jody

    Jody,
    
    I kinda prefer her in the flesh, maybe a bronzed bust or something
    instead!
    
    Bonnie 
    
    

    re: .24
    
    I've got some gold body powder.  Think that will do the trick?
    
    --bonnie
    

    I think bronzing her bust would probably be kind of uncomfortable
    for her...body powder is intriguing, though.
    
    pardonnez moi for the digression
    
    on with the show
    
    -Jody
    

    
    .18
    
    Amen!
    
    Having managed to also trim down over a period of several years,
    I am extremely sensitive to this issue.  Being overweight ( I detest
    the word obese) and then losing some/lot of that weight can be an
    upsetting thing in and of itself.  There are schools of thought
    that say that some overweight folks (women, in particular) are
    overweight to shield themselves.  Once the shield is shed, the emotions
    can really run amok.
    
    I know it's a slight divergence from the subject, but a great book
    to read is "The Only Diet There is"  I can't remember the author[s
    name off the top of my head.
    

    Re having my bust bronzed:
    
    while I _am_ of the opinion that I have a very nice bust, I would
    strongly discourage any consideration of bronzing it  ;)
    
    Lee

    And I expect your SO wouldn't like it either

    RE: .28
    
    Sondra Ray is the author of "The Only Diet There Is" (a book with
    a lot of food for thought) ;-)
    
    Having been overweight for a better percentage of my life (although
    I was once 8 lbs. underweight when I first arrived in Utah), I'll
    have to agree with those who believe that women who have extra pounds
    probably suffer more discrimination than our male counterparts.
    
    When I first became single and decided to sign up at a dating service,
    the man who ran it said I wouldn't have much luck because, frankly,
    "Who'd want to date you?  You obviously need to lose weight!"  Ouch!
     I had just lost about 40 lbs. and was feeling rather good about
    myself at the time.  Sooo, I went to another dating service run
    by two women who made me feel very welcome.  One of them told me
    that the main difference between men who signed up with the dating
    service and women who singed up with the dating service was that
    the men's first question about their would-be date was usually,
    "What does she LOOK like?" and the women's was, "What is he LIKE?"
    It doesn't seem to matter how much the topic is discussed, the fact
    remains...people are people, and some of them are caring and
    compassionate, and some aren't.  I feel fortunate to have known
    more of the former and fewer of the latter.  As for my feelings
    about myself...I am me.  I like me, and it's okay that others may
    not feel that way.
    
    Barb

    Re: .18---
    
    WoW!  What a testimonial!  You should be VERY, VERY proud of yourself.
    That's a real achievement.  I'm not only impressed, I'm inspired;
    I am working on trimming down myself, and success breeds more success.
    
    Congratulations,
    
    Jane

    A friend of mine sent me this FACT OF THE DAY...  I found it
    heartening...
    
    
    Venus de Milo has 42" hips.
    
    :)
    
    -Jody
    

    yeah, Jody, but isn't she 8' tall or something? :-)
    
    Bonnie

    	Just don't cut off your arms Jody!
    
    				;-)		--D

    All jokes aside, we live in time in which zaftig (sp?) is definitely
    OUT. There have been many times on the planet when zaftig was 
    definitely IN. The art of those times reflects those sensibilities.
    
    --DE
    

    (and for the non-yiddish speakers, "zaftig" means "juicy", btw)

    giggle

    Re: .34
    
    The Venus de Milo, I have read, is 5'2" with a 32" chest and
    42" hips.  If she were a woman of flesh instead of a woman
    of marble, and if she still had her arms, she'd probably weigh
    about 135-140 lbs.
    
    --bonnie

    re: .40 Short and curvey  - I LOVE it!
    
    

    re: .27
    one of my friends translates "zaftig" to "huggable" 
    
    e

    I prefer "cuddly", and I find cuddly women far more attractive
    than the walking toothpicks one sees around.
    
    				Steve

< Note 62.43 by QUARK::LIONEL "In Search of the Lost Code" >


<    I prefer "cuddly", and I find cuddly women far more attractive
<    than the walking toothpicks one sees around.
<    
<    				Steve
<

Steve, you've probably just become the most popular man in Digital!
At least with the women :*) liesl

    Leisel...he's already been quite popular on that score with many
    people who have know him for a while.
    
    Bonnie

    I've never noticed any shortage of men who find me or other
    well-rounded women attractive.
     
    The people who have remarked unfavorably on my weight are almost
    all women.
    
    --bonnie, who's a little taller than the Venus de Milo . . . 

    Although some women may be plump and have a significant number of
    admirers one needs only to read our Singles conference to realize
    that many men have on their list of requirements for a potental
    SO "Weight in proportion to height" or out and out "Slim".
    
    Meeting people in a declared "Singles" environment is a lot different
    than say meeting people in a work environment.  People in a "Singles"
    situation evaluate first on a potential relationship and the criteria
    tends to be around physical attributes.  Whereas other meetings
    involving work or shared mutual interests people evaluate on skills, 
    abilities or interests.  
    
    

    re: .47...
    
    I was surprised to see you say that people evaltuate others based
    primarily on looks in the Singles notesfile.  I have always found
    that when I meet someone over the computer I am a lot less likely
    to make assumptions about their characters based on their bodies.
    Quite often I have grown to really like someone before I met them,
    people I otherwise might have been (gasp!  Did I do this?) prejudiced
    against because of certain physical characteristics, or not even
    given a second glance.
    
    This is why I like meeting people through electronic means so well.
    It has really taught me that physical looks are *so* superficial.
    I like to think that I no longer judge people on what they look
    like because of what I have learned through recent years of electronic
    meetings.                                  
    
    On the other hand, this could be just me.  My singles ad listed
    almost no physical requirements, so maybe such things are just less
    important to me than to others...
    
    D!ana

    Re : Singles file
    
    I too, prefer meeting electronicly. You know what you are getting
    with out the horrors of trying to get someone to notice you,
    trying to get some one to look throught the few extra pounds,etc.
    
    I did notice quite a few ads that specified slim, athletic, or
    (fill in the blank with your favorite word for skinny).
    I took the easy way out and placed my own ad. No, I did not lie
    about my looks and yes, I got responses.  (Just for the record,
    I'm marrying one of the people who answered)           
    
    Dee

Another definition I heard for "zaftig" was "full-bosomed".

As in: Bette Midler is quite zaftig.  :-)

            Carol 

    RE: .50
    
    I think "zaftig" means the whole magilla - full hips, breasts,
    you know.....just generally huggable!  :-)
    
    --DE
    

    Well, "juicy" is a literal rather than a figurative <npi ;')>
    xlation, so you can take your own choice for poetry's sake.
    
    						=maggie

    Re .43, It still really pisses me off that most people recognize
    that it's very cruel to comment on overweight people but perfectly
    acceptable to say mean things about the appearance of thin people.
     
    In regard to "walking toothpicks one sees around" and how pleased
    overweight women seem to be by this comment, how would any overweight
    men feel if I were to say, "I definitely prefer long and lean
    to some of these fat blimps I see walking around DEC."  I don't
    think it would be well taken.
    
    I really try to overlook the fact that some extremely nice and
    interesting people have a lot of unsightly blubber attached to their
    bodies.  I wish that people would also try to overlook the fact
    that some of us can't help how thin we are.  I eat whatever I want,
    whenever I want and I've weighed 93 lbs. for the past 14 yrs.
    
    I think we can all have a preference without unduly putting down
    what doesn't appeal to us.
    
    I should have put this in the hot button topic I guess.
    
    Lorna
    

    Gee, Lorna, I agree with you. Such commentary is to be avoided.
    But then, halfway thru your reply, I came across a sentence about
    how tolerant you are of people with "unsightly blubber", and your
    note kind of lost its impact.
    
    --DE
    

    Re .54, I'm really sorry I used such poor phrasing in my note. 
    It was rude.  Please forgive me, Dawn.  I was in a grumpy mood and
    Steve's response hit me the wrong way.  It made me think, There
    goes another guy trying to make heavy women feel good by putting
    down skinny women!!!  If I like people I really don't give a damn
    what they look like.  Life's too short to be so shallow. 
    
    Also, Steve, I know you didn't really mean to offend anybody skinny
    and I'm not upset at you personally.  But, it does make me angry
    when people make unfavorable comments about somebody just because
    they're skinny.  Because I'm skinny but I'm a worthwhile nice person
    anyway!
    
    Lorna
    

    Here's the deal, Lorna:
    
    You're a worthwhile, nice person. Period.
    
    (not "in spite of" anything!)
    
    Gee, maybe The Blubber Lobby is more vocal than The Toothpick Lobby.
    :-)
    
    Watch out when we combine forces!
    
    --DE
    

    Interestly enough, I have gain a few pounds and I feel much happier
    about myself, I look better and I feel healthier.
    
    I think I have always had a problem with putting on too much weight
    and that if I did I would not be attractive any more.  But I have
    found I have become more attractive because I am happier about how
    I feel about myself.  I think alot of it has to do with being
    comfortable with yourself and who you are.
    
    Denise

    in re .53
    
    Lorna,
    
    you are definitely not in the walking toothpick category..you
    are perfectly proportioned for your height and look lovely.
    
    But I do appreciate that those of us who have gotten static
    for being a tad bigger than average should also be sensitive
    to the feelings of those on the other side.
    
    Bonnie
    
    p.s. is it okay to criticise those who are 'normal'??? :-)  ;-)

       We've all been talking about how people are valuable no matter
       what they look like and how we all value each other, but...I
       don't know about the rest of you but I find that I make a
       distinction between who I might value as a friend as opposed to
       who I might value as a lover. And physical appearance would
       affect whether a given male fell into one category or the other. 

       No matter how much I'd like to say the physical appearance
       doesn't matter I'd be lying if I said it. There are some male
       body types that I just find non-appealing in a sexual way not to
       mention certain habits of cleanliness. (the cleanliness part
       would even affect "just friends"). 

       Maybe the right person would make me overlook my predjudices
       but I'm not too sure. I feel like such a hypocrite saying on the
       one hand how we should overlook these things and on the other
       having these mental deffinitions of what parameters a lover must
       fit. I'm not talking about saying someone must be a certain
       weight or height but rather an all-over gestalt of what my mind
       defines as sexually attractive. There just seems to be a spark
       from certain individuals that says "this one maybe" that is
       totally physical. The personality of the person will indeed be
       the determining factor but some are eliminated by the PF
       (physical factor) regarless of personality.

       Maybe I should have put this into true confessions. Bottom line
       is that I see in myself some of the same things I see in men and
       their views of what a woman should look like to "be acceptable".
       liesl

    .58
    
    Whats normal????
    
    

    re: .60
    
    I'll join your parade, liesl, and I'd be daring (read: foolish)
    enough to suggest such an attitude is "normal" (in the statistical,
    middle-of-the-bell-curve sense, not judgemental).  Some people 
    like 'em tall, some like 'em  small, some like, well, you know 
    how the song goes.  Personally, Loni Anderson could (theoretically) 
    rip her clothes off in front of me and my reaction would be mimimal; 
    conversely, it'd jeopardize my status as a free citizen (perhaps my 
    status as a living being, depending on her martial arts expertise) 
    if I were to find myself in the same county as, say, Jill Clayburg.  
    Though my own "turn on" centers tend to react more strongly towards 
    thinner women, I've long found Shelly Winters attractive; likewise 
    Nancy (Heart) Wilson.
    
    As far as a lover's looks go, I agree with John Lennon that "Whatever
    get's you through the night, it's alright".
    
    Steve
    

    Steve, Leisel, I don't think anyone sees a problem with personal
    preferances for romantic involvement. What some of us view as problems
    is the view that those of us who are not average in one way or another
    are some type of pond scum, and to be avoided at all costs.
    
    Verbiage which suggests that we should hide in our homes and not
    be seen on the streets...the word "unsightly", and other loaded
    and prejudicial words...suggestions that we allow an intolerable
    situation to exist ("How could she let herself *go* like that?!?")...
    suggestions from people like (I've blanked. The woman who played
    Rhoda's sharp-tongued neighbor) who say fat people should be locked
    away somewhere til they lose weight
    
                              <ahem>
                             <excuse me>
    
          **** LOCKED AWAY SOMEWHERE!?!?!? ARE YOU NUTS!?!?!? ***
          **** WHO THE ($%#&^#&#$ DO YOU THINK YOU *ARE*  *****
    
                              <ahem>
    
    
    I don't think any of us "not average" folk want everyone in the
    world to fall panting at our feet, we'd really just settle for not
    being called names or treated as if we are blots on the landscape.
    
    Oh yeah....and being able to get decent clothing without paying
    the earth. (different topic)
    
    --DE
    

    Re .59, .61, I have been attracted to some men because of their
    personalities, regardless of looks, and I have been attracted to
    some men because of their looks.  But, I guess if it's the personality
    that attracts me the looks don't have to be great but they can't
    be my idea of repulsive (whatever that may be).  And, if it's the
    looks that attract me first, the personality has to seem somewhat
    appealing to me, too.  When it comes to relationships the personality
    is more important than the looks, but I can still appreciate a good
    looking guy.  For example, I've always considered Woody Allen one
    of the most attractive men in the world - intelligence, originality
    and wit - who cares what he looks like.  But, once when I had 3rd
    row center seats for a Duran Duran concert while watching
    Simon LeBon, to my horror, I found myself thinking, Geez, could
    I have fun with that for a couple hours!  (I once scolded a male
    coworker for making the same comment about a young woman who had
    walked by!)
    
    Lorna
    
    P.S.  Re .Bonnie & "normal", "normal" are people that you look at
    and their size seems just right.  They're not overweight but they're
    not skinny either.  They look "just right".  It is okay to criticize
    these people.  (only kidding)
     

    re: .62
    
    � What some of us view as problems is the view that those of us 
    � who are not average in one way or another are some type of pond 
    � scum, and to be avoided at all costs.
    
    Agreed.  And furthermore, those of us who've worked hard at becoming
    pond scum (world class, I might add) resent the label being applied
    so indiscriminately, particularly when it's to people who are, in
    fact downright nice.  There's just no justice in this world!

    � Oh yeah....and being able to get decent clothing without paying
    � the earth. (different topic)
    
    From the "Make of This What You Will" Dept:
    
    A couple of years ago I (6'0", 170lbs) went with my friend Dana
    (6'0" 175 or so) to buy a suit.  I usually take a 39 long coat
    and Dana a 40 long.  My waist size is 31-32" and Dana's roughly
    the same.
    
    We *could not* get a suit to fit:  we were told that the manufacturers
    make the trousers to fit the statistically average male waist for
    that coat size. . .for a 39 long that average is (or was) 36". 
    The salesman told us that if it was a matter of a one or two inch
    difference, they could alter.  But attempts to take the pants in
    four inches would destroy them.  Boy did that ever frost my butt!
    Especially because I'd spent considerable time and run an ungodly
    number of miles working off some of the excess I'd been carrying
    on that very butt.  Congratulations, pal, you lose. . .aaarrgh!
    
    As a gross generalization, I place clothing manufacturers just above
    lawyers in the food chain (and lawyers, again grossly) just above
    leeches.
    
    Steve
    

    RE: .64
    
    ...reminds me of the cartoon with the dragon leaning against the
    tree, a smug smile on his face, picking his teeth with a lance.
    Bits and pieces of armor lay scattered about him.
    
    The caption: 
    
    
    Sometimes the dragon wins.
    
    
    Ah well, you could always take 1/2 a steambath! :-)
    
    --DE
    

    re .64  Steve, now you know why there are "Tall Man" stores (and
    far more of them then "Tall Girls" stores where I shop); my father
    was 6'4", which was *very* tall for a man who would be in his mid-70s
    if he were still alive today, and that is where his clothes came
    from.  It wasn't until maybe 15 years ago that he could get longsleeve
    shirts in any color but white, but at least the shirts, trousers,
    etc., were not way too big around; he was *very* thin when my folks
    married (not being much of a cook himself) and never got to be more
    than what I would consider normal girth for a man of his height.

What is considered "normal" and "attractive" changes over time, and
between cultures.  We have been "programmed" (Excuse the high tech lingo)
into finding certain physical characteristics attractive and others not.
When we are considering a lover, it is difficult to ignore that programming
even though we intellectually may think that "looks" aren't important.

In addition, we all have our own life styles.  When looking for a relationship
we would like to meet someone whose life style is more or less compatible
with our own.  Some physical characteristics may be an indication of our life
style. (Granted not always)

When placing an add in the single notes file for example, a person would be
foolish to be anything but honest.  It would only lead to an uncomfortable
situation when the people finally decide to meet.

So, what I am saying is that it is unfair to criticize people for being
concerned about such "superficial" things.  

SAH
    

    I agree with .67 (SAH).  Ignoring this "programming" in others is
    sticking your head in the sand.  A number of women who are overweight
    expressed that they were very comfortable with themselves, and felt
    very attractive just the way (weigh?) they were.  But if these women
    are seeking the company of single men, they should be made aware
    of the fact that generally speaking, men do not share that view.
    As evidence to my statement, just go to any singles dance, and see
    what percentage of heavy women are dancing and what percentage are
    sitting, compared with thinner women.
    
    And I believe that not one single man in this audience will admit
    that ONLY physical attraction should be considered when selecting
    a woman to date.  Other qualities are Much more important.  But
    many men (myself included) will not take the time to find out what
    a woman who we consider unattractive is like inside, if there are
    attractive women available.  Are we shallow?  Perhaps.  But this
    is reality as I have seen it.  I would welcome comments from those
    who have had different experiences.
                                       
    And regarding the activity and health aspects, I challenge any
    overweight woman (or Man, for that matter) to ask her/his Doctor
    whether or not you would be healthier/live longer if you lost
    weight.  By denying this, you are doing yourself a disservice.
                                                            
    Jack (who_stays_within_10_lbs_of_my_ideal_weight_for_MY_benefit)
                                       
    

    Jack,
    
    I'm not sure what to say in response to your note. First, I hope
    you realize that "attractiveness" is very subjective. In your note,
    you make it sound like your standards are the same ones that everyone
    else uses. My father, for example, is very attracted to "zaftig"
    women. The women he gets involved with are alive and gorgeous (imho)
    
    Second, your note assumes that everyone in this conference is
    heterosexual. This may be a new idea, but has it occurred to you
    that there are a few women here who really don't care whether single
    men find them attractive?
    
    And third, on a more personal note, there are some people who consider
    me overweight. and yet, when i think about how unhealthy i was when i
    was thin, and how healthy (physically _and_ emotionally) i am now, i
    know i wouldn't trade. If I lose weight, fine. If I don't, that's fine,
    too. My md has suggested all sorts of things to help me be healthier,
    but he's never mentioned my weight, at least not yet. 

    
    Liz

    RE: .69
    
    > Second, your note assumes that everyone in this conference is
    > heterosexual. This may be a new idea, but has it occurred to you
    > that there are a few women here who really don't care whether single
    > men find them attractive?
    
    Liz, I've often wondered, though: Do lesbian women also not have
    their own set of physical preferences in the women they'd like to
    meet?
    
    Do some seek tall women, slim women, large breasts, blondes.....?
    
      Alan

    RE: .69 (Liz)
    
    Yes, Liz - You're right.  I am discussing My Perception of the
    preference of Hetersexual Men for Heterosexual Women.  I have no
    exposure to homosexual men or women, and cannot speak on my
    observations of them.  Thank you for presenting another point of
    view.
    
    And I can by no means include the experiences of every man or woman
    regarding their preference for zaftig partners.  (Note that .68
    didn't discuss female attraction/lack of attraction for "zaftig"
    [sic] men.)
    
    I'm glad you are totally satisfied with your own appearance, Liz.
    It has always been my belief that a person who truly FEELS attractive
    IS attractive.  And from your notes in this conference, never having
    met you, I'm sure you fit into the category of an attractive woman!
    
    Enjoy!
    
    Jack

    
    	Lorna, Boy does what you write hold true for me also!! Being
    	skinny has not been easy. Until I had a problem with my weight,
    	I never had a problem in finding dates. Once, I went from ~180
    	pounds down to my present 113 I've had to put up with a lot
    	of rude remarks. BTW, I'm about 5' 11" tall. I've met plenty
    	of people over the computers only to have them say things like
    	"gee, I DIDN'T know you were that THIN" or "I couldn't go out
    	with any MAN who weighed less than I do". So, it's not only
    	men that are baised, women also have their share.
    
    	G_B
    
    

    re .68 by J. Wilson
    >I challenge any overweight woman (or Man, for that matter) to ask
    >her/his Doctor whether or not you would be healthier/live longer
    >if you lost weight.
    
    My mother was a very large woman for about ten years.  At one of her 
    physicals she asked her doctor whether he thought she should lose weight.
    His response was that she was extremely healthy with a strong heart
    and low blood pressure and that she would keep right on going forever,
    especially since she excercised regularly.  He said the only reason
    for her to lose weight would be if she felt unhappy with her
    appearance, and that the only time when she would jeopardize her
    health would be if she lost weight and then regained it.  
    
    It is possible to be overweight and yet healthier than the average
    person.  My mother hasn't been sick in years.  So there! :-)
    
                  --Rebecca_who_hasn't_formally_introduced_herself_but
    who_is_a_diligent_WN_reader_but_won't_formally_introduce_herself_because_
    she_is_going_back_to_school_in_a_week_anyway_

    Rebecca (.74):
    You quoted me correctly when I said:
    >>I challenge any overweight woman (or Man, for that matter) to ask
    >>her/his Doctor whether or not you would be healthier/live longer
                     ------------------------------------------------- 
    >>if you lost weight.                                             
    
    You replied:
    > My mother was a very large woman for about ten years.  At one of her 
    > physicals she asked her doctor whether he thought she should lose weight.
                                     ------------------------------------------
    
    I believe that these are very different questions.  The doctor in
    question said that there was no need for her to change, if she was
    healthy and happy.  That is not to say that she wouldn't live longer
    and be healthier if she lost the excess.
    
    >It is possible to be overweight and yet healthier than the average
     ------------------------------------------------------------------
    >person.  My mother hasn't been sick in years.  So there! :-)
     ------
    
    Is there anyone knowledgeable (e.g. Health Services) who agree with
    this statement?  Maybe, for health reasons, I should change to a
    pasta and sundaes diet!  ;^)
    
    Rebecca, Hope you AND your Mother have health and long life!
        
    Jack   

       I'd have to admit that in some ways I agree with Eagles. I
       wouldn't go out with someone I found unattractive. That goes both
       mentally and physically. I suppose the kicker is what we call
       "attractive". I don't think a someone has to look like a fashion
       model to be attractive but for me they do have to be clean and
       smell good and take care of themselves. Why would I care to be
       seen with someone who thinks so little of themselves they ignore
       caring for their bodies or their minds? A guy who had no concept
       of world affairs or at least a taste of art/music/reading would
       seem very UNattractive to me. Intelligence is very attractive.
       (Men who write system level code are a turn on - ooh, speak to me
       in BLISS you animal) ;*) 

       On the issue of body size. I can't even imagin making love to a
       very fat man no matter how nice a guy he may be. It is just not
       sexually attractive. Now, I don't have  problems being friends
       or working with them, but not sex. I'd be hard for me to fault a
       man for the same feelings. On the other hand, I may allow a
       larger standard deviation than some men on what is attractive as
       far as size goes. liesl
       

    (I've been away for a week, else I would have replied to this
    earlier...)
    
    My comment about my personal preferences in physical proportions
    was intended to show that there do exist men who do not mind
    "a few extra pounds".  In no way was it intended as an insult
    against very thin women.  I'm sorry if my choice of phrasing
    implied otherwise.
    
    There are many thin women whose appearance is pleasing to me, but
    I still find myself drawn towards those on the "plus" side of
    the spectrum.  It's possibly because I'm tall and not thin (but
    not fat either) myself.  Who knows.
    
    I also admit that I would not go out with someone I found physically
    unattractive.  If it were a "blind" date, I would not cancel it,
    but would not persue it further (unless there was something very
    special about her that caught my interest.)  However, my "limits
    of acceptability" are very wide.  If the woman is beautiful inside
    I often find it makes her beautiful outside to me.
    
    				Steve

    Jwilson: Just because one is fat does not mean one eats more than
    one's peers, or that they eat only "pasta and sundaes". This comment
    falls into the old trap of assuming that overweight people are self-
    indulgent, and if they would only have a little discipline, they
    would be normal. Also, what an MD says about weight is not always
    the most knowledge-full (gaak) information. 
    
    We forget, in this culture, how much our perceptions of "health"
    are skewed by our perceptions of "normality". I've known many people
    who ride their friends to lose weight "for their health", but don't
    similarly ride other people to quit smoking, which is patently
    UNhealthy (but *not*, you see, unattractive to most perceptions).
    
    RE: others
    
    I will repeat (and take the liberty of speaking for my "not average"
    brothers and sisters) - we don't *care* if you aren't falling at
    our feet with your tongues hanging out in paroxyms of sexual attraction
    to us. We, after all, may not be attracted to *you* (the *gall*
    of some people). However, we do ask that you not treat us like pond
    scum in the context of friendship, acquaintance-ship, or casual
    contact. It is not uncommon to have one's weight mentioned the *very
    first* time you meet someone! ("Boy, I wish I could eat what *I*
    wanted and stay *THAT SKINNY*"  "Now, now, you shouldn't eat that
    cookie, should you?") Talk about gall.
    
    Last time I checked, someone's looks were neither here nor there
    in the bounds of social intercourse. For romantic interludes, if
    you are attracted to some particular body type, who *cares*??
    
    --DE
    

    She's right, it isn't uncommon in this world to (even before you
    meet the people, for chrissake) overhear them remarking, "What a
    shame" or "And she has such a pretty face, too" (leaving unspoken
    the trailing words 'too bad about the rest of her...')
    
    -Jody
    

Note 62.67                      

>So, what I am saying is that it is unfair to criticize people for being
>concerned about such "superficial" things.  

Life isn't always "fair", eh?_:-).. even for the superficial.


Note 62.68                      

>    But many men (myself included) will not take the time to find out what
>    a woman who we consider unattractive is like inside, if there are
>    attractive women available.  Are we shallow?  Perhaps.  But this
>    is reality as I have seen it.  I would welcome comments from those
>    who have had different experiences.

I have been both heavy and thin and I prefer the way I am treated by men
when I am on the heavy side.  Its difficult to trust someone who
is more concerned with your appearance than anything else.  

What if one gets into an accident or (God forbid) comes down with cancer
or some other disease that robs one of one's physical appearance...

Note 62.71                      

>	Sorry ... this old eagle only "dates" physically attractive
>    women and often couldn't care less what other qualities they have.

You do have your female equivalent Eagle.  I knew many women in high school
and college who only "dated" men who had money (and nice cars) and often
couldn't care less what other qualities they had.  Perhaps people like
you and them will find each other and live happily ever after.  I hope so,
we all deserve some happiness_:-)

Mary

"I knew many women in high school and college who only "dated" men who had money
(and nice cars) and often couldn't care less what other qualities they had."

I wouldn't put liesl in the same category as them!  (she seems quite nice :-)) 

Then there are the '~80%' of women who are not interested in men less then 2
inches taller then them.  Oddly enough this seems to be common even in the
taller women who are often '''forced to make do''' with shorter men, but respect
them less.

Jim 

    Well, I think there's a difference between being what is conventionally
    perceived as goodlooking and being what *I* consider attractive.
     Sometimes I find men that most women would consider goodlooking
    attractive, and sometimes I don't.  Sometimes I consider men attractive
    who would never get hired for a shirt ad, but there's something
    else about them that I find very attractive - their converstion,
    sense of humor, style of dress and hair, the way they present
    themselves in general.  It's true that I probably wouldn't want
    to date a man that *I* didn't consider attractive for some reason
    or another, but that doesn't mean that in order for me to find a
    man attractive he has to look like a shirt ad.  For example, I consider
    4 of the most *attractive* men in the world to be: Woody Allen,
    Bob Dylan, Tom Petty (of and the Heartbreakers) and Keith Richards
    (of the Rolling Stones).  Not one of them is conventionally good
    looking but I'd be thrilled to have one of them notice *me* if I
    ever met them!  There's more to being attractive than just a pretty
    face :-).  I can buy a painting if all I want to do is look at
    something pretty.
    
    Besides, the real issue is like what Dawn said, you may not want
    to date somebody because of the way they look, but you don't have
    to insult them if they're walking on the beach in a bathing suit
    minding their own business and you just don't happen to find them
    cute.
    
    Lorna
    

<	Do lesbian women also not have
<    their own set of physical preferences in the women they'd like to
<    meet?
<    Do some seek tall women, slim women, large breasts, blondes.....?
    
Ah, yes.  The particular characteristics vary per woman for me.  Some examples:
I like Olivia Newton-John, Veronica Hamel, Connie Selecca (Concetta Seleccia).
If I had my absolute preference, I like them with a little more meat on their
bones than the last two (bone to bone is no fun), and I like about a C cup
breast (and may have mine reduced someday to that size). I find that I tend to
be more easily attracted to blonds, although I absolutely ADORE long hair, and
I go crazy over what I consider an attractive woman in a dress.  I also like a
woman who is a little taller than I am. 

Now for reality:  one of my first (female) lovers was HUGE.  The woman was 
(and is) extremely obese.  I loved her no less for it.  She was warm, 
compassionate, loving, and fun.  Her body did not turn me on, but her soul did.
A woman that I dated (and slept with) shortly after that was VERY petite.
She was a little doll.  My current lover (and only spouse) is an inch shorter
than myself, has medium size breasts (she says that they are small), is 
brunette, is just slightly over the "ideal" weight for her build, and wears
dresses 4-5 days out of 7.  Heaven.  She may not be Olivia or Veronica,
but she is WONderful.  :-)

               Carol

	I think Carol has a very good point. No matter how many little
	rules we have about what seems sexy to us, the right person can
	break them all and still be loved. In the context of this note
	though, I do see that some of us (myself included) don't always
	give the benefit of the doubt once that physical first impression
	is made. 

	liesl

    I am short, 5'1" and in my head think that I want a lover who is
    not a whole lot bigger than me.  However, my first lover was 6 feet
    tall and had been abused as a child.  Sometimes when she would get
    real angry, she'd just sort of pick me up and toss me.  This is
    not to say that we both didn't have our issues to work on in the
    relationship.  After that, I really kept clear of lovers who were
    bigger than me.  
    
    I have found that big people will sometimes use their size to
    intimidate people who are smaller.  Are any of you familiar with
    Maxine Feldman?  She has the routine down perfectly and I have been
    the recipient of her wrath.  Big people on the streets would rather
    run over little people than move out of the way.  However, I have
    found that if I can establish eye contact in this situation, the
    big person generally will not crash into me.  Men are clearly worse
    in this area than are women.
    
    I am now with a woman who is only about 1 inch taller than me but
    somewhat plump.  In general, I think that women who love women are
    less concerned with the looks-ism stuff.  Any other opinions?
    

    I don't see anything wrong with someone having preferences for
    certain body types any more than having preferences for certain
    personality types. What you consider attractive is what you
    consider attractive, and that's a gut reaction, not something
    that is generally arrived at after long periods of cogitation.
    
    If one was to say, "I prefer women who don't smoke," that would
    be just as superficial a judgement, since there are many wonderful
    and lovable women who smoke. But if it turns you off, than that's
    that. And in the same vein, some men are turned off by obesity.
    
    Personally speaking, I *prefer* women who are on the thin side,
    but in reality, I've probably been attracted to as many women
    who are on the heavy side as those who are not. My conscious
    has a certain preference that my subconscious doesn't necessarily
    follow.
    
    I don't feel the least bit guilty about having a given preference,
    but then, I never think of women who don't conform to that prefer-
    ence as being sub-human. I will confess that I've occasionally
    had some unvoiced thoughts of the "Gee, she's such a nice person;
    too bad she's so {fat,ugly,whatever}", but like any fault, it's
    something that I'm trying very hard to correct.
    
    I do agree that the real problem is the men who think of women who
    don't fit the ideal image of beauty as being inferior in general
    to those they consider beautiful.
    
    --- jerry

    
    re: .88
    
    Didn't you mean that your subconcious has reactions that your concious
    doesn't necessarily follow, not the other way around, like you said
    it?
    
    I basically agree with .88.  Some of the most beautiful women I
    know are externally less than wonderful...
    
    Is it possible that (kind of, not in such concrete terms) obesity,
    smoking and other personal faults are viewed as weaknesses, and since 
    they are the most visible, people are perhaps judged too quickly because
    of them?

    Bill

    re:.89
    
    No, I meant what I said exactly the way I said it. My preferences
    towards thinner women are made by the conscious mind. My attraction
    to heavier women happens without conscious thought. Thus, my
    subconscious doesn't necessarily follow what my conscious mind
    says. Apparently, my subconscious is more on the ball than my
    conscious.
    
    --- jerry

    re: .90
    
    Ok, in retrospect (with a good night's sleep behind me), I guess
    your way makes more sense...  One's conscious mind is turned off
    by obesity, but the subconcious is attracted, ignoring the physical
    condition...
    
    Bill-who-has-had-too-many-late-nights

    
    I'm only affected by obesity when there is a sexual/romantic
    connotation to a relationship. 
    
    In that context, both my concious and unconcious minds agree
    that its a turnoff.
    
    In a platonic friendship context, it doen't matter...

    [See what you miss when you stop reading =WN=? Somebody went and
    started my favorite topic, and I wasn't around.]
    
    My ideal of feminine beauty is Renoir's "Odalisque". Luckily for
    me, Janice could have been the model.
    
    "Reubenesque" isn't a euphemism, it's a paean!
    
    	-- Charles

    Gosh, Charles, if only we weren't both married. ;-) I certainly
    do like a man with good taste.
    
    Tamzen

    re: .94
    
    Don't worry, Tamzen -- looks to me like Jon and Neil both have
    great taste in wives.  [Now how does one make that winky face?]
    
    --bonnie

    Opinions on several points, from a "big beautiful" woman:
    
    1."Obese" is a term used by the medical profession to indicate
    that the individual is 30% or more heavier than the height-weight
    charts say s/he should be.
    
    Question: who formulated the height/weight charts??
    
    2."Overweight" is a term fraught with social and psychological
    implications...the nastiest being that the overweight person can't
    "control" him/herself.
    
    An equally upsetting corollary to this is: therefore, s/he has no
    business being sexually active, or heavens forbid, interested in
    *S*E*X*.
    
    "Fat" woman/man is not much better, also due to negative connotations.
       
    3.We need to concentrate more on re-defining the contingencies.  If we
    continue to accept that weight is an extremely important issue, then we
    will continue to be obsessive about eating behaviors in general- and we
    will continue to foster anorexia and bulemia.  Weight, per se, is not
    the defining factor of personhood.
    
    (This is not to belittle medical conditions that require weight loss to
    control them, such as sleep apnea and angina (to name just two that I
    am intimately acquainted with!))
    
    As long as we accept the definition that fat=bad, and don't make an
    attempt to know the person, we will have trouble with person = good.
    
    4.It strikes me that this discussion is a lot like the "lady"
    vs."woman" discussion, in that the terms are so emotionally charged
    that it is difficult not to respond to the emotion and focus on the
    issues.
    
    (I didn't mean that to sound as high-handed as it undoubtedly does.)
    
    Lynn  

    			-< FROM ANOTHER BIG BEAUTIFUL WOMAN >-
    
    WELL SAID!!!!!!    :-)

    Yes indeed! 
    
    A while ago I coined the term "Woman of Weight" in this very file,
    I believe. It *is* a little cumbersome to say, but I think I like
    the secondary implications enough to keep using it.
    
    --DE-another-Woman-of-Weight
    
    

    Re: .96
    
    >Question: who formulated the height/weight charts??
    
    Insurance companies, I believe.  Actually, the formula I've seen for
    women is 100 lbs for 5' and 5 pounds for every inch over that.  I think
    the current trend is to look at percentage of body fat as well as the 
    circumference of various points.  I've also seen obese defined as 25%
    or even 20% over recommended weight for one's height.

    I have a real problem with charts that make general statements about
    what some one should weigh. There are a lot of anorexic young women
    out there and some of the problem is those charts.  My daughter
    is 5'7" tall and weighs around 145 to 150 lbs. She wears a size
    8 and in some things a size 6, she is by no stretch of the imagination
    fat, but when she watches the beauty pagents on TV and hears that
    Miss xx is 5'10" tall and weighs 118 lbs she starts screaming about
    how fat she is.  She is very athletic and is solid muscle. Even
    her doctor said that she was in better physical condition that some
    professional athletes. She still wants to weigh 120 lbs. 

    The charts the insurance companies generated are based on nothing more
    than how likely they are to have to pay off on your life insurance
    policy.  From their point of views, your "ideal weight" is the
    weight at which you're most likely to live the longest.
    
    It says nothing about what kind of health or quality of life you
    will have.  They don't care how you look.  It's strictly based on
    longevity.
    
    --bonnie

I took a psychology course in "Motivation and Emotion" about a year ago,
wonderful course; speciically we did a section on obesity, and reasons for
it.  I found the section quite fascinating, and I would like to tell what
I learned and get some feedback on it...

The section was about people who are obese from overeating, not those with
thyroid problems or other health problems.

They discussed a lot of studies that suggest that obese people have different
hunger cues than non-obese (they referred to them as "normal", which I found
offsensive at the time, but will use becuse it's convenient) people.

Some background: contrary to popular belief, the fundamental nervous structure
that makes you eat is not the same one that makes you hungry.  the two are
structures communiate, but are not related.  (I think the "eat response" is
in the hypothalamus, but I wouldn't bet on it, neurophysiology was not my
best subject.)  For instance, if you destroy that section on a rat, the rat
will literally starve to death on a pile of food.  The rat will exhibit all
the signs of aggitation and physical discomfort that rats do when they are
hungry, but it won't eat.  People have had similar disorders (natural, 
hopefully, not laboratory induced.  :-)  They have better luck than rats, 
because they can learn that they must eat to live, but still these people 
tend to be undernourished; they have to *regimen* themselves to eat, and in
general, and intellectual commitment to something is not as convincing as a
bodily impetus to do something.

*Anyway*, it appears that "normal" people get most of their cues that it's
time to eat from hunger reponses.  "Obese" people seem to pick up their
cues externally, like an awareness of how long it's been since they last
ate, or an availability of food right in front of them.

For instance, in one study, obese people and normal people were put in
a room where they couldn't eat for 6 hours.  All the rooms had clocks...
some of the clocks were fast...as in, after 6 hours, the people thought
8 hours had past (or whatever.)  Some had clock that were slow (seemed 
like 4 hours.)  They people were asked to rate their level of hungriness
after coming out.  Normal people did not differ in their level of rated
hungriness based on how long they *thought* they were in the room, but
instead on the actually length of time.  Obese people who were in the
rooms with the slow clocks rated their hunger as much lower than the obese
people in the rooms with fast clocks.  And indeed, when allowed to eat,
the amount the normal people ate wasn't affected by which clock they saw,
whereas it did affect obese people's amount of food.

Another example, demonstrating that obese people's hunger cues are often
related to the visual presence of food...  Half of the group of people
were given sandwiches to eat before the test (the full half), and half
weren't (the hungry half.)  they were then put in a room with a sandwich
in front of them, which they were told they could eat.  they were also
told they could eat a sandwich that was in a nearby refrigerator, but out
of sight.  Hungry/normal people tended to eat the sandwich in front of
them and some of the sandwich in the frig.  Full/normal people tended to
eat only part of the sandwich in front of them.  Obese people of both
groups didn't differ; whether they were Hungry or Full, they ate the
sandwich in front of them, but not the one in the refrigerator.  (A later
study showed that obese people of both groups would eat both sandwiches
if they were both *visible*.)

A final example: obese people seem to use taste as an eating cue more than
normal people.  A group was kept without food for some period of time,
and then given a large milkshake.  Half of the milkshakes had an additive
to make them taste bad, while the others tasted good.  the normal people
tended to drink about the same amount of the milkshake, wehther it was
the "good" or "bad" one.  Obese people, on the other hand, drank much less
if it tasted bad than if it tasted good.

These (and others, I could go one forever, the book sure did!) studies
seem to indicate that the relationship between bodily reponses to hunger
and the amount one eats differs for obese people than for normal people.
The theories about *why* this would be true ranged from social learning
to neurological differences, but no theory had much more convincing 
evidence than the others so I won't bother getting into that.

The section went on to say that the reason these people with different
responses get fat is because of the constant availability of these external
cues; advertisements showing food have more effect on these people;
have good tasting food being available affects them more too; etc.  But
the article suggest that in a different society, where food wasn't so
easily available, that these same types of people would end up *under-
nourished* for the same reasons.  In a country with a food shortage, food
is not easily available.  Normal people will feel hungry when they don't
eat, so they will seek out food.  "Obese-type" people won't have the
external cues (such a food in front of them) so they won't feel hungry and
they won't seek out food.

Anyway, sorry for being so long winded...I just thought it was an interesting
study and that other people might want to add something.  (I am something
of a psychology buff...if someone knowsof other related studies, and can
quote me sources, I'd love to hear them.)

(Oh yeah, I don't have the name of the book I got these studies from, nor
the journal articles where the book itself referenced, but i anyone is
really interested, I can track own my psych book and let you know.)

D!ana  

    Re: .100
    
    Yeah, but would she still want to weigh 120 lbs if she couldn't
    perform even half so well in athletics?
    
    Thank goodness, the health profession has pretty much given up on the
    idea of "proper" weight for one's height.  In fact, I think the focus
    on percentage of body fat has started to slide a little.

    re: .96 Wonderfully said!
                             
    Personally I prefer the term BBW (Big Beautiful Women) whatever,
    I love me the way I am.  I am confident, inside and out and am at
    the point in my life where I am the most important thing.  
                             
    I please myself with my dress, hair, wear brights, live in trousers
    mainly because I feel comformable in them and love them.  My attitude
    is, if you don't like me, frankly I really don't give a damn, because
    probably I wouldn't like you either.
    
    I am told frequently that I look at least ten years younger than I am,
    and I smile and laugh constantly.  I rarely eat red meat, never
    have salt, mostly drink water (except for alcohol about once a
    fortnight), don't smoke.  After participating in a one year program
    for a new drug for asthma and being tested every month for ECG,
    blood pressure and blood tests I can attest that I am extremely
    healthy.  

    My workmates and friends accept me as I am, a warm caring woman,
    and the men in my life have never complained about anything (^;    
    The moral is, accept yourself and like what you are for what you
    are....
    
    ....dale