MaxNoob Posted November 28, 2011 Share Posted November 28, 2011 Guys are evaluating you based on 3 categories: 1) Looks 2) Personality 3) Intelligence For the vast majority of guys, the highest weighting goes to looks, so if you don't get a pass in that category, they won't bother asking you out. If you have an exceptional personality, it can do splash damage to the looks category to render it less important, or help to create the perception that you are more attractive. But the real weapon of mass destruction is getting someone to fall in love with you - that will turn those 3 categories to rubble. All that's left is one category: in love, perfect 10, there's no one else in the world I'd rather be with. A study showed it's possible to fall in love by staring into someone's eyes for 2 minutes straight. So maybe next time a guy asks you for a favor, ask them to do that 2 minute stare first. For science! Some other ways people fall in love: acts of kindness, being grateful, intelligence, humbleness. You say guys just toy with you when you show interest, but it is possible to get someone to fall in love with you without necessarily showing romantic interest. I've done it and I'm sure you can do it too. All the recommendations in this thread have been about ways to incrementally improve your attractiveness; work on your hair, clothes, try to be slightly bitchy and mysterious, believe that you are a 10. Maybe that can help, but it won't make you a 10, and it won't solve your problem of guys leaving you for hotter girls, because none of those recommendations cause people to fall in love. And yes, I've looked at my diet. Trainers have looked at my diet. Doctors have looked at my diet, nutritionists have looked at my diet. One month, just for kicks, I whittled down my calorie intake to 1200 calories, while still doing my regular exercise. Aside from nearly fainting a couple of times, it's only impact on my body was that I GAINED weight. Your genes can make it more difficult for you to lose weight, but your body cannot disobey the laws of thermodynamics. You either ate more salty foods so that your body retained more water at the end of the month, or you underestimated your calorie intake. Link to post Share on other sites
crosswordfiend Posted November 28, 2011 Share Posted November 28, 2011 I really do not see how this is possible. Short of having some metabolic disorder (that you would probably know about by now). I am not saying that you need to lose weight, I am just saying that I have never met anyone that ate less than they burned and gained weight. Most people grossly under-estimate their caloric intake. Depends on where those calories come from. When insulin levels are high, the body can not make use of fat reserves to meet its caloric needs. She might want to try scaling back on carbs and eating more protein and fat. Link to post Share on other sites
Eternal Sunshine Posted November 28, 2011 Share Posted November 28, 2011 Depends on where those calories come from. When insulin levels are high, the body can not make use of fat reserves to meet its caloric needs. She might want to try scaling back on carbs and eating more protein and fat. I disagree. The basic laws of physics still apply. Even if she was eating 1200 cals of pure sugar, she would lose weight (not that I am recommending it for health reasons). Link to post Share on other sites
crosswordfiend Posted November 28, 2011 Share Posted November 28, 2011 I disagree. The basic laws of physics still apply. Even if she was eating 1200 cals of pure sugar, she would lose weight (not that I am recommending it for health reasons). The second law of thermodynamics applies at the level of cellular respiration rather than with respect to total calories consumed. You need to be counting in terms of ATP rather than calories. If she ate 1200 calories of pure sugar, she would get diarrhea. On a starvation diet, the body would slow down non-core function, ie make you tired, so that you don't consume as many calories. Link to post Share on other sites
nofool4u Posted November 28, 2011 Share Posted November 28, 2011 NOW I'm feeling pretty damn resentful. I've listened to these guys bitch and complain on and on about how girls just ignore them, how girls are superficial and only want money and muscles. Just like the women who complain they can't find a good man. All too familiar. If thats you in the pic, I don't see why a guy wouldn't send looks your way. Seems the very same guys that are complaining about women being superficial aren't seeing their own hypocrisy. Just tell them to man up and talk to her themselves. Or just tell them to "grow a set of balls". You can do that without seeming like you are jealous. And not saying you are. Its understandable to hear these guys talk about superficiality, then exhibit it themselves, and get a little peeved. Link to post Share on other sites
dasein Posted November 28, 2011 Share Posted November 28, 2011 On a starvation diet, the body would slow down non-core function, ie make you tired, so that you don't consume as many calories. Agree with the whole post, and it's amazing how the diet industry scams so many people about calories. The best way to lose weight IMO is to INCREASE caloric intake and move as many high fiber, bulky, nutrition and phytochemical rich foods into the diet as possible. Increase the metabolism through activity and quality foods, grow muscle mass and strength, weight comes off. I tried this out in 2007 by DOUBLING my caloric intake and limiting the foods to high fiber, unprocessed fruits and veg and lean protein. No liquid calories, low starch, no bread, very light caffeine (green tea). Lost ten pounds in a month due to the energy blast that kept me moving. I literally couldn't sit still. Once my body adjusted, I didn't have the appetite to eat all those calories and ended up at a good maintenance level. I tell all my friends who are wanting to lose weight that they need to add lots of calories to their diet, just the right type. They never listen LOL. Link to post Share on other sites
Eternal Sunshine Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Agree with the whole post, and it's amazing how the diet industry scams so many people about calories. The best way to lose weight IMO is to INCREASE caloric intake and move as many high fiber, bulky, nutrition and phytochemical rich foods into the diet as possible. Increase the metabolism through activity and quality foods, grow muscle mass and strength, weight comes off. I tried this out in 2007 by DOUBLING my caloric intake and limiting the foods to high fiber, unprocessed fruits and veg and lean protein. No liquid calories, low starch, no bread, very light caffeine (green tea). Lost ten pounds in a month due to the energy blast that kept me moving. I literally couldn't sit still. Once my body adjusted, I didn't have the appetite to eat all those calories and ended up at a good maintenance level. I tell all my friends who are wanting to lose weight that they need to add lots of calories to their diet, just the right type. They never listen LOL. Sure, if you spend more calories than you consume, you will lose weight. It's as simple as that. You may have been eating more, but your energy expenditure was higher than the number of calories you were consuming. Green tea and coffee all speed up metabolism and make you burn more at rest. I fully agree that exercise and building muscle mass will increase your base metabolic rate. Calories expanded > calories consumed = weight loss. No matter which way you go about it. Link to post Share on other sites
Eternal Sunshine Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 As for "starvation mode" it's mostly untrue. Anorexics almost don't eat at all, their body is definitely in starvation mode and they are still losing. Atkins diets and similar still really work to make you consume less calories. You are allowed to eat all the protein and fat under the sun, but what it does is make you feel less hungry and you are in effect just consuming fewer calories. People are making this more complicated than it needs to be. I do agree that there is such thing as "fine tuning" your diet, but in all reality it probably only accounts for few % and is not really worth spending much time on. You are better off keeping things simple. Link to post Share on other sites
dasein Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Calories expanded > calories consumed = weight loss. No matter which way you go about it. OK but this is a deceptive statement when offered in a vacuum, as it does not account for the effects of lowered metabolism on the "calories expended" figure. And that deception among others is at the core of all the worthless fad diets in the world. For most people, the best first step to losing weight is to eat more calories, of higher quality, not less. With respect to "starvation mode" you are confusing apples and oranges. The type of short term starvation mode that lowers metabolism and prevents weight loss is very different than the morbid starvation mode the body enters due to a long term pattern of self abuse or real food deprivation. Link to post Share on other sites
missgangrene Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 *Nearly faints from laughing so hard* You have GOT to be kidding. I DO go to bars/night clubs once in a while, and not only do I NOT get hit on or flirted with, let alone have guys "tripping over themselves," most guys either 1) pretend I'm not there 2) want me to get them my hot friend's number or 3) after a few drinks, decide it's much more fun insulting me to my face. "Hey, look how red she turns when I ask her how much it sucks to have a flat ass even when she's fat!" Dude. Do you live in like, Douche City? I've never heard of the things you say happening past junior high school. Link to post Share on other sites
Ariadne Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 But the real weapon of mass destruction is getting someone to fall in love with you - that will turn those 3 categories to rubble. All that's left is one category: in love, perfect 10 I this. Link to post Share on other sites
ChessPieceFace Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 SCalories expanded > calories consumed = weight loss. No matter which way you go about it. Fail. Try calories burned > calories metabolized. Personally, I have a "fat" weight where I can seemingly eat as much as I want and just hover at that weight. The body stops absorbing the calories beyond a certain point. Fat people burn less / absorb more calories. It's a fact. They aren't fat because they sit around eating bonbons all day, they're fat because of their metabolism. I know lots of thin people who eat like pigs and get very little exercise. I know lots of fat people who go on strict diets and seem to make very little progress. That said, anyone can, of course, lose weight. I am against the ignorant people who think fat people are entirely to blame, but I am also against fat people who give up and claim they can't succeed. The truth is, fat people have a harder road and have to fight against their "poor" metabolism (poor in terms of our modern, calorie-rich western society anyway.) But it can be done. If someone has no empathy for you and doesn't understand the medical reasons why it's hard, feel free to smack them in the face. But giving up isn't a valid solution. Link to post Share on other sites
LurkerXX Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Yeppers-verhrzn has enough self-awareness of her body to know this. Variety is what saves us in the long view: a variety of metabolism types, where some can survive famine, and others can survive amidst animals that can prey on people...ect. I am not sure that the hard work to go from more than reasonably fit to trim in today's standards would really be worth the effort for her though. I think the trying to find a happy assertive median between people pleaser and defensive snapper is the key. And to find people outside of work. I have a friend who is a mechanical engineer and too much attention of her as 'The Female' is NOT a good thing or something she looks for at her work. She is dating another engineer, but not out of that group; he is rather well adjusted. I agree with those who agree with trying somewhat less nerdy looking guys-there are plenty of geeky folks whose appearance does not follow the stereotype. Maybe you can find someone who is not looking for someone 'hot enough' to make up for their dearth of attention if you steer clear of people that cling to subculture stereotypes for identity. Link to post Share on other sites
Els Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Fail. Try calories burned > calories metabolized. You do know that 'calories burned' is pretty much the layman term for 'calories metabolized', yes? What did you think metabolism meant? Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts