The Blue Knight Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I'm not sure why this is such a sore subject with people. We all know that age comes with marriage and that over the years some things are going to change. There's only so much one can do about wrinkles, graying hair, and all that comes with that lovely package. Weight however (aside from medical reasons) is not the same thing. If you marry a petite woman who is a size 4/5 at age 23, you shouldn't expect her to be a size 18/20 when she's 40. If you marry a man who is 5'10, 190 lbs, with a 34 inch waist and fit at 24, you shouldn't expect a man who is 5'10, 240 lbs with a 40 inch waist when he's 40. Taking care of your physical appearance is part of the marriage contract as far as I'm concerned. You control what you can control. Weight and fitness are typically controllable. It's about disciplining yourself and thinking of someone other than yourself. People who fail to monitor what goes into their mouths are just too selfish about that area of their lives to monitor it properly. Then when a spouse wants out or cheats on them 40 lbs later they can't figure out the reason why?
dasein Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Leaving aside the rest of the contention for a minute, I think a lot of this comes down to what you think "letting oneself go" is. I'm not sure what you consider "letting yourself go" really. I set my opinion on that out already, as pertains to women, losing the female body shape entirely and gaining so much weight that she has no hip-waist ratio, no waist at all really, flappy arms and rolls of fat on her sides, basically looking nothing at all like she did when entering the relationship or marriage. Women are free to describe the male equivalent. I don't think anyone in the thread is complaining about a gain of 10-20 pounds on an average sized body and if so I missed it. (how many times does that have to be typed out by various posters btw, 5? 10? infinity? before it sinks in and the strawmanning about men expecting -perfection- stops? not addressed at zg) Would it surprise you to know that I think fixating on fitness to the point where many people (without the stronger range of metabolisms) would need to to maintain anything close to their 20 year old bodies at 50 would seem ultimately UNHEALTHY to me? No, wouldn't surprise me. I feel the same way, the <10% body fat cut, ripped, "jacked" look that you see on men in movies and that many women claim to find hot and seek is very unhealthy, for example, and not a generally desirable state of fit male body IMO. If men bought Vogue magazine and not Sports Illustrated or Playboy, would agree that men prefer an unhealthy standard in women today as well. But in a thread about partners getting fat, which is a relatively frequent issue, I'd rather not go into the very tiny % of people who get addicted to fitness and exercise to an unhealthy degree. No one is claiming that someone should look at 50 like they did at 20. Not in this thread, nor anywhere else the issue is discussed, why keep hedging so? But I -do- intend to look better at 50 than 20 actually, as at 20 I wasn't exercising regularly, eating well, sleeping well, was drinking gallons of alcohol a week, and despite weighing less and looking "younger" in some respects, was a skinny fatass at the time nonetheless. I would say I see that phenomenon more with men, who tend to get the beer belly after they're married and let it keep growing. Once more, men gaining some belly is not comparable to the kind of female weight gain I'm describing. On average, -any- excess weight on a male body goes straight to the core before other areas, not so for women. A man can be in excellent, top, overall shape and still have love handles or a gut. Many pro athletes do. It's only been in the last couple of decades if that, that the six pack look was considered the male beauty norm. In the past it was merely a relatively flat stomach. Sometimes I don't think that women truly get how extreme an expectation or preference of a six-pack is, and it's a testament to men's desire to do anything to get women that such has become the standard. I know you didn't express this specifically, but there seems to be some equating a man who has any fat in the middle as being out of shape in the thread, and that's ridiculous.
mostlyclueless Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 What if women lose a desirable WHR after menopause? This is a biological reality and has nothing to do with letting themselves go -- should their husbands leave them for younger models?
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Once more, men gaining some belly is not comparable to the kind of female weight gain I'm describing. Because you say so? I think that is between the man with the belly and his wife. A man can be in excellent, top, overall shape and still have love handles or a gut. A middle aged woman can be in good overall shape and still have a big ass, cellulite and a belly.
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 What if women lose a desirable WHR after menopause? This is a biological reality and has nothing to do with letting themselves go -- should their husbands leave them for younger models? Duh. All women after menopause should be sequestered so nobody has to look at them at all. Talk about poor fertility!
zengirl Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I set my opinion on that out already, Honestly, I tried to find that in assessing your posts, but I must've gotten lost in the ranting. as pertains to women, losing the female body shape entirely and gaining so much weight that she has no hip-waist ratio, no waist at all really, flappy arms and rolls of fat on her sides, basically looking nothing at all like she did when entering the relationship or marriage. Outside of truly elderly women, who aren't necessarily "fat" but lose much of those shapely qualities with age as bodies do what they do (and I'm just not going to judge the attractiveness of 80 year olds -- in general; I hope we can all agree that by that time, being able to keep things in proper working order is an achievement; aesthetics aren't important), I can only think of one RL example of this that I've seen, and it was a woman with a hyperthyroid issue (a friend's Mom). She was very thin when they married -- VERY thin -- started losing too much weight for no reason, almost died, had to have her thyroid partially removed, and gained weight subsequently, despite eating and behaving in a healthy fashion---and in fact, having to watch her weight for her whole life to a much higher degree than most people. Other than that, literally all the overweight women I know in their 30s, 40s, and 50s have struggled with weight all their lives, and that was apparent in older photos. Some of them may have had a period in which they looked their "best" (not always their youngest period) but for most of them it was AFTER they were married. Most of my Mom's friends still have reasonably decent shapes. Not fit, as I said, but certainly womanly. Granted many probably don't have as good of a breast look as it appears in public (TY to bras on that one) because breasts don't tend to age well. Someone would have to be "close to overweight" to even get that shape, I would imagine, without a medical issue. For instance, someone with my metabolism is never going to BE that shape. The people who are either would have to be someone who's doing a TON of fitness related stuff now (I avoid those people in general) and then stops or someone who has had frequent ups and downs with weight throughout their life, which generally wouldn't be a secret. Women are free to describe the male equivalent. I don't think anyone in the thread is complaining about a gain of 10-20 pounds on an average sized body and if so I missed it. (how many times does that have to be typed out by various posters btw, 5? 10? infinity? before it sinks in and the strawmanning about men expecting -perfection- stops? not addressed at zg) I think it's been improperly defined in general what "too much weight" is or should be, so now one is really strawmanning so much as having different conversations perhaps. No, wouldn't surprise me. I feel the same way, the <10% body fat cut, ripped, "jacked" look that you see on men in movies and that many women claim to find hot and seek is very unhealthy, for example, and not a generally desirable state of fit male body IMO. Agree, ftr. And I know many women who DON'T like that look, fwiw. If men bought Vogue magazine and not Sports Illustrated or Playboy, would agree that men prefer an unhealthy standard in women today as well. I think magazines like Playboy and particularly Maxim promote unhealthy standards. Not as much with weight as with weight-to-breast-size ratios. A lot of it is in the way the women are photoshopped too though. But in a thread about partners getting fat, which is a relatively frequent issue, I'd rather not go into the very tiny % of people who get addicted to fitness and exercise to an unhealthy degree. I find that to be a more frequent issue I see than people getting fat unexpectedly. I actually don't know anyone who got old, married, and suddenly fat. Gained a little weight with aging? Sure, everyone does. Couldn't lose all the baby weight? Sure. Suddenly changed shape completely? No. . . as MC said, I've seen it happen to a few men, but no women, really. Once more, men gaining some belly is not comparable to the kind of female weight gain I'm describing. FWIW, with what you wrote: I'm not really talking about a "little" belly. I'm talking about like a Santa belly. Sure, some pro athletes may have that (large unattractive-to-me men like linebackers), but I'm talking about it on a person whose belly clearly outsizes their frame. Tall and broad-shouldered, barrel-chested men are generally forgiven some belly without anyone noticing. In the circles I've seen, it's far more common for a man to gain a significant amount of weight than for a woman to; it's also far more common for women to yo-yo with weight, whereas men tend to go in a straight line. At any rate, I don't like 6 packs. I think they look bizarre on men and women.
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I find that to be a more frequent issue I see than people getting fat unexpectedly. I actually don't know anyone who got old, married, and suddenly fat. Gained a little weight with aging? Sure, everyone does. Couldn't lose all the baby weight? Sure. Suddenly changed shape completely? No. I live in a rural area with a lot of poverty, and I do see many obese people, including women. I think quite a few of the nubile 14 year old girls who I see in Walmart and outside of MacDonald's are destined to become fat. Their (youngish) moms often are. Maybe this is the demographic dasein is a part of.
FitChick Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 What if women lose a desirable WHR after menopause? This is a biological reality and has nothing to do with letting themselves go Sorry, not true. I belong to a fitness forum and there are plenty of women who are slim and fit at 45+. Balancing hormones makes the job easier but you still have to eat less and move more, same as when you were younger. Good excuse to use on an ignorant man though! Of course, men can also blame their diminishing hormone levels for their boobs and bellies. Read Suzanne Somer's books on anti-aging for solutions.
Mme. Chaucer Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Sorry, not true. I belong to a fitness forum and there are plenty of women who are slim and fit at 45+. Balancing hormones makes the job easier but you still have to eat less and move more, same as when you were younger. . She didn't say they weren't slim and fit. She said they lacked a "desirable" WTR.
mostlyclueless Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Sorry, not true. I belong to a fitness forum and there are plenty of women who are slim and fit at 45+. Balancing hormones makes the job easier but you still have to eat less and move more, same as when you were younger. Good excuse to use on an ignorant man though! Of course, men can also blame their diminishing hormone levels for their boobs and bellies. Read Suzanne Somer's books on anti-aging for solutions. Suzanne Somers is a complete quack. Of course it is possible for some women to maintain a more desirable physique than others after menopause. But it is, as a I said above, a biological fact that WHR changes after menopause. Weight gain at the time of menopause Body fat distribution, the menopause transition, and hormone replacement therapy - EM|consulte Versita Publications - Journal Article This is not disputed within the medical community.
FitChick Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Suzanne Somers is a complete quack. I said above, a biological fact that WHR changes after menopause. This is not disputed within the medical community. That doesn't mean you can't change it! You obviously haven't read any of her books so you erroneously assume this is her opinion. No, all of her books are based on interviews she's done with progressive doctors in the field of antiaging medicine who are constantly updating their research. Thankfully, more and more doctors are learning about this research and telling their patients. My gyn is one of them. If you don't want to buy any of her books, go to the library. 1
The Blue Knight Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Suzanne Somers is a complete quack. Of course it is possible for some women to maintain a more desirable physique than others after menopause. But it is, as a I said above, a biological fact that WHR changes after menopause. Weight gain at the time of menopause Body fat distribution, the menopause transition, and hormone replacement therapy - EM|consulte Versita Publications - Journal Article This is not disputed within the medical community. Well Suzanne Somers is doing something right that most women her age haven't figured out. And her book "Knockout" does a superb job of exposing the FDA and AMA for the frauds that they are. But you'd have to read the book to know that.
zengirl Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I live in a rural area with a lot of poverty, and I do see many obese people, including women. I think quite a few of the nubile 14 year old girls who I see in Walmart and outside of MacDonald's are destined to become fat. Their (youngish) moms often are. Maybe this is the demographic dasein is a part of. Maybe. Perhaps this is a truly socio-economic issue. Also depends on the age when they're married. Most poor people these days are not getting married, though (seriously, statistics bear this out, and it's a growing gap) and they're certainly not sitting around kvetching about weight, are they? They've got bigger problems. I work with kids from poor communities (most of the moms I've met are not fat - though some are - or married, frankly) and many are obese as children and teens. The ones who aren't don't seem likely to balloon up in a few years, but perhaps I'm wrong. As to the poor who become obese, I've got nothing but compassion for someone who lives in a food desert or has other various challenges and has a lack of healthy choices available to them. Seriously. If those are the people, daesin is speaking of, I'd say they have bigger issues than whether they or their wives get fat. I read some diaries on another site that truly deal with poverty, and malnutrition is such a huge issue. People suggest stupid things like, "Just snack on hummus or almonds," which might as well be saying, "Buy some diamonds," to people who live in some kinds of poverty. There are some healthy foods you can buy for cheap, if you have access to a grocery store, but it's much harder. We subsidize unhealthy industries better than healthy ones, in terms of food, sadly. But that's another thread altogether. 1
mostlyclueless Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Seriously, the sources Suzanne Somers uses are not scientific and have been discredited wholesale by the scientific and medical communities, see here for a brief summary: Blogging Suzanne Somers Knockout, part 1: How cancer testimonials mislead : Respectful Insolence
zengirl Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 That doesn't mean you can't change it! You obviously haven't read any of her books so you erroneously assume this is her opinion. No, all of her books are based on interviews she's done with progressive doctors in the field of antiaging medicine who are constantly updating their research. Thankfully, more and more doctors are learning about this research and telling their patients. My gyn is one of them. If you don't want to buy any of her books, go to the library. Fitchick, fwiw, we should note that what you're talking about is fighting against the body's natural aging process, which would then naturally be easier for some than others, etc, etc. I think there's a big difference between saying, "You can choose to fight aging if you want. I do! Here are some tips." (which is what you seem to be saying) And saying, "No one has to age, that's a bunch of crock, these people are just lazy." That's different, and it implies everyone should put their aesthetics at a high priority, which many people just don't do. I think people are entitled to their own priorities. If the aesthetics of your mate, even as they age, are a priority for you, then you should say so BEFORE they age. Don't assume their looks are as much of a priority to them. They're not lying if they prioritize their looks the exact same and life just happens to make it harder to keep them (and they don't do that work). They're just succumbing to life's whims by putting in the exact same effort. As many of us do, in various ways, at various times. 3
mesmerized Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I would certainly dump a guy for getting too fat. Im not attracted to fat men.
The Blue Knight Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Seriously, the sources Suzanne Somers uses are not scientific and have been discredited wholesale by the scientific and medical communities, see here for a brief summary: Blogging Suzanne Somers Knockout, part 1: How cancer testimonials mislead : Respectful Insolence There are far more books and articles about about suppressed alternative cancer therapies than what Somers has written about. The problem with your philosophy clueless is you're using the wolf guarding the hen house approach. Of course the medical and science communities are going to discredit people who talk about alternative approaches. They are protecting themselves, their grants, and their government oversights. It's about $$$. I'd suggest you get on Joe Mercola's website and get up with what the FDA, the AMA, and other bodies who are supposed to "watch out for us" are really doing . . . protecting their own interests.
The Blue Knight Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I would certainly dump a guy for getting too fat. Im not attracted to fat men. Does that mean Doug Heffernan is out?
dasein Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Your post even tries to imply that the numbers for the men are incorrect, as if you want to blind yourself to the fact that this is not a predominately female problem, but a predominately male one. You want to introduce BMI numbers as evidence of some male hypocrisy on this issue, that's wrong on three levels, you get called on it, and of course it's about me being "blind." No one has ever said obesity wasn't a male problem, what I have said is that IME, men don't let themselves go after marriage to the extent women do. The BMI allows for the skeletal and muscle mass difference between men and women. It takes into account that men have a higher muscle mass and larger skeletal frame than women, so the disparity you mention does not exist. The disparity does exist despite the first two statements being true. As stated clearly previously, BMI fails after a certain level of muscle mass is achieved. All bodybuilders -are- either "obese" by BMI standards or trying for hours daily in the gym to get there. Lots of athletes -are- obese by BMI standards despite being no such thing in reality. Male bodies -are- capable of attaining much higher muscle % than female, so it's not really a controversial statement that the difference in male and female obesity rates, as measured by BMI, are partially, if not wholly explained by men exceeding the level of muscle mass % past which BMI has no descriptive usefulness. But to use your logic, it also doesn’t take into account all the women you see working out at the gym, and women athletes with more muscle mass than some men. So that should even the ‘disparity’ out when taken into account. LS always manages to disappoint. So in your world the number of women and men doing serious bodybuilding (not Zumba, yoga, and spin class) and competitive sports is equivalent, most female fitness enthusiasts are seeking to build extraordinary muscle mass just like the guys, and female bodies are every bit as capable as male in achieving the kind of extraordinary muscle mass that voids the usefulness of BMI? Sure whatever. I stand by everything I've said in the thread about BMI.
mostlyclueless Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Blue Knight, believe me I am expert in medical science, not that that means anything on the internet. Let me just say I really hope that if anything happens to you, you go to a real doctor and doesn't listen to this alternative medicine mythology. Alternative medicine that works is just called medicine. Don't buy into the conspiracy theories.
FitChick Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Of course the medical and science communities are going to discredit people who talk about alternative approaches. They are protecting themselves, their grants, and their government oversights. It's about $$$. I'd suggest you get on Joe Mercola's website and get up with what the FDA, the AMA, and other bodies who are supposed to "watch out for us" are really doing . . . protecting their own interests. Overdosed America is one of those books, written by an MD who blows the lid off the FDA and BigPharma's practices. Quite eye opening. 1
FitChick Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 I think there's a big difference between saying, "You can choose to fight aging if you want. I do! Here are some tips." (which is what you seem to be saying) And saying, "No one has to age, that's a bunch of crock, these people are just lazy." That's different, and it implies everyone should put their aesthetics at a high priority, which many people just don't do. Everyone ages. It used to be considered "natural" for old people to lose all their teeth and go blind with cataracts. You can control the negative effects of aging to some extent by keeping up with the current research. Of course, nobody has to. Like I said, other women looking worse only makes me look better!
mesmerized Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Does that mean Doug Heffernan is out? I don't find him attractive at all.
dasein Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Maybe this is the demographic dasein is a part of. Will give you the benefit of the doubt in using "demographic" instead of "culture." But generally, yes, we are all part of this culture, everyone who has fast food restaurants lining the streets where they live is. It's more pronounced in certain geographical areas, but when I travel, I see it everywhere in the U.S., cities, towns. Less so in expensive suburbs.
The Blue Knight Posted April 2, 2012 Posted April 2, 2012 Blue Knight, believe me I am expert in medical science, not that that means anything on the internet. Let me just say I really hope that if anything happens to you, you go to a real doctor and doesn't listen to this alternative medicine mythology. Alternative medicine that works is just called medicine. Don't buy into the conspiracy theories. ha ha ha . . . you're talking to the wrong guy about that subject. I went through a nightmare of having doctors and specialists try to find out what was wrong with me a couple years back. Multiple symptoms and each doctor pulled blood and did whatever their particular specialty called for. In the end twelve different doctors couldn't figure it out. They'd tell me what it wasn't but couldn't tell me what it was. I FINALLY figured it out on my own after a year of suffering. I just finally put together the symptoms that the doctors sat their looking stupid trying to figure out. What got me to finally consider Somers and other writers books was what happened to me. Somers is interviewing people in the field. She's not writing as an expert. Her own misdiagnosis in the beginning of the book "Knockout" I can completely relate too. The medical professionals screwed that one up as well. I had a friend who had the identical same thing happen to him as what happened to me. Except they misdiagnosed him twice and were both times they were wrong! I have no faith in the average doctor and I don't say that out of disrespect. I don't believe they are to blame because they are caught up in "the system." They only practice what they are told in medical schools. Radiation and Chemo are prime examples of what's wrong with medicine. My understanding is that those approaches only work in three types of specific cancers effectively and that unless you are "typed" before the treatment, they'd be ineffective anyway. I've seen more than my share of people on hospice (as a cop) and it's an awful thing to watch as they waste away. Yep, and everyone of them did Radiation and Chemo. Every time I hear or know of someone who has cancer, I try to get them to consider something outside of the Radiation / Chemo approach, but we are raised in the U.S. to trust doctors and that's what most people end up doing and it costs them their life. Joe Mercola is a doctor by the way. He's been interviewed on several shows including Dr. Oz and he always sets the medical world on it's head because he tosses out the conventional wisdom in favor of more sound approaches, such as prevention (which our medical community spends little time on).
Recommended Posts