He is just upset that his type isn't included and can't express himself in a functional manner. Instead of asking to be included he has to tear down those that are. Can you really help the man for being in love with this body type?
OT - SI swimsuit issue, 3 covers this year.
- Thread starter RUtix4me
- Start date
I'm not really sure you need to put out a memo about it. Or did I miss one saying we are putting big gals on the cover now?
He is just upset that his type isn't included and can't express himself in a functional manner. Instead of asking to be included he has to tear down those that are. Can you really help the man for being in love with this body type?
Eww. But she would be as appropriate as a fat girl on the cover. Just a different body type, right?
I am in the Ashley Graham group. I always liked women with curves. I've never understood the appeal of really skinny girls.
We must be looking at different photos or something is wrong in the water in NJ.
Maybe next to the big girl, but Hailey Clausen is skinny to you? Here is another real SI model. She looks skinny to you?
Maybe next to the big girl, but Hailey Clausen is skinny to you? Here is another real SI model. She looks skinny to you?
No need to argue. Leave me Ronda. You guys can fight over the other two.
Anyone who thinks she is unworthy because she has a few extra pounds...geez.
Anyone who thinks she is unworthy because she has a few extra pounds...geez.
That's cool...just makes you an outlier.
Twitter is a blaze with this news...for obvious reason.
Twitter is a blaze with this news...for obvious reason.
I'm with Cali on this one. And I find it amusing that this is the thread that broke the camel's back and got me to reactivate my account after lurking for so long. But nevertheless, here it goes.
Fat isn't fit. Fat isn't sexy. Fat is, by and large, not attractive to men. Yes, there are outliers in this regard, but outliers do not make the rule. Beauty standards in both genders are for the most part not subjective; statements to that effect are the sorts of things that unattractive people say to feel better about themselves. People across cultures and throughout history overwhelmingly find and have found the same sorts of basic physical features attractive. There is an abundance of scientific literature that for all intents and purposes proves that this is the case. And guess what? Ashley Graham's body is not physically attractive, and she will not be considered sexually attractive by most men.
Putting her on the cover is just another example of PC culture run amok, and frankly the underlying motivation for doing so is a bit underhanded and sinister. This video takes a scalpel to the whole phenomenon of shoehorning token heffers into "sexy" publications : .
Granted, the example discussed in the video is a bit more extreme than Ashley Graham, but the principle is the same. Besides, is anyone with any testosterone left seriously advocating for this sort of thing? After looking into this SI Swimsuit thing, the world needs way more Hailey Clausons and Rose Bertrams, not more Ashley Grahams. The latter type surrounds us in our every day lives everywhere we go.
Fat isn't fit. Fat isn't sexy. Fat is, by and large, not attractive to men. Yes, there are outliers in this regard, but outliers do not make the rule. Beauty standards in both genders are for the most part not subjective; statements to that effect are the sorts of things that unattractive people say to feel better about themselves. People across cultures and throughout history overwhelmingly find and have found the same sorts of basic physical features attractive. There is an abundance of scientific literature that for all intents and purposes proves that this is the case. And guess what? Ashley Graham's body is not physically attractive, and she will not be considered sexually attractive by most men.
Putting her on the cover is just another example of PC culture run amok, and frankly the underlying motivation for doing so is a bit underhanded and sinister. This video takes a scalpel to the whole phenomenon of shoehorning token heffers into "sexy" publications : .
Granted, the example discussed in the video is a bit more extreme than Ashley Graham, but the principle is the same. Besides, is anyone with any testosterone left seriously advocating for this sort of thing? After looking into this SI Swimsuit thing, the world needs way more Hailey Clausons and Rose Bertrams, not more Ashley Grahams. The latter type surrounds us in our every day lives everywhere we go.
We must be looking at different photos or something is wrong in the water in NJ.
Maybe next to the big girl, but Hailey Clausen is skinny to you? Here is another real SI model. She looks skinny to you?
Actually don't like that picture of her. Prefer these:
Had a tough choice between Clauson and Graham, with Rousey third. In real life, I'd probably give Graham the edge... in these two pictures, I'd give Clauson the edge. Clauson's a little twiggy for my tastes, but it's a flattering picture (airbrushing helps everyone). Graham actually has curves, but the picture isn't as good.
As with most things, I completely disagree with Cali. Shocker.
Edit: And to Cali's question - yes, Hannah Davis is skinny to me. Her cover was beautifully shot and photoshopped - but in real life, she's wispy. Give me Kate Upton over her any day.
As with most things, I completely disagree with Cali. Shocker.
Edit: And to Cali's question - yes, Hannah Davis is skinny to me. Her cover was beautifully shot and photoshopped - but in real life, she's wispy. Give me Kate Upton over her any day.
That's what made you resubscribe? Time to go back to lurking.
I agree to a point that the SI Swimsuit issue may not be the best vessel for such a message, but the message itself is a good one. Everything else you said is pure dog #@!t. There are several people in this thread that either chose Ashley outright or said they found her attractive. She's not even "fat," she's just a different body type and looks perfectly healthy for that body type.
Not everyone is built to be the perfectly proportioned swimsuit model, just like I'm sure you're no Calvin Klein underwear model. Now if you want to say that those that aren't shouldn't be swimsuit models, that's one thing. But to suggest someone born with a larger frame can't be sexy just means you love your own opinion way too much. Different strokes.
Absolutely - they all are. But I'll always take 38D with hips over 32C without... or Davis' 32B without. ymmv.
Rhonda Rousey gets a cover before Jessica Gomes? I may never pick up SI again! Oh well it's been a while. Let's take a trip down memory lane:
More Jessica Gomes, please.
Don't encourage him. She already has a court order.
No, the message is not a good one. You really think that SI Swimsuit included Ashley Graham because she's what its target audience actually wants to see? If her body type is actually what most men were physically attracted to, then the entire history of the calendar would've been markedly different.They're quite obviously just throwing the social justice crowd a bone. And depending on what source you consult, Ashley Graham is 5'9" and weighs anywhere from 170 to 201 lbs. Best case scenario, her BMI is in the "overweight" category; worst case, her BMI is a few decimals shy of obese. Sure, there are limitations associated with BMI, but by and large it is a reliable indicator of health. And one can't analogize Graham to a 5'9" male body builder who weighs over 200 pounds. No one is going to seriously argue that Graham's weight comes from muscle. The message from the PC groups/people, filtered through the SI Swimsuit Calendar editors' choices this year is two-fold: (1) "We're going to beat men over the head with overweight women until they convince themselves they like overweight women, or until they're shamed into no longer expressing what they actually want."; and (2) "We're going to hold up objectively medically overweight women as an aesthetic ideal just because some large women got sad about not getting to go to prom."
Again, your response is based on the misconception that beauty standards are primarily subjective. This is demonstrably not the case.
A lot of nonsense in this post. You can look throughout history and in many eras women that were "hot" in their respective era wouldn't even get a second look now, and likely be viewed as ugly. The idea that this is about PC is ludicrous, people need to get over their own insecurities. Some guys like a little meat to grab on to, I personally don't, but to each their own. SI is in the business of selling magazines and will likely still do that with these issues, and clearly they are getting a lot of buzz. You don't like the cover with a larger woman on it, don't buy the magazine, simple as that.
The irony of all of this is that the most outspoken about putting this woman on the cover because of her size and that it is just PC nonsense are the same folks that get loud and outspoken against Michelle Obama's healthy food initiatives and Michael Bloomberg's large sugary drink bans.
Again, wrong. When it comes to hair (length, fullness), skin, facial features (symmetry), breast size, waist-to-hip ratio (in most cases, strongly correlated with weight), and so forth, human males have remained remarkably consistent in what they're actually into. Same goes for what women like in men, but that's off-topic, ja? Some starting points addressing your first paragraph:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3682657.stm
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-s...l-men-love-a-waistline-allegedly-1617654.html
http://www.livescience.com/7023-rules-attraction-game-love.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/08/080818-body-symmetry.html
And before you start citing Medieval and Renaissance depictions of large (i.e. "Rubenesque") women, keep in mind that there is at best an overlap, but almost certainly not an equivalence, between the artistic ideals of a few artists' work and the physical characteristics that men actually appreciated.
And I frankly have no idea what you're going on about in your second paragraph.
Can't even go a single thread without talking about the left-wing conspiracy. This place is Disqus lite.
What conspiracy? The people/groups who actively take up causes like fat acceptance and its proliferation in the media are usually feminists/feminist groups. Most feminist groups are unabashedly left-wing. How is it a "conspiracy" when all I'm doing is describing things that have been happening in plain sight for years now?
Your post is based on the complete fallacy that beauty standards are biological and stagnant and not fluid and driven by society. It also presupposes that those standards are somehow healthy and natural.
Beauty standards have ebbed and flowed drastically since our first male ancestors were banging women one step removed from apes. They remain different across different societies, and frankly, there's nothing all that healthy about our current standard, which causes the number of eating/body image disorders we have. Also nothing natural or biologically-rooted about covering yourself in plastic pieces, shaving every hair off your body, etc. There's a reason we've come to like that weird sh#t and it's because pop culture pushes it and reinforces it over and over again. SI Swimsuit Issue is one of the best examples out there.
Sorry, the message is good, even though many supposedly educated folks are too thick and/or misogynistic to get it. And give me a break with the "beating men over the head" - it's one girl out of dozens, if you don't like it, turn the page.
You didn't? The second one is obviously more than a size 2. She also has curves. I'm guesssing that porker might even be at least a size 10.
She ain't big. She's fat. A 200lbs. woman is fat by any standard unless she is 6'6 and a body builder.
Size 10? Hope you don't buy clothes for your wife... Ashley Graham is a 16.
If I'm reading this right you are saying we have a choice in who we love? These things change and society plays a part in it? That's pretty homophobic in my opinion and I think you should be more sensitive to the way straight guys are born.
Nice try, slick, but I was very clearly focused on the societal level, not the personal level. Sexual orientation is a separate discussion having nothing to do with this one.
My point is not even debatable. Go back and look at some of the sex icons from just a few decades ago. Even Marilyn Monroe would be called "fat" by the posters in this thread.
BTW, if you want to try and "trap" someone, consult with some of your smarter friends first. They actually have the tools for it.
why do you think it was a trap? It was a question based on what you posted about having a choice in who we love. Also, I can't consult with all my smart friends because the really smart ones put you on ignore months ago.
I'll concede that the term "beauty standards" is broader and leaves more room for societal influence than "the physical attributes men find sexually attractive" which is what I've really been talking about. As to the latter, uh, yeah, they ARE biological and generally not all that fluid. That still leaves a lot of room for variation, mind you. And eating disorders are attributable to a large and varied volume of biological, psychological, and environmental factors. It's intellectually dishonest (and emotionally manipulative to the reader) to blame eating disorders and body dysmorphia on the biological fact that men respond the most to thin(ner) women with an hourglass figure as opposed to rolls of fat and cellulite, and that this fact has historically been reflected in media geared towards men.
And if you need any evidence that people are turning the page on this supposedly "good" message, just look at the number of downvotes that each video of Graham has on SI Swimsuit's Youtube page in comparison with the videos of the other models. It's clear evidence that people do not appreciate being preached at through the freakin' SI Swimsuit Edition.
Last edited:
Nonsense. I'm calling Ashley Graham fat because she IS fat from both a visual and medical perspective. Marilyn wasn't built like a heroin chic model (which, if you've been paying attention, is NOT the body type most men are attracted to) but she did not at any point weigh 170+ lbs or wear a 21st-century size 14. Marilyn's body type is far closer to the other SI models than Graham's.
