The 11 "beautiful" girls on The Saturday Night Show Last Night.

endacl

If the modelling doesn't work out, perhaps it's time the Roly Polys were reformed?

:

TheBeardedLady

kjl wrote: »

I personally do not find overweight people attractive, I am not saying curvaceous women, but women with massive double chins and big round body don't do it for me and I would imagine most guys have a similar view.

So you're asking others what they think and if they do?

Shenshen

kjl wrote: »

Well, from my experience women don't know what men find attractive, but I can assure you if it was a comparison to a normal sized women the men would pic the thin girl every time. source: I'm male and so are most of my friends.

The plural of anecdote is not fact.

There is no shortage of men out there who find overweight females attractive, and will actually prefer them to normal weight women. Source : I'm a fat female.

FullblownRose

As for the modelling, you can be an alternative model and plus-size models are alternative in a way. They seem attractive enough to make goodplus size models, to me. I'm not keen on the tan and gigantic hair, personally.

nokia69

will they have 11 obese male models on next week

mikom

nokia69 wrote: »

will they have 11 obese male models on next week

Next week is small dick week.

Shenshen

nokia69 wrote: »

will they have 11 obese male models on next week

Yes, please. Some of those guys modelling for jacomo.ie are hot!

dellas1979

kjl wrote: »

The also did a nude un-airbrushed photo to show off all their natural beauty.

It really pisses me off if that is being promoted as "natural beauty" and they are all caked in make up.

I thought it would be a woman, no matter what her size, with no make up/hair extensions etc. A "real" woman (with false eye lashes

No make up seems to be a bigger clanger, than their size or posing with no clothes.

One eyed Jack

nokia69 wrote: »

will they have 11 obese male models on next week

Well if there's a modelling agency for obese male models, sign me up (not sure if I'd have the balls to get naked though, I'm not THAT confident :pac:)

mikom wrote: »

Next week is small dick week.

Then again...

TheBeardedLady

humbert wrote: »

They look overweight and in a time when obesity is having a detrimental effect on a huge number of people's lives I don't think it helps to be promoting the idea that being fat is OK or unavoidable.

I didn't see the show though so I don't really know what the tone or substance of it was.

I'd be interested to know how many people watched that programme last night and suddenly decided that being overweight was healthy and "ok"

I've seen women smoking in films, even modern ones, as a way of making them seem more seductive and edgy but as a grown adult, I'm not so stupid to think it's alright to start back on the smokes again because I know smoking is dangerous.


Same goes for people who go on sun beds to get a tan in Winter; they have a tan in Winter when I look pasty and pale but I know they're dangerous.

I think you should give people some credit.

I guess I'd prefer to see women like the ones in the OP than women too afraid to leave their homes for fear of being ridiculed and absolutely hating the way they look and in turn, themselves as people (we're not the sum of how we look). T

he fact that one of them has got a gastric band means she knows it's not healthy to be the size she is and perhaps they're taking steps to lose the weight (not an easy feat) but they can still feel attractive and confident in the mean time DESPITE their size.

Edit: I didn't watch the programme so I don't know the ins and outs of it.

kjl

dellas1979 wrote: »

It really pisses me off if that is being promoted as "natural beauty" and they are all caked in make up.

I thought it would be a woman, no matter what her size, with no make up/hair extensions etc. A "real" woman (with false eye lashes

No make up seems to be a bigger clanger, than their size or posing with no clothes.

Agreed, airbrush free, but not make up brush.

Pwindedd

I know which one I'd like to throw me around in da bedroom. And no tan on the old Egyptian cotton is a bonus.


https://christianpundit.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/regularguywithmodel.jpg?w=660

kjl

Pwindedd wrote: »

I know which one I'd like to throw me around in da bedroom. And no tan on the old Egyptian cotton is a bonus.


https://christianpundit.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/regularguywithmodel.jpg?w=660

regular guy is still seriously buff

Pwindedd

kjl wrote: »

regular guy is still seriously buff

In fairness he's sucking it in like a goodun bless him. He'd still be classed as overweight.

RDM_83 again

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Well that's some sample size you've got there. I'd probably defer to your vast knowledge and experience if I thought you and your friends were within an asses roar of being representative of all men, but quite frankly - you're not, and for what it's worth (though you probably don't care) - it seems you and your friends don't know what men find attractive either. You only know what you find attractive, and your friends could well be lying through their teeth due to peer pressure.

You'll grow out of that when you're past puberty (it's hoped!).

Obviously everything to do with attractiveness is subjective and people will like different things however its just stupid to dismiss the idea that its possibly to work out whats the most desirable body shape for the most people (which is something thats easily measurable).

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0162309595000747

It seems that larger body size, a high waist-to-hip ratio, and larger hips make the female figure appear older, unattractive, and less desirable for engaging in romantic relationships.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0191886994901163

Two studies were conducted to determine the relative role played by overall body fat and body fat distribution as indicated by the measure of waist-to-hip ratio (WHR) in determining female perceived attractiveness and associated personality attributes. Contrary to popular belief, thin female figures were neither perceived most attractive nor assigned many desirable personality traits, except youthfulness. The measure of body fat distribution, the WHR, was found to be the critical variable associated with attractiveness. Normal weight female figures with low WHR were judged to be most attractive and were assigned many desirable qualities.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0191886901000733

Their task was to rate eight line drawings varying in weight (light and heavy) and waist-to-hip ratio WHR (0.5, 0.7 with small waist and hip size, 0.7 with large waist and hip size, and 0.9). The stimulus figures were rated on attractiveness, healthiness, fertility, youthfulness, and willingness to engage in short-term and long-term relationships, on a seven-point Likert scale. The results showed an overall preference for the 0.7 WHR and the light weight category, as predicted.

All these studies and many more show that what men tend to find attractive is a certain waste to hip ratio, this doesn't tell you much about what weight men prefer, but it does tell you that the body shape that tends to result in someone being called overweight/obese in the West is not what the majority find most attractive.

Shenshen wrote: »

The plural of anecdote is not fact.

There is no shortage of men out there who find overweight females attractive, and will actually prefer them to normal weight women. Source : I'm a fat female.

Thats valid, we aren't a hive mind, but no shortage doesn't indicate that its not a minority opinion, in the end though it doesn't matter there is an awful lot of people and if only 30 people out of a hundred find you attractive rather than 70 out of a hundred you'l be ok

One eyed Jack

Pwindedd wrote: »

I know which one I'd like to throw me around in da bedroom. And no tan on the old Egyptian cotton is a bonus.

Your man on the right would be like trying to grab hold of a bar of soap with all that baby oil!

kjl

kjl wrote: »

regular guy is still seriously buff

He's lardy, not buff. Pasty and lardy. Then again, he probably describes himself as a 'real' man. Deluded, eh? As if the Calvin Klein model wasn't real.

Down with anyone thinking they're okay to look at without the approval of internet strangers.

Big Bag of Chips

Didn't see the show, just saw the photo now. There is no way that photo isn't air brushed. They might not have air brushed their body shape, but they have certainly coloured the picture. Every single one of them is the exact same shade.

I don't have an opinion on the show or what was said because I didn't see it. But who are they kidding trying to claim that picture wasn't touched up?!

Lyger

But even though this isn't an explicit endorsement of being overweight, it's still glossing over the health risks.
I know people can be very nasty to overweight people and I wouldn't agree with even a slight hint of that, but I do agree very much with positive reinforcement of healthy lifestyle choices and getting to the root of why people can be addicted to food (it isn't always just mere love of grub).
I'm not talking about people who are a bit "pudgy" (heaven knows I am myself ) but a BMI in the high 20s upwards is simply bad for the health. The smoking comparison is apt because people wouldn't appear on a talk show to talk about how they're smokers and can smoke in public and still look attractive.

This doesn't mean I don't think overweight people can be attractive, have fun, relationships, sex, be happy within themselves, do some plus size modelling etc, but just to address the excess weight at the same time. With liking yourself comes treating yourself well, so it's a kind thing to do for yourself.
People are saying their health isn't for anyone to comment on - this would be true if they were just private individuals minding their own business, but they're not, they've put themselves in the public domain and opened up the debate.

I'm not just concerned about excess weight, but also being underweight. The emaciated girl-women on catwalks who just look exhausted and miserable and starved... this sh*t needs to stop too.
I cannot for the life of me figure out why those modelling jobs are not given to slim but healthy women, including with curves. Women have breasts and rounder bums like - even the very slim ones! Surely the clothes would hang/fit better on them?!

Royale with Cheese

Candie wrote: »

He's lardy, not buff. Pasty and lardy. Then again, he probably describes himself as a 'real' man. Deluded, eh? As if the Calvin Klein model wasn't real

The Calvin Klein model??? It is a sad day when Freddie Ljungberg is more well known for his underpants than for this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGNXw64IQjs

ShadowHearth

I am a male who lost 4.2 stone in 12 weeks and I am still clasified as "fat Bastard" by DHL. There is nothing sexy, healthy or attractive in being fat. No matter what way you spin it.
I know that fat girls are not attractive and I know that I am not attractive as fatty too. The only way to fix it, is to lose some weight and I am on it like a **** truck, those girls should too.

It's interesting to note that all the so-called Supermodels of the 90's would now be considered Plus-size models, as the sample sizes from couture houses has gone down from a 8-10, to a 4-6. A 4-6 is the approximate size of an 11 year old girl in terms of waist and hip measurements.

This is Robyn Lawley, plus-size supermodel of the moment:

http://i.imgur.com/SAoDhwc.jpg

She bears no comparison in terms of weight to the girls in the OP's photo, and to me looks pretty spectacularly healthy and shapely, rather than overweight, and is certainly not obese.

It's reasonable to wonder if the ladies in the OP are a good example of healthy womanhood, and reasonable to think they aren't. It is not reasonable to consider women like Robin Lawley as being plus-sized, since she's quite obviously the happy healthy medium between the emaciated mainstream catwalk models and the average girl.

cloud493

Being fat is not sexy or fun, its just horrible, as an ex fat person. You sweat constantly. Your short of breath. Cant run fast. Stink a lot. You take up more than one seat on public transport. Your just never very attractive, you hate your own body. Just some reasons why I'm so careful with my weight these days :P

Tilly

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

The Calvin Klein model??? It is a sad day when Freddie Ljungberg is more well known for his underpants than for this

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGNXw64IQjs

That's Freddie lunchbox to you.

Mmmmmmm Freddie.....

ShadowHearth

Candie wrote: »

It's interesting to note that all the so-called Supermodels of the 90's would now be considered Plus-size models, as the sample sizes from couture houses has gone down from a 8-10, to a 4-6. A 4-6 is the approximate size of an 11 year old girl in terms of waist and hip measurements.

This is Robyn Lawley, plus-size supermodel of the moment:

http://i.imgur.com/SAoDhwc.jpg

She bears no comparison in terms of weight to the girls in the OP's photo, and to me looks pretty spectacularly healthy and shapely, rather than overweight, and is certainly not obese.

It's reasonable to wonder if the ladies in the OP are a good example of healthy womanhood, and reasonable to think they aren't. It is not reasonable to consider women like Robin Lawley as being plus-sized, since she's quite obviously the happy healthy medium between the emaciated mainstream catwalk models and the average girl.

The one in your picture looks lovely. The Girls that we are talking about now - Not so much...
As mentioned already in this thread. There are just way too much about Extremes in both ways.

Candie

Candie wrote: »

It's interesting to note that all the so-called Supermodels of the 90's would now be considered Plus-size models, as the sample sizes from couture houses has gone down from a 8-10, to a 4-6. A 4-6 is the approximate size of an 11 year old girl in terms of waist and hip measurements.

This is Robyn Lawley, plus-size supermodel of the moment:

http://i.imgur.com/SAoDhwc.jpg

She bears no comparison in terms of weight to the girls in the OP's photo, and to me looks pretty spectacularly healthy and shapely, rather than overweight, and is certainly not obese.

It's reasonable to wonder if the ladies in the OP are a good example of healthy womanhood, and reasonable to think they aren't. It is not reasonable to consider women like Robin Lawley as being plus-sized, since she's quite obviously the happy healthy medium between the emaciated mainstream catwalk models and the average girl.

What about heights?
Also the "super models" also generally had something close to a decent set of hips, the main fashion ones now are far smaller-hipped in general I would've thought.

Lyger

Candie wrote: »

It's interesting to note that all the so-called Supermodels of the 90's would now be considered Plus-size models, as the sample sizes from couture houses has gone down from a 8-10, to a 4-6. A 4-6 is the approximate size of an 11 year old girl in terms of waist and hip measurements.

This is Robyn Lawley, plus-size supermodel of the moment:

http://i.imgur.com/SAoDhwc.jpg

She bears no comparison in terms of weight to the girls in the OP's photo, and to me looks pretty spectacularly healthy and shapely, rather than overweight, and is certainly not obese.

It's reasonable to wonder if the ladies in the OP are a good example of healthy womanhood, and reasonable to think they aren't. It is not reasonable to consider women like Robin Lawley as being plus-sized, since she's quite obviously the happy healthy medium between the emaciated mainstream catwalk models and the average girl.

Indeed. Back in 1992/3 direction, Campbell, Schiffer, Crawford, McPherson, Turlington, Klum et al were just everywhere - and they were shapely and fit and healthy. "Amazonian" was the description regularly used re them.
They had pretty unattainable bodies (their height alone) but they were not unhealthy.
Other supermodels through the years have included Jerry Hall and Christie Brinkley - radiantly healthy looking women.

well spoken man

bucket of vaseline and a jar of viagra then sling me in there.......happy man

Tarzana

Lyger wrote: »

Surely the clothes would hang/fit better on them?!

From a fashion point of view, not really. Being small breasted and very slim shows off the line and cut of the clothing better. But sadly, the desired shape would be the natural shape of very few women. So willowy women are scouted, and then expected to lose a hell of a lot more weight. Basically, walking clothes hangers are what designers want. There is also the "exclusivity" thing that the fashion industry likes to project, a rarefied world. Few women will be this slim and tall, and it is therefore "special".

DoYouEvenLift

Some of them might be still attractive even though they're chubby or actually overweight because they have really good faces but don't kid yourself, they'd look even better if they had the body to go along with their faces.