body type and dating

As I get closer and closer to my goal weight, I noticed that the types of guys I attract are very different from when I was overweight (I had big boobs and now I'm average). Obviously, the better you look, the more people you will attract, but this goes a little deeper than just looks. It's more like the quality is better. They actually have goals, can hold an intelligent conversation, and want relationships. I still get the occasional loser but not as many. This came up in a conversation with my sister and she said that women with certain bodies (big boobs or butts) have a harder time finding a men who would want a relationship than a women with average features.

At first I thought that was stupid, but then I thought about it and it actually makes sense. Take someone like Pamela Anderson. She has big boobs and she is seen as a sex symbol that some men would want to sleep with. How many men out there would want to marry her? Looking at her ex husbands and boyfriends, what would you say about there quality?  Then, take someone like Cameron Diaz. She's skinny with no boobs or butt and she attracts men who want to be in a relationship with her. Of course some just want to have sex with her ( every woman is going to meet those types) but for the most part she is seen as dateable.

What does everyone else think? Does being physically average ( when it comes to body type) give a person better dating options than someone with larger features? 

It may seem pretentious but I would class myself as a decent guy that a women would want a relation ship with (this is based of my friends and roomates who generally cheat and lie just to sleep with the next "cute" girl).

I can say it is almost entirely based of personality for me. I'm not shallow I just couldn't be with someone who I wasn't sexually attracted to as well but this mainly relies on personality. But no I never notice a big butt or boobs when it comes to me looking at girls. I don't think there is any sort of initial attraction for me until I actually start talking to someone. From then on depends whether or not I like someone.

Plus girls with glasses and small boobs are cute as hell :)

Not that you want to know I just would love a girl like that.

Original Post by peppas25:

As I get closer and closer to my goal weight, I noticed that the types of guys I attract are very different from when I was overweight (I had big boobs and now I'm average). Obviously, the better you look, the more people you will attract, but this goes a little deeper than just looks. It's more like the quality is better. They actually have goals, can hold an intelligent conversation, and want relationships. I still get the occasional loser but not as many. This came up in a conversation with my sister and she said that women with certain bodies (big boobs or butts) have a harder time finding a men who would want a relationship than a women with average features.

At first I thought that was stupid, but then I thought about it and it actually makes sense. Take someone like Pamela Anderson. She has big boobs and she is seen as a sex symbol that some men would want to sleep with. How many men out there would want to marry her? Looking at her ex husbands and boyfriends, what would you say about there quality?  Then, take someone like Cameron Diaz. She's skinny with no boobs or butt and she attracts men who want to be in a relationship with her. Of course some just want to have sex with her ( every woman is going to meet those types) but for the most part she is seen as dateable.

What does everyone else think? Does being physically average ( when it comes to body type) give a person better dating options than someone with larger features? 

perhaps you are generalizing.

At my largest I never attracted creeps - I attracted smart guys who wanted relationships. As I lost weight I started getting hit on by sleazeballs again; it was like adolescence all over again.

I guess it is how you define loserdom. If you want high socioeconomic status guys, then yes, your chances improve with slenderness because many of those guys want a girl that will make their friends jealous, and that means "social standard of beauty" -  even if it isn't what they are actually interested in.

The pamela anderson/cameron diaz thing is probably due to perceived "bimbohood" in terms of intelligence (probably not entirely deserved) more than body type. Women who are perceived as intelligent, mature, and thoughtful will naturally attract people who want relationships.

The main difference I can see about losing weight is that you can probably have more conventionally physically attractive partners, since people tend to date and marry people who are about the same level that they are. If there is a big difference in something like physical appeal, there will be an opposite, correspondingly big difference in something like intelligence, money, power, sanity, etc. (You're better off dating someone who's at about your level in everything, in other words). And of course when you climb up any of those ladders, you will attract more people with all of the above qualities. (Yes, this means that unattractive people who get smarter, richer, and kinder will attract prettier partners, too).

Do bigger women have a harder time getting relationships? Not if they have those relationships with men who are also big, that's for sure. I know A LOT of smart, thoughtful, mature guys who can't find girlfriends because they are not conventionally attractive and don't make the big bucks. If you want people to not be shallow about your looks, don't be shallow about theirs either.

What I think is that your weight loss has helped you become more confident. Men (well, human beings in general) who are looking purely for sex will shamelessly go for people who appear insecure and play on their weaknesses in order to get what they want with little to no effort.

On the other hand, those who are not scared to invest in something deep and complex will probably enjoy the challenge and gratification that an assertive partner provides.

trustwomen- I used Pamela Anderson and Cameron Diaz as examples that most people were familiar with. I was going more on their looks and less on their background; although, their background does have something to do with it. I think Pamela's large chest gets her the wrong kind of attention while someone like Cameron Diaz doesn't have the kind of body that would get her that much of the wrong attention ( by wrong attention I mean guys that strictly want to sleep with you).

Also, I define "loserdom" as someone who basicly wants nothing out of life. They have no goals, all they want to do is sleep and party, is on drugs, has a ton of kids, etc . I don't care how much money I guy makes. In fact, when I said a guy of quality I mentioned personality traits and not looks. 

When it comes to my personality, I'm shy and insecure about my body. Emotionally, I'm still overweight. The only thing that has changed about me is the number on the scale.  

Original Post by peppas25:

trustwomen- I used Pamela Anderson and Cameron Diaz as examples that most people were familiar with. I was going more on their looks and less on their background; although, their background does have something to do with it. I think Pamela's large chest gets her the wrong kind of attention while someone like Cameron Diaz doesn't have the kind of body that would get her that much of the wrong attention ( by wrong attention I mean guys that strictly want to sleep with you).

Huh. See I think Cameron Diaz is 1000x more attractive than Pamela Anderson. Plastic surgery doesn't make you beautiful. I would hazard a guess that more guys would want to sleep with Diaz than Anderson. Not that it really matters!

Possibly its a confidence thing. I know you say you still feel insecure, but I think there is a perception that overweight people have less confidence than people of a healthy weight. So maybe people are assuming you are confident and are attracted to that... without knowing your history.

Just my guess.

I have big boobs therefore I must attract mindless idiots without goals.

You're putting waaaaay too much stock in the big boobs thing.  Forgive me for being blunt (honest) here, but overweight women who are proud of their big boobs are fooling themselves. Pamela Anderson had big boobs, but she wasn't fat. Cameron Diaz had small boobs, and is STILL sexy because she isn't fat.

If you loose a lot of weight, you are getting sexier even if your boobs shrink. There are very few men who are attracted to fat women with big boobs.  So few in fact, that it is considered a fetish and there are names for those rare kind of men: "chubby chasers".

The way you speak makes it sound like you are going from sexy to average by loosing weight.  Believe me, that's not true in the eyes of the vast majority of men.  You are going from fat to sexy, and you are attracting more quality men because they know that they are quality and wouldn't bother with an overweight woman.

Don't say, "I had big boobs, but now I am average."  You should be saying, "I was overweight, but now I am sexy."  Give yourself credit for what you have accomplished and accept your new sexier self and enjoy it.  Don't twist the facts to continue to consider yourself "average" when in fact you are really "sexy" now. Give yourself some credit!  Congratulate yourself!

And send me your phone number.   :)

That last line didn't come off as creepy at all.

You might want to check out this group.  I think it's right up your alley.

Original Post by ily51:

What I think is that your weight loss has helped you become more confident. Men (well, human beings in general) who are looking purely for sex will shamelessly go for people who appear insecure and play on their weaknesses in order to get what they want with little to no effort.

Bollocks. Men who are looking purely for sex will shamelessly go for the people they're attracted to. Insecure women are the ones who get ridiculously clingy and chase men away shortly thereafter.

Confidence is sexy.

Yes, there's a particular breed of man who'll prey on insecure women for their own games, but then there's an equivalent breed of woman who'll play insecure men for patsies too. That sort of manipulative strain is hardly gender specific.

(Shamelessly pursue sex? So people should be full of shame for wanting to get laid? Maybe they should feel guilty every time they get a glass of water while they're at it...)

Original Post by peppas25:

trustwomen- I used Pamela Anderson and Cameron Diaz as examples that most people were familiar with. I was going more on their looks and less on their background; although, their background does have something to do with it. I think Pamela's large chest gets her the wrong kind of attention while someone like Cameron Diaz doesn't have the kind of body that would get her that much of the wrong attention ( by wrong attention I mean guys that strictly want to sleep with you).

Also, I define "loserdom" as someone who basicly wants nothing out of life. They have no goals, all they want to do is sleep and party, is on drugs, has a ton of kids, etc . I don't care how much money I guy makes. In fact, when I said a guy of quality I mentioned personality traits and not looks. 

When it comes to my personality, I'm shy and insecure about my body. Emotionally, I'm still overweight. The only thing that has changed about me is the number on the scale.  

I imagine that Cameron Diaz meets lots and lots of men who "just want to sleep with her", as does Pamela Anderson. The "wrong kind of attention" can come from many different sources for many different reasons. I am probably not the person to ask about whether small boobs spare you from it, because I have had big boobs since I was 11 and have consistently gotten my share of "the wrong kind of attention" (except when it was returned, in which case it became "the right kind of attention"), EXCEPT when I was at my biggest, at which point I seemed to magically become sexless and invisible to the majority of men.

As for why "losers" went for you before, and do so less now (are you maybe just interacting with them/meeting them less now?) I have no idea. It is the exact opposite of my experience. When I was bigger I'd attract only nice, smart (though not so conventionally attractive) people - people fell for me after getting to know me. Now that I am smaller I still attract nice guys, but I also get hit on by sleazeballs (who often use the same kinds of language and ideology as headybrew, for that matter).  I imagine that I am not yet in the "league" of being courted by deep, goal-oriented, relationship-seeking Calvin Klein models. However, since I am attached, perhaps that is for the best.

Honestly, OP, if you are looking for a serious, kind guy with goals, and you don't care if he's gorgeous or not and you don't care if he's rich or not (assuming that "goals" isn't shorthand for "will be rich in the future", and being middle-class is OK with you) - my hearty recommendation is to get a little more nerdy and start meeting the vast numbers of engineers, programmers, science grad students, and the like who get written off by women all the time because they aren't Bill Gates.

Original Post by hatamoto:

Bollocks. Men who are looking purely for sex will shamelessly go for the people they're attracted to. Insecure women are the ones who get ridiculously clingy and chase men away shortly thereafter.

Confidence is sexy.

Yes, there's a particular breed of man who'll prey on insecure women for their own games, but then there's an equivalent breed of woman who'll play insecure men for patsies too. That sort of manipulative strain is hardly gender specific.

(Shamelessly pursue sex? So people should be full of shame for wanting to get laid? Maybe they should feel guilty every time they get a glass of water while they're at it...)

Hata, I hate to disagree with you, but when people are just looking to get laid, their standards sometimes drop a bit. I know there have been people in my sexual history that I cringe at - I would chew my arm off rather than be in an LTR with them - yet for a time they met my requirements (and honestly, I have no regrets, because their purpose was often served admirably).

Yes, you pursue those you are attracted to (a guy hitting on you will never do so if he isn't genuinely attracted to you, because what would be the point?) but you don't necessarily go for the MOST attractive person, but sometimes the person you think will be most likely to respond in kind. Sometimes that will be the insecure fat chick. Using false promises of a relationship to get sex is hardly new. (It's NOT a tiny minority of men who are attracted to overweight women - morbidly obese, maybe - but the merely overweight have many suitors. These men won't necessarily be willing to have LTRs with them because of the social status/stigma involved, but they definitely are sexually attracted).

And yes, women do a flip version of this, except it tends to be via "becoming friends" with a vulnerable guy who they know likes them, stringing him along and using him shamelessly. (Often leaving a newly fledged misogynist in their wake, too.) Basically - using false promises of sex to get a pseudo-"relationship". Just as icky.

Original Post by trustwomen:

Hata, I hate to disagree with you, but when people are just looking to get laid, their standards sometimes drop a bit. I know there have been people in my sexual history that I cringe at - I would chew my arm off rather than be in an LTR with them - yet for a time they met my requirements (and honestly, I have no regrets, because their purpose was often served admirably).

Heh, I think we've all been there. As you say, over time if you're going through a 'dry spell' that your standards may slip somewhat. I wasn't objecting to that particular point so much as the implication that men specifically target low self esteem women when looking for sex. While you may have a small portion of men who do engage in this predatory activity, I think that painting all men with that brush is laughable.

Yes, you pursue those you are attracted to (a guy hitting on you will never do so if he isn't genuinely attracted to you, because what would be the point?) but you don't necessarily go for the MOST attractive person, but sometimes the person you think will be most likely to respond in kind. Sometimes that will be the insecure fat chick. Using false promises of a relationship to get sex is hardly new. (It's NOT a tiny minority of men who are attracted to overweight women - morbidly obese, maybe - but the merely overweight have many suitors. These men won't necessarily be willing to have LTRs with them because of the social status/stigma involved, but they definitely are sexually attracted).

There's some research I once saw (lost to the sands of time) that said 25% of men state a preference for women with more curve than is the current, popularly accepted standard of beauty, with a footnote that perhaps as much as 25% more unofficially are attracted but are driven to 'conform to the norm' outwardly. A small percentage, one or two percentage points, preferred truly LARGE women to such a degree that it was considered fetishistic, but a significant portion of men would be happier with a size 10 over a size 2.

Biologically, it makes intuitive sense; for the longest time, humans lived in conditions of nutritional scarcity. Women with some additional padding were more likely to survive the lean times, be more robust in fighting off illness, and passing those traits on to children.

And yes, women do a flip version of this, except it tends to be via "becoming friends" with a vulnerable guy who they know likes them, stringing him along and using him shamelessly. (Often leaving a newly fledged misogynist in their wake, too.) Basically - using false promises of sex to get a pseudo-"relationship". Just as icky.

Aiiee, the dreaded friend zone! Yep, exactly what I was referring to... and exactly what this article from The Onion refers to. Read it and laugh... or weep, depending on your situation. There's also a followup on Digg which is just as funny/truthful as the Onion, albeit a bit more grim.

I have small boobs, but I am average to slim. I have attracted all different kinds of guys: creepy, successful or "rich," nerdy, black (I have a black girl butt), guys who are very sensitive and nice, etc.

I think part of it is the way you, as a woman, perceive different guys. For example, if you personally do not like bad boys, then when they approach you, you will automatically reject them based on judgement even if you have not talked to them. I talk to everyone and treat everyone the same when I first meet them. That is, unless they are friggin' rude or creepy right off the bat.

Hata, I read that Onion article and it rings so true, as do so many Onion articles. I never used guys in that way, I'm fairly sure, but I knew people who did...

Here's another interesting Onion article. I have met so many women who have been with exactly this guy... (I used to work at a women's health clinic).

Original Post by schnooder:

I have big boobs therefore I must attract mindless idiots without goals.

 I knew there was a reason why I liked you.

Original Post by peppas25:

Take someone like Pamela Anderson. She has big boobs and she is seen as a sex symbol that some men would want to sleep with. How many men out there would want to marry her? Looking at her ex husbands and boyfriends, what would you say about there quality?  Then, take someone like Cameron Diaz. She's skinny with no boobs or butt and she attracts men who want to be in a relationship with her.

I think it's funny that the person you use as an example of someone nobody would want to have a relationship with, has been married twice.  And the person you use as an example of someone who attracts people interested in a long term relationship hasn't.

i honestly think its all about confidence. thats what people are most attracted to regardless of weight (although this does help initially as you are initially attracted to someones appearance). but for example,  i know this overweight short guy who is not considered the "attractive" type, and hes basically like a ladies man because his confidence level is through the roof.

You guys are all way over-thinking this.  As she gets slimmer, she gets sexier and attracts a larger variety of men to choose from.  It's that simple.  Occam's Razor applies here.

I realize that it's politically incorrect to even suggest that a healthy, in-shape body is more attractive than an overweight one, but that's just the way it is. We have so many euphemisms for fat...  "Curvy", "voluptuous", "full-figured", "rubenesque", "BBW" ... Let's just admit it. We're fat, and fat is not sexy.  Yes there is a range where a few extra pounds has been considered attractive, both now and in eras past.  But what we have going on now is not an epidemic of curvaceousness.

Obesity shortens our lifespans and causes strokes, heart attacks, diabetes and just plain reduces our ability to enjoy life.  And that is not sexy.

Evolution selects for different tastes for different genders.  Women invest 9 months of their life and risk death during childbirth for each of their offspring. It's hard to hunt down a woolly mammoth to eat when you're 8 months pregnant. Women are physiologically capable of bearing only a few children during their lifetimes.  Therefore Evolution selects for women to want a strong, supportive, dedicated mate to help her through her pregnancy and to help raise the children. That's why rich doctors are considered sexy.

Men, on the other hand invest only 5 minutes, and their risk is limited to catching a disease or getting beaten up by a jealous alpha male member of the social group.  There is another voluntary investment a man can make, and that is that he can volunteer his support for the mother and his children to increase their odds of survival. Thus there are 2 common procreational strategies among males:

 1- Promiscuity with as little long term support as possible (hopefully she won't even remember his name) Conserving all means of support for strategy 2.

 2- Monagamy with as much support as necessary given to the mother and children. Unless he suspects that one of the children may not be his. Then he'd be wasting his precious means of support on some other man's child. Hence the jealousy instinct.

Most men will follow both of these strategies at some point during their life. (sometimes simultaneously.)

What it all comes down to, political correctness aside, is that what men have to offer women is support. That's what women need the most in the procreational business transaction. That's why they crave men who are "career oriented", "ambitious", or just plain "rich"...

And what women have to offer to men is a healthy body to gestate, give birth to and nurse a child. That's why men crave strong young bodies and the outward signs of health.

Fat is not an outward sign of health. Fat is considered ugly by men because it is unhealthy. Women are a bit more forgiving of outward appearances if the man seems like he is the type that can and will support her. Women still crave healthy genes in their mates, but they put a lot more emphasis on a strong (confident) alpha male who has both the means of support and the intent to support her.  That's also why women are such pushovers for grandiose romantic gestures -- Romantic gestures are outward indicators of intent to support.

OK, That's a very abbreviated summary of what the field of evolutionary psychology has to say about it.  I'm sure a lot of readers will just dismiss all this and jump back into their politically correct state of denial. But by using euphemisms like "curvy" we are doing a disservice to ourselves and others. Somebody has to do the emperor a favor and tell him he has no clothes. Stop *enabling* people to remain fat and unhealthy by telling them that they're "curvy".

The OP has done a great thing by getting closer to her goal weight. She should be congratulated for that. I hate to hear her characterize her success as "I had big boobs and now I'm average". That minimizes it. It makes it sound like she's less attractive than she used to be, which is a strange twisted logic, and the opposite of the truth.

She's not attracting higher quality men because she doesn't have big boobs any more. She's attracting higher quality men because she's sexier then ever.  And perhaps more importantly, she's healthier than ever.

I recognize some Dawkins in that summary. Loved the selfish gene... don't always agree with his hypotheses, but the dude has definitely presented a cogent argument.

... and I disagree, in part, with you. I love me curvy women. I don't want to sex up skinny stick chicks or monster buff women who can bench press me. The former leave BAD bruises all along the lower abdomen, and the latter just simply don't appeal to me. For me, women with a six-pack are not a turn on. This doesn't mean that I like women who can hide a six-pack in the folds of their flesh, it means that I like women that look like WOMEN. I mentioned Scarlett Johansson before, but most of the old "bombshell" actresses conform, at least bodywise. I've got just the tiiiiiniest crush on Kat Dennings right now.

Yes, it's good she's getting healthy, it's a laudable goal as are her efforts to reach that goal. Society, however, has decided that there's a standard for beauty that is not possible for many women to reach without doing real physical harm to themselves. Women are not, and have never been, designed to operate at peak efficiency with 6% body fat... unless you think that periods spontaneously stopping is a sign of health. Indeed, from a health perspective, not only is a little extra weight attractive to a wide swath of men, it can help you live longer.

So no, curvy is not a disservice. If you're 100lbs overweight and trying to claim you're curvy, then the disservice is self-delusion.

Original Post by hatamoto:
For me, women with a six-pack are not a turn on. This doesn't mean that I like women who can hide a six-pack in the folds of their flesh,

Actually I'm not sure we disagree at all on that. You are expressing exactly what I am trying to say.  There is a range that is sexy to (most) men. That range includes a few extra pounds. It does not typically include the ability to "hide a six-pac" as you say. I personally don't mind a little extra "cushion for the pushin'". But Curvy means hour-glass shaped, not pumpkin shaped. I think there's too much of a tendency to call pumpkin shapes curvy.

I want to make it very clear, I am definitely more of the pumpkin shape right now. So I'm not just criticizing others without having walked in their shoes...

Yes, it's good she's getting healthy, it's a laudable goal as are her efforts to reach that goal. Society, however, has decided that there's a standard for beauty that is not possible for many women to reach without doing real physical harm to themselves.

Agreed.  Being too thin may be in fashion right now, but it is far from healthy and thus one would expect evolution to select against a sexual attraction to anorexics.  Society's standard is culturally generated, while our instinctual preferences are biologically generated. Over time, culture's standards will swing back and forth around the more stable biological standards.

I would suggest that rewarding extreme thinness is just as much a disservice as condoning obesity. Yet both of those disservices are common in our current culture.  We are fooling ourselves in both directions.

So no, curvy is not a disservice. If you're 100lbs overweight and trying to claim you're curvy, then the disservice is self-delusion.

Yes. That last bit is exactly what I'm trying to say. 10 or even 20 lbs may be curvy. 100lbs is a literal death sentence. I know. I'm trying to lose 153lbs while I've still got some life left. And I count among my true friends the ones who won't pull the punches. Even the ones who will make a joke about it now and then. Because they are the ones that are being honest and delivering a wake-up call.