Join John Adams, world renowned Intl Matchmaker, Monday nights 8:30 EST for Live Webcasts!
And check out Five Reasons why you should attend a FREE AFA Seminar! See locations and dates here.
View Active Topics View Your Posts Latest 100 Topics FAQ Topics Mobile Friendly Theme
Discuss and talk about any general topic.
America has a weight problem. We know that approximately 70% of the U.S. population is overweight, but this affects men and women about equally. This alone does not explain the 10:1 male:female ratio one can routinely find in America on a daily basis. Female preferences being more lenient towards male weight isn't a satisfying explanation either.
It has been pointed out that BMI is simply a function of weight and height, and does not necessarily indicate fatness. While it is safe to assume nearly 100% of high-BMI women are fat, men can have a high BMI but low body fat by building muscle. It is easily possible for a man to be considered "overweight" but have 5% body fat and be in perfect health. However, the occurrence of massive muscles in women is for all practical purposes nonexistent.
The question then becomes, what percentage of the overweight male population is fat, and what percentage merely has high muscle mass? For the sake of this discussion, let's assume 50% of overweight men are fat and 50% are muscular.
Consider a population of 100 women and 100 men. We know that 70 women and 70 men will be considered overweight, leaving 30 healthy women and 30 healthy men. However, if we assume 50% of the overweight men are actually muscular with low body fat, that gives us 30 healthy women and 65 healthy men, roughly a 2:1 male to female ratio.
It gets really interesting when people start pairing off. It's safe to say that at any given time, 90% of healthy women will not be single. They will be either married, dating someone, or be otherwise unavailable. The only truly single women are ones who just moved to a new city, but for the sake of this discussion let's say only 90% of healthy women are paired off. That means we subtract 27 healthy women, and the 27 healthy men they are paired with, leaving three healthy single women and 38 single healthy men, a 12:1 male to female ratio.
Isn't that what we see in real life on a daily basis in America?
The next step is to determine the real male overweight rate, which could answer this question objectively and provide a solid explanation why dating in America seems so skewed.
Coming back to life.
Check out our Dating Sites and International Romance Tours!
Special Offer! FREE 6 Month Membership on ForeignWomen.com! Sign up here.
Find Your Foreign Sweetheart Now! Try our international Dating Sites and Overseas Romance Tours!
Men are fat, not ripped. Just look at this forum. I won't mention names, but half the regulars here have mentioned at one point or another that they are fat, and some of those who have posted self photos are fat as blimps. Walking around this small town in now, almost all the men are fat, at least 20lbs from a six-pack, which is the true measure of whether you are fat or not. Everyone has a six-pack under the blubber, whether or not they exercise.
Best test of fat versus fit is the handstand against wall for a minute. Unlike pushups and pullups, you can't cheat on handstands. Bending the arms and other forms of doing a handstand half-ass just makes it more difficult. (Free-standing handstand additionally tests balance, which is why I specified against wall.) Can half the men in the USA do a wall handstand for a minute? I doubt it.
Frank, do you know a place called Elko Nevada? I stayed there once on my way to idaho on business in the USA. I stayed with an american couple.
In nevada, especially Vegas, fat land whales everywhere, except the dancing girls and whores. And those horrid slot machines everywhere. In every restaurant, and public place. Im surprised they dont have them in toilets so you can play while having a dump. In front of all these machines, fat welfare type people. Fat people everywhere. Idaho was different. People were fit.
California had less fat people but lots of plastic people, faggots and yuppies. Arizona also seemed less fat. Stayed in a place called Williams. In Salina kansas the lady behind the desk at the hotel was huge, and I got the feeling she wanted to give me a ride from the number of times she came to my room. She was wider than me and I am sure outweighed me My dick and entire pelvis would probably disappeared in blubber.
What is noticeable is the huge portions of food, and everything covered in fatty sauces. And they drink a 1 litre cool drink like water. All that sugar... no wonder whales are not endangered in the USA.
Certainly I know Elko. The working ranchers in that area aren't fat. The gold miners and truck drivers who sit on machinery all day are fat, as are the town people, but it's hard to get ranch work done while being fat.
Probably the only part of the United States you would enjoy is the Great Basin (other than big cities therein), which includes Nevada. Lots of white racists in northern Idaho, retired outdoorsmen types who moved there from big cities to avoid blacks.
Is the solution for a one world government to engineer the population levels so that there is only one man for every 10 women? Imagine the f***ing paradise that would be for men? Men would never be sex starved and would have pretty much unlimited attention from women.
So we need to implement a one world government immediately and start a program of specific eugenics and population control.
No, 50% of men aren't ripped and muscular. Nope, nope. I'd say it'd be more like 5-10% of overweight men are muscular. And it would be probably easily under 1% of men who are shredded, as in, perfect looking six pack, etc, while still being over 25 BMI. That said, there's a lot of guys nearer to about 20% bodyfat with some extra muscle, and 20% bodyfat generally won't leave you with a gut, depending on fat storage. If you were looking at straight out weight and height differences, I think it's really more that most guys fit more in an average size category based on BMI. Very few men are say, 20 BMIs, or 120lbs or whatever. It's a really, really, really small percentage of adult men who are that size now in USA. But then for women, you get a much wider range of BMIs, from straight out underweight girls weighing like 90lbs, to 300lb girls. So if you see a group of men, most will be pretty close to the average of 27 BMI or whatever, but in a group of girls, one girl may be 19 BMI, the other 35, the other 28, etc.
One rather obvious thing, too, is many times girls will lie about their weight straight out. I went out with a girl here in US once who told me she weighed either 150 or 160lbs, and was wearing like... size 12 or 14 or something. I told my sister that and she said that's probably not likely she weighed that, because she said when she wore that size she was closer to 190lbs. I guess going with this discrepancy of averages, that's the bigger problem. Women weigh much closer to what men weigh, but their heights aren't going up to keep up with the weight. So a 190lb guy at 5'9 isn't gonna look fantastic, but won't be a total blob. But take that guy at 5'4, blob. But then most girls are about 5'4 in height.
So anyway, regarding weight, I think it's that, not that men are ultra jacked and ripped. It's more that there's more extremes in size with females, so while there's still an average size, there's a lot more variance, whereas more men are more close to the average.
Really, I think the problem overall is that people in USA are completely utterly delusional about weight and health, and it's quite bad. Me right now, I'm 200 at about 20% or so bodyfat, and everyone in my family thinks I'm "skinny" or don't need to lose a lot of weight. Of course, it's because the men in the family are weighing closer to 260-300lbs now. I do have some muscle, and my ideal weight is actually about 170-175, which puts me at exactly 25 BMI, and is a weight Asian people say I'm too skinny at (a good sign, haha.) But in Asia, if I said "yeah I should lose weight" at this weight, people agree with me and say it's a good idea, but in USA, they're like "oh, it's fine, have another slice of pizza!" And people just let themselves balloon up to 300lbs when it's really really hard to do anything about their weight at that stage as you can barely walk, nevermind exercise.
This is all conjecture. If anyone finds a sound of information on the above question you could just plug those numbers into the equation above and we'd have a real answer.
Coming back to life.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3837418/ Here's one.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_c ... ndex_(BMI)
Interestingly, it says females have a tiny percentage lower BMI (.2), but then another study says a tiny percentage higher of obesity (2.1%.) So that more or less goes with my inferences, that with females, the range of "average" is a lot wider than with males. Also it says males have a higher percentage of overweight BMI than females, but females have a higher percentage obese. I guess it pretty much proved my inferences.
It is already solved why Americans are FAT.
I replied to Winston post some years back and he agreed.
The American government is using, some Ionic Weapon, some EMF radiation to make Americans fatter.
When an American goes abroad, he automatically after few months become normal. TRY IT...
When immigrants go to America, after few months they start becoming fat. I know many Indians have become extremely fat, even eating Indian veg food in America.
Its not "Americans" but America, the place that makes you FAT.
Winston said..He eats same portion of Food in America and Taiwan and yet in America he gets more fatter.
America is the worst place to be born as a human being, if you are knowledgeable. All these stupid ignorant third world people keep on going to America for "better life" just to become experiments for the American government.
Once Americans get out of America they become normal again.
Frankie baby telling us (again) about his six pack and 'unfit' fat people.
You probably don't remember the world heavyweight title fight between Tim Witherspoon and Frank Bruno.
One was fat, no six pack, love handles, man breasts...
The other had a perfect physique and had a sculpted six pack.
Who won the fight... well, not the guy with the six pack... he was outlasted and clubbed to the canvas in exhaustion by the fat guy.
So what do we take from this?
Not everyone with a six pack is 'fit' (every smack rat I have ever known has had a 'six pack')
And not every chubby man is 'unfit'.
Now, of course you think your silly handstand is an ultimate test of fitness - because you can do one - it is an ultimate test of body strength, granted - but can it test if that person has the stamina to run ten miles, and of course it can't.
The ultimate test of fitness is a route march with full webbing, rifle and boots - 10 miles is a good number to sort the men from the boys. (I am sure Kradmelder would agree).
I knew lads who were brilliant in the gym who would collapse and give up at the side of the road because they couldn't mentally deal with the going when it got tough.
I am sure every one who would collapse like a deck of cards on a route march had a six pack and could do a handstand on the wall.
I'm sure I would destroy everyone here on that 10 mile march test, but that's because I've spent at least 3 months per year for the last 20 years backpacking and my body stays in condition for that activity permanently now. I could even do it barefoot on rocky ground. I walked the length of the Pyrenees barefoot with a backpack once (6 weeks on rocky trails). And 10 miles is nothing. I did 25 miles day after day on the pacific crest trail for 4 months on end.
Heavyweight boxers are a special case. Try the middleweights: all the champions there have a six pack.
I sincerely hope you and everyone else is irritated by my boasting of my six pack: maybe it will cause you to raise your standards and expect better of yourselves. And I'll continue boasting to ensure I don't get infected by other people's low standards.
There's really nothing special about a six pack, you know. Everyone has one buried under the blubber. Don't need to work to get one. Just put down the fork.
Last edited by retiredfrank on December 23rd, 2016, 4:25 am, edited 2 times in total.
We did 40 km, 25 miles, when we were young men. Last one I did I was with the kommando unit (your reserve unit) in my mid 30s. It was 16 km (10 miles) on and off road and up a steep mountain pass. The rsm drove up in the steepest section asking everyone do you want to quit, hop in the back, at the point where people were staggering and just getting one foot in front of the other and cursing the whole panorama of Gods for being born. I politely give him the bird. And I do mean polite, as you must be to an rsm unless you feel like running to the bottom of the hill, pick up a rock and bring it back up again then get cursed out for altering state property. I made it under 4 hrs, just within medal time for the over 30s. Cant recall the exact time or limits as it felt like eternity And times vary for different terrains. The young permanent force okes from the infantry battalion were of course much faster and did it in route formation. My legs were rubber and i was quite dehydrated. Now it would kill me.
Unfortunately as you get older and develop your mind, your body does the opposite.
This is the online version of 'whistling in the dark'.
You have no idea about anyone on here or what they do to keep themselves in shape. I train six days a week, I can do a good hard 12 rounds. Do I have a six pack? No. Do I wan't one? Not really. The fact you are comparing a military route march to your silly hike proves a point about how little you know about anything.
As Kradmelder will tell you - you start marching as a platoon and because the idea is to keep the squad intact, you start doubling and the pace remains that way, if you haven't done it, don't assume - you have no idea what you are talking about. People with your six pack have been left lying on the side of the road - proves my point a lot better than it does yours.
Because middleweights have to make a weight limit! Bloody hell! Have you an idea of anything at all, so, if an athlete has to make 160lbs then they will more than likely have defined abs. Why does that deny the fact that heavyweight boxers without abs but who can do 10 rounds aren't fit?
It doesn't, and we can also talk about rugby forwards, world class strongman athletes (can you pull a full sized plane 100 meters? Probably not) and such like men. To play 80 minutes as a forward on a rugby pitch is extremely demanding, as is being a world class strongman.
No, because you are some faceless guy on the internet, who cares?
I don't know you from adam, and wouldn't know you if I fell and tripped over you on the street.
I have my exercise routines that include strength, cardio and boxing and it does for me, thank you very much.
You can do what you want, you are talking shite and need to be corrected.
Of course, we did the same, I just picked 10 miles as a good number because I saw many gym heroes fall by the wayside with that number of clicks.
10 miles in 4 hours is good for an old timer. Good on yer!
And of course, it is best suited to younger men who are constantly prepared - my point was, there were many who gave up at the side road who were great at jumping over vaulting horses, swinging around ropes etc...
And you are talking like a fatty who desperate to justify his food addiction. Someday, when you are older, you will learn that fat is poison. Even a few extra pounds in a man (I'm less sure about women, especially for cellulite fat on the thighs and arms of women) lowers testosterone and causes a cascade of other unhealthy hormone changes. You will learn that being lean, which means having a six-pack, is far more important for health than being muscular, though of course some muscle is good.
(Ex-military guys in their 20's collapse on those "silly hill hikes" that I find easy. Happens all the time on the Appalachian Trail. Cheers!)