Hi All

Just wanting some others opinions and to get a bit of frustration of my chest.

Why is it that if an actress or someone in the media is skinny or thin they are described as being fit. A person who is thin/skinnny can also eat crap food smoke 100 cigarettes a day and be as 'unhealthy' as a person who is obese. Being physically fit demands a lot of hard work and it gets annoying if one who is fit but not stick thin is still considered big or sometimes ( I hate to say it but have heard it) as fat!!!

I'm not saying thin is a bad thing, I am aware some people are naturally thin,( look at some athletes, marathoners, high jumpers) I guess my rant is mainly in regards to supermodels who look anorexic and are being described as great and the ideal ( in this country, UK, I'm even aware of 5 year old girls on diets!!, not sure what it's like elsewhere)

Do any other woman feel the same way? open to mens opinions also.
Trish Stratus or Kate Moss, heathy looking vs needs a good meal!

Personally thin is nice but i prefer toned. When a girl is naked and you can see a rough outline of her musculature i consider that to be fit. Now a few people will have genetics which means they can be ultra thin really easy. Some people even go on extremely low calorie diets to achieve this ultimate thinnes. Supermodels are beautifull (whether due to extreme make up and good photography), but some are too thin. Personally i would ignore what other people see as beautiful and do what you want for your own self. Excercising and eating properly has many more benefits other than just looking good.

I can see where women would be more... upset by supermodels. Are they hot? Yeah. To me, they need more meat on their bones. I'll take Stacy Kiebler over Kate Moss any day 'n twice on Sunday.

-R

Hey,

I dont think people outside the Uk use the word fit to describe a good looking girl, in the same way we do in england. :)

Id rather sleep with some who looked like Trish Stratus then any super model anyday. Mind you, i dont think id sleep with trish stratus herself, as she has slept with rather a lot of people. So perhaps Torrie Wilson is a better bet ;)

Supermodels are just that. Models. There bodys are what is considered best to show off the latest fasions. Someone who looks fit (as in athletic) is, in my opinion, more attractive then someone who is thin. But thats me. Others may prefer thin, or even overweight people. Theres someone for everyone, and so long as you look how you wanna look, thats really all that matters.

So where in the UK are you from ?

I have to agree with all the posts so far.
I dont want to make too much of a generalisation but going on the quick office pole just completed and my own feelings about this i think that nearly all guys dont find the thin models that attractive. It is how they make the dresses look that the fashion industry is bothered about and it does seen like the only people in the office that liked the look of the thin models were the women. Perhaps its a urban myth that women prescribe to, that guys like that shape.

Having checked out klpants site i think it fair to say she is fit!
I much prefer her figure to any of the fashion models I have seen. She has the right balance

Wilders

just to clear up some confusion, I meant - why are thin/skinny people labelled as physically fit not fanciable fit, skinny doesn't mean physically fit

Skinny may not be fit but it's way better than fat.

just to clear up some confusion, I meant - why are thin/skinny people labelled as physically fit not fanciable fit, skinny doesn't mean physically fit

In actuality, I think most people stereotype your average beanpole runway model as unhealthy. Whatever the motive may be... jealousy... etc... I don't think I know of a single woman who believes female models to be fit. Most women seem to associate the frailty of the average model's frame with anorexia and bulemia - not fitness as we define it. I admit... I hold the latter stereotypes too... I believe that a woman can't that tiny and be very healthy/fit at the same time. Fitness models are much more attractive to me.

I do see your point that it's easy to confuse being thin with being fit. There's a dichotomy that exists in what you're ranting about... models are beautiful to me... they have appealing, symmetrical faces and bodies and I have yet to see one that couldn't put on a burlap sack and make it look fantabulous. The flip side of that coin? Women idolize that model look; just perouse the magazines at the supermarket checkout next time you're there. Yet women despise these models for being rail-thin as they are and label the path to the bodies they envy as "unhealthy".

Love them for looking good... hate them for the "unhealthiness" of achieving their look... I prefer my wife's inspiration. She loves Monica Brant. I have to agree. Hottie. She's healthy, she's beautiful, and she achieved her look in a healthy manner. That's the way to go.

-R

-R

I dont think anyone here can tell you why they are labeled as fit. Simply becuase we dont agree with them :confused:

Skinny may not be fit but it's way better than fat.

I disagree. Way too skinny can easily be as gross as too fat.

Bit dissapointed, thought there would be at least 1 female response, this is supposed to be a female fitness forum isn't it??

Thanks for the responses from the guys.

Well...I definitely prefer athletic looking women...like Demi Moore in Charlies Angles...Now that's fit :nod:

(...and she is well above 40!)

I didn't respond because I haven't noticed the behavior you're describing.

I think Madonna is fit. I think Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Garner are fit. I don't think Penelope Cruz is fit, or Nicole Kidman, or Calista Flockhart, or Lara Flynn Boyle. But I've never heard them described as fit.

Are you thinking of someone in particular? Perhaps you have seen or heard people describe them as fit because they look healthy - they have a glow in their skin, they are well hydrated and well rested.

Cindy Crawford looks like she's probably fit, and Tyra Banks, too. Do you think they're not?

Sexy is a whole different story. I don't know about Laetitia Casta being fit or not, but it's hard to deny that she's sexy.

The point I had been trying to make has been overlooked.

Yes Madonna probably is fit as she is notorious for working out, as I said, being physically fit is different than just being thin, would Angelina Jolie be able to run 3 miles without getting winded? the stunt people are the one's in the films who do the action scenes not the actresses, most actresses smoke to stay slim ( yes, I know big generalisation), so I would have throught walking a flight of stairs would wind them due to the smoking.
Being sexy and good looking has nothing to do with being physiaclly fit, being able to run 3 miles, do pushups, athletic type stuff is what I mean.



I didn't respond because I haven't noticed the behavior you're describing.

I think Madonna is fit. I think Angelina Jolie and Jennifer Garner are fit. I don't think Penelope Cruz is fit, or Nicole Kidman, or Calista Flockhart, or Lara Flynn Boyle. But I've never heard them described as fit.

Are you thinking of someone in particular? Perhaps you have seen or heard people describe them as fit because they look healthy - they have a glow in their skin, they are well hydrated and well rested.

Cindy Crawford looks like she's probably fit, and Tyra Banks, too. Do you think they're not?

Sexy is a whole different story. I don't know about Laetitia Casta being fit or not, but it's hard to deny that she's sexy.

I didn't respond to your post because I honestly don't understand the underlying point you're trying to make. Don't take this wrong, but it seems like everytime someone responds, you say that they have overlooked your point. I'd appreciate it if you just came out and downright SAID exactly what you mean.

I have said what I meant, I respect the responses of the other people, I had to try and clear up my point made in my FIRST post as what is the point in making a post when the responses are off topic.





I didn't respond to your post because I honestly don't understand the underlying point you're trying to make. Don't take this wrong, but it seems like everytime someone responds, you say that they have overlooked your point. I'd appreciate it if you just came out and downright SAID exactly what you mean.

I'll take Stacy Kiebler over Kate Moss any day 'n twice on Sunday.

-R

Amen, brah.

I don't go lusty after women like I did in my teens and early 20's, but Stacy Kiebler has a 'natural' thing going on that makes me feel like I've noticed girls for the first time all over again.

http://stinger1987.homestead.com/files/stacy2.jpg

Ken

I think she was trying to point out that being "thin" doesnt necesarily mean fit and athletic, but rather thin in most cases in our society means simply skinny, while a woman (or man) that is slightly busty can be fit and athletic

I dont think she was trying to touch on the sexual nature of the topic thin models vs busty girl next door

thanks for that, you've got it!



I think she was trying to point out that being "thin" doesnt necesarily mean fit and athletic, but rather thin in most cases in our society means simply skinny, while a woman (or man) that is slightly busty can be fit and athletic

I dont think she was trying to touch on the sexual nature of the topic thin models vs busty girl next door

l still don't get it. Did anyone say Calista Flockhart is fit?

Would Angelina Jolie be able to run 3 miles without getting winded?
Why, yes, I think she would. I really don't know for sure, but she looks like she would. Do you think she wouldn't?

Put it this way:

Put Angelina Jolie and Queen Latifah in a race. Guess who I'm gonna put my money on?

not the point she was trying to make guava...

Amen, brah.

http://www.halloftheblackdragon.com/east/ldragon/september0.jpg

The only way she could be more perfect is if she had an identical twin.

Guess I didn't read this thread well enough... 'cause now I'm confused at to what klpants' message was...

-R

not the point she was trying to make guava...

Yeah, I think the point she was getting at was somewhere along the lines of a person's lifestyle not necessarily being a reflection of their skin-deep appearance.

That, coupled with the fact that regardless of their lifestyle (and incorporation or neglect of proper fitness and nutrition) they look thin and by that association they are therefore 'in shape'.

I admit it's highly frustrating for someone like me to have busted his hump for 7 months to look like I finally do, while I have friends who eat terribly, drink more than 'socially', and haven't seen the inside of a gym or owned a pair of running shoes in 10 years. Yet they still look 'thin' and 'in shape'.

I guess the illusion ends there, because I went mountain biking with an old friend last Saturday (who fits my said description) and he could not keep up with me past 10 minutes into the bike ride. I had fully intended on a 3 hour tour. :(

Ken

People think all Scandinavians are tall. In my case, thats true.

Were you thinking all Norwegians ski to school, even during summer? No. :D Its a lot colder in Canada. Norwegians would be frozen stiff in Saskatoon during winter!



I can only tell how fit I am. But it wouldnt surprise me if somebody "bigger" would win over me in some sort of physical competition. Infact, the way I see it, they could be hiding more muscles! I dont think skinny women carry any worth to mention amount of musle. Now Im thinking 5'11, 110Ibs girl. I dont know what you were thinking when you said thin.

Ken has got it too

Put three slim people in a line with 3 overwieght people (not obese)

The fitness levels of all people will be different, in fact the slim peole could have a worse fitness level ( i mean through a test of physical fitness) than the overweight people, so why is is skinny people are sometimes labelled as being physically fit ( when they may not have done any actvity in their lives) while overwight people are labelled as unfit.

as ken said ' a person's lifestyle not necessarily being a reflection of their skin-deep appearance'







Yeah, I think the point she was getting at was somewhere along the lines of a person's lifestyle not necessarily being a reflection of their skin-deep appearance.

That, coupled with the fact that regardless of their lifestyle (and incorporation or neglect of proper fitness and nutrition) they look thin and by that association they are therefore 'in shape'.

I admit it's highly frustrating for someone like me to have busted his hump for 7 months to look like I finally do, while I have friends who eat terribly, drink more than 'socially', and haven't seen the inside of a gym or owned a pair of running shoes in 10 years. Yet they still look 'thin' and 'in shape'.

I guess the illusion ends there, because I went mountain biking with an old friend last Saturday (who fits my said description) and he could not keep up with me past 10 minutes into the bike ride. I had fully intended on a 3 hour tour. :(

Ken

Oh, okay, NOW I get it.

The thin person is more likely to be labelled as physically fit because people assume that they must do a lot of exercise in order to be able to look that good.

Also, people assume that if you exercise a lot you would not be overweight.

There are exceptions to the rule, but generally, I find these assumptions to be valid.

I dont believe people are so judgemental that they think thin=fit (maybe a UK thing?). When I see a thin person smoking, that would be "not healthy" Some people got the skinny frame and doesnt have to do anything to keep it. Its bluh but not equal fit. Not in my head.

A 5K would be won by a thin person. Why? Less to move.

so why is is skinny people are sometimes labelled as being physically fit ( when they may not have done any actvity in their lives) while overwight people are labelled as unfit.


Funny enough, I don't think that klpants' question has STILL been answered!

To put it as best as *I* can, a picture says a thousand words. When I see a thin person with visual evidence of a toned physique, I automatically (dare I) assume that they take care of themselves by means of diet and exercise.

The reality, is that there are people out there with a metabolism that support their build and appearance. The rest of us just have to work a little harder, that's all.

However, in 20 years it will be MUCH harder for these people to maintain the same lifestyle and enjoy their youthful appearance. It will also be equally difficult to adopt a lifestyle such as the ones many of us here at JSF have gotten used to.

Ken

I dont make such assumptions. If I see a person I dont judge their fitness based purely on their looks. But suppose i was in school and i had to chose a girl to join my team of running i would chose a skinny girl rather than a bulky girl due to the common denominator that less weight usualy means a person can run faster. Now say I was picking a team to throw hammer, I would chose the bulky girl because again on average that girl will have more strength. Now I am guessing people make the assumption that skinny people are fit because, on a majority we view fat people as lazy and more often than not as you are climbing the stairs of an office building you see a fat person caughing and wheezing as they make their way up the stairs and not a thin person. This most likely is the route of the misconception that fat people are unfit so thin people are fit!

I live in UK and get what you mean - forget this stuff about Fit meaning sexy.

In the gutterpress magazines that you see at the supermarket checkout, Venous Williams was slated for wearing a slinky dress and called fat, whereas Calista Flockhart, Debra Messing and other 'Lolipop' girls with absolutely no muscle tone whatsoever get called sexy, athletic and 'super fit'.

A different example, a Radio DJ Here (Chris Moyles) started training since he was over wight - something like 250lbs at 5'10. He managed to loose a lot of wieght, ran a half marathon etc but is still called fat and unhealthy cos he still looks bulky. He must be 'Fit' since he ran a half marathon but just doesn look like he stepped off SUnset Boulevard.

Perhaps its just a culture thing, but here it seems that if you weigh 98lbs it doesnt matter how much exercise you do you are automatically super fit!

Vincent

Fitness is defined differently by everyone.

Maybe a runway model is someone's idea of fitness. Maybe a movie star with a great physique is. Maybe a power lifter is. You won't see the guys from the World's Strongest Man contest doing wind sprints, but you can't dispute they have excellent conditioning and explosive power to compete as they do. I certainly wouldn't tell a guy who can drag a semi truck 30 meters that he's not fit.

This is all moot, the more I think about it. Define fitness for yourself and live it.

-R

Well said.

Anybody ever read The World According to Garp? John Irving, as a vigorous, stocky sort of guy, has a lot to say on this subject.

At one point in the story, Garp's wife cheats on him with one of her grad students. The guy is described in the book as being really thin, thin as a clothes hanger. He's described as not even really having much of a body.

But then John Irving makes another point. Clothes look good on clothes hangers.

And that's why models are really thin; it makes the clothes look good. Beautiful models are the exception, most models don't really look all that much better than average people under average light, but they are built to make clothes look good, and that's why they get hired.

Does thin equal healthy? Probably not. However, a few years ago I started losing some weight. It seemed that when I hit my late 30's I ballooned up to 210 lbs. It seems pretty common for men to start packing it on around that age group. About four years ago I started losing some weight by changing my diet (less food+more exercise). At 51 I'm down to around 166 lbs which inspired me to increase and be more consistent with exercising. I feel much better without the weight and I feel even better with the increased workouts. :d_biggrin

Anybody ever read The World According to Garp?
AMAZING book...one of my favorites.

klpants,

I know what you're getting at. I used to weigh 102 lbs., and I'm 5'4". Very very skinny. Size 0 clothes were loose on me.

I was not fit *at all*. Weights? Forget it. Cardio? Bah. Smoking? Yes, lots. (I've since quit.) Food? Junk.

People used to ask me all the time "Wow, you must work out a lot. What do you do?"

Unless you call going through Taco Bell to get a large Pepsi and following that up with a full flavor Newport cigarette for lunch working out, I didn't work out at all.

I think people think thin people work out because you can see their muscles (even if they are tiny) because there's no fat covering them. I dunno. I always thought it was pretty idiotic when people asked me how I worked out.

Oh, and as a side note on the "is plain thin sexy topic". . . at that weight, men didn't take notice of me even remotely as much as they did at non-working out 120 lbs. Strong evidence for men not being obsessed with thinness the way women are.

at that weight, men didn't take notice of me even remotely as much as they did at non-working out 120 lbs. Strong evidence for men not being obsessed with thinness the way women are.I don't know if you had it, but there's a certain look that some women smokers get, whereby they are very thin. They look rather gaunt and you can tell that they will be hideous when they are older because they'll have a super low body fat, a terribly frail figure, and smoke like a chimney. I know somebody like that. She's thin, but just _looks_ like a smoker.

Hi, Newbie here- but I just couldn't help but comment.

I also think that I understand the question. I once had a conventionally "good" figure, for my height. I had a tiny waist, muscular legs, bubble butt (but toned), and perky but large breasts. But I was far from being what I consider "fit". Just like Freemason said above, junk food, smoking, etc. Also plenty of alcohol for me. The only thing keeping my legs and butt toned was horseback riding, and I shudder to think how large I might have been without the general excercise of horsemanship- putting on saddles, mucking out stalls, etc. But that was the *only* real exercise I got. I was 105 lbs at 4 ft 11 inches.

When I recently set out to lose weight, it wasn't for aesthetic purposes. Sure, that's a plus, but- I told my husband "I want to be in better physical condition than I was at age 20." And his reply was, "But you were a HOTTIE back in the day! Why would you need to be thinner than that?"

And I said, "I didn't say I wanted to be thinner than that. I said I wanted to be in better physical condition," to which he just shook his head and looked confused. There. That's proof positive that some people truly think that being thin means being "fit". There is a huge difference between being healthy and looking hot.

Take that flat-chested chick in the picture that someone posted up there. What if she had a butt-ugly face? We would no longer think she was hot. We would just give her kudos for being healthy looking.

FerretNose

I don't know if you had it, but there's a certain look that some women smokers get, whereby they are very thin. They look rather gaunt and you can tell that they will be hideous when they are older because they'll have a super low body fat, a terribly frail figure, and smoke like a chimney. I know somebody like that. She's thin, but just _looks_ like a smoker.

No, I didn't have that look. I know because most people had no idea that I smoked and the few that ended up seeing me smoke would always act shocked when they found out.

Just skinny. Looked like a model in a swimsuit, but that look doesn't come off so well in real life like it does on the page. :)

People said I looked anorexic when I weighed 110 (Im 5 foot 11). And when they heard I was jogging three times a week they said they had "proof". Just so you know, I was 14/15.
Maybe thats why I didnt get the q. Depends which circles you are in and where you are from.
It doesnt matter if you weigh 200 and have to lose w. "Diet=eating disorder". Same with thin.

Define Fit
Define Healthy
Define thin

Ultra Marathon runner are thin and aerobically fit but lack strength and isn't a healthy activity

Power lifters are strong and have huge muscular strength but agin due to the excess weight, musclar or otherwise, health may be an issue.

Models are thin but may or may not be fit or healthy.

Why is thin considered fit: beacuase fit people, sprinters, gymnasts, ballet dancers, martial artists etc are usually lean. The converse of course isn't alway true. Being heavy doen't mean your unfit but it doesn't help.

Being thin doen't mean your fit but it helps for endurance and bodyweight strength activities.

Ignore how the media portray things. Work out what best for you. Look in the mirror. Be honest about where your at and where you can potentially go and enjoy the ride.

Ger

Thanks Freemason, just what I was getting at!! Good for you for stopping smoking, bet you feel a LOT better now.




klpants,

I know what you're getting at. I used to weigh 102 lbs., and I'm 5'4". Very very skinny. Size 0 clothes were loose on me.

I was not fit *at all*. Weights? Forget it. Cardio? Bah. Smoking? Yes, lots. (I've since quit.) Food? Junk.

People used to ask me all the time "Wow, you must work out a lot. What do you do?"

Unless you call going through Taco Bell to get a large Pepsi and following that up with a full flavor Newport cigarette for lunch working out, I didn't work out at all.

I think people think thin people work out because you can see their muscles (even if they are tiny) because there's no fat covering them. I dunno. I always thought it was pretty idiotic when people asked me how I worked out.

Oh, and as a side note on the "is plain thin sexy topic". . . at that weight, men didn't take notice of me even remotely as much as they did at non-working out 120 lbs. Strong evidence for men not being obsessed with thinness the way women are.

Ahh, finally the evidence is proving my point
Thanks for those comments FerretNose!!



Hi, Newbie here- but I just couldn't help but comment.

I also think that I understand the question. I once had a conventionally "good" figure, for my height. I had a tiny waist, muscular legs, bubble butt (but toned), and perky but large breasts. But I was far from being what I consider "fit". Just like Freemason said above, junk food, smoking, etc. Also plenty of alcohol for me. The only thing keeping my legs and butt toned was horseback riding, and I shudder to think how large I might have been without the general excercise of horsemanship- putting on saddles, mucking out stalls, etc. But that was the *only* real exercise I got. I was 105 lbs at 4 ft 11 inches.

When I recently set out to lose weight, it wasn't for aesthetic purposes. Sure, that's a plus, but- I told my husband "I want to be in better physical condition than I was at age 20." And his reply was, "But you were a HOTTIE back in the day! Why would you need to be thinner than that?"

And I said, "I didn't say I wanted to be thinner than that. I said I wanted to be in better physical condition," to which he just shook his head and looked confused. There. That's proof positive that some people truly think that being thin means being "fit". There is a huge difference between being healthy and looking hot.

Take that flat-chested chick in the picture that someone posted up there. What if she had a butt-ugly face? We would no longer think she was hot. We would just give her kudos for being healthy looking.

FerretNose