Quote: (08-24-2011 04:16 PM)speakeasy Wrote:
Quote: (08-24-2011 12:25 PM)Mace Wrote:
The obesity epidemic really skews the dating market against men here. When 99% of men are competing for 60% of the women, it's the single biggest factor in today's screwed up sexual marketplace.
I think we're forgetting to factor in that almost the same amount of American men are overweight as the women. So Budweiser Bubba is effectively off the table for an attractive in shape girl as well. So how many men are you really competing with?
There is a catch here too, though.
Budweiser Bubba counts as much towards obesity as
this guy,
this guy and
this guy.
Obesity is calculated by BMI. 5'10, 215 = obese.
This is the thing with men: testosterone allows them to pack on masses of muscle (which is heavier than fat), and thus exposes them easily to "obesity" via sports or general weight training, even if they're still fit and healthy.
Now, one might be tempted to counter by saying "Well, this applies to women too. I'm sure some of them are just muscular."
This would be wrong.
Women lack testosterone, and hence cannot pack on muscle to the same degree that men can. This is why you do not see very many female bodybuilders(and the few you do see are much smaller than their male counterparts), weightlifters, or football players.
Here is what all of this means:
-Many men can be obese, and still very fit. Other obese athletes you may know include: Shaun Alexander, Michael Turner, Ray Lewis, Osie Umenyiora, Brandon Jacobs, Rashard Mendenhall, Donovan McNabb, and Clay Matthews. In fact, I can include a majority of Pro/College Football players, quite a few MLB guys, and most Heavyweight Boxers in this category. These men can cover much of that weight with muscle mass, which women generally tend to like. They're obese, but still attractive.
-Women generally cannot reach these weights without carrying a lot of body fat, because they simply cannot build heavy muscle mass as men can. It is biology-too much estrogen, not enough testosterone. Michael Turner can be fit and muscular at 5'11 235-240, and very fast too. Michael Vick can do the same at 6'0, 215(borderline obese by BMI). A woman that size is simply fat-there's nowhere else for the weight to come from.
This is not to say that muscle is a complete non-factor for women when it comes to BMI. They can in many cases build enough lean muscle to push them into the overweight category, especially if they're African-American. A woman at 5'7, 160 can be fit if she works out and has built some solid lean muscle, even though that may technically make her "overweight".
5'7, 200? No.
This guy can pull that off, but good luck finding a woman who can. They cannot pack on that much muscle, so you can be certain that she'll be hauling a lot of flab around. An obese man can be fit, but an obese woman is almost
always a fat or chubby one. Women can thank nature for the double standard.
-The numbers are a lot worse for men than they look. You'll look at the stats and see that both genders are close in obesity rates in the USA(something like 32-33% for men and 35% for women). It looks like it might cancel out.
But you're forgetting about Gym-rat George, who lifts 4-5 days a week and measures in at 5'10, 220(obese). He doesn't have a female equivalent (no woman can build that same amount of muscle, even with massive testosterone/steroid dosing). At the same time, he is fit, has fairly low body fat, and is muscular.
You are competing with him, and he has a lot of like-minded company within that "obese" category of men. Any guy who lifts can join him quickly. Take a look at the rates for each sex and then examine men and their exercise habits-it isn't hard to imagine that, when you look at that 33% rate for guys, you may be able to subtract several percentage points(maybe even 10 or more) to account for fit, but muscular dudes, and you won't be able to do the same for women.
Conclusion: The market is skewed away from men.