Mainstream views of beauty

[fireluxlou]

Originally Posted by Mecegirl

So has anyone else heard about Caroline Wozniacki "imitating" Serena Williams by stuffing her bra and skirt? The difference in response is interesting.

Well her and her Serena are quite friendly and Serena's response was friendly and didn't mind it, but that doesn't mean it was right for her to do, nor does it mean we can't discuss it. It made me immediately think of Sarah Baartman .

[T. Trian]

Originally Posted by Mr Flibble

Sorry, popped back in to see if it was safe.

No need to apologize, Mr, you're free to come and go as you please. And there's no danger here. In fact, this thread has proven to me time and time again just how capable of rational conversation the good people here on AW are even if the subject may be of a somewhat more flammable nature

Originally Posted by Mr Flibble

No, they said pretty much what crunchy, unimportant, kuwi and aruna have said right here in this thread....

(I am a member of said forum)

ETA: this is obviously a matter of perception (because I saw nothing of that sort at all, only the same arguments as here), but I don't see much in the way of difference in the argument, only (perhaps) in the method of its presentation. The crux remains the same.

Firstly, how do you know which forum I'm referring to?

Secondly, when discussing the only other forum you and I are both members of (AFAIK anyway), I honestly have to say that I do believe I have not had this conversation over there and hence nobody could have said the same things to me. If there indeed has somehow been such a conversation there and I have been happily ignorant of even being a part of it, could you PM me the link to the thread?

Thirdly, I do think that particular forum is lowbrow and some of the more active members ensure the quality of discourse there will likely never improve especially when at least one of them is a moderator and a bad one at that (the worst moderator I've ever encountered anywhere, in fact).

Then again, myself and K. Trian did find a few great beta-readers and had plenty of good laughs there so it definitely wasn't all bad But I suppose this is so far off-topic that if you find there's more to say on the subject, please feel free to PM me about it

[crunchyblanket]

Joking aside, someone in this thread called judging people by their looks a stinky attitude and while I don't find that the best term, well, to me it seems that you are doing just that: judging people based on their looks and associating negative traits to said people.

You did something similar earlier in the thread where you suggested women who appear model-thin are less physically capable, and also where you equate 'muscular' with 'healthy'.

Out of interest: if you were single and looking for a new partner and met a guy who was otherwise just perfect but did have an excess of rippling muscle, would that mean you'd pass him up?

No, but it's not what I personally find attractive. Mr Crunchy's short, stocky and a tad overweight, and that's absolutely fine by me.

[Mecegirl]

Originally Posted by K. Trian

I saw a short news article in one Finnish tabloid, but it only read something like "Wozniacki amused the audience by imitating Serena Williams and then she lost the match to Sharapova" or something. What kinds of differences have there been elsewhere in the media?

Well in some circles it seems that what she did is considered cute and harmless fun.

Others are accusing her of being disrespectful/unprofessional.There is also talk of how what she did is racist.

Both groups agree that Wozniacki would have been better served by imitating Serena William's playing style rather than her body type.

One thing that I have noticed is that people who think the joke was harmless mention how cute/attractive Wozniacki is.

Here are some links that I have found.
http://guyism.com/sports/caroline-wo...irt263733.html

http://hellobeautiful.com/2587268/hu...-tennis-match/

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/1...aria-sharapova

http://larrybrownsports.com/tennis/c...ression/103275

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/1...n_2272271.html

Originally Posted by fireluxlou

Well her and her Serena are quite friendly and Serena's response was friendly and didn't mind it, but that doesn't mean it was right for her to do, nor does it mean we can't discuss it. It made me immediately think of Sarah Baartman .

It made me think of her as well. The Williams sisters body type has been a topic since their pro career took off and not all of that attention has been positive.

[T. Trian]

Originally Posted by crunchyblanket

You did something similar earlier in the thread where you suggested women who appear model-thin are less physically capable, and also where you equate 'muscular' with 'healthy'.

That is absolutely correct. I just never claimed that I don't judge people according to their looks nor did I call it a stinky attitude. What I did claim was that while I do judge people according to their looks, I do not expect it to be an accurate way to judge people, only that someone's looks give you some information about them.

I also clarified both statements a few times. I would be happy to clarify them further if need be

A thought:
Perhaps I do that at least partly because I've had hobbies where I get to directly gauge another person's physical capabilities (levels of "raw" strength, aerobic endurance, anaerobic endurance, "explosiveness," coordination, agility etc) ever since I was 5yo and because a bad estimate sometimes resulted in mistakes, I've started paying what may be more attention to this skill than the average person does (I do believe gauging someone's physical capabilities by their looks to be a skill even if it's nowhere near accurate/reliable)? I'm not sure.
What I do know is that nowadays when I'm about to spar with a woman/girl/man/boy (mostly in combat sports), I'm usually not completely wrong with my initial estimates regarding their strength/endurance etc. (the level of skill is much more difficult to estimate just by looking at a still person but once they start moving and attacking/defending and I add those observations to what I've observed about their overall demeanor before, I get a pretty good idea where they stand skill-wise in relation to myself and I can adjust my own performance accordingly).

How much of this kind of... estimations/judging/gauging or whatever it's called do you folks do? Do you consider it a good or a bad thing? Do you do it in some specific context (e.g. like in the sphere of some hobby) or "all" the time/everywhere?

Because I'm also into self-defense, I try to maintain a degree of situational awareness whenever I'm around other people. In essence that means I regularly try to gather as much information about other people as I can with a glance or a few and short of going to talk to them, mostly I have to do it visually before I can categorize them into one of four groups:
1. appears physically and socially harmless to me (e.g. a happy child)
2. appears physically harmless to me but may be problematic socially (e.g. an old man half my size who is missing one leg, is drunk, and antagonizes people around him and is headed my way)
3. appears socially harmless but may be problematic physically (e.g. a big, muscular man who appears sober and happy and is, say, buying ice cream to his small children)
4. appears physically and socially problematic (e.g. a big, muscular man who appears intoxicated and harasses and shoves people around him and is headed my way)

I find this sort of situational awareness a necessary component of self-defense so I don't really even want to stop doing it even if it wasn't an instinct by now. Does anybody else here do this sort of evaluation based on people's looks?

[Satsya]

So you meant in terms of fighting prowess? But you should already know, then, that the visibility of muscles has nothing to do with athletic ability. A guy that works out at the gym daily and models for romance covers could be easily beaten by a frail old man who's a sensei of Cuong Nhu.

Taking all your posts together, I think you and everyone else here mostly agree on the discussed issues. It's just that the angle you're coming from isn't the angle everyone else is thinking about.

There is a point where weight can be a problem in either direction, too much or too little. But those problems have to be treated separately from the wide range of natural shapes bodies can take. Some people are naturally thin as rails. Some people are naturally on the bulky side. It doesn't necessarily follow that they're unhealthy or healthy because they have that natural state.

[Kitty27]

Originally Posted by K. Trian

I know it's a natural part of a conversation, and I'm guilty of it too, but when a discussion is flooded with what we call "arkitieto" in Finnish (It's like common knowledge or every day knowledge, something that we gather from our own experiences, but it's not systematic, it doesn't explain contradictions between things), the discussion loses, what should I call it, "credibility". Also, it may bring in some snarkiness too, as everyone thinks they're right -- to put it bluntly. There will be as many facts in the conversation as there are participants.


and

To you. Yes, to you. Ironically, I will counter it by saying, thank god I can dash friggin' fast that few hundred meters or else I would've missed my bus this morning and frozen my ovaries in the lovely Finnish winter.
But these experiences, this personal knowledge, gets us only so far. It rarely shows patterns, it doesn't generalize (that is, if you wish to generalize), and it doesn't explain, merely describes.

On another note, have you noticed how experts often simplify things, straighten the curves so to speak?
Like when I talked with my brother who used to coach one Finnish runner (European Champion), and I asked him, how would you, based on your education and knowledge of human physiology, define a good fitness level. He replied: "a person who runs 400 m under a minute." I was like "wtf, rly? Narrow much!" But when I started to think about it more, it kinda does make sense. If I could run it under 60secs, maybe I wouldn't get tired so fast in boxing, maybe I could maintain that 11km/h tempo when I run laps, maybe I wouldn't get all winded if I had to run away from some bad folk on a Friday night when making my way back home from the train station. Obviously this doesn't apply to everyone, but the 60secs (I'm almost there!) is my white whale.


I'm sensing you're struggling to find the connections discussed here between beauty (read: bodytypes) and healthy? This is certainly a meandering discussion, and a phenomenon that's laden with personal knowledge and experiences, which in turn, seems to lead to dragging in another participant's personality. I'm not a huge fan of that. Although, as you can see it, I do discuss my own experiences, use that common, personal knowledge too. I wouldn't use it in a research project, or any academic work for that matter, but I guess here it's ok 'cause this isn't the lecture room.


Oh yeah, and come to think of it, perhaps the most famous black supermodels, Tyra Banks and Naomi Campbell weren't very curvy in their hayday. Banks kind has it, and her weight has fluctuated, but even she's not all that "bootilicious."


Another scary example how people try to morph their body to match an ideal their bodies were never meant to match.


An interesting point! And perhaps a good thing, even though I think we've all agreed you shouldn't replace ideals with ideals, but still, sometimes ideals may bring positive things too.

It's funny though, now that there's been talk here about men's attitudes as well, but do you think men make these "I like that there's something to hold on in a girl" comments more than the opposite?

P.s. all bolding added.
P.p.s. the reason why I rambled about the common, personal knowledge stuff was because I started to wonder why these discussion often become so... emotional? Note: I'm still pretty new to internet boards (used to frequent one wild west -like when I was 17-18). It shows!

In my culture,they do. Tis a terrible thing to be a Black woman with no ass as evidenced by how much some Black women are willing to do to get that body. It doesn't affect all women the same way,though. Some don't care whatsoever and that is how self confidence works. Unfortunately,many don't have that trait as evidenced by the epidemic of butt shots and the like.

Originally Posted by K. Trian

I saw a short news article in one Finnish tabloid, but it only read something like "Wozniacki amused the audience by imitating Serena Williams and then she lost the match to Sharapova" or something. What kinds of differences have there been elsewhere in the media?

Lord.
For why,though?

This is not cute. She should be trying to play like Serena,not imitate her body type in a "joking" manner. There has been all kinds of negative attention focused on the Willams sisters bodies and racist attempts to say their physiques and innate "physicality" are why they are so successful. Not because of,oh I don't know, sheer hard work and discipline.

[aruna]

Originally Posted by T. Trian

re

I find this sort of situational awareness a necessary component of self-defense so I don't really even want to stop doing it even if it wasn't an instinct by now. Does anybody else here do this sort of evaluation based on people's looks?

I don't. But then, I'm not interested in self-defence. My son and his girlfriend are schooled in Chinese martial arts and maybe they do it - no idea.

The thing is, I am just not interested in a person's physical capabilities, strength, or level of self-defence capabilities. I do notice (apart from general stuff such as age, sex, race) if they are fat or not, especially women, and I think this is a holdover from my own battles with fat as a young girl. But it has nothing to do with if I think they are healthy or not; if I judge their health or not has more to do with what they eat than how they look. Like, I might judge a mother with her child at the supermarket if they have their shopping trolley packed full with junk food and coke and wish I could replace everything with healthy options - but of course I don't say anything!

I am much more interested in a person's character; their level of compassion vs selfishness, level of inconsideration for others vs respect. I don't have much esteem for people who go through life like a bulldozer only trying to fulfilling their own wants. Just a few days ago I was in an argument with someone on another board who claimed that relationships (ie marriage) was always a power game, that you had to always be pitting yourself against the orher person in order to retain your own level of power. I disagreed vehemently. I don't believe that winning is everything.

I don't care about a persons physical strength, and it is often misleading. More important is their mental strength, and that is not synonymous with their ability to always get their own way. You can be strong in more subtle ways. I prefer the strength of water to the strength of a stone, speaking metaphorically. And a person's physical strength is no indicator of their mental strength.

There's for instance my mother, who is 95 years old and practically bedridden. She can hardly walk anymore - but she tries. Even if it takes half a hour to get to the kitchen, she will shuffle forward on her walker. And go down the stairs every evening to get the fresh air.

And her mind - oh lord. She has the telephone numbers of about twenty people stored im there and if you ask for someone's number she'll rattle it off. She might appear to be asleep in bed, but the minute you call her name she's up and discussing matters with you. She reads two newspapers a day front to back and is on top of everything that's happening. If one paper is late shell have you check every couple of minutes if its come yet. She's quite a phonomenon! And it all has to do with her mind, not her body. Oh, and she hasn't been ill at all for as long as I can remember. Her only health complaint is constipation!

I wonder if those musclemen on the covers of magazines can compete with that?

[Lavern08]

Originally Posted by aruna

...The thing is, I am just not interested in a person's physical capabilities, strength, or level of self-defence capabilities.

This ^

... Like, I might judge a mother with her child at the supermarket if they have their shopping trolley packed full with junk food and coke and wish I could replace everything with healthy options - but of course I don't say anything!

This ^

I am much more interested in a person's character; their level of compassion vs selfishness, level of inconsideration for others vs respect.

And this ^

[Ken]

Originally Posted by Kitty27

There has been all kinds of negative attention focused on the Willams sisters bodies and racist attempts to say their physiques and innate "physicality" are why they are so successful. Not because of,oh I don't know, sheer hard work and discipline.

... have also heard some say that Serena is on steroids b/c of how muscular she is. Another stupid perspective there. She looks as good as she does b/c she trains hard on the court. And come on. If she was taking performance drugs someone would have caught on by now with all the media surrounding her. They even comment on her wardrobe for pete's sake. So the criticism is totally unfounded. People need to get off her case and acknowledge her greatness as an athlete. Talent like that is rare and maybe difficult to accept for some.

[kuwisdelu]

Originally Posted by T. Trian

I find this sort of situational awareness a necessary component of self-defense so I don't really even want to stop doing it even if it wasn't an instinct by now. Does anybody else here do this sort of evaluation based on people's looks?

I don't really see what any of that has to do with beauty or attractiveness, though.

Sure, if someone's fighting technique is beautiful, I might recognize that, but that doesn't mean I necessarily find that person attractive.

Not to mention, the only martial art I do right now is kendo, which has pretty much 0% application to self-defense, and the vast majority of evaluating physical "looks" (unless you're counting things like posture with "looks") that might apply in an unarmed art go out the window with shinai.

Whether I find someone beautiful doesn't really have much of anything to do with sparring, to me.

[backslashbaby]

I size up men as far as what sort of physical threat they could pose, yeah. I've had too many run-ins with dangerous men (strangers) to not do so.

That has nothing to do with whether or not I find a man attractive. It just means I'm not afraid of certain creepy characters who walk down my street, for example, because I know they aren't carrying a gun and the physical match works out in my favor. Unless they end up knowing great moves, of course. There's always that.

If the guy is big enough, I move far, far away while they walk by. That sort of thing.

[T. Trian]

Originally Posted by Satsya

So you meant in terms of fighting prowess? But you should already know, then, that the visibility of muscles has nothing to do with athletic ability. A guy that works out at the gym daily and models for romance covers could be easily beaten by a frail old man who's a sensei of Cuong Nhu.

I have no idea what Cuong Nhu is but I know that a little child could defeat Brock Lesnar easily outside of the octagon. The situation just has to be such that it favors the child and puts Lesnar in a vulnerable position in regards to the child who would, say, point a gun at Lesnar while he's sleeping, pull the trigger, no more Lesnar.

So yeah, anybody can beat anybody on the street if they succeed in manipulating the outcome of the situation to their favor.

But if we speak in terms of athleticism, absolutely, to a degree you can look at a skinny person and think they're stronger than they look. That definitely happens (with K. Trian for example, she's definitely stronger than she looks with her long, slender limbs).

What I have noticed, however, is that there's strength like that, and then there's the kind of strength where a guy can grab your head as if in an RNC but too high so that there's no danger foryou to choke out and yet they are able to squeeze the head so hard that you simply pass out. I've seen that happen. It just kinda woke me up to the ridiculous amounts of strength some people have. The thing is, guys like that who have freaky strength usually do look the part. I have never met a skinny guy who could make someone pass out just by squeezing the upper half of someone's head. Or grab me into a bearhug under the arms and squeeze so hard I have to tap out. Big, strong-looking guys, yeah, skinny guys, never (though some have tried just like I but none of us "normal-" or skinny-looking guys could do it).

That's the kind of strength you just have to shake your head at, it's so far above what a skinnier person could ever do because at some point you just have to look at it from the perspective of physics and science. There are limits to what muscles can do and the smaller they are, the lower the limit.

So:
Yes, a smaller person can be surprisingly strong
No, they can't be as strong as the freakishly strong who also look the part
Yes, a smaller person can defeat the bigger/stronger if the situation is tilted in their favor
No, a skinny 100lbs guy wouldn't survive in the octagon (in a fight under standard MMA rules) with, say, UFC heavyweights no matter how skilled he is. Most people accept this as a fact and that's also why there are things like weight classes in combat sports/martial arts tournaments/competitions.

Originally Posted by Satsya

It doesn't necessarily follow that they're unhealthy or healthy because they have that natural state.

I agree, it definitely doesn't. However, I was talking about that in the context of majorities so while that word can get tiring over time, the part where I said something like that also needs the proper context it was said in.

Originally Posted by kuwisdelu

I don't really see what any of that has to do with beauty or attractiveness, though.

It doesn't, not without the proper context. And the context for that in this thread is judging people by their looks. You can't really cultivate the kind of awareness of your surroundings I find necessary for proper self-defense unless you do what has been discussed here in great detail: judge people according to their looks.
Oh, and it's also related to the discussion we've had here about physical ability and a person's ability to estimate someone's physical capabilities solely on their looks alone.

Originally Posted by backslashbaby

I size up men as far as what sort of physical threat they could pose, yeah. I've had too many run-ins with dangerous men (strangers) to not do so.

That has nothing to do with whether or not I find a man attractive.

*snip*

If the guy is big enough, I move far, far away while they walk by. That sort of thing.

That's exactly the sort of thing I meant: you look at people and make a judgement call (which includes but is not limited to making a rough estimate on their physical capabilities) based on their looks.

Originally Posted by aruna

I wonder if those musclemen on the covers of magazines can compete with that?

First, I do agree with your entire post and we seem to have similar values and ideals.

I just wondered why you appear to see it as a bad thing that I judge a person's physical ability when I look at them while you (at least as far as I understood it) appeared to see it as acceptable to note that a person looks athletic and then associate negative traits upon them on the basis that they look athletic, i.e. judge them by their looks (the part of your previous post I quoted in my post previous to this one).

There's just that bit in the quote that I would like to ask you about for clarification: do you believe having bigger muscles somehow lowers a person's capacity for mental strength? That's the impression that (possibly rhetoric) I got from that statement.

PS. Props for your mom for hanging tough. My dad's parent's died when the grandfather was 93 and a few years later when the grandmother was 88. My regret is that I didn't know them as well as I would have wanted to and now it's too late.

[kuwisdelu]

Originally Posted by T. Trian

It doesn't, not without the proper context. And the context for that in this thread is judging people by their looks. You can't really cultivate the kind of awareness of your surroundings I find necessary for proper self-defense unless you do what has been discussed here in great detail: judge people according to their looks.
Oh, and it's also related to the discussion we've had here about physical ability and a person's ability to estimate someone's physical capabilities solely on their looks alone.

And I still don't really get what that entire tangent has had to do with beauty or attractiveness, either.

[Cyia]

Originally Posted by T. Trian

there's the kind of strength where a guy can grab your head as if in an RNC but too high so that there's no danger foryou to choke out and yet they are able to squeeze the head so hard that you simply pass out. I've seen that happen. It just kinda woke me up to the ridiculous amounts of strength some people have.

That's not strength. It's a classic sleeper hold, which is to block the flow of blood from the carotid artery. You're not trying to grab at the windpipe, which is where most people mess up. Blocking the artery will induce unconsciousness in a matter of seconds, whereas trying to knock someone out by restricting airflow can leave you with a freaked out and fully fight-capable opponent for minutes.

(ETA -- the bear hug version is to block the axillary artery, which is under the armpit.)

[Kitty27]

Originally Posted by backslashbaby

I size up men as far as what sort of physical threat they could pose, yeah. I've had too many run-ins with dangerous men (strangers) to not do so.

That has nothing to do with whether or not I find a man attractive. It just means I'm not afraid of certain creepy characters who walk down my street, for example, because I know they aren't carrying a gun and the physical match works out in my favor. Unless they end up knowing great moves, of course. There's always that.

If the guy is big enough, I move far, far away while they walk by. That sort of thing.

My mother is five feet 2 and maybe 130lbs. She wouldn't dare lift a weight as that is "mannish" behavior. We grew up in a rough neighborhood for part of our lives and she firmly and still does believe that her 380 made all the difference. Even if the man was six feet 8 and 400lbs,she believed her gun made the situation equal.She used to tote that gun but said she had to get with the newfangled times so she switched guns. Now she has a 9mm.

She always told me and my cousin that Ms.380 brings peace out of any confusion. She even took it to church! Looking at the discussion about physical size/lack thereof and how it can impact how a person defends themselves,reminds me of her gun worshiping ways.

[Cyia]

Originally Posted by Kitty27

She always told me and my cousin that Ms.380 brings peace out of any confusion. She even took it to church! Looking at the discussion about physical size/lack thereof and how it can impact how a person defends themselves,reminds me of her gun worshiping ways.

Sounds like my grandmother. After my grandfather died in the early 80's, her nightly ritual of securing the house involved popping off 2 shots into the air before she locked the door so everyone knew she was armed, and that the gun was loaded. When we moved her into her first apartment, I found that gun under her pillow.

[backslashbaby]

I was thinking that it'd be nice for folks to know you had protection and weren't to be tangled with by looking at you. Shooting in the air before locking the door! Well, that does the trick for the night


eta: on topic, I dress so that you really wouldn't notice my musculature. I carry a few extra pounds, so most people would probably think it's not muscle. You don't see cut arms or anything -- just bigger, unless I'm actively flexing. That's ironic for telling how healthy or strong I am/folks could be. If I were a model now, I'd be the not-so-plus-size plus size variety and folks would not know my body composition.

"Abs are made in the kitchen" Well, they are there, and strong, but you just don't see the cuts on many folks. With women especially, folks rarely assume that any bulk is predominantly due to muscle.

I've been lean as hell and I still don't fit a very small size. I'm bigger to start with.

So, trying to tell a girl who might want to lose 35 lbs from a girl who is a mesomorph with 15 extra is fruitless. With women, we go so much by physical size (like a size 8), it's insane. Bigger = fat in too many people's minds.

[T. Trian]

Originally Posted by Cyia

That's not strength. It's a classic sleeper hold, which is to block the flow of blood from the carotid artery. You're not trying to grab at the windpipe, which is where most people mess up. Blocking the artery will induce unconsciousness in a matter of seconds, whereas trying to knock someone out by restricting airflow can leave you with a freaked out and fully fight-capable opponent for minutes.

Just a quick continuance on this OT: I explained badly: you grab an RNC ("sleeper hold") but where normally you'd put pressure on either the sides of the neck (which is the case in the choke you described) or the throat, here you'd aim half a head higher so that you are squeezing the head at around temple height. You can make a guy pass out that way if you're strong enough but I (6,1/185lbs and athletic) am nowhere near strong enough. Guys who can pull that off are so strong that they can make you tap out pretty much by grabbing and squeezing any bodypart.


BTT:

Originally Posted by backslashbaby

Bigger = fat in too many people's minds.

Too true. And many people stare at their weight (and their BMI) way too much. Usually it's the same people who fail to acknowledge that muscle weighs more than fat so even if their waist size is going down, they are horrified when their weight goes up instead of down.


PS. Kitty, your mom is a smart woman.

[Cyia]

Originally Posted by T. Trian

Just a quick continuance on this OT: I explained badly: you grab an RNC ("sleeper hold") but where normally you'd put pressure on either the sides of the neck (which is the case in the choke you described) or the throat, here you'd aim half a head higher so that you are squeezing the head at around temple height.

In that case, you're inducing unconsciousness by applying pressure to the meningeal artery, which crosses the temporal region of the skull. You're also very close to the eye, which is next to the temple and the ocular nerve. Pressure to that nerve can cause disorientation fairly quickly. Increasing pressure to the head can cause the nerve to swell, which will, in return cause severe pain.

[T. Trian]

That's very interesting. Too bad I still can't make anyone pass out that way in sparring

[aruna]

Originally Posted by T. Trian

There's just that bit in the quote that I would like to ask you about for clarification: do you believe having bigger muscles somehow lowers a person's capacity for mental strength? That's the impression that (possibly rhetoric) I got from that statement.

PS. Props for your mom for hanging tough. My dad's parent's died when the grandfather was 93 and a few years later when the grandmother was 88. My regret is that I didn't know them as well as I would have wanted to and now it's too late.

No. I didn't say that (bolded question).

But I also don't think that physical strength is an indication of mental strength.

I was really referring to the vanity that sometimes those body-building types fall victim to. My experience: my own son, who in his late teens got into weight-lifting and was intensely proud of his bulging muscles, constantly showing them off and flexing them in the mirror. Obviously, it was just a part of his growing up and signified a lack of self confidence. I didn't like the look at all and told him so; he also had a lot of tatoos done when he was underage. I almost wept at the sight! His beautiful skin! I actually find huge, bulging muscles supremely unattractive in both males and females and it's unlikely, if I were single, that I'd be attracted to such a man in the first place, even before I got to appreciate his fantastic character. So yes, we do judge people on their looks to a certain extent, and certainly in our search for a mate we'll be attracted to or put off by certain types from the outset. I have no problem being friends with a body- builder. I certainly continued to love my son!

Anyway, my son grew up, thank goodness, and no longer aspired to look like Mr Universe. He still has a good, strong physique and a great character. His physique comes from good, honest physical work, like in the photo below. Sure, it's not all muscle and probably falls under your criteria, but I think he's fine.

Coconutman

And he's no longer vain!

[K. Trian]

Just thought I'd add it here, but for as homogenous a country as mine, it was really quite refreshing that Lola Odusoga was chosen Miss Finland in 1996 and Miss Scandinavia in 1997. This in a culture where most of the beauty pageants are blonde and blue-eyed. And she's still probably the most famous and loved model/Miss Finland winner over here even though her brand of beauty might really not be considered mainstream around here in general. Though I believe the beauty ideal really isn't that narrowed anymore around here. Now we also have a non-blonde Miss Finland, Sara Chafak, and she's just adored by the media. Of course it's always quite dubious when a woman's worth is measured in looks, but... you know, just to add some examples here that even the dark north is little by little becoming less narrow-eyed when it comes to beauty ideals xP

[Kim Fierce]

Different cultures definitely help shape one's own perception of beauty! For most of my teen/adult life I have been in good shape, around 125-135 lbs, but always curvy. Kids my age told me by butt was too round. I grew up in a very small 99 per cent white town and was very glad when I broadened my horizons and discovered that a flat butt is not the universal sign of beauty!

I think I do have some body dysmorphism or whatever you call it. I used to starve myself, think I had to look like a rail. I finally accepted myself at 135 in my mid twenties and realized I looked good.

Then I got pregnant! lol Now my son is 2 and I still weigh 170, haven't lost all the baby weight. The older he gets the more I start to worry. Now my wife is not skinny, she is honestly a big woman, so I don't know why I judge myself more than her. I just don't want her to contract health problems (we both have family history of diabetes, and after my dad had a heart attack he was told to quit smoking and lose weight . . . he did not, and had another heart attack. So to me, healthy eating, weight loss, non-smoker . . . these are ways to longer life.) so I do try to promote healthy eating in our home, for our sake and our son's, and I would like us to exercise together somehow even though we work very different shifts! I am not sure how others perceive my body, but I know I am the type who has to exercise to be what I call "in shape". But after my son was born, I started a good exercise/writing routine, but then got published for the first time and exercise went to the wayside. I want to get into exercise again both to lose weight and because I think eating right and exercising will help me live longer and stave off health problems.

I don't know what other people see my body as. I know I have a distorted view of it so I just try not to worry about it too much.