>>148975634
I'm not insulting you, but I think you're projecting a lot of those issues. It's portrayed as attractive because it is and has been, historically, seen as attractive. I mean, have you seen paintings? The old masters were horndogs, and a lot of their subjects were plump women
The "something better" is subjective, how do you quantify "better" in this case without going to subjective metrics like what YOU think is attractive? I've hooked up with girls of all body types, I don't really have a "type", but my own taste dictates what I'm attracted to. Can I really say that guys hooking up with skinny heroin-chic girls with 0 ass and tits are only coping because they can't "get something better"? Nah
The "letting their bodies go" is also subjective, there's a fuckton of heavier girls that are in my gym EVERY DAY here, a lot of them aim for the thick look, and in the years I've been there they've only gotten thicker. Is that letting your body go? Why is it that this term is only used with bigger chicks and not with people like models? Sure, they're thin, but are they healthy? Is that a good role model to encourage girls with?
I don't know if you're old enough, but the extremely thin body type was HUGE in the 2000s and I knew so many girls who got extremely sick trying to achieve it. You would only see that type of body in every media, of course people were going to strive to be that body. Was it healthy? Is becoming bullimic letting go of your body or is it taking care of it? Is stopping eating healthy?
The only difference from then to now is that now there isn't just one body type being plastered everywhere. In this comic right here you have a thick chick and a thin one, I don't see how that's a bad thing.
And again, it's literally all subjective. As you said, it doesn't match YOUR experience. That doesn't make it the rule, my man, in my IRL experience football is massively more popular than american football, but if you're american, that's the opposite. Get it?
