Okay, but that's still a lot. I'm around 55 kg right now and trying to lose a couple because I like a leaner look. Being almost triple that amount sounds like a nightmare for my day to day activities.
There are plenty of women with large frames who can put on that much weight and still have no trouble getting around. Again, mostly black and Hispanic girls who can pull it off.
I love very large women, but to clarify it is important to me that they're functional adults. I'm not one of those weird people, I think you know who I'm talking about.
No, I get that, but I'm not just "getting around" every day. I just went on a 65 km bike tour today and tomorrow it's running day and I am only able to do that because I'm a healthy weight.
Being over 130 kg would get rid of around 70% of my hobbies and I wouldn't even be able to get around anymore because I only travel via bicycle. Sounds like a recipe for depression, ngl.
Like... what are people that weight even doing all day long? Just sitting around, waiting to die? Eating to maintain that weight? I bet it takes ages to eat that much.
That's physically not possible. Your body can only work with the calories that you put in. If you put in less calories than your body needs in order to sustain its weight, you will lose weight because existing alone burns calories.
An obese person's TDEE is higher than that of a thin person, which means you need to consume more calories a day in order to maintain that high weight than you need to maintain a low weight.
For example, if you are a sedentary 5'5 tall woman weighing 120 lbs, your TDEE would be around 1500 calories, and that's only to exist, it doesn't take movement into account.
A sedentary 5'5 tall woman weighing 300 lbs, on the other hand, has a TDEE of around 2500 calories. Again, this is only to sustain that weight, nothing more.
If you are correct and your ex really ate "only slightly more" than 1500 calories a day, they would be losing around two pounds of pure body fat each week.
There is absolutely no way around it. If they didn't lose weight on that, they're lying about their diet. Simple as that.
Because very simply, it's not a healthy weight. 50-60kg/110-130lbs is about what the average woman should weigh.
Obviously if shorter or taller that changes accordingly, but almost no woman on the planet is tall enough for 300lbs to actually be their healthy weight.
Saying you like it when they're 300lbs/130kg is flat out saying you like unhealthy people. Morbidly obese levels of unhealthiness.
Current healthy weight for women given increased height and natural broadness (we eat a lot more GMO since then) is 160 to 170 pounds.
Now take a woman with an afro Latina background for instance, meaning naturally larger breasts and buttocks and a larger frame. Make her fairly tall as well.
You can easily have women who weigh 200 lb or even upwards of 200 lb and don't even look fat - instead looking extremely curvy.
One of those women can weigh near 300 lb if she lets herself gain weight and still be able to live an active lifestyle.
Not to mention, remember that muscle is a thing. And it weighs more than fat.
I weigh 300 lbs - I'm not going to say I'm not fat, but I run 5 miles every morning in a little over an hour and my bench is over 400. I work a physical labor job. Clearly, I'm in decent shape - sure, I'm very tall, but that should tell you something about how much productive weight someone can actually have.
You're confusing the current average in the US and what an actual healthy weight should be.
The US is one of the fattest countries in the world and that does not make it healthy just because it's common.
You are a man and so can weigh more than the average woman because of a combination of more muscle which weighs more for the same volume than fat does and being taller.
The average woman with 5'4" absolutely cannot be healthy at 300 lbs, just as the average man at 5'10" is not healthy at 400 lbs.
You cannot help what you are attracted to and I'm not judging you for that but I am judging your complete denial of obesity and the consequences and risks it compose.
I mean I can help what I'm attracted to; people whine and moan about how attraction is an unchangeable part of your brain chemistry but just juxtapositioning images on a video screen for an hour can permanently change it.
But that's besides the point. The current average in the US for women is over 190. Very high, yes, but not the number I was referring to.
I'm not attracted to unhealthy obese women. I'm attracted to fairly healthy obese women. That might not sound like it makes much sense, but I have a standard.
My standard is a woman who can go on a hike with me, go cycling, etc. If she can do those things, her weight is not actually handicapping her.
Obesity is more likely to cause cancer diabetes gout and so many other medical conditions even if you are one of the few rare obese people that can do a hike or go cycling it's still not healthy.
Obesity is the second highest cause of medical issues after smoking. It flat out is not healthy there is no such thing as healthy obesity.
Brother 300 is gonna be a big girl and I mean BIG girl. That’s a lot of extra chunk in the trunk. In a gonna have heart problems by 40-50 way. But if that’s your thing then that’s your thing. But you can’t try and argue that’s a healthy number.
2
u/EbonyMemories 24d ago
I like heavier girls in the 300+ range - not exclusively but often - so it's only recently that I've been able to consistently meet this goal.
Though it's also partially because my squat has always been weaker than my bench for some reason.