Sign in / up

back to article FATTIES have most SUCCESS with opposite SEX! Have some pies and SCORE

Yet more great news today for those assessed as fatties by the now massively discredited Body Mass Index (BMI) system: you're probably more successful with the opposite sex than your undernourished contemporaries. We learn this from a new study by trick-cyclists in California, who surveyed 60,058 heterosexual men and women …

COMMENTS

House rules Send corrections
This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    North America. Nough said

    22 8
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      That is one angle

      The other one is that number of partners is an approximation of the likelihood of being dumped.

      So, one possible interpretation of the data is that less obese people get dumped less often so they do not need to switch that often.

      32 5
      1. AndrueC Silver badge
        Reply Icon
        Meh

        Re: That is one angle

        Perhaps it just reflects desperation? Maybe those in the 'healthy' range have a stable partner that satisfies their needs whereas those in the 'not so healthy' range have to resort to frequent bar crawling or the less well illuminated parts of town in order to get their rocks off.

        16 4
        1. alain williams Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: That is one angle

          Maybe cause and effect is the other way round: it is being with a woman that makes a man fat.

          9 0
          1. Message From A Self-Destructing Turnip
            Reply Icon

            Re: That is one angle

            Nah its far simpler, greedy c*nts will eat or f*ck everything that they possibly can.

            3 5
          2. Anonymous Coward
            Reply Icon
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: That is one angle

            That agrees with my experience: women like to feed me AND my cooking skills are zero. My healthiest weight was as a poor student - when I survived on bread, cheese, apples and coleslaw (none of which need cooking!)

            1 0
          3. Glenturret Single Malt
            Reply Icon

            Re: That is one angle

            Just what I was thinking. As I read it, the people surveyed were all in a relationship at the time and no account was taken of any changes since that relationship was formed.

            0 0
      2. Grikath
        Reply Icon

        Re: That is one angle

        Nope.. the correct angle.. The US as a whole has gotten so fat, it's shifted the perception of "attractive" towards what the rest of the world would call "chubby".

        21 4
        1. Bleu
          Reply Icon

          Re: That is one angle

          'Chubby', like 'curvy', a great euphemism for 'grossly obese'.

          0 2
      3. Mexflyboy
        Reply Icon
        Trollface

        Re: That is one angle

        Ha! Some skinny person is a wee bit bitter... ;-)

        13 0
        1. werdsmith Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: That is one angle

          I don't count in the bitter category having been married to a fine woman for 16 years.

          But I would suggest that the bloaters would probably be considered more accessible (which is a nice way of saying they are easy). I do understand that the people that get the most lays tend to be the chubby-chasers. The porkers probably have more self esteem issues which keeps relationships short and causes churn.

          7 4
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      I think I might get into the business of American dating kits. A bag of flour, a plank with straps, a tyre lever, and step ladders spring to mind as likely high demand items...

      3 1
    3. SuccessCase
      Reply Icon

      I think this simply reveals the tactic of sitting on a partner so they can't escape your advances is far more prevalent than anyone previously realised.

      11 1
    4. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      "Why can't people just love me for who I am and not care how fat I am?", regular complaint of fat north American women.

      Obviously it's not just that, it's the fact you are far more likely to f around that puts me off further. Science says.

      1 2

    5. This post has been deleted by its author

    6. Mexflyboy
      Reply Icon
      Paris Hilton

      From living in the UK for 15 years now, I can say my fellow Brits themselves are giving the USAians a run for their chubby money... I used to have problems finding clothes in my Rubenesque size 15 years ago, whereas now I am in chubbyland.

      0 0
  2. Your alien overlord - fear me

    Fat blokes like fat hookers. Science says so.

    9 3
    1. Bleu
      Reply Icon

      So they all

      fetishize a particular rugby position?

      0 0
  3. TheProf

    I always tell the truth in surveys

    I do. Honestly!

    27 0
  4. DanceMan

    I note that this survey measures quantity, not quality.

    29 0
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      @DanceMan

      You've obviously never heard the phrase, never mind the quality feel the width, which is even more appropriate here.

      13 2
    2. Sir Runcible Spoon
      Reply Icon

      Agreed, I read the info and immediately thought that the survey was measuring the inability to *keep* a partner (i.e. the more partners you have the less you are able to maintain a steady relationship).

      This assumption also assumes some kind of moral strength (i.e. one partner at a time etc.) for generalisation purposes :)

      11 1
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Came to say the same: "more successful with the opposite sex" != "the number of sexual partners they'd had"

        I'd argue the opposite. Success tends to one, while a smattering of revolting drunken one-night flabfests and a procession of cheap whores does not come anywhere near my idea of "success"

        Sounds like the trick cyclists have outdone themselves.

        17 3
        1. Palpy
          Reply Icon

          Yeah, that was my take too -- more sexual partners often (usually?) = poor success at sexual relationships.

          I'm not interested enough to read the paper, but perhaps one might look instead at the frequency of sex with a committed partner, or at overall sexual satisfaction.

          "Correlating" one body measurement with one behavioral measurement is damned iffy, yes? Sexual activity is complex, especially for certain cetaceans, mollusks, dragonfiles, and fetishists. Drawing simple conclusions is probably best left for simple minds.

          7 0
          1. P. Lee
            Reply Icon

            > more sexual partners often (usually?) = poor success at sexual relationships.

            Now you're just undermining the music industry.

            The current crop seems particularly odd with TayTay's self esteem so low she's quite happy to sleep with someone she knows is going to dump her; someone else asking his girlfriend if she'll stick by him if he goes to jail or whether she's willing to die for him (presumably he wants her to take the rap for murder he committed) and yes, you may be young and you are stupid for not getting more than a private verbal commitment - of course he was going to lie in that context.

            2 2
            1. Anonymous Coward
              Reply Icon
              WTF?

              Re: > more sexual partners often (usually?) = poor success at sexual relationships.

              WTF did I just read? Am I supposed to understand that or know who Tay Tay is. Google might be my friend but, no, I'm not going to even look.

              5 1
              1. Eddy Ito
                Reply Icon

                Re: > more sexual partners often (usually?) = poor success at sexual relationships.

                According to DDG, Taytay could be either of two municipalities in the Philippines. It doesn't help me understand any better either.

                2 0
    3. fishman
      Reply Icon

      "I note that this survey measures quantity, not quality."

      Sort of the McDonalds of sex.

      1 0
  5. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Counting partners....

    Might not be the best metric for "pulling success", it may be that the skinnies are staying together because they're happy with the selection whereas fatties are constantly hunting something with fewer folds of lard.

    However, as Zappa said, "The bigger the cushion the better the pushin'".

    12 1
  6. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Isn't this just because ...

    ... all the fatties are having bed-breaking sex with each other? Whilst the healthy people (a) aren't getting pissed (UK sense = drunk) on a regular basis (staying sober *really* lowers your success rate, possibly because it doesn't lower your 'acceptance criteria') and (b) for lower BMIs the answer to "Fancy a shag tonight?" is one of: (exercise freaks) "Hmm, tempting, but I've gotta get to the gym"; (footballers) "Sorry honey but I've got a groin strain"; (people who do a lot of physical work, like Mrs Coward) "You've got to be joking, I've shovelled 1 tonne of horse shit, ridden three horses and swept the yard twice and I'm knackered"

    6 1
  7. Silviu C.

    People lie yo!

    Here's the obvious problem with this research:

    "The researchers **asked** the respondents their height, weight and the number of sexual partners they'd had, among other things."

    People fucking lie! All the time!

    In this case weight and height could be verified. But number of sex partners... NOPE

    3 2
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: People lie yo!

      Yo Silviu C dude,

      We seriously tried to do the whole survey thing without like actually asking or anything.

      Just to far out for the norms, the man stuffed us and we totally ended up asking 'cos we like wanted an answer.

      2 0
    2. James Micallef Silver badge
      Reply Icon
      Trollface

      Re: People lie yo!

      "The researchers **asked** the respondents "

      What rubbish science! The researchers should have embedded an accelerometer in the subjects' pelvises, a webcam between their eyes, and some Internet-of-things chippery to send all the data* back to headquarters for analyses.

      *No doubt unencrypted and easily accesible by anyone else

      3 0
      1. Sir Runcible Spoon
        Reply Icon
        Coat

        Re: People lie yo!

        " to send all the data* back to headquarters for analyses"

        A new type of helmet cam? Oh dear, I think I just grossed myself out...

        5 0
    3. Mark 85
      Reply Icon

      Re: People lie yo!

      I'm thinking along those lines also. The one thing I note is that they didn't ask the respondents about their "partners" for the evening. I'm wondering if things are skewed a bit by wishful thinking or to make themselves appear to be more successful then they are.

      One has to remember the words of Lazarus Long: "Everyone lies about sex".

      0 0
  8. Zog_but_not_the_first
    Boffin

    BMI

    Is US BMI the same as European BMI, or is it like many other stateside measures?

    2 0
    1. TitterYeNot
      Reply Icon
      Coat

      Re: BMI

      "Is US BMI the same as European BMI, or is it like many other stateside measures?"

      No - European BMI is 'Body Mass Index', in the US it's 'Butt Magnitude Indicator'.

      Joking aside, I'm not one to talk, with my expanding middle-age midriff. I'm just relieved to find out that I was right all along, and that studies such as this are finally proving that it is just relaxed muscle after all.

      <Coughs>

      4 0
    2. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: BMI

      "Is US BMI the same as European BMI, or is it like many other stateside measures?"

      US gallons and pints are smaller than British gallons and pints, though in the usual IP land grab US children are taught "a pint weighs a pound, the whole world round."

      3 0
      1. TheVogon
        Reply Icon

        Re: BMI

        "a pint weighs a pound, the whole world round."

        They might want to compare the weight of a pint of air and a pint of mercury.....

        4 1
        1. Paul Crawford Silver badge
          Reply Icon

          Re: BMI

          I know excess drinking is bad for you, but a pint of Hg? Strewth!

          2 0
  9. JetSetJim
    Pint

    A sure candidate for the ...

    IG Nobel award.

    Holes abound in the research, going by what is reported here, but an entertaining read nonetheless.

    2 0
  10. hatti
    Windows

    Who ate all the pies

    I look forward to reading a future article on the impending world pie shortage.

    4 0
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Who ate all the pies

      Never mind the pies, what about the missing Viz reference?

      (AC because sexist fat shaming wins me a crucifixion)

      2 0
      1. Anonymous Coward
        Reply Icon
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Who ate all the pies

        Oh Lordy...

        0 0
  11. A Non e-mouse Silver badge

    BMI

    The key problem with this is the BMI score: It doesn't tell you if the weight is from fat or muscle. Without that key piece of information, you don't know if all these "obese" people having copious sex are lard-arses or muscular men/women.

    4 0
    1. Anonymous Coward
      Reply Icon
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: BMI

      It also assumes that you're two-dimensional.

      5 0
      1. frank ly
        Reply Icon

        Re: BMI

        "It also assumes that you're two-dimensional."

        From Lewis: "... it assumes that healthy weight should scale up in relation to the square of height - a patently absurd idea, ..."

        The square of height thing seems to assume that we're modelled as a cylinder, which is not a bad approximation - and that's all it is, an approximation to let a doctor/nurse or yourself obtain a quick and easy measure for comparison purposes. It's also only appropriate for someone around average height and build, not a particularly tall or muscular man or woman.

        The last time my doctor had a good look at me (almost naked), she said I could do with having a bit more weight. I pointed out that my BMI was 23 and she went very quiet. I didn't point out that she was a bit of a porker and that people tend to want to see themselves as 'normal'.

        5 2
        1. The Vociferous Time Waster
          Reply Icon

          Re: BMI

          Even a cylinder is a cubic function where as BMI is a square so your argument is pretty much invalid.

          5 0
          1. DanDanDan
            Reply Icon

            Re: BMI

            Even a cylinder is a cubic function where as BMI is a square so your argument is pretty much invalid.

            The increase of a cylinder with respect to length is actually linear. Double the length of a cylinder and its volume doubles. If you double the radius only, then it's quadratic. If you increase its length and radius in proportion, then after dividing by the length (as you would to calculate BMI), then it's back to quadratic again.

            4 0
            1. Sir Runcible Spoon
              Reply Icon

              Re: BMI

              Se we are looking at some kind of cone shape then?

              1 0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.