Miss Lockhart wrote: » Just in the last 3 months or so it seems to have become an aspiration among a good few of the teen girls I know
Daqster wrote: » Do more woman buy red tops than men. I'm not so sure. Granted, the OK mag type maybe, but by and large, men are bombard with just as much of that stuff as women, in my view at least.
I couldn't disagree with you more. A quick read of the turn ons and turn offs thread shows that women are just as likely to be turned off by men's physical appearance, as men are about women's and the 'Would you date a guy that was 5ft8"' left lads in no doubt that height is without question a huge deal for most woman.
I don't think that is anything to go by though, at least not to any great degree. That would be a bit like saying there aren't as many male prostitutes as female, because woman don't enjoy sex as much as men.
Some of that is true, but the diet stuff is a red herring, as 'over a lifetime' would be including a time when I wouldn't argue that there was undoubtedly more pressure on woman to look a certain way, compared to today, where as I say, I feel it is pretty much an even split.
Again though, you are just unlikely to hear men vocalize this kind of thing as it is, in the main, deemed as something which females do and *most* guys will run a million miles away form doing something which is seen by society as being not very 'manly', which of course is idiotic but honestly can't think of one of my mates that would bring up being on a diet in a public setting the way women would have no problem doing. Hopefully that will change but I highly doubt it. I think guys would be less embarrassed to be seen reading Playboy on the train than a 'What's The Best Diet To Lose That Excess Belly Fat' copy of Men's Health.
enda1 wrote: » Not as exploited as a tesco floor staff getting a couple of quid an hour.
Rough Sleeper wrote: » You're going to have to qualify how simply using terms like these is displaying a poor understanding of biology, or anatomy, more accurately. They're physical quirks that some men find attractive. Like tits or arses, just more niche.
poundapunnet wrote: » That thigh gap has much more to do with where you carry your weight and how broad your hipbones are than your weight. Neither of which are things you can do much about. You're either going to be part of a small percentage of women who have one easily enough just by being reasonably slim, or you'll have to be dangerously thin or incredibly fit. I hate January, I feel like these threads are everywhere. Everyone stop dieting!
I don't know about the first two terms you've listed, but "arse dimples," or back dimples as I'd call them, is a term that has been in use since way before the internet became what it is today. What would you rather people call them, lateral lumbar indentations, or what?
Iwasfrozen wrote: » I don't think it's fair to say a woman with a bikini bridge or thigh gap is always too skinny.
Czarcasm wrote: » You just happened to provide a perfect example of my point. In attempting to correct my use of the word biology, you showed you have a poor understanding of biology. "Anatomy" on it's own is incorrect, as anatomy is only one aspect of biology. Physiology is the more relevant aspect. Both aspects together are called biology and both aspects together are what determines physical characteristics.
Wurly wrote: » Yet another way for the media to bully women and tell them how they should look. Stop buying into it. Get yourself to a healthy, happy weight and then f*ck what society says you should look like!
Shrills wrote: » People find certain characteristics sexy, no one is telling women they have to have thigh gaps or bikini bridges, merely commenting on what they find sexy.
Rough Sleeper wrote: » I'm reading this post and it's like your saying "No, Lagos is not the capital city of Nigeria. That would be Abuja." Not factually inaccurate, but completely unrelated to anything I'm saying. Physiology is basically how the body works. People simply using terms like "bikini bridge" (which I actually find pretty absurd) are not making any sort of comment on the functioning of the body; they're merely using niche descriptions of anatomical phenomena, hence my correct use of the word. If a girl said that she like a six pack on a bloke, would you reply "Don't you know that acquiring a six pack requites appropriate behavioural modifications like operating under a caloric deficit and exercising regularly, and the ease at which you'll obtain one is determined by genetic predisposition? You have a very poor understanding of biology?" Probably not, as, despite the fact the information is correct, it's a non-sequitur reply.
Czarcasm wrote: » There are so many physiological factors involved. I've even seen photos where "now you see it", "now you don't", and that was just based on a change of underwear!
Czarcasm wrote: » Ok, I get what you're saying now. I suppose where I'm coming from is that when people use these descriptions of "anatomical phenomena", they often aren't just commenting, they're analysing, simplifying, encouraging the idea that these are somehow aspirational and achievable "features". They're not, not in any meaningful sense anyway. There are so many physiological factors involved. I've even seen photos where "now you see it", "now you don't", and that was just based on a change of underwear! Same photoshoot, same day, same Rihanna. Now can you honestly tell me the appearance, or absence, of this "thigh gap", makes a whole pile of difference? I'm not saying you're actually encouraging the phenomena by proclaiming that you find it attractive (hell, I find fat women attractive, and we're all aware that being fat isn't healthy!), but there ARE people who will take it to an extreme level due to their misunderstanding of biology - amateur anatomists with no understanding of physiology -http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/10/28/robyn-lawley-why-the-dangerous-thigh-gap-trend-makes-me-mad.html
The Mustard wrote: » Thigh gap eh? Wasn't there in my day. Which was about four years ago.
A Brad Maddox Guy wrote: » Just so yis know this new Bikini Bridge thing is a 4chan prank.
Michael D Not Higgins wrote: » In fairness, I think in this case it's down to her walking in the second photo. You can see one leg is coming across the other which would naturally close any gap.
looks like her camel toe fell out also
poundapunnet wrote: » Photos like that have been all over pro-ana and thinspiration sites for years, though without the name attached. 4chan try to take credit everything!
A Brad Maddox Guy wrote: » They're the ones that have given it a name and brought it to the mainstream. Like you say it didn't have a name attached. Now it does and it's being discussed on mainstream news sites and is on twitter and instagram. I had never heard of a bikini bridge even though I'd seen photos before, until people on 4chan talked about creating this furore a couple weeks ago. Since then I've seen it mentioned on popular sites quite often. It obviously existed before but they really are responsible for this being a current fad.
poundapunnet wrote: » Oooh I can come up with some new names for things from pro-ana sites! The clavicle pit! The bicep convex! The googly jaw! The wrist ridge! The xylo-rib-ophone! The nappy-arse! Off to 4chan with me wahey
A Brad Maddox Guy wrote: » Do you not get what I'm saying? It wasnt in the mainstream the way the thigh gap was. Now it is and it's because of 4chan. That's how they're largely responsible for this trend.
poundapunnet wrote: » What you're saying isn't complicated and once you clarified that you meant 4chan was responsible for the name I got your point. Hence my thanking of your post. Relax.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://wb.vanillicon.com/v2/bb1b435feca4d036f6db42bb67252c40.svg)
