Dollhouse
Nude Eliza news
POSTED BY: whozit
UPDATED: Sunday, April 19, 2009 23:30
VIEWED: 16141
PAGE 3 of 4
Saturday, April 18, 2009 1:38 PM
Quote:
Originally posted by Penguin:
EXCUSE ME!
Back on topic!!
Nekked wimmin!!!
*yawn* - you'll get over that in time ;)
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 6:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
I think it's taking it a bit far to say that's how they should look. Historically speaking, that has been the ideal form for women only for the last 30 years or so. In the big picture, "real" women have rarely looked like that. As recently as the 60's, a fuller figure was considered ideal - look at Marilyn Monroe - the epitome of female beauty at the time, and would be considered overweight today.
You're confusing ideal with healthy. I'm talking about a healthy women and what that looks like regardless of what is considered ideal. Slim women, such as the ones in these photos, are healthy. They don't "need a sandwich."
Point of fact, healthy diet (i.e. healthy food + exercise) and "you'll" look like that. At least it won't take much effort until one reaches 40. That is assuming that one hasn't totally screwed themselves already. But, who's fault is that.
Of course, age means "filling out" and that will eventually mean going not healthy when it comes to weight. But, that only really becomes an issue when one gets near geriatric.
But, QUANDOM is quite right. We in North America are really going to have to re-learn 1) what food actually is, and 2) what a proper portion size is. Our health really really depends on that. And if you think that there's no financial concerns, just wait a decade or two and see what happens to the health care system.
----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 6:23 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LexiBlock:
Unlikely. They are in the media because they are able to stay abnormally thin. You are supposed to put on weight with age, assuming no abnormal developments (obviously not several tons, but this is below normal)
For there age they are completely normal. Again, you're confusing average with normal. These women are normal for the human body that has proper diet and exercise. That certainly doesn't fit what is average today. But, there is a difference between what is normal to the human body and the horror that the average person does to his/her body.
EDIT: I should add that having a tan was normal and encouraged at one point. So, was smoking. So, was a lot of stuff. Then we did this thing called learning. It changes things. It really does.
----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 7:17 AM
Right. 'Cause being fat or skinny is all about diet and exercise. Which is why I have to eat a lot of veggies and work out five days a week to maintain my 110 pounds... except I don't. And, all those fatties must just eat too much/not exercise enough.
::rolls eyes::
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 7:48 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by LexiBlock:Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by stinkingrose:
Somebody get those girls a sandwich!
No, actually that's what healthy women are supposed to look like.
Unlikely. They are in the media because they are able to stay abnormally thin. You are supposed to put on weight with age, assuming no abnormal developments (obviously not several tons, but this is below normal)
Nah, I'm with SigmaNunki; it's really what women are supposed to look like. :) Eliza, at least. She simply has a perfect figure. Sierra, arguably, is probably a mite too thin; still frakkin' attractive, though, and her thinness is endlessly better-looking than, say, Mellie's chubbiness.
But that's just me, of course.
--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 8:58 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by asarian:Quote:
Originally posted by LexiBlock:Quote:
Originally posted by SigmaNunki:Quote:
Originally posted by stinkingrose:
Somebody get those girls a sandwich!
No, actually that's what healthy women are supposed to look like.
Unlikely. They are in the media because they are able to stay abnormally thin. You are supposed to put on weight with age, assuming no abnormal developments (obviously not several tons, but this is below normal)
Nah, I'm with SigmaNunki; it's really what women are supposed to look like. :) Eliza, at least. She simply has a perfect figure. Sierra, arguably, is probably a mite too thin; still frakkin' attractive, though, and her thinness is endlessly better-looking than, say, Mellie's chubbiness.
But that's just me, of course.
--
"Mei-mei, everything I have is right here." -- Simon Tam
Mellie's chubby? Really? I see her as more of the realistic body type and I'm a 21 year old health conscious San Franciscan who studies the nude figure most of the week.
Quote:
Point of fact, healthy diet (i.e. healthy food + exercise) and "you'll" look like that
Um... no?
Granted you can look like Eliza and be healthy, but the perfect figure isn't for everyone. It all depends on body type, metabolism and your genes. (Eliza probably has great genes) Some people aren't built to be the perfectly thin, they never will be. Granted taking out fast food and walking everywhere helps keep trim and healthy (I live in a fairly pro-health city, no drinking, no smoking, try to walk everywhere as well as cook for myself) but I don't think guys understand how difficult it is for most women to get to 'looking' like Eliza.
Men are built differently. You fellas are utilitarian, back in the day you were the hunters and providers. You have high metabolisms for the most part and in your prime you can eat a buffet table and not gain an ounce. It's easier for you to lose weight and stay in shape because you're designed that way.
Women, we are totally different. We were built to bare the fruit of thine loins therefore we are usually programmed to easily gain weight and keep it on. Our body chemistry is very different and it takes a lot more work for us to develop that sexy little six pack because in reality, we weren't really designed to flaunt that. Plus you guys have it easy with the eating thing because you never PMS. Try sticking to lean meats, rice, fruits and veggies when you're on your period for five days and every fibre of your being wants a pint of ben and jerrys and a bacon cheeseburger. And you're extremely growly to the rest of the world because you are denying yourself said unhealthy pleasure.
I used to look like Eliza. 5'7", 120 lbs, 5% body fat, between a size 3 and 5 with all lean muscle. It took ALOT of work to get down to that and maintain it as a woman. Beyond eating the right portions and foods, it was working out vigorously two hours a day. My brother? It's so easy for him to get ripped it's ridiculous. After various health scares (that had nothing to do with being that thin, in fact the fitness saved my life) I've settled on the fact that while I could go back to that zealous health nut lifestyle, ditch a few curves and slide a perfect ass back into my favorite jeans, I'm content being a little thicker. I'm healthy, I eat right, I walk a average of 3 miles a day, I go to the gym once a week, I don't look like any of those women.
Apologies if I am overstepping my bounds. My posts get a little wonky after midnight and weight always makes me a might techy.
Those pictures though...... ai... ya..... airbrushed for sure but very nice.
Your Indian Pirate Lord,
Ash
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 9:10 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Right. 'Cause being fat or skinny is all about diet and exercise. Which is why I have to eat a lot of veggies and work out five days a week to maintain my 110 pounds... except I don't. And, all those fatties must just eat too much/not exercise enough.
Actually, that's medical fact. There ARE certain foods that get that metabolism going. They are natural foods. Those food like substances that people eat today (e.g. at McDonalds, etc) are ones that kill the bodies metabolism. Then there's the trans fats, etc, etc, etc, that are in the more commonly eaten 'food.'
One doesn't get fat when one burns about the same amount of calories that they eat and eats a balanced diet.
Then there's the weird things that happen to the body when one doesn't get a balanced diet (and possibly eats many many calories). As in, those chips that are so popular might give someone the calories, but they certainly aren't healthy and they certainly don't have much nutritional value at all.
This might not be convenient to most people these days, but that's how it is.
That said, this can, depending on how far gone someone is, be reversed to one degree or another. The body is an amazing adaptive system and can recover from grand abuse. So, long as that abuse wasn't in the long term and too grand.
Want to do a comparison. Just take what the average weight was a couple decades ago (two is enough) and compare it to now. The do the same to the diet. I don't think that you'll be happy with the results. Because, they go right along with what I'm saying.
Hell, just look at the high-schoolers today verses a couple decades ago (again two is enough). Back then most were skinny, a couple were between that and chubby and a handful were fat. Now, what we got is most are chubby to fat with some obese and above with skinny getting more and more rare.
Now aside from the diet comparison during these times, take a look at the difference in exercise. An in, 'soccer moms' are kinda more prevalent now than then. So, the kids aren't walking nearly as much. The things they tend to do are becoming less and less active.
Etc.
Seriously. Sedentary lifestyle + poor diet = obesity. Yes, it really is that simple.
(EDIT: Fixed neural misfire in the equation.)
The one aside is when we leave generality and look at certain corner cases. As in, there are some medications that can cause weight gain by various mechanisms. Similarly, there are some medical conditions that do the same. BUT, these are few and far between (understatement) and as such can be safely ignored when speaking in general.
----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 9:34 AM
Lol, SigmaNunki! I don't even know when to start. I'll come back with a more articulate reply when I've gotten some sleep, but until then, I find your views on this matter to be both stunningly incorrect and utterly repulsive.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 9:53 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by TuJiaoZuo:
Mellie's chubby? Really? I see her as more of the realistic body type and I'm a 21 year old health conscious San Franciscan who studies the nude figure most of the week.
No, she is chubby. Perhaps not by todays *average*. But, overall she is chubby.
Why do people keep confusing ideal, average and healthy? They... are... all... different... right... now.
Quote:
Originally posted by TuJiaoZuo:
Granted you can look like Eliza and be healthy, but the perfect figure isn't for everyone.
I'm stopping you here because you are misrepresenting me. You see, you are solely talking about Eliza and I'm not. I looked at ALL of them and constantly referenced ALL of them. And if you look, there is some padding on a couple of them. Did I complain and say that this shouldn't be? No. I said that ALL of these women would be considered healthy. I also mentioned that age was a factor among others.
Seriously, pointing at the best of them and referencing that as what I'm talking about?!?!? Poor form not to mention logical fallacy.
Quote:
Originally posted by TuJiaoZuo:
I'm healthy, I eat right, I walk a average of 3 miles a day, I go to the gym once a week, I don't look like any of those women.
Three miles isn't really much. I mean, I might walk that in a day when I don't leave my apartment. Once a week also isn't enough. In fact, that wouldn't really have much of an overall effect at all. And if you aren't near (you didn't say how far away you are from these women) what these women look like, I'd say that you aren't eating as healthy as you think you are (stats would tell me portion size is the main issue).
Working out effectively means doing it at least 3 times a week. But, that doesn't have to be at the gym. It can be some yoga in the living room for half an hour per day.
I honestly don't understand why people think that working out needs to be at a gym. Playing football or rollerblading or yoga at home or ... would be just as good and more fun. Not to mention cheaper.
It's about regular (i.e. pretty much daily) exercise. Anything other than that and one get drastically diminishing returns.
As an aside, the no time thing is also total BS. That is assuming that ones life isn't a gigantic cluster f***. Because, if it is, then one needs to fix there life before becoming more healthy (less stress = more healthy as well). Anyway, when one exercises, it has many many benefits. One of them being becoming more efficient overall. So, one might lose that 1/2 hour to exercise. But, it'll also lead to better efficiency that will compensate for that lose. It's positive sum game.
At any rate, this whole thing reminds me of a friend of my wife's parents. She keeps saying how she doesn't understand how she is fat. Because, you know, she eats so little. And seeing what she puts on her plate at meals, one would think that too. But, when you watch her cook, she is constantly nibbling on this that and the other thing. In other words, she 'nickel and diming' herself to death.
Which leads me into something else that I see as a problem in North America (though primarily the US <- changing though). That being the overstatement of what one does right and the understatement of what one does wrong. The real killer though, is that these things don't even seem to be deliberate. These people actually seem to believe it and resist the truth even when confronted absolute proof.
With this sort of mentality, I quake for our worlds future.
----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Sunday, April 19, 2009 9:54 AM
Quote:
Originally posted by yinyang:
Lol, SigmaNunki! I don't even know when to start. I'll come back with a more articulate reply when I've gotten some sleep, but until then, I find your views on this matter to be both stunningly incorrect and utterly repulsive.
Thank you for showing us just what level you are working on
----
I am on The Original List (twice). We are The Forsaken and we aim to burn!
"We don't fear the reaper"
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME