good for you?

Bingo, Josh! We, of course, have known each other for a decade thru formerly print and now wildly-popular online magazine, DIMENSIONS... www.dimensionsmagazine.com , which along with GNOSIS and REALITY HACKERS/MONDO 2000 were the first Bay Area desktop-publishing successes. Before that, circa '85, DIMENSIONS was a photocopied 'zine' with cartoon pinupgirl covers by yours truly. I think that as this article surfaces in Salon tonite, we've scored yet another breakthru... we are very near the moment when a passion for Big Beautiful Women is no longer a 'niche subculture'... we are perilously near mainstream! This is what the 21st Century American woman looks like, and may soon BE HAPPY with looking like.

This whole article strikes me as bizarre. First of all isn't it a little unusual that in a world where the average white woman is size 14 - 16 the author went out with exlusively skinny women? Unless you purposely date models they're not that easy to find.

Secondly, despite what the Victoria's Secret catalogues may suggest, plenty of men desire and love average size women. Look around you at all the sexed up couples you know and count how many are of average size.

Later in the article the author elides the idea of a non skinny woman with a more than averagely fat woman. They're very different things. Marilyn Monroe was curvy - I wouldn't say she was fat. Weighing 200 pounds is starting to be pretty big ... marrying a woman who weighs 235 pounds - well, that's much bigger than average. So if the author is saying he likes women who are unusually large - that's unusual. But if he's saying he likes women who aren't skinny - that's normal.

The average weight of models has dropped dramatically since the fifties. This isn't because men's tastes have changed, it's because women's consumer power has increased. And in selling to women advertisers find it profitable to market an unattainable ideal. This spurs the consumer to feel inadequate and therefore in need of something - hopefully the product advertised. Look at the heroin junky models advertising clothes and bags in Vanity Fair - these women are not meant to be sexy! They look dead. They're meant to look cool, unattainable and rare - and they are.

Also, skinny, bony people look better in photographs than round soft people, even though in real life the round person may be much more beautiful than the bony one. The camera adds ten pounds at least when it flattens a three dimensional person into two dimensions on the page or screen.

Finally, the photo the author uses to illustrate this article seems to be making fun of his wife. He is lifting her and he looks as though he is staggering - or at least his face is completely buried in her stomach. It's a 'gag' shot which is an unusual choice for a just married couple. More weird still, while the photo reveals his wife in all her curvy abundance it emphasises his smallness by comparison, and completely conceals his appearance. Thus she is exposed and he remains hidden. Perhaps that's the source of a fat woman's appeal to this man?

...than it is to be attracted to really underweight women. An actress 30 pounds overweight would have a very difficult time getting mainstream TV or movie work (unless she's being cast as the fat friend) and would be derided as fat and unattractive. But Audrey Tatou, at 5'3" and 85 pounds (Amelie, The Da Vinci Code) is about 30 pounds *under* weight and is considered attractive though she has the stature and physique of a pre-pubescent child.

We live in a culture where men drool over women who slim down to ridiculous proportions then get boob jobs to artificially re-inflate the breasts they've so sadly dessicated by maintaining a weight far below what is a normal healthy base line for their height (Lindsay Lohan, Paris Hilton, Demi Moore, Sharon Stone, Courtney Cox). It's the most illogical behavior in the world, and certainly not the decision making of a sane, intelligent, confident woman.... but the results are held up to women everywhere as the standard of beauty to acheive. And then - this is the good part - guys who pursue the women who've reached this ideal get to know them and are taken aback that they act ..well...kinda psycho.

So it's difficult for me to tisk Mr. Max's preference. His liking of ample flesh isn't really any stranger than guys thinking jutting hip bones, visible rib cages and winged collarbones are the epitome of sexy. Both are several standard deviations from a healthy norm, it's just that, at this point in history, the scree at the emaciation end is considered ideal while the scree at the fat end is, well, not.

... this article seems like a "troll post."

If the author truly loved beautiful big women, why didn't he post a photo of himself and his wife on their wedding day which _didn't_ look like an outtake from "The Daily Show"?

"You're entitled to your opinion, but comments like that aren't going to float with me."

Thank you for giving an example of what a decent person might say when he or she hears a cruel joke about fat.

Thanks, Josh Max and Salon, for the refreshing article. I love the responses to the fat-phobic comments from co-workers. It's not so unusual for a man to love ample women, but it's somewhat rare to find a man who will stand up against these rude comments in public and admit his preference without shame.

I think the wedding photo is fun and affectionate - she's obviously having a great time!

Being attracted to fat women isn't so unusual... hell, look at most Rennaissance paintings. It also makes sense biologically; plump, well-nourished women are more likely to produce healthy offspring, so they should be more attractive.

In reading the responses I just had to say something. It seems that some disbelieve, and I'm thinking it's likely because they cannot fathom that a guy could not only like, but actually prefer, a fat woman. Well, better get used to it, because it is not only genuine attraction, the numbers of admirers are growing. *heh*

I have been reading Josh's articles for years now, in various publications. I also post on a message board for one of the online communities he refers to in his article, and remember well when he and Julie got together. I've seen the picture accompanying the article many times, and can say that yes, that is Josh (well, not that I can see his face -- after all, it's buried somewhere, but I know it's Josh!). I can particularly say I know it is he since Josh and I met for the first time last year, with a group of friends (Julie, unfortunately, had to be at work). So, no, he is no troll, and the pic and post really *is* of, and from, Josh Max. He and Julie are vary talented musically, with regular gigs and recordings. Check them out some time. :)

Josh, another good one -- and one, of course, that hits close to home and to my heart.

T