In the following tables, I compare body mass index (BMI) with family income, using the 1991 National Health Interview Survey. Remember that all data is self-reported, and people lie on surveys. Men, specifically, lie about their heights if they are shorter than 6'0".
| Variables | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Role | Name | Label | Range | MD | Dataset |
| Row | hs_bmi(Recoded) | BMI | 1.0000-7.0000 | 2 | |
| Column | incfam(Recoded) | family income | 1-3 | 1 | |
| Control | sex | sex | 1-2 | 1 | |
| Filter | age(35-60) | age | 0-99 | 1 | |
| Statistics for sex = 1(male) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cells contain: -Row percent -N of cases |
incfam | ||||
| 1 0-19,999 |
2 20,000-49,999 |
3 50,000+ |
ROW TOTAL |
||
| hs_bmi | 1.0000: <20 | 48.0 118 |
46.7 115 |
5.3 13 |
100.0 246 |
| 2.0000: 20-<22.5 | 33.9 338 |
56.6 564 |
9.4 94 |
100.0 996 |
|
| 3.0000: 22.5-<25 | 26.0 534 |
61.6 1,265 |
12.3 253 |
100.0 2,052 |
|
| 4.0000: 25-<27.5 | 24.1 661 |
63.4 1,740 |
12.5 343 |
100.0 2,744 |
|
| 5.0000: 27.5-<30 | 26.3 407 |
62.2 963 |
11.5 178 |
100.0 1,548 |
|
| 6.0000: 30-<35 | 26.9 335 |
62.9 784 |
10.2 127 |
100.0 1,246 |
|
| 7.0000: 35+ | 34.7 140 |
58.1 234 |
7.2 29 |
100.0 403 |
|
| COL TOTAL | 27.4 2,533 |
61.3 5,665 |
11.2 1,037 |
100.0 9,235 |
|
| Statistics for sex = 2(female) | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cells contain: -Row percent -N of cases |
incfam | ||||
| 1 0-19,999 |
2 20,000-49,999 |
3 50,000+ |
ROW TOTAL |
||
| hs_bmi | 1.0000: <20 | 28.7 307 |
57.5 616 |
13.8 148 |
100.0 1,071 |
| 2.0000: 20-<22.5 | 27.3 606 |
62.2 1,380 |
10.5 233 |
100.0 2,219 |
|
| 3.0000: 22.5-<25 | 29.5 678 |
60.1 1,384 |
10.4 239 |
100.0 2,301 |
|
| 4.0000: 25-<27.5 | 34.6 654 |
56.8 1,072 |
8.6 162 |
100.0 1,888 |
|
| 5.0000: 27.5-<30 | 44.1 453 |
48.9 503 |
7.0 72 |
100.0 1,028 |
|
| 6.0000: 30-<35 | 41.3 595 |
50.9 733 |
7.8 113 |
100.0 1,441 |
|
| 7.0000: 35+ | 48.9 391 |
45.9 367 |
5.1 41 |
100.0 799 |
|
| COL TOTAL | 34.3 3,684 |
56.3 6,055 |
9.4 1,008 |
100.0 10,747 |
|
These tables demonstrate what I call the Skinny Man Effect.
For women, the lower their BMI the higher their predicted family income. Remember that this is family income, so it includes her income if she works, and her husband's income if she's married.
But men have a different distribution. It turns out that men who are officially "overweight" with a BMI between 25 and 27.5 have higher incomes than men who have a "healthy" weight. So if you're a man, being thin may be good for your health (if we are to believe the people who make these definitions), but it's bad for your wallet.
You hear over and over again that poverty is a risk factor for obesity, but as we see above, for men, poverty is also a risk factor for having a "healthy" weight.
There is other evidence that men of lower weights have negative outcomes in life. Thus I call it the Skinny Man Effect.
Let's talk about confounding factors for a minute. As age increases, so does BMI. Age also has a positive correlation with income. I used ages 35-60 because it's an age range with less change in these factors. Men have a big increase in both BMI and income as they progress from 18 to 30, but by 35 that effect is leveling off.
Despite the above confounding factors, I am certain that the Skinny Man Effect is real, because I still see it when I plug in a much narrower age range.
Aw, too bad. I always liked skinny boys.
Posted by: Spungen | May 11, 2007 at 01:03 AM
Same here, except that I liked cute chubby white girls.
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 02:10 AM
Let's face it, David, we've got low-class tastes. It's not too late for you to retrain your preferences, perhaps with shock therapy, thus avoiding doom to a life of proledom.
Posted by: Spungen | May 11, 2007 at 02:17 AM
And thanks, HS, for providing yet another excuse for men to cultivate beer bellies while imposing rigid standards upon women.
Posted by: Spungen | May 11, 2007 at 02:20 AM
Thanks to HS, I'll know that I should avoid any chubby white women as it implies social inferiority and prole tastes.
Is it impossible to enjoy the best of both worlds? :)
And thanks, HS, for providing yet another excuse for men to cultivate beer bellies while imposing rigid standards upon women.
Who cares what the women want. It's all about pleasing the Y chromosome, your lord and master.
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 02:34 AM
I like skinny guys - as long as they are not *skinnier* than me. :)
Posted by: Avi | May 11, 2007 at 04:07 AM
David,
That last comment was a little too, as screenwriters say, on the nose. You may truly believe that, but do try to keep it under wraps.
That way by the time some girl figures you out, she'll be married and pregnant with your kid. Then she's stuck with you or she's back on the dating scene with her adorable little albatross. The world is full of single moms who wake up to reality a little too late.
I reiterate my suggestion that you and Spungen should start a blog. :o)
Posted by: beowulf | May 11, 2007 at 04:14 AM
Remember that all data is self-reported, and people lie on surveys. Men, specifically, lie about their heights if they are shorter than 6'0".
Could that be a factor here? If short men tend to overstate their height (but not their weight), that would skew the recorded BMIs of short men downwards. Height is positively correlated with income, so this would skew the average incomes for low-BMI men downwards.
Also, IMO 25-27.5 is a healthy BMI for men. Men gain muscle mass more easily than women do, so men who regularly or semi-regularly do resistance exercise tend to be at or above the high end of the "healthy" BMI range.
Posted by: Brandon Berg | May 11, 2007 at 04:16 AM
That last comment was a little too, as screenwriters say, on the nose. You may truly believe that, but do try to keep it under wraps.
That was a failed attempted at a witty and sarcastic response to Maitress Spungen, mind you, that's what I get for posting at two-something in the morning.
That way by the time some girl figures you out, she'll be married and pregnant with your kid. Then she's stuck with you or she's back on the dating scene with her adorable little albatross. The world is full of single moms who wake up to reality a little too late.
I'd actually prefer that a female stay with me because she loves me, not because she's desperate. Mind you, knowing my luck, I'll end up marrying some single mom who's fleeing that type of guy...
I reiterate my suggestion that you and Spungen should start a blog. :o)
Considering that I can barely update my own blog, I'll stay away from co-hosting a blog...
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 05:21 AM
I've been fat and thin more times than Oprah, yet my income has been steadily inching upward for years. What can this mean? With any luck at all, I will not start making a connection.
Posted by: Don Marsh | May 11, 2007 at 05:36 AM
There is very little evidence that being moderately overweight (BMI25-30) is actually bad for your health. I also suspect that while TV ideolizes women with a BMI of 19, I personnaly and a lot of other men prefer BMIs of around 23. I remember reading a Brithish investigation which basically states that the optimum BMI for a man is around 26. Men who even moderately exercise will have slighter bigger BMIs.
One of the factors that isn't discussed very much is that BMI doesn´t adjust that well for height. BMI overstates the weight of tall men and underestimates the weight of short men. That is because it adjusts by elevating with 2 for simplicity, but should be elevating by around 2.4
Posted by: Gannon | May 11, 2007 at 08:33 AM
Maybe it's that high earning men (whose income is a lot more than 50,000) don't have the amount of time necessary to exercise themselves down to extreme thinness. While their stay-at-home wives certainly do, and make it into an eternal goal.
I currently live in a high-income beach area in South Florida, and I've met these women (political friends of my parents). They brag about shopping at Whole foods, going to the trainer, and their low weights (these women are all middle-aged with working husbands). They've all had plastic surgery, and complain about the weight their implants added to the scale. So, this is definitely household income reflected.
As for working women, they may feel the need to keep up with their boss's wives, or forgo eating under stress.
Posted by: Axolotl | May 11, 2007 at 08:41 AM
I reiterate my suggestion that you and Spungen should start a blog.
If David tries to take Spungen away, I will take his little Y chromosome and beat him over the head with it.
(Ok, not really, but once I thought it, I just had to say it. You know how it is.)
Posted by: Bob V | May 11, 2007 at 08:41 AM
Maybe it's that high earning men (whose income is a lot more than 50,000) don't have the amount of time necessary to exercise themselves down to extreme thinness. While their stay-at-home wives certainly do, and make it into an eternal goal.
I certainly encounter enough beefy men on the train each day, SCA's and otherwise, to believe that high-income men tend to be long on eating and short on exercising. It's reasonable to assume that most are in the higher income categories given the nature of long-distance train commuting.
What I do not accept is that most of them have no time for exercise. That's an absurd excuse. I'm out of the house for 12 hours each workday counting commuting time, yet I find ample time to hit the gym. It's all a matter of prioritizing.
Posted by: Peter | May 11, 2007 at 09:30 AM
Well yuck it up all you want but I dont see how you escape the fact that if you have a BMI of 22.5 or less you have less than a 10% chance of making a decent living.
Posted by: Turambar | May 11, 2007 at 10:32 AM
From what I observe of the engineering department next to me in the cubicle farm, the tall, skinny guys have the perfect temperaments to make CAD monkey beta males.
Posted by: mondo | May 11, 2007 at 11:05 AM
CAD monkey beta males.
Ha! Same over here.
Ditto all the comments about male BMI in the 25 to 30 range. I run 15 miles a week, and my BMI is still 26.
Posted by: The Engineer | May 11, 2007 at 11:37 AM
Theory: Backward causality: Being a skinny is an undesirable state for any self respecting man. If you cant get your body to a decent level of muscularity then you are unlike to accomplish other goals.
Forward causality: Being scrawny means other people respect you less. You are given less opportunity and have lower self esteem.
Doesnt a CAD monkey make more than $50K? I mean come on.....
Posted by: Turambar | May 11, 2007 at 12:35 PM
Anyone that looked at me would recognize that I am a very skinny male, but b/c I work out, and muscle weighs more than fat, my BMI is "overweight". It's a ridiculous measure. That said, other research shows that:
- Skinny men get a wage penalty, fat men get a wage benefit.
- Skinny men get a dating penalty, but fat carries no dating benefit or dating penalty for men.
- Skinny women getting a dating and wage benefit, fat women get a dating and wage penalty.
- Finally, BMI of partner predicts female orgasm (higher BMIs lead to more orgasms). But given the stupidity of BMI stated above this could mean women are horny for fat or muscle or both. (but not bones poking everywhere) It could also mean fat men are having sex with fat women, and fat women have stronger libidos - which is why they have more children and more sex partners.
Posted by: Rain And | May 11, 2007 at 12:41 PM
Another thought. Research shows that drinking predicts wages too - people that drink more alcohol have higher wages. Other research shows this is a byproduct of social ability. People that have higher social ability both drink more alcohol (because drinking is largely a social activity) and are able to earn higher wages. (because social ability is a valuable skill)
So what we are possibly really seeing is that people that have genetically good social skills, end up drinking more than people with genetically poor social skills, and this drinking makes them fatter. So extroverted men are fatter, and get higher wages and more women b/c of their social skills and despite their fat.
Posted by: Rain And | May 11, 2007 at 12:59 PM
Skinny men get a dating penalty, but fat carries no dating benefit or dating penalty for men.
I am suspicious that fat carries no penalty for men. Substantially less penalty for men than the steep penalty for women, maybe, but that runs contrary to my own relative success when I've weighed more and weighed less.
Posted by: trumwill | May 11, 2007 at 01:22 PM
Doesnt a CAD monkey make more than $50K? I mean come on.....
They do (as well as be in relationships with attractive women).
Relatively speaking though, their PM's are the more obese fratboy-looking types who know nothing but also make more per hour. They're the ones who need to keep the clients happy though. I couldn't imagine putting some of those CAD monkey types in the same room with clients, middle-aged women/men who usually know far less.
Posted by: mondo | May 11, 2007 at 01:34 PM
For comparison purposes, my BMI is 21, and that's with giving my actual height of 5'7 and weight of 135 lbs.
People that have higher social ability both drink more alcohol (because drinking is largely a social activity) and are able to earn higher wages.
Interestingly, I drink very little outside of home since I don't go to bars, and I don't drink at home at all.
Finally, BMI of partner predicts female orgasm (higher BMIs lead to more orgasms). But given the stupidity of BMI stated above this could mean women are horny for fat or muscle or both
Could this possibly explain why Asian women find white men attractive, and white women find black men attractive?
Skinny women getting a dating and wage benefit, fat women get a dating and wage penalty.
Which leads to the phenomenon of loser fat white women dating loser black men.
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 01:49 PM
For comparison purposes, my BMI is 21, and that's with giving my actual height of 5'7 and weight of 135 lbs.
So why havent you applied yourself and bulked up? Do you think the with perseverance to lift regularly you would be more like to have finished your degree?
DA you are a one man focus group.
Posted by: | May 11, 2007 at 01:55 PM
So why havent you applied yourself and bulked up?
Primarily because I don't see the benefits of it. People say that they feel better after exercising, and despite doing so, I don't feel any of those benefits. Plus, per my last physical, I'm in relatively good health with no high blood pressure or any other conditions, and I'm not overweight so there isn't a situation that screams at me to exercise.
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 02:20 PM
You got to get your head right. No one cares about inner beauty or what your systolic pressure is.
HS just showed you what the benefit is- you have a 10% chance of making decent money at your BMI. Plus it never hurts to impress a girl with your guns before you show her your portfolio.
Now get to work- I expect you to be a black Bonaducci by September.
Posted by: | May 11, 2007 at 02:31 PM
I am suspicious that fat carries no penalty for men. Substantially less penalty for men than the steep penalty for women, maybe, but that runs contrary to my own relative success when I've weighed more and weighed less.
My impression is that men don't suffer a penalty in the dating sphere unless they're significantly overweight. Women, in contrast, seem to suffer if they're even just moderately overweight.
Could it have been in your case that you had more self-confidence when your weight was lower? Better self-confidence can translate into better luck in dating.
Posted by: Peter | May 11, 2007 at 02:39 PM
HS just showed you what the benefit is
No he didn't. If you confuse correlation with causation you could make things worse.
Focus on building a career, not muscles - a better pay-off for the non-Alpha.
Posted by: Rain And | May 11, 2007 at 02:43 PM
The only professional problems that I've had with people are CAD monkeys and welders. They both think that they're smarter than engineers despite having no book learning whatsoever. Fucking bitch to work with. Always trying to second guess you.
Posted by: The Engineer | May 11, 2007 at 02:44 PM
Maybe I'm just a (former) musclehead, but I think being ripped gives you a certain authority.
When I was ripped, it did give me more confidence. I didn't feel the need to back down because of fear of getting my ass kicked.
Posted by: The Engineer | May 11, 2007 at 02:48 PM
HS just showed you what the benefit is- you have a 10% chance of making decent money at your BMI.
Building up muscle tone does not magically make you 10% richer. There are plenty of successful geeky nerds with no muscles while there are plenty of built strong guys who live poorly.
Plus it never hurts to impress a girl with your guns before you show her your portfolio.
Yeah, that's the only decent benefit, but mind you, those girls tend to be retarded at best, and most will ditch when they find out that you're a nothing but a nerd with muscles. Muscles are do not make for good anti-depressants.
When I was ripped, it did give me more confidence. I didn't feel the need to back down because of fear of getting my ass kicked.
What were you doing that required you to have you worry about getting your ass kicked? Were you dating women who are cheating on their boyfriends? Were you hanging around bad neighbourhoods?
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 03:42 PM
"HS just showed you what the benefit is"
No he didn't. If you confuse correlation with causation you could make things worse.
Well then you tell us where you think the causation is. I personally think its valid- men value power, size and determination. If you are built like Niles Crane, you arent showing those qualities to the world.
No wonder there are people spitting on David multiple times a day.
Posted by: | May 11, 2007 at 03:46 PM
If you are built like Niles Crane, you arent showing those qualities to the world.
One would presume that Niles's expensive tastes and aversion to anything remotely prole like would have shown that he has money, and thus, some type of influence and power.
BTW, some people have pegged me as Frasier despite my diminutive stature.
No wonder there are people spitting on David multiple times a day.
From what I've seen, it's a concentrated group of alpha men who do the spitting, while any female will do so with a dirty look as punishment for even glancing at her.
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 04:33 PM
My impression is that men don't suffer a penalty in the dating sphere unless they're significantly overweight. Women, in contrast, seem to suffer if they're even just moderately overweight.
It's possible that the threshold for penalty is lower for women. It definitely hits both, though, albeit not equally.
Could it have been in your case that you had more self-confidence when your weight was lower? Better self-confidence can translate into better luck in dating.
I thought about the possibility of that, but the answer is no. My self-perception lagged behind my weight fluctuation. In other words, I still thought that I was fat even when my ribcage was quite visible... and I thought that I was thin longer than I was.
Posted by: trumwill | May 11, 2007 at 04:59 PM
What were you doing that required you to have you worry about getting your ass kicked?
Well, I am kind of obnoxious.
Seriously, let me give you a couple of examples:
I was in McDonald's one time, standing in line with my wife, and some punk was standing behind me with his girl. For some reason he was making fun of how I was standing, and he said something. When I turned around to ask him if he had a problem, he saw how ripped I was and backed down. He said something like "no, I wouldn't make fun of somebody as big as you".
Another time I was at Darien Lake with my wife and my college ski team, and 3 drunk idiots went on the looping roller coaster with beers. When we went upside down, the beers spilled all over my wife and got her really upset. I got off the coaster and confronted the guys, and one of the tried to sucker punch me, at which point I kicked all 3 of their asses (it kind of helped that they were drunk, of course, but still).
I think I told you about the time I was driving through Toronto for work and stopped to get some dinner. A guy at the restarant was just berating his girl, and it was quite obvious that he was a wife beater. I just got right in his face, telling him to shut the fuck up or we're going outside. The thing that ticked me off the most was all the Canadians there who were just going to eat their dinners while this guy berates his wife, or whatever. Nation of pussies.
Another time I was in Barcelona for business, and all the Spaniards told me not to walk around the neighborhood that my hotel was in. They wouldn't tell me anything other than that it was "bad". Well, it turns out that it was the muslim neighborhood. I didn't feel unsafe waking around, they're all like 5'8" and 135. I could have taken the whole fucking neighborhood if need be.
I always felt safe working in the Middle East, too. I towered over the Arabs. Until, of course, the hotel I had stayed in the month before in Yanbu, Saudi, got shot up by terrorists and some of the guys at one of my contractors were killed. Then I decided that the risks I was taking over there weren't worth the puny paycheck I was getting.
Posted by: The Engineer | May 11, 2007 at 05:03 PM
What were you doing that required you to have you worry about getting your ass kicked?
Seriously! Who knew Engineer grew up in the Ghe-tttttto. Or maybe his real name is Sue.
Well then you tell us where you think the causation is.
I already did. Scroll up.
There are a lot more logical and responsible ways to boost your chances of high income from 9.4% to 12.3% than to try to pack on and maintain 20 more pounds of muscle at the gym (an incredibly tedious thing for people who aren't nuch into that). Extra schooling for one. And the premium was never shown to come from muscle, anyway. More likely the BMI is from fat, and it is a correlate of high income, not a cause.
Posted by: Rain And | May 11, 2007 at 05:20 PM
Oops, didn't see the reply.
I should say that I do think muscles make a mate value difference for men to a certain extent (maybe casual sex only). Fat and muscle may cancel eachother out in dating studies that show heavier guys get no penalty.
I see no evidence that muscles give a guy a higher paycheck. Muscles are blue collar
. . . like picking fights with drunk guys at Darien Lake. j/k. :P
Posted by: Rain And | May 11, 2007 at 05:29 PM
Muscles are blue collar
. . . like picking fights with drunk guys at Darien Lake. j/k. :P
Yeah, well, there are some things that should put you into fight mode, blue collar or not. Something that makes your wife cry, for example.
White collar pussies would threaten to sue them or something.
Maybe it's just because I'm from Texas. Wait... that's not it.
Posted by: The Engineer | May 11, 2007 at 05:50 PM
Who knew Engineer grew up in the Ghe-tttttto.
Tell him, David. Is Freeport the ghetto?
Posted by: The Engineer | May 11, 2007 at 05:51 PM
- Skinny men get a dating penalty, but fat carries no dating benefit or dating penalty for men.
Dienekes linked to a study showing that this was true in Britain but that the reverse was true in Greece. From personal observation, the same is true in Spain, and probably Italy too. Most of the people here live where there's a non-trivial presence of Mediterranean imports. If you're skinny, just approach them, and you rely less on luck. Plus, these girls are hotter on average than Anglo girls, so even more incentive.
Oh, caveat: the study showed that Greek women were more demanding than Brits about a guy's Waist-to-Chest Ratio, meaning you also need to have a solid "upside-down triangle" torso to impress the Greeks.
Posted by: Agnostic | May 11, 2007 at 05:56 PM
Well, I am kind of obnoxious.
Now I see why you bother fighting. Also, kudos to you on stopping that wife beater. And Canadians are not pussies. I've actually seen more man on man fights up there than here in the States. Not fighting is a white collar thing no matter where you are in the world.
Tell him, David. Is Freeport the ghetto?
It kinda is a ghetto, and it's probably why he knows how to fight. Crime is low by real ghetto standards, but when compared with the surrounding areas, Freeport is a little rough in certain areas. It's probably still safer than the neighbouring all-black (yet slowly turning Central American) Roosevelt...
Then I decided that the risks I was taking over there weren't worth the puny paycheck I was getting.
My dad almost took one of those jobs, but he stumbled upon my mother, and the rest is history...
Posted by: David Alexander | May 11, 2007 at 06:04 PM
Not fighting is a white collar thing no matter where you are in the world.
Yeah, and thanks to that attitude there are 3,000 dead people and a ... no, I really shouldn't get onto that particular rant again.
But I'll say one thing: meek acceptance of death is not heroism.
Posted by: Peter | May 11, 2007 at 08:44 PM
"HS just showed you what the benefit is- you have a 10% chance of making decent money at your BMI."
Building up muscle tone does not magically make you 10% richer. There are plenty of successful geeky nerds with no muscles while there are plenty of built strong guys who live poorly.
Look at table, the top category makes more than 2x the bottom. And guess which category you are more likely to be in at your BMI.
At least you can no longer say that that you dont see the benefit to it.
"Plus it never hurts to impress a girl with your guns before you show her your portfolio."
Yeah, that's the only decent benefit, but mind you, those girls tend to be retarded at best, and most will ditch when they find out that you're a nothing but a nerd with muscles. Muscles are do not make for good anti-depressants.
I know Spungen explained this to me but I still dont understand. Why can you not believe in yourself enough to accept that there are women out there who will be happy with you? If one of them starts dating you because you look good in Under Armor, so be it. Those of us who are married look back at our former dating selves and shake our heads at all the crazy things we used to think about approaching women.
Rain And- Here is the mechanism for the BMI effect. Our focus group is too tentative in his scrawniness to put himself in front of opportunity. It has nothing to do with social drinking.
Posted by: Turambar | May 11, 2007 at 10:55 PM
I'm in the second to lowest BMI category, so maybe I need to eat and lift to gain some weight. Summer's coming, Jersey Shore slutty girls will be all around, it's time for Jack to stop complaining about women and start striking out again (with hopefully an occasional success). How much does muscle really attract hot women?
Peter, a couple questions. These alpha guys who ride the train with you, you say they don't get any exercise. But aren't they the guys getting all the women? If they look like crap, seems like they wouldn't be very successful. Oh, and of course, on the one plane on 9/11 to fly out from the New York area, they DID fight back, remember.
Spungen, about me not being "deep", I would hope you can tell I'm a bit deeper than I show here.
Posted by: Jack | May 12, 2007 at 12:55 PM
Peter, a couple questions. These alpha guys who ride the train with you, you say they don't get any exercise. But aren't they the guys getting all the women? If they look like crap, seems like they wouldn't be very successful. Oh, and of course, on the one plane on 9/11 to fly out from the New York area, they DID fight back, remember.
Most of the SCA's who torment me on the train in fact are rather pudgy and soft-bodied though generally not what you'd call fat. Cartball's exercise value is distinctly limited. What I would imagine is that to the extent they're out snagging women, their wealth and power more than compensates for their physical deficits. Indeed, I am not convinced that the "Alphaness" that attracts women can be described in physical terms. A commanding, dominate-the-room personality and an income well into the six figures goes a lot farther with women than does a 350-pound bench press.
Also, keeping in mind that most of the SCA's are in the 35+ age group, with an average age well in excess of 40, it's quite possible that many of them were physically quite the studs back in their college days but have gone to seed, so to speak. The ex-athlete who turns into a couch potato after college is a common stereotype, after all.
Oh, not to get on too much of a rant or anything, but the Flight 93 passengers who fought back were brave, but in reality they accomplished very little in terms of saving lives. The aircraft probably would have struck the White House or the Capitol, both of which had been evacuated by then. And of course any physical damage to either building would've been repaired quickly, as was the case with the Pentagon; contrast that with the World Trade Center site, which remains a hole in the ground and undoubtedly will stay that way for many years to come (hey, whatever happened to the "Freedom Tower?")
Posted by: Peter | May 12, 2007 at 05:16 PM
I wonder who the most mentally screwed up halfsigma poster is? This negative obsession with people who play golf and foorball is getting disturbing.
Posted by: | May 12, 2007 at 07:48 PM
This negative obsession with people who play golf and foorball is getting disturbing.
I am obsessed with golf and foot - er, The Most Important Sport in the World for good reasons. The fact that 90% of men over age 30 participate in no physical activity other than cartball means, among other things, that there are virtually no participatory sports activities for those rare men like me that actually are interested in being active. I live in an area absolutely chock-full of "youth" sports leagues yet which offers almost nothing for adults. There are a few - very few - adult basketball and baseball/softball leagues, unfortunately "adult" in this context actually means "a few years out of high school." If men over 30 were interested in sports other than cartball there might actually be enough interest in "real" sports for some leagues to exist.
As for The Most Important Sport in the World, well, if you're an American male who doesn't worship The Almighty NFL you're considered a total misfit and weirdo, quite possibly some sort of faggot.
Posted by: Peter | May 12, 2007 at 08:43 PM
Why is this site fulll of men? Is it some secret fraternity? Anyway, I'm a girl, skinny, petite, and that seems to be a good thing haha. My hypothetical male twin would be a big loooooser in contrast.
Skinny, though I am, I don't like skinny men at all, few women do. Back to the point - I'd expect skinny men to be rich, aren't nerdy scientists/geeks/programmers/engineers usually skinny?
Posted by: trixnee | May 15, 2007 at 08:22 PM
Your statistic is way off. The income brackets are too coarse. 0-20k??? 20k-50k? 50+k??? There are categories for proles. A middle class or higher person would make 100+k.
At your ranges you only catch the prole phenomenon. And that's very simple, destitute and bottom out of sight people (as defined by Fussel) are in shape because they have less food and they do the really hard manual labor.
There have been many studies relating weight (or rather lack of) to income, for higher income brackets. Not to say that income is a perfect class predictor, but rather to say that up to the upper class, it generally is.
Posted by: Marcus | May 15, 2007 at 11:24 PM
I am a skinny male who despises the fact. You gotta try to make yourself look bigger, stick on a t-shirt under your shirt, even wear some shorts under your pants. It's frustrating because without this, you get sneers from men and women who think you are trying to be skinny.
I've been skinny all my life; at school I had a fair bit of bullying related to it, so I studied.. not as hard as I would have if I was butt ugly.
I've always had a job in excess of $35-40k right now i'm on a bit of a downward curve as I'm reaching a point where I want to settle down, but don't want some girl who wants only money.. so if women are determining that skinny guys have more money, then thats exactly who I am attracting.
The upside of all this, is those women who aren't bothered with the superficial side become instantly apparent.
I believe that whilst people continue to judge people on physical appearance (height, weight, colour, etc) a lot of the world is going to remain unhappy, because most of us don't fit in the fine line that is 'perfection'.
If the world could just accept that people aren't who they are by intention, more through causality, then we would be happier as a nation and a species.
Posted by: Jay | May 28, 2007 at 02:52 PM