Okay this has been bothering me for awhile...
We're all tired of seeing the anorexic, fake bake look that seems prevalent nowadays, as well as the abundance of surgically altered female celebrities. I often hear people say that they prefer "real" women, like Kelly Brook, Monica Bellucci, Scarlet Johanson, and the old school chicks like Raquel Welch and Sophia Loren (back when bodies were real, they say).
But aren't those women just as abnormal? They have flat stomachs, big boobs, medium-sized thighs, etc... I hear people saying things like "hey see those ladies actually eat every now and then," but isn't the reality that most women can have the same eating habits as these ideal women but will put fat on in different places? I.E. non-celebrity women who have normal eating habits may find that their food goes to their thighs, yet they are just naturally flat chested or something like that. If a good appetite was enough, then by that logic, wouldn't more women look like Raquel and Scarlett? I don't know ONE person who really looks like Raquel Welch or Kelly Brook. To me these chicks just look like slim (not anorexic, but still thinner than average women) who have big boobs, which is not a common combination.
I don't know...I'm kind of ranting a bit, but just like anorexic girls are trying to fit an unhealthy image, there are some chicks who are gonna hear the praises of these "real" women and then get depressed when they can't be voluptuous with a tiny waist. And then naturally thinner women who aren't as shapely will resort to implants (butt and breast) because they don't fit this ideal image.
Is there possibly some middle ground we can find where naturally thin and larger women can be considered real, and where people don't hold up very uncommon body types as "real women"?
Bookmarks