• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Plus-sized model Ashley Graham lands Sports Illustrated swimsuit gig

lb_on_teh_cb said:
i try to think what a 5'9" woman would normally weigh - 120 or so? then i added another 10 lbs for each of her boobs, so im guessing she sports about 60 lbs of fat at least. she's gotta be around 30% or higher.
Click to expand...
Bmi is a poor calculator of obesity
 
Grand Mal said:
The point is you don't know what you're talking about when the subject is healthy body types.
Click to expand...
hmm, if you say so (of course that werent the subject either)

Grand Mal said:
You call this guy...View attachment 67197764

healthy
Click to expand...
i didnt, you did. but i bet his body fat % is lower than the beached whale they trying to sell you as sexy

Grand Mal said:
but a woman needs to be stick-figure anorexic to be a healthy body type.
Click to expand...
not at all, she just needs to not be obese


Grand Mal said:
Admit it. It's all about what you find attractive, not what's healthy.
Click to expand...
maybe. or maybe its her appearing to be so proud of herself (and pretending to be sexy) and im not sure why. i bet the local all you can eat buffet isnt happy to see her show up
 
CLAX1911 said:
Bmi is a poor calculator of obesity
Click to expand...

of course it is, if the person is an athlete and has muscle - for ex im guessing arnold schwarzenegger shows up as extremely obese acc to BMI.

but for most people its a good enough indicator. i said body fat % anyway, so im not sure why you bring it up


RetiredUSN said:
Ashley Graham is beautiful.
Click to expand...

well, that settles it
 
Last edited:
Dragonfly said:
Ashley-Graham:-Sports-Illustrated-Swimsuit-2016--06-300x420.jpg
Click to expand...
Hm. I'm not sure what I think about all this, and so I think I'm going to have to investigate very, very, thoroughly.
 
Hawkeye10 said:
Zen socialist, the only one I know of. I am a former Liberal.
Click to expand...

Zen socialist? As in, what is the sound of one hand giving and taking at the same time?
 
Nice looking lass. She'd look even better without the flab.
 
lb_on_teh_cb said:
of course it is, if the person is an athlete and has muscle - for ex im guessing arnold schwarzenegger shows up as extremely obese acc to BMI.
Click to expand...
First bmi doesn't measure obesity. It measures body mass index. Obesity is an arbitrary and nearly meaningless term. Bmi tells you specifically your percentage of body fat. If you measured a body builder they would likely turn out as 0%-3% body fat. Which isn't surprising because body building is simply extreme dieting, and occasional dehydration.

Bmi is a poor calculator because it is based on a standard. Different people have different body shapes. A person who is short and stalky will never register as 0%-3% body fat. A fat guy with a real thick neck will measure a lower body fat percentage. Because it is based on length measurement (on men) around the abdomen and neck.

The skin fold test is better but not perfect.

but for most people its a good enough indicator.
Click to expand...
No it isn't. It's a terribly poor indicator of obesity.

i said body fat % anyway, so im not sure why you bring it up
Click to expand...
Duh...um...because body mass index is used to tell people what their body fat percentage is.

I brought it up because that is the only thing people use to find body fat percentage. There are more accurate ways to tell but they are involved.
 
CLAX1911 said:
BMI tells you specifically your percentage of body fat.
Click to expand...
no BMI just guesses at what your bodyfat % is by comparing your weight to the square of your height - which is why it will be inaccurate for weightlifters, bodybuilders, anyone who does serious training. its a crude measurement. Calipers would probably be better, even the scales that purport to show your fat% are likely better but i think you need to be submerged in water to find the true %.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index#Limitations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:...ody_Fat_for_Men_in_NCHS'_NHANES_1994_Data.PNG

The medical establishment[34] and statistical community[35] have both highlighted the limitations of BMI.

Mathematician Keith Devlin and the restaurant industry association Center for Consumer Freedom argue that the error in the BMI is significant and so pervasive that it is not generally useful in evaluation of health.[36][37] University of Chicago political science professor Eric Oliver says BMI is a convenient but inaccurate measure of weight, forced onto the populace, and should be revised
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Dragonfly said:
Plus-sized model Ashley Graham is SI swimsuit model - CNN.com



Well this should be fun.

Is SI just being pc here? Or perhaps the times they are a changin'?

Thoughts?
Click to expand...


[On plus-sized models in general] Great for them - but I've been working off 40 lbs for a few years, now. If I work off just 20 I'll be happy (To this date I've worked off 12) . . . but there's never going to be a time where I look good in a bikini or shorts or a tank top.

It was one thing, 3 years ago, to imagine 'if I lost 50 lbs and got down to 120 I'd look fabulous in a bikini - like all those models'. But here I am, 12 lbs down - I workout routinely, I eat well, I'm healthier than ever before (compared to when I was anorexic and weight 95 lbs - etc).

And yet - even back then when I was 90 (the smallest I've ever been in my adult life) and even after I had my 3rd child and I was UP to 105 and god help me I had an emotional meltdown. But I STILL never looked good in a bikini - or even shorts.

So - some women are models and picturesque and can look good lounging on the beach in just about anything. Good for them. They have nice skin and smooth features and - whatever - they just look nice.

A majority of women, me included, cannot pull any of that **** off no matter how thin or thick we are.

So who gives a ****? These models don't represent MOST woman whether we're overweight, on-target, or underweight . . . they never have and they never will. That is WHY they are models, in fact. So who really cares how skinny or fat they are? There is no representation for most women. And as far as I'm concerned, they serve no purpose what so ever.

Regular women - regardless of how much we weigh: we just need clothes that are designed to fit us and look good WITH ALL OUR FLAWS IN PLACE as they are. No matter how many plus size models they put on magazine covers - it won't make me suddenly look good by some default of association. It doesn't matter.

I used to have body-image goals, but I've let go of that. Like most women, it's all bull**** smoke-up-my-ass lies which I nearly killed myself - several times - to try to achieve. I just now have a weight target which is based on a maintainable average and nothing more.
 
Last edited:
lb_on_teh_cb said:
no BMI just guesses at what your bodyfat % is by comparing your weight to the square of your height - which is why it will be inaccurate for weightlifters, bodybuilders, anyone who does serious training. its a crude measurement.
Click to expand...
That is how body fat percentage is measured.

Calipers would probably be better, even the scales that purport to show your fat% are likely better but i think you need to be submerged in water to find the true %.
Click to expand...
That would be a terrible way to measure buddy fat percentage as well. All submerging a person in water will tell you is how much water they displaced. A tall person would displace more than a short person. A body builder would displace more than a skinny person. It's just as poor as bmi.

Calipers meaning a skin fold test, which I already said are flawed as well. It needs to be done by a professional. Because you can easily skew the data. And even that isn't a good indicator of body mass.
 
lb_on_teh_cb said:
no BMI just guesses at what your bodyfat % is by comparing your weight to the square of your height - which is why it will be inaccurate for weightlifters, bodybuilders, anyone who does serious training. its a crude measurement. Calipers would probably be better, even the scales that purport to show your fat% are likely better but i think you need to be submerged in water to find the true %.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Body_mass_index#Limitations

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:...ody_Fat_for_Men_in_NCHS'_NHANES_1994_Data.PNG
Click to expand...

When I was in the Navy and got the BMI measurements, I almost always ended up on that section of the chart that had dashes not numbers.
 
CLAX1911 said:
That is how body fat percentage is measured.

That would be a terrible way to measure buddy fat percentage as well. All submerging a person in water will tell you is how much water they displaced. A tall person would displace more than a short person. A body builder would displace more than a skinny person. It's just as poor as bmi.

Calipers meaning a skin fold test, which I already said are flawed as well. It needs to be done by a professional. Because you can easily skew the data. And even that isn't a good indicator of body mass.
Click to expand...
eh, we'll have to disagree then
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom