There's a taboo word among the AZ community regarding Formidable

Never call her fat

She usually isn't fat. This, however, is morbidly obese.

Morbidly? with those thighs and stomach she's plump at most not morbidly obese.

No matter how I look at it, I see text-book morbid obesity. Only thing missing is cellulitis, but that doesn't really go well with fetishizing fatness now does it.

cellulitis is an infection... I know cause I ended up getting it once under my arm and I'm not morbidly obese so it's got nothing to do with weight...it's just a common bacterial infection that causes redness and swelling and in my case it caused this lump and I got worried cause it was kinda near a lymph node and my mom had cancer before so I got all panicky and the doctor said it's just an easily treated infection and gave me these pills and the lump went away.

TLDR Cellulitis is the wrong word there I think

BaldurAnthology said:
cellulitis is an infection... I know cause I ended up getting it once under my arm and I'm not morbidly obese so it's got nothing to do with weight...it's just a common bacterial infection that causes redness and swelling and in my case it caused this lump and I got worried cause it was kinda near a lymph node and my mom had cancer before so I got all panicky and the doctor said it's just an easily treated infection and gave me these pills and the lump went away.

TLDR Cellulitis is the wrong word there I think

Not really, as it's commonly associated with morbid obesity, as it tends to be harder to really keep up personal hygienie. Though that might be true for people who are even more overweight than this girl.

When it comes to illustrations, thick (thicc?) as in Reisalin Stout is as far as I want to go. Above that BBW would be a more neutral term for plump or obese.
That should be made a keyword for filtering purposes.

Genex said:
When it comes to illustrations, thick (thicc?) as in Reisalin Stout is as far as I want to go. Above that BBW would be a more neutral term for plump or obese.
That should be made a keyword for filtering purposes.

Well, myself like any normal person thinks overweight is revolting to look at but since it's 2d, it's tolerable. Also, such tag would be very subjective.

Arknovalisk said:
Not really, as it's commonly associated with morbid obesity, as it tends to be harder to really keep up personal hygienie. Though that might be true for people who are even more overweight than this girl.

It is a COMMON bacterial infection. Weight's got nothing to do with it. I'm not overweight yet I still got a cellulitis infection. Get your facts straight. I shower every day I use loofas and back scrubbers and all that sort of shit. I got an infection. It happens.

Also there's no need to fat shame people who are actually obese. It feels like people are like.. if they're fat they're instantly useless or unattractive, yet there are still overweight girls that still look hot just a bit soft. IDK. Maybe just like... be a bit more sensitive towards other people yeah? I'm not fat I worked hard not to be fat but still some people are fat and they try hard to get rid of it.. I know it took me a while after some medicine shot my weight up to get rid of it... be a bit more considerate

BaldurAnthology said:
It is a COMMON bacterial infection. Weight's got nothing to do with it. I'm not overweight yet I still got a cellulitis infection. Get your facts straight. I shower every day I use loofas and back scrubbers and all that sort of shit. I got an infection. It happens.

Also there's no need to fat shame people who are actually obese. It feels like people are like.. if they're fat they're instantly useless or unattractive, yet there are still overweight girls that still look hot just a bit soft. IDK. Maybe just like... be a bit more sensitive towards other people yeah? I'm not fat I worked hard not to be fat but still some people are fat and they try hard to get rid of it.. I know it took me a while after some medicine shot my weight up to get rid of it... be a bit more considerate

I did NOT ask for your personal life blog, it's completely unwarranted so keep it to yourself. And on other note, look up what "commonly associated with" means, hint: it doesn't mean it's exclusive to something.
I'm talking about illustrations, not "being insensitive towards other people". Also I can tolerate them, I don't even mind them, just pointed out this is that territory.

(And fat people have a sure-fire way to get rid of their weight, eating less calories by the way)

Arknovalisk said:
I did NOT ask for your personal life blog, it's completely unwarranted so keep it to yourself. And on other note, look up what "commonly associated with" means, hint: it doesn't mean it's exclusive to something.
I'm talking about illustrations, not "being insensitive towards other people". Also I can tolerate them, I don't even mind them, just pointed out this is that territory.

(And fat people have a sure-fire way to get rid of their weight, eating less calories by the way)

certain kinds of antidepressants can make you gain weight regardless of what calories they eat.

BaldurAnthology said:
certain kinds of antidepressants can make you gain weight regardless of what calories they eat.

Do they break the laws of thermodynamics? Nope?
Then it's still not "regardless", it's just that they need to eat even lower calories.

Arknovalisk said:
Do they break the laws of thermodynamics? Nope?
Then it's still not "regardless", it's just that they need to eat even lower calories.

You couldn't be more wrong, just a hint, ignorance won't lead you to anywhere only to hubris of yourself and what you think is "true"

Simply eating less calories is for some people with a sickness regarding being more "fat" than usual is not an option.
It is an Chemical issue inside the body/system.There is enough scientific research about this topic, some people system is working a bit diffrent compared to other, it's a genetical thing, (which can caused by DNA damages)

Some people can eat abnormous amounts of food, they don't do sport or anything, but they stay slim, some people only have to eat minimal food , but they body still will produce more fat than it acutally should to. The Laws of thermodynamics doesn't work quite well here.

And pal don't forget there exist multiple layers of law in this universe. Which Scientist are trying to melt/make them work with the actual law's we know yet!

As example , we are aware meanwhile of the world called quantum physics&mechanic&more they follow their own Laws&Rules and somehow they stand in conflict with the World/Universe we know and their physics. Einstein's E=mc² still is true, but it conflicts with the world of quantum cause they FOLLOW their OWN LAW , and for now it seems they are unaffected by the Laws of the Universe we known before based on Einstein's e=mc²

Paradox in this universe is more common than most people think.

We are living in a Universe with multiple layers of laws, some are affecting each other, and some don't. (what we known yet)

And btw
I'm lucky enough to be one of those people with some fucked DNA i can eat so much , and yet i don't really get fat, and i don't do any sport. Actually i'm under my BMI. Where is your thermodynamics now? I've known people who didn't needed to eat much calories to get fat. from myself i know the one world, from others i know the other world.

And now crawl back under your rock and world.

I'm always amazed how far the ignorance bliss of some human being actually can go... still after all these years

PS, you don't have to ask for personal lifeblogs , since this is a open access site where you only need an account to comment stuff. So please grab your rude attitude, and get back to the cave where you came from.

Exactly! There's conditions like Endomitriosis which can cause people to gain weight regardless of what they eat... a condition that can actually cause cancer I might add. There are all kinds of physical problems that mean even if they eat only vegetables and meat their entire lives and exercise like.. 13 hours a day or something they still get fat. It doesn't mean they're not strong, just that they're heavy, and they're healthier than most people. Hell I've known people who eat a crapton and are super skinny yet are super unhealthy because they only eat bad food. Your metabolism has a huge impact on your weight as well. Skinny does not equal healthy

drfeelgood said:
You couldn't be more wrong, just a hint, ignorance won't lead you to anywhere only to hubris of yourself and what you think is "true"

Simply eating less calories is for some people with a sickness regarding being more "fat" than usual is not an option.
It is an Chemical issue inside the body/system.There is enough scientific research about this topic, some people system is working a bit diffrent compared to other, it's a genetical thing, (which can caused by DNA damages)

Some people can eat abnormous amounts of food, they don't do sport or anything, but they stay slim, some people only have to eat minimal food , but they body still will produce more fat than it acutally should to. The Laws of thermodynamics doesn't work quite well here.

No, YOU are wrong. Yes, it's highly genetic how much calories a person's metabolism burns, all kind of hormonal problems and dysfunctions can also increase or decrease it significantly, BUT if you eat under the calories that it burns, you will still lose weight. Calories in calories out was NEVER, EVER debunked. So you are the "wrong and ignorant".

And about all your multuple layers of law argument:
you seem to like arguing that facts are facts, and I'm sure you can talk about metaphysic and whatever in certain places, but let's keep our feet on the earth for this discussion, since we won't go anywhere otherwise.

Also @BaldurAnthology
no matter the condition, your body can't just create mass without any calories. I guarantee you if anyone, under any condition only eats half an apple a day, they will lose weight until they eventually die. Of course metabolism is a huge key factor, and in very, very extreme cases, it can lead to extremeties such as burning only several hundred calories per day, or burning like 5k plus for others; but the fact remains if you eat under those calories, you WILL lose weight.

Stop trying to find excuses for everything, like the vast majority of "I wanna lose fat, but I can't" people smh

BaldurAnthology said:
Exactly! There's conditions like Endomitriosis which can cause people to gain weight regardless of what they eat... a condition that can actually cause cancer I might add. There are all kinds of physical problems that mean even if they eat only vegetables and meat their entire lives and exercise like.. 13 hours a day or something they still get fat. It doesn't mean they're not strong, just that they're heavy, and they're healthier than most people. Hell I've known people who eat a crapton and are super skinny yet are super unhealthy because they only eat bad food. Your metabolism has a huge impact on your weight as well. Skinny does not equal healthy

Yeah in regard of cancer this can become a real issue, since some cancer cells seems to benefit from it if the metabolism of the person is a bit diffrent compared to other, giving those cells either alot of nutrition for faster growth, and in some cases try starve a cancer cell, will make that cell even more aggressive in it's behaviour. But there is also the opposite site, in some cases "starving" can reduce the growth of a cancer cell, but not always.

Some nutrition parts seem also be able to reduce the growth of cancer cells as example the oil of natural lemons helps to reduce the growth of cancer cells (have been tested on smaller animals) but the effects on humans are unknown for now

Arknovalisk said:
No, YOU are wrong. Yes, it's highly genetic how much calories a person's metabolism burns, all kind of hormonal problems and dysfunctions can also increase or decrease it significantly, BUT if you eat under the calories that it burns, you will still lose weight. Calories in calories out was NEVER, EVER debunked. So you are the "wrong and ignorant".

And about all your multuple layers of law argument:
you seem to like arguing that facts are facts, and I'm sure you can talk about metaphysic and whatever in certain places, but let's keep our feet on the earth for this discussion, since we won't go anywhere otherwise.

Also @BaldurAnthology
no matter the condition, your body can't just create mass without any calories. I guarantee you if anyone, under any condition only eats half an apple a day, they will lose weight until they eventually die. Of course metabolism is a huge key factor, and in very, very extreme cases, it can lead to extremeties such as burning only several hundred calories per day, or burning like 5k plus for others; but the fact remains if you eat under those calories, you WILL lose weight.

Stop trying to find excuses for everything, like the vast majority of "I wanna lose fat, but I can't" people smh

Your argument has no merit, as if someone ate only half an apple a day they'd starve to death. The body has a minimum requirement for calories it must intake to function, and frequently intaking LESS than the required amounts will make your body activate a natural survival against FAMINE mode and make your food automatically convert to MORE fat.

Be you a nutritionist? Be you a doctor? Then shut it.

And how much calories are those "minimum requirement", again? Few hundreds, tops?
Assuming you have extra fat cells already, I'm pretty sure if you get in the essential fat and minerals, you are still at such a low caloric value that you will survive AND lose fat too.

ps: no, I ain't a nutritionist nor a doctor, most of them are not exactly on point anyways, and there's no rule that I couldn't talk about it, you of all people certainly won't get to tell me what to do, you prove time and time again to be a stubborn and toxic fool on this site.

Talking to that guy has no sense, please do yourself a favor go to Doctor that is also a scientist and is an expert in this topic, he will gladly confirm what we said, and prove you with alot of information that this Topic is more complex that you are willing to accept.
Honestly i have been once dumb and absolutly idiotic with ignorance myself, but then suddenly one day i realized, i was all the time wrong, and my behaviour was disrespectful, cause i learned the opposite , i learned diffrent views, and wasn't dumb enough to keep focusing on only 1 view and meaning.

I was once in more or less the same shoes like you, behaved like you, but that didn't make me right or true. I had to learn it on the hard way.

Arknovalisk said:
And how much calories are those "minimum requirement", again? Few hundreds, tops?
Assuming you have extra fat cells already, I'm pretty sure if you get in the essential fat and minerals, you are still at such a low caloric value that you will survive AND lose fat too.

ps: no, I ain't a nutritionist nor a doctor, most of them are not exactly on point anyways, and there's no rule that I couldn't talk about it, you of all people certainly won't get to tell me what to do, you prove time and time again to be a stubborn and toxic fool on this site.

Pot calling the kettle black there boyo

drfeelgood said:
Talking to that guy has no sense, please do yourself a favor go to Doctor that is also a scientist and is an expert in this topic, he will gladly confirm what we said, and prove you with alot of information that this Topic is more complex that you are willing to accept.
Honestly i have been once dumb and absolutly idiotic with ignorance myself, but then suddenly one day i realized, i was all the time wrong, and my behaviour was disrespectful, cause i learned the opposite , i learned diffrent views, and wasn't dumb enough to keep focusing on only 1 view and meaning.

You seem to be pretty idiotic and dumb, denying facts to make yourself feel good now, though, so you see, THAT is a prime example for paradox, right there.
Be it doctor or scientist, nobody sane ever debunked calories in calories out, neither did you.

Arknovalisk said:
You seem to be pretty idiotic and dumb, denying facts to make yourself feel good now, though, so you see, THAT is a prime example for paradox, right there.
Be it doctor or scientist, nobody sane ever debunked calories in calories out, neither did you.

na pal, i just were more or less the same like you, some time ago. The diffrence between you and me now is, that i've evolved, and learned from my mistakes, and are willing to not repeat them.

drfeelgood said:
na pal, i just were more or less the same like you, some time ago. The diffrence between you and me now is, that i've evolved, and learned from my mistakes, and are willing to not repeat them.

Nah, this is paradox like I stated. How do I know it? Because - funnily enough - I was a dumb, narrow minded person once (just like you are now), but then one day, I learned how to think rationally, and that sometimes, no matter how bitter it is, I have to accept the truth, even if it doesn't make me feel comfortable.
One day, probably once you get to a certain age, you will probably grow up to accept that you can't go looking for excuses for everything.

Arknovalisk said:
You seem to be pretty idiotic and dumb, denying facts to make yourself feel good now, though, so you see, THAT is a prime example for paradox, right there.
Be it doctor or scientist, nobody sane ever debunked calories in calories out, neither did you.

Calling someone idiotic and dumb, yet refusing to acknowledge and accept that your views might be wrong is just ignorant. Your way is not necessarily the right way. No two doctors can agree about this. My facts came from doctors and nutritionists. Does that mean that some other doctor has since debunked them? Oh probably they have. People debunk stuff all the time. Keeping your mind rigid and unmoving is the first step to remain in the darkness your entire life.

To end this discussion, if you don't like how a girl looks... don't comment on it. Simply don't take the time to load up the image and go "ew" then comment of how you don't like the look of it... nobody needs to know nobody cares about your opinion, my opinion.. anyone's opinion. We're just here to look at porn. Get off your sanctimonious high horse and move on.That's all I have to say on this discussion. I'm moving on to better things. I suggest you do too.

I just pointed out she's morbidly obese. That was a harmless comment, too.
You seem to really hate facts (just like calories in calories out is) for some reason.
Maybe work to better yourself instead of wanting to control what people can or can not do.

Also your whole post is peak irony. Someone makes a remark about a picture, then you start a personal crusade against someone's OPINION, talking condescendingly, and you finish up saying THEY talk like they are on a high horse, and that NOBODY cares about their OPINION (the thing you started your whole spreging against).
I literally can't.

This is getting pretty retarded imo.