wolverine66 wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » _incogNEATo_ wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. This I completely agree with. The males in my family that are dads do no look like Seth Rogen in the least, treat their women like queens, but push that extra mile to balance life, kids and gym. That's why I agree with the video because (if you actually watched the whole video) both men admit that one of them is too extreme and the other is a work in progress but the label of "dad bod" is an insult to dads who are great dads the are great athletes as well, I watched the whole video and while he does say that, he also says that there are "two women that wouldn't find him attractive." I agree that it is flawed to think that the 'dad-bod' is most desired. I also think that a rebuttal like this is useless when your defense is based on opinion and shaming towards 'soft-bodied' individuals. Luckily, I'm a little of both. My arms and shoulders are hard AF and my belly is soft. I get ALL women! It wasn't a rebuttal. It was affirming that both sides are in the extreme and I can identify why the response to dad bod was somewhat deserved. Don't get me wrong, like you just said, there are "soft bodied" individuals like yourself who do get women (when I was out of shape it was no different) but to label "dad bod" is stupid. To say it was deserved means that there is merit in what these guys are saying. I would say that if they were more rational, and reasoned instead of hot-headed and insulting, they would have been able to get valid points accross. Instead any valid points get lost in their own ego, and putting everyone down. There is probably a response that needs to be presented to the "dad bod" thing, but this is not it.
upgradeddiddy wrote: » _incogNEATo_ wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. This I completely agree with. The males in my family that are dads do no look like Seth Rogen in the least, treat their women like queens, but push that extra mile to balance life, kids and gym. That's why I agree with the video because (if you actually watched the whole video) both men admit that one of them is too extreme and the other is a work in progress but the label of "dad bod" is an insult to dads who are great dads the are great athletes as well, I watched the whole video and while he does say that, he also says that there are "two women that wouldn't find him attractive." I agree that it is flawed to think that the 'dad-bod' is most desired. I also think that a rebuttal like this is useless when your defense is based on opinion and shaming towards 'soft-bodied' individuals. Luckily, I'm a little of both. My arms and shoulders are hard AF and my belly is soft. I get ALL women! It wasn't a rebuttal. It was affirming that both sides are in the extreme and I can identify why the response to dad bod was somewhat deserved. Don't get me wrong, like you just said, there are "soft bodied" individuals like yourself who do get women (when I was out of shape it was no different) but to label "dad bod" is stupid.
_incogNEATo_ wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. This I completely agree with. The males in my family that are dads do no look like Seth Rogen in the least, treat their women like queens, but push that extra mile to balance life, kids and gym. That's why I agree with the video because (if you actually watched the whole video) both men admit that one of them is too extreme and the other is a work in progress but the label of "dad bod" is an insult to dads who are great dads the are great athletes as well, I watched the whole video and while he does say that, he also says that there are "two women that wouldn't find him attractive." I agree that it is flawed to think that the 'dad-bod' is most desired. I also think that a rebuttal like this is useless when your defense is based on opinion and shaming towards 'soft-bodied' individuals. Luckily, I'm a little of both. My arms and shoulders are hard AF and my belly is soft. I get ALL women!
upgradeddiddy wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. This I completely agree with. The males in my family that are dads do no look like Seth Rogen in the least, treat their women like queens, but push that extra mile to balance life, kids and gym. That's why I agree with the video because (if you actually watched the whole video) both men admit that one of them is too extreme and the other is a work in progress but the label of "dad bod" is an insult to dads who are great dads the are great athletes as well,
LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it.
upgradeddiddy wrote: » wolverine66 wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » _incogNEATo_ wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. This I completely agree with. The males in my family that are dads do no look like Seth Rogen in the least, treat their women like queens, but push that extra mile to balance life, kids and gym. That's why I agree with the video because (if you actually watched the whole video) both men admit that one of them is too extreme and the other is a work in progress but the label of "dad bod" is an insult to dads who are great dads the are great athletes as well, I watched the whole video and while he does say that, he also says that there are "two women that wouldn't find him attractive." I agree that it is flawed to think that the 'dad-bod' is most desired. I also think that a rebuttal like this is useless when your defense is based on opinion and shaming towards 'soft-bodied' individuals. Luckily, I'm a little of both. My arms and shoulders are hard AF and my belly is soft. I get ALL women! It wasn't a rebuttal. It was affirming that both sides are in the extreme and I can identify why the response to dad bod was somewhat deserved. Don't get me wrong, like you just said, there are "soft bodied" individuals like yourself who do get women (when I was out of shape it was no different) but to label "dad bod" is stupid. To say it was deserved means that there is merit in what these guys are saying. I would say that if they were more rational, and reasoned instead of hot-headed and insulting, they would have been able to get valid points accross. Instead any valid points get lost in their own ego, and putting everyone down. There is probably a response that needs to be presented to the "dad bod" thing, but this is not it. Not all arguments need to fit sensibilities to be any more valid that one another (coming from the family I do, sometimes I can throw a bunch of diverse thesaurus backed argument, other times there a bunch of m***** f****** in there. Doesn't make one argument more valid than the other because you have to listen to grasp and think of other world views. That's a true sense of gathering right and wrong or equal). The whole dad bod thing was off putting. I would think the whole part of the argument saying "you know what you are getting. The same body at 22 is the same you are going to have at 45..." Should be more insulting that someone pointing out your pudge because the "dad bod" mantra eludes that the dad bod guy is not capable of changing his physique because he isn't doing anything now. But hey, it sounds more intelligent so she makes the better point....smh
wolverine66 wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » wolverine66 wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » _incogNEATo_ wrote: » upgradeddiddy wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. This I completely agree with. The males in my family that are dads do no look like Seth Rogen in the least, treat their women like queens, but push that extra mile to balance life, kids and gym. That's why I agree with the video because (if you actually watched the whole video) both men admit that one of them is too extreme and the other is a work in progress but the label of "dad bod" is an insult to dads who are great dads the are great athletes as well, I watched the whole video and while he does say that, he also says that there are "two women that wouldn't find him attractive." I agree that it is flawed to think that the 'dad-bod' is most desired. I also think that a rebuttal like this is useless when your defense is based on opinion and shaming towards 'soft-bodied' individuals. Luckily, I'm a little of both. My arms and shoulders are hard AF and my belly is soft. I get ALL women! It wasn't a rebuttal. It was affirming that both sides are in the extreme and I can identify why the response to dad bod was somewhat deserved. Don't get me wrong, like you just said, there are "soft bodied" individuals like yourself who do get women (when I was out of shape it was no different) but to label "dad bod" is stupid. To say it was deserved means that there is merit in what these guys are saying. I would say that if they were more rational, and reasoned instead of hot-headed and insulting, they would have been able to get valid points accross. Instead any valid points get lost in their own ego, and putting everyone down. There is probably a response that needs to be presented to the "dad bod" thing, but this is not it. Not all arguments need to fit sensibilities to be any more valid that one another (coming from the family I do, sometimes I can throw a bunch of diverse thesaurus backed argument, other times there a bunch of m***** f****** in there. Doesn't make one argument more valid than the other because you have to listen to grasp and think of other world views. That's a true sense of gathering right and wrong or equal). The whole dad bod thing was off putting. I would think the whole part of the argument saying "you know what you are getting. The same body at 22 is the same you are going to have at 45..." Should be more insulting that someone pointing out your pudge because the "dad bod" mantra eludes that the dad bod guy is not capable of changing his physique because he isn't doing anything now. But hey, it sounds more intelligent so she makes the better point....smh re-read what I said. I didn't say it was invalid. I said that valid points got lost in the presentation. As a professional in the field of communication, if you want to get your point across, it must be done in a way where people feel receptive. If you attack people out of the gate, they will not feel receptive. You will find more people don't watch the entire video because the presentation is flawed. i can't continue a conversation here if you are going to misrepresent my position, and put words in my mouth. I haven't commented at all on the original article, because, as I stated, I haven't read it. I didn't say she makes any points, let alone "better" points. I also didn't say anything about intelligence, or sounding intelligent. These guys start off by insulting guys who don't look like them, and women. By doing this, they immediately put up a barrier to whatever message they are trying to convey. They have given neither group a reason to continue listening.
LolBroScience wrote: » wolverine66 wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. I never saw the original "Dad bod" article, and never hear the term until yesterday, so I can't comment on it (I'm not sure I even want to see it). This video does seem like they took it personally. Which is odd seeing as they proclaim to be ALPHA... you'd think that would encompass not being thin skinned. Not sure if this is the "original", but this is the one that I saw posted multiple times.http://theodysseyonline.com/clemson/dad-bod/97484 It's written by a college girl who graduates in 17' Saw a few others with ridiculous stereotypical Facebook comments as well.
wolverine66 wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » I think that the original article, and this video response represent extreme ends of the spectrum. Both miss the boat. The article and many of the commenters stereotype men who are in shape, who lift, etc. This video response seems like they took personal offense to it. I never saw the original "Dad bod" article, and never hear the term until yesterday, so I can't comment on it (I'm not sure I even want to see it). This video does seem like they took it personally. Which is odd seeing as they proclaim to be ALPHA... you'd think that would encompass not being thin skinned.
MonkeyMel21 wrote: » I might point out that the article was written by an 18 year old college student, that isn't even majoring in journalism or anything of the sort. Her intention wasn't for it to make it past normal reach of the publication. She just needed a topic and this was an inside joke between her and her other college aged friends.
LolBroScience wrote: » MonkeyMel21 wrote: » I might point out that the article was written by an 18 year old college student, that isn't even majoring in journalism or anything of the sort. Her intention wasn't for it to make it past normal reach of the publication. She just needed a topic and this was an inside joke between her and her other college aged friends. That's all fine and dandy, but the comments still point out the negative stereotypes associated with those individuals with above average physiques. There are people that really do think that way.
yopeeps025 wrote: » LolBroScience wrote: » MonkeyMel21 wrote: » I might point out that the article was written by an 18 year old college student, that isn't even majoring in journalism or anything of the sort. Her intention wasn't for it to make it past normal reach of the publication. She just needed a topic and this was an inside joke between her and her other college aged friends. That's all fine and dandy, but the comments still point out the negative stereotypes associated with those individuals with above average physiques. There are people that really do think that way. read the facebook comments below the article. Now that is a show.
http://youtu.be/5n94h8qnbwU