Page 2 of 6 [ 92 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

trojan51
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: Seattle, Washington, United States

22 Mar 2011, 9:03 pm

its up to you if weight should be an issue or not, its your choice, no one's gonna stop you!



TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

22 Mar 2011, 9:14 pm

ToadOfSteel wrote:
Pistonhead wrote:
An object in motion will remain in motion, basic physics.

240lb girl on top of you = pain (unless your name is Wolverine, Hulk, Juggernaut, etc.)
120lb girl on top of you = fun


Engineering 101: put the heaviest object on the bottom... a top-heavy construct tends to topple easily.


It's pretty boring to do the same position every time.

Otherwise, I like the way you think.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

22 Mar 2011, 9:23 pm

Frieslander wrote:
i guess it depends from person to person, huh? I loved the photo of the girl who labelled herself as "full-figured" on OkCupid. And I often consider myself a fan of the full-figured type.

But I saw a full body pic of her she sent by email, and I felt like she was trying to hide her body with the type of clothes she was wearing. I know, it was just one photo, and I don't know if she always dresses this way. But, then I think of what people will think of her.... way down the line if she would ever become my girlfriend. I'm probably way overthinking this right now.... but I can't help it! aah!

Plus her brother has a boyfriend, and I wonder how my parents would think of a girl who is either gay or bi, and I shouldn't think that way.


It really does sound like you're over thinking it a bit. What other people will think of your relationship should one develop is of little importance, really.

If you have concerns about her being insecure over her body, you should ask. I'd suggest being as delicate as you can if you decide to, though.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


zen_mistress
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,033

22 Mar 2011, 9:38 pm

ToadOfSteel wrote:
Pistonhead wrote:
An object in motion will remain in motion, basic physics.

240lb girl on top of you = pain (unless your name is Wolverine, Hulk, Juggernaut, etc.)
120lb girl on top of you = fun


Engineering 101: put the heaviest object on the bottom... a top-heavy construct tends to topple easily.


What about a girl underneath a guy? All the muscle and bone weight of a guy can add up to usually 150-180 pounds. Why is it ok for a guy to put 170 pounds of weight on a small female, but if it is a female who is heavy it is bad?


_________________
"Caravan is the name of my history, and my life an extraordinary adventure."
~ Amin Maalouf

Taking a break.


ToadOfSteel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2007
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,157
Location: New Jersey

22 Mar 2011, 9:47 pm

Pistonhead wrote:
ToadOfSteel wrote:
Pistonhead wrote:
An object in motion will remain in motion, basic physics.

240lb girl on top of you = pain (unless your name is Wolverine, Hulk, Juggernaut, etc.)
120lb girl on top of you = fun


Engineering 101: put the heaviest object on the bottom... a top-heavy construct tends to topple easily.


Engineering 102: when a man is on top his weight isn't a big deal, when a woman is on top anything that isn't absorbed by the legs is absorbed by the pelvis

Go watch the episode of Futurama that is about "death by snoo snoo" or whatever.


I think the amazon women weighed more than those guys (even brannigan), if only through sheer muscle mass and being 7 feet tall. Hence, my rule applies.

It also applies to you: you mentioned in the other weight thread that you were "damned to be under 190" for the rest of your life (link), meaning that it makes perfect sense for a 240 lb woman on top of you to be uncomfortable. My 300 lb body, with a bunch of muscle and fat added on however, could probably manage it. (At least in theory, it's not like i've had practical experience, but that's the idea I get)

zen_mistress wrote:
What about a girl underneath a guy? All the muscle and bone weight of a guy can add up to usually 150-180 pounds. Why is it ok for a guy to put 170 pounds of weight on a small female, but if it is a female who is heavy it is bad?

I'd normally say it isn't... I'd feel like i'd crush just about anyone if I was on top. On the other hand, a 170 pound guy on top of a 240 pound woman would be fine...

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
It's pretty boring to do the same position every time.

Otherwise, I like the way you think.

My rule only applies to positions where one person has to put their weight on the other. Again, I don't know from experience, but I'd entertain a guess that there are plenty of positions that don't impose such an issue...



Last edited by ToadOfSteel on 22 Mar 2011, 9:54 pm, edited 2 times in total.

TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

22 Mar 2011, 9:49 pm

The bigger the two participants are, the less positions they are able to do efficiently.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


Pistonhead
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jun 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,732
Location: Bradenton, Florida

22 Mar 2011, 9:55 pm

Actually, I've had over 400lbs of heavy machinery fall on me and I walked away unharmed.

You just don't understand the human anatomy, when a woman is getting plowed MOST of the time her legs are spread. When a man is having sex most of the time his legs are half open or most of the way closed. Male parts are located further north with (usually) an upward curve and female parts are located further south and go pretty close to straight up from a standing position. Now given that information can you deduce how much weight a male on top places on a woman on average versus a woman on top?

Keep in mind I probably have more muscle than you even if you weigh 300lbs, I walk to a cash register at Walmart and I get told I'm ripped. Fat will only serve as a crumple zone to lengthen the time duration of the initial impact of the weight.


_________________
"Some ideals are worth dying for"
==tOGoWPO==


zen_mistress
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,033

22 Mar 2011, 9:57 pm

ToadOfSteel wrote:

I'd normally say it isn't... I'd feel like i'd crush just about anyone if I was on top. On the other hand, a 170 pound guy on top of a 240 pound woman would be fine...


Oh well, on top is only one position, there are many others.....


_________________
"Caravan is the name of my history, and my life an extraordinary adventure."
~ Amin Maalouf

Taking a break.


Last edited by zen_mistress on 22 Mar 2011, 10:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.

TeaEarlGreyHot
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jul 2010
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 28,982
Location: California

22 Mar 2011, 10:04 pm

ToadOfSteel wrote:

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
It's pretty boring to do the same position every time.

Otherwise, I like the way you think.

My rule only applies to positions where one person has to put their weight on the other. Again, I don't know from experience, but I'd entertain a guess that there are plenty of positions that don't impose such an issue...


I was actually joking when I said I liked the way you think. Sex just doesn't work like two objects of different sizes/weights. First off, women and men both have a different center of gravity. Second... like Pistonhead said our 'sexy bits' are in different areas and requires different positions for penetration. These two factors play into successful/unsuccessful sex.

Not to mention a book can't stick out a hand and balance itself.


_________________
Still looking for that blue jean baby queen, prettiest girl I've ever seen.


wefunction
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jan 2011
Age: 47
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,486

22 Mar 2011, 10:13 pm

Frieslander wrote:
somehow I'm not appreciating all the jokes.... this is pretty serious issue with me. But don't worry, I'm not offended.


I know what you mean. It's all pretty "meh".



V10L3T
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 9 Mar 2011
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 43
Location: FL

22 Mar 2011, 11:00 pm

it's important to me! any boyfriend of mine must. be. chubby.


ok, he doesnt HAVE to be, but i definitely think it's cute :) so no, weight doesnt matter to me. but it's super annoying when the other person complains about their weight..



starygrrl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2009
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 795

22 Mar 2011, 11:07 pm

Pistonhead wrote:
ToadOfSteel wrote:
Pistonhead wrote:
An object in motion will remain in motion, basic physics.

240lb girl on top of you = pain (unless your name is Wolverine, Hulk, Juggernaut, etc.)
120lb girl on top of you = fun


Engineering 101: put the heaviest object on the bottom... a top-heavy construct tends to topple easily.


Engineering 102: when a man is on top his weight isn't a big deal, when a woman is on top anything that isn't absorbed by the legs is absorbed by the pelvis

Go watch the episode of Futurama that is about "death by snoo snoo" or whatever.


Speaking from experience as a skinny/tall girl with a heavier boyfriend, it is pretty uncomfortable for smaller women to have larger guys on top. But as it was mentioned there are plenty of other positions. I prefer to be on top though.



trojan51
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 361
Location: Seattle, Washington, United States

23 Mar 2011, 12:23 am

I would prefer the woman to be on top, thats just me personally.



emuman100
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2011
Age: 40
Gender: Male
Posts: 555

23 Mar 2011, 1:50 am

I am not at all ashamed to say I'm attracted to large women with large hips, thighs, and butts. I don't know why, but ever since I started taking a sexual interest in women, I always liked overweight women. I'm not sure if it's an AS thing or just personal preference.



Wombat
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Oct 2006
Age: 76
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,051

23 Mar 2011, 2:03 am

A few pounds overweight is no big deal.

But there are so many obese people these days then how do you know that they won't weigh 400 pounds and have a butt like the back of a bus within a few years?



Frieslander
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Jan 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,767
Location: Michigan, USA

23 Mar 2011, 11:14 am

TeaEarlGreyHot wrote:
ToadOfSteel wrote:
Pistonhead wrote:
An object in motion will remain in motion, basic physics.

240lb girl on top of you = pain (unless your name is Wolverine, Hulk, Juggernaut, etc.)
120lb girl on top of you = fun


Engineering 101: put the heaviest object on the bottom... a top-heavy construct tends to topple easily.


It's pretty boring to do the same position every time.

Otherwise, I like the way you think.


WEll, I do weight over 200 lbs. I'm tall, though, so, there isn't much muscle or fat.


_________________
Friesland = a province in the Netherlands. Pronounced so that it rhymes the English word "free" (not "fry"). I live in the USA, but I have a Frisian surname and all-Dutch ancestry. Just a minor Aspie obsession of mine.