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.