Why were fatties seen as beautiful way back?

Why are body ideals so different now than then? Why did men find fatties so attractive?

Attached: C2C9A777-F489-4493-8A86-CBBE9A6D932E.jpg (3543x3758, 1.33M)

Depends who is exerting power over public opinion. Back then the power hierarchy was probably dominated by fat people.

derp because starvation and malnutrition are the number 1 causes of evolution in nature and in the food chain, most people even in the western world had to ration food in some degree up until the literl 19th/20th centuries, you actual fucking dipshit lulzzz

Because fat women are the only attractive women. Jews have used tv scrawny broads to convince you otherwise

see my post applies to you too

Well let's do express one thing here. These classical artworks aren't mere base pornography. The women aren't there depicted by the artist, solely to give the viewer a boner. That sort of painting would've likely been burned or something as degenerate and godless. So I doubt that is sheerly what turned on people in that era.

this is probably going to be a huge 1 post by this ID thread but there was a particular famous painter who liked BBW and would paint that, and it became a stereotype associated with the time

there are lots of paintings of more conventionally attractive women

Simple, when all the people are all thin and starving, some curves and blubber probably feels like a rarity. Probably indicates they have wealth too.

>Look at painting
>fat chicks
>not an art expert but suspect Rubens
>checks - it's Rubens
Most of the "way back they loved fat chicks" people are usually refering to a Rubens painting. He was a chubby chaser.
Most art is with fit as fuck women/men. Rubens was just really into bbw.

I don't believe that. I'm looking at that chick's butt and thighs and I'm getting a little worked up. I doubt that sensation wasn't around a few hundred years ago.

>Reverse psychological Jewry

That's bullshit. Paintings like this were done because they couldn't do real sex scenes so you do something close enough so, like you said, it doesn't get censored.

Attached: Leda-And-The-Swan.jpg (600x456, 55K)

Largely this. if a girl was a bit thicc and had some meat on her bones it was a sign that she was wealthy and thriving.

Because it was a sign of wealth, which makes you attractive.

Dont know why you fags have to overexplain anything.

Fat girls have smelly vaginas.

>I try to interpret subtleties about the painting
>Rubens just like chubby chicks

don't forget surviving childbirth

That's a myth fatass women believe. There's some scholarship that believes Peter Paul Rubens was a chubby chaser, and those paintings were just projecting his fetish. Normal people in old times wanted healthy women who could bear children, not lard-o's who will eat everything that isn't nailed down and whine about their knees as the reason why housework doesn't get done.

In a time where it was hard to fill your stomach being fat was a symbol of luxury.

Even then, the modern extollation of it being a sign of beauty is more part of a fat positivity thing, sort of how like the world at large forgets that big dicks were once socially what small dicks are now.

Can we stop with the "it was a sign of wealth which was attractive" meme, that was probably made up on the spot by some boomer in the 1970s or something?

Rubens liked chubby women for the same reason lots of men like chubby women--- which is some unexplainable sexual thing that has nothing to do with "wealth" or some other pseudoscientific bullshit explanation.

You could explain to me all day why men want to stick their tongues in women's anuses. It still won't make sense. And men will still want to do it.

Only the wealthy could afford to patronize artists
Only the wealthy could afford to be fat
Do the math

No, you're a dumb dumb. It's simpler than that.

>1 post by this ID

sage

>ou could explain to me all day why men want to stick their tongues in women's anuses. It still won't make sense. And men will still want to do it.

This is so true.

Still 1 post by this id
SHILL THREAD GO AWAY THANKS

It's not that Wealth is attractive, it's that only the wealthy could be fat and only the wealthy could pay artists

This 100%. people in 19th century photos don't look like Abercrombie and Fitch models by choice.

>Rubens was a chubby chaser
Actually quite the opposite is true, Rubens hated fat people and excess in general, he simply painted fat bitches to appeal to the uneducated masses. It was basically porn for disgusting plebs.

Really tho? That one bitch got cellulite on her Back, bro. And biceps. Check out them Popeye arms.

This guy's looking for fantasy shit that's Way uncommon, in addition to being very slightly off on the feminine body in contrast to the male.

I've only seen like one woman with musculature like that in my entire life, and she was a freaking 6' Big Bertha type milf that, granted, I'd of boned the shit out of because damn them's some really big tits, but if she wasn't working physical labor her whole life 5/7 40+ a week as some fem outlier exception, I guarantee she would've been like 280 pounds of fat.
In short, very few bitches are hot with bods like that. They're just fat.

Yeah like how white skin used to mean you weren't a manual laborer

I’m not a shill i just forgot about this thread

The women in these paintings would be considered slim by contemporary North Ameican standards.

Attached: woefYg0.jpg (600x721, 393K)

It's about child rearing and fertility. More mass that could be used by the body to supply nutrition to the unborn baby in times of duress.

>implying you wouldn't love to stick it in those plump brappers

Only the wealthy could eat on a consistent basis to be fat. So it was more of a status symbol

Correct.

rubens is always singled out for some reason.
Why not go look at Cranach the elder and see they had many different beauty ideals 'back then'.

When everyone is famished and the privileged is plump, what's attractive is thicc. When everyone is thicc and the privileged is sticc, then sticc is sexy.

Attached: Sticc+vs+thicc.jpg (540x355, 32K)