Approaching the "weight" issue

Can't you just do things together that involve exercise?

Bike Ride's, Walks, Swimming?

my Ex was a size 16, and as such I tried to get her to go on Bike ride's, go swimming etc. she was having none of it (though she did want to swim now and again, I was more on the lines of every week).

Ended it after mutually thinking the same thing. Just shows she wasn't right for me.

Up to you how you handle it though.
 
Yeah spose, tbh I prefer a size 10 to a 6 anyway but that's just me :D

Yeah, a size 6 seems a little too thin unless your other half is really short. My wife is an 8-10 depending on the cut of the cloth. She is one of those lucky people who never seem to gain weight, even when pregnant she only gained a few pounds (9 pounds total, my son was 7lbs 8oz when born) over the baby weight, which was cause for concern amongst her doctors...she and baby were just fine however.

I, on the other hand...well that is a different story entirely. :eek:
 
Is she though, these threads always confuse me as there seems to be two clearly different camps and I'm never sure which is correct.

So here is a theoretical question for anyone with the knowledge to take it on.

Tom and Bob sit still in a chair for a day and expend the exact same amount of energy. Tom eats 3000kcal in ice cream while Bob eats 3000kcal in just plain double cream. Who puts on the most weight in pure fat?

It seems some people would say Tom would put on more fat because of the sugars and carb content. Whereas some seem to say it should be exactly the same.

Genuinely interested to hear from anyone with more knowledge then I. :)

I'd be more than happy for a nutritionist to come in and set us straight, but as I understand it, you're correct. Calories is a unit of energy, and an indicator as to how much we're consuming. If we're consuming x amount, we should be expending y amount during the day.

What the term doesn't consider, is what comes within that calorie...

x can include 50% of your RDA of sugar, fat, salt, be completely processed and contain refined ingredients that the body struggles to break down.

OR x can be packed full of vitamins, easily digestible ingredients that the body laps up, processes, and then comes out the other end.

Same amount of calories, tackled differently.
 
My wife is a size 8. She is 5ft2 and used to be a size 6 when she was in her early 20's. When she was working 60 hours a week her weight went up and she got to a size 10, which upset her immensely because she has a lot of clothes and all of them size 6-8. So she managed to slim herself back down to a size 8, which for me is a healthy size and shes happy.
 
Say, "Stop stuffing your face you fat parking. I don't even want to park you any more because you're so parking unattractive. I'm going to park other women unless you start to take care of yourself."
 
Yeah, a size 6 seems a little too thin unless your other half is really short. My wife is an 8-10 depending on the cut of the cloth. She is one of those lucky people who never seem to gain weight, even when pregnant she only gained a few pounds (9 pounds total, my son was 7lbs 8oz when born) over the baby weight, which was cause for concern amongst her doctors...she and baby were just fine however.

I, on the other hand...well that is a different story entirely. :eek:

shes only 5ft6 so a 10 looks ok, 6 was too skinny.
 
Probably very little difference, or none.

But in reality eating the double cream will not be fun - the ice cream will be easy. In fact after the ice cream you'll probably want another, after the cream you'll probably want to gag.

The 'real world' comparison is 2500kcal of cream (you couldn't finish it) or 4500 kcal of ice cream (went back for seconds).

Is she though, these threads always confuse me as there seems to be two clearly different camps and I'm never sure which is correct.

So here is a theoretical question for anyone with the knowledge to take it on.

Tom and Bob sit still in a chair for a day and expend the exact same amount of energy. Tom eats 3000kcal in ice cream while Bob eats 3000kcal in just plain double cream. Who puts on the most weight in pure fat?

It seems some people would say Tom would put on more fat because of the sugars and carb content. Whereas some seem to say it should be exactly the same.

Genuinely interested to hear from anyone with more knowledge then I. :)
 
I now eat around 3000 good calories a day (trying to bulk up to lift), and I struggle to put on any weight. There is a difference in quality of calories. If she's eating the same calories a day in broccoli and salad, do you really think she's putting on weight?

most adult men need over 2k calories just to live.
3k calories whilst trying to bulk up is almost nothing.

as I've said before my recommended calorie intake per day is 2500 not counting exercise etc so using 3000 calories as an an example of being able to eat what you like as long as it's not processed is hardly a good example when your weight lifting anyway

unless you are a midget then you should be eating more near 3500-4000 whilst trying to bulk
 
Probably very little difference, or none.

But in reality eating the double cream will not be fun - the ice cream will be easy. In fact after the ice cream you'll probably want another, after the cream you'll probably want to gag.

The 'real world' comparison is 2500kcal of cream (you couldn't finish it) or 4500 kcal of ice cream (went back for seconds).

Thanks, so the real issue seems to be sugars are much more edible in large quantities whereas other food sources are more filling or sickly.
 
Buy her dog (a greyhound that was about to get put down ;)), tell her that she'll have to walk it and that it can't be let off the lead because it will run away and she'll have to run around the park with it because they need a lot of exercise... job done.
 
Last edited:
Have a word with the kids in the street so when they see her they shout "oi pork chop!" or some kinda mean name. I think if I got abuse off random children it would make me do something :-D
 
Back
Top Bottom