Talk:Big Beautiful Woman

Big Handsome Men was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 14 April 2009 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Big Beautiful Woman. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Big Beautiful Woman article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Archives

Archive 1

Terminology

In this diff, an anon changed many instances of the word "large" or "larger-bodied" to "fat". As the fat acceptance movement itself is active in de-stigmatizing the word "fat" and discouraging the use of euphemisms, I think this change is a good thing. Thoughts? Joie de Vivre 14:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. It's still insulting to most people of size and is still used mostly that way against them. Baseball Bugs 15:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Let me put it this way: "fat" is to "plus-size" as "fag" is to "gay". Baseball Bugs 15:09, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, it's more like "'fat' is to 'plus-size' as 'gay' is to 'alternatively-oriented'. --Succubus MacAstaroth (talk) 06:25, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not always true. My friend is fat, a clothing designer, and a member of the "fatshionista" community on Livejournal; she was gleefully telling me about a recent poll as to whether a young woman doing her thesis on "Fat Women and the Media" should use the word "fat" in the piece. The response was unanimously supportive; everyone said that the word "fat" was completely appropriate.

What other options are there? "Overweight" is no good; because where is the "appropriate weight" that they are supposedly "over"? I don't think we should go back to "large"; lots of women find the word "large" to be downright offensive when used to describe their bodies. These euphemisms make it sound as though the fact that they are fat is some terrible thing that must not be mentioned, the way that, decades ago, people would refuse to speak the word "cancer" aloud. I think "fat" is the most neutral and least offensive term. Joie de Vivre 15:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And, as far as comparing "fat" to "fag" and "plus-size" to "gay"; I don't think that that is true. I know more women who are comfortable being called "fat" than there are those who are comfortable being called "plus-sized". And the ones who consider themselves "plus-sized" tend to have much lower self-esteem than the ones who consider themselves "fat". So who should we cater to, here? What are our options? Joie de Vivre 15:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider the fact that the IP address who changed it was likely being insulting and ridiculing. Then consider the fact that the article is unreferenced. Obviously, I would be in favor of putting it back to where I had it at 10:27. It's interesting to go back to the original entry in February 2004 and see how it was worded and how narrowly (and inaccurately) it was originally defined (see below). Baseball Bugs 16:09, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Old version

BBWs (acronym for "Big Beautiful Women") are the focus of a vaguely-defined, fairly widespread internet subculture with interests ranging from size acceptance to force-feeding. Generally defined as an attractive, self-confident "woman of size", the BBW is the subject of much veneration by so-called fat admirers.

BBWs are not to be confused with feedees, who belong to a specialized part of the subculture.

Links

[1] BBW Magazine BBW Network Dimensions Magazine

There are medical standards for 'overweight' (which, incidentally, are heavier than those of the fashion industry). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brian Patrie (talk • contribs) 02:33, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) Well, people can use the word "gay" or "black" to imply insult or ridicule to gay or black people, but that doesn't make the words rude. You didn't address any of the concerns I raised about reverting to the term "large". Let's give it a day or two and see if anyone else has an opinion to share. Joie de Vivre 16:41, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're right that one man's or one woman's insult can be another's badge of honor. My concern in this article is that the ones who kept putting in "FAT" were ridiculing the subject matter (as with that IP address earlier, which you reverted). Leaving it be for a few days is fine. :) Baseball Bugs 16:48, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I realize that they may have meant it in ridicule, but think of it this way: plenty of Republicans use the word "liberal" as a slur, but in blue states it is a neutral, normal, descriptive term that bears no negative connotation whatsoever. I'm glad you're willing to be patient; thanks. Joie de Vivre 17:53, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they use "liberal" as a synonym for "Communist", just as we liberals use "conservative" interchangeably with "Fascist". Regarding "fat", it's political correctness coming full circle. Bill Veeck, who had a wooden leg, used to say, "I'm not 'handicapped', I'm crippled." Later, "handicapped" also became considered too strong, and then "disabled" or even "differently-abled" came into fashion. In that sense, "fat" is to "BBW" as "crippled" is to "disabled". Baseball Bugs 18:00, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Political correctness coming full circle" in this context is also called 'reclaiming'.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 21:14, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

"Reclaiming" by some, and imposing on others who still don't like being called fat and who resent somebody else telling them how they should feel about it. Baseball Bugs 22:10, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A more trivial example is when the manager of the Giants called the new American League "white elephants", and the owner-manager of the Athletics immediately adopted a white elephant as a defiant logo... which they still use, over 100 years later. Baseball Bugs 18:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, the term "fat" appears quite enough times in this article. Larger-than-average is far less POV-laden. Just because you and others think oversized women should be OK with it doesn't make it so. It's like telling deaf people that they should be OK with terms like "dummy". Baseball Bugs 22:39, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Check your personal comments please: I don't think anything about what others "should" think. I do know many fat women who strongly prefer the term fat. What you think that I think that others should think is irrelevant. :P Could we compromise and use different terms throughout? "Fat" in regards to its usage in fat acceptance? I think that repeating the word "large" is no good. Joie de Vivre 23:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And many do not like it. The term "fat" appears in there plenty of times, along with other synonyms. It's there in the term "fat acceptance" and some other places where it's not POV-pushing. To call it "larger-than-average acceptance" would be political correctness taken too far. A comparison: It's fair to say that Satchel Paige played in the Negro Leagues, because that's what they were called. But it's not appropriate to call Satchel Paige himself a "negro", because that term is considered old-fashioned at least and offensive at worst. Do you see what I'm getting at? Baseball Bugs 23:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've read your re-wording now, and I like it. Sehr gut. :) Baseball Bugs 23:19, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweeeet. 23:25, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Added article issues tag

Right now, the whole article is unreferenced. I strongly feel that there are elements of OR hiding behind the weasel words throughout - it's an article about a vaguely defined neologism for which reliable sources and verifiability are difficult to find, and it seems like the article largely discusses the term's use merely on the Internet, which seems like unsourcable OR. I added a general cleanup tag for the article due to the messy sentences everywhere - and the page has also been targeted by vandals and spammers at various points.

That being said, this is definitely a valid article as it seems like a highly notable internet-based neologism, but it just seems hard to find any serious sources on - the term will most likely continue to be largely subjective for the foreseeable future.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 21:27, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

For starters, just defining "big" is a problem. By modern Twiggy-ish standards, Jayne Mansfield would have been a "BBW". Baseball Bugs 22:12, 22 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. There's no way I'd say the term "BBW" would apply to her though, especially seeing the multiple pictures of her that reveal her body size. Also, the fact that the term seems to describe an "Internet-based subculture" doesn't really make much sense - either that is pornography, feederism or dating sites, surely? It's certainly not any one unified thing, and besides there were surely many men (and women...) who were attracted to women who would be seen as BBW long before the Internet gained prominence...-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 08:37, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The specific term BBW might be internet-connected, but I'm not convinced of that without proof. There is no question that plus-sized babes have been considered attractive by many men for many generations. Baseball Bugs 08:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, exactly. I'm currently debating on the physical attractiveness talk page whether the article's picture of Jessica Alba truly shows a body shape that most men today find attractive. I argued that although she has the right proportions (i.e. bust-waist-hip ratio), many men may find the same hourglass ratio on a larger woman with more body fat attractive.-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 08:51, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Way too skinny for my tastes. The Twiggy look, almost. But you're talking to someone who thinks Rosie O'Donnell is kinda cute (on a good day), and that Paris Hilton is homely (on most any day). Baseball Bugs 08:58, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, do you want to add support to my discussion on that talk page?-h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 09:23, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I put in my tupence worth. I'm not sure what the point of the article is. You like what you like, and I like what I like, statistics be damned. 0:) Baseball Bugs 09:45, 23 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Common prefernce

I'd like to edit parts of this statement:

Once an easy target for adult-oriented fetish sites, the term BBW as entered in a search engine has been adopted by numerous specialty online dating sites thus promoting the idea of these women as a common and accepted preference.

I'd like to change the wording of "target" to something less loaded, perhaps "identifier"? Also I'd like to remove the part about BBW attraction as a "common" prefernce. BBW dating sites perhaps promote the idea of BBW attraction as something socially acceptable, but I see no evidence refernced anywhere in this article to it being common. There are plenty of gay dating sites listed on Google too, that doesn't make it common. --Patrick80639 16:35, 8 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and made the changes. --Patrick80639 19:57, 10 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The problem with this article is that it tends to attract original research and unverifiable claims, and the issues you bring up here arise from such original research. Because it's about a neologism, there's no strict definition of what it really means and has become a loaded word, in both the dating services industry and in the pornography world. This article should really focus mainly on discussing the term itself, the history, and the subculture of fat admiration and possibly mentions of things like fat acceptance movement and even feederism.--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 07:31, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Rubens Venus at a Mirror c1615.jpg

Image:Rubens Venus at a Mirror c1615.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 16:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please define 'FA'

The article uses the term 'FA' at least twice. Searching Wikipedia does not return a definition. Please Define, thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.180.186.38 (talk) 05:56, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe it was intended as an abbreviation of the fat acceptance movement. - jc37 14:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You're incorrect there - it's actually an abbreviation for "fat admirer".--h i s ^{s p a c e} _{r e s e a r c h} 07:27, 17 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with HisSpaceResearch...as an FA myself, I can attest that it means "fat admirer" although I shy away from the term in my own speech. To me, there are skinny women, and then there are beautiful women. Yes, I am biased. 65.248.164.214 (talk) 20:54, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

FFA

I noticed that Female Fat Admirer redirects here-- I don't think it really should as it usually refers to a (any) woman with a preferance for heavy males, BBWs aren't really involved. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.211.130.123 (talk) 09:08, 23 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest deletion

I suggest this article be deleted. It is objectifying, inaccurate, and based solely on the writers preferences.

As a male, I like women. Body shape has no bearing on the women I am attracted to. None whatsoever (yeah, I'm weird). The very idea of an encyclopedia having an article about womens' body shapes is offensive to me. As is the categorization into four typical shapes. I wonder whether the writer(s) have ever seen an unclothed lady in person. Whether there is any scientific basis to the four body shape claim I find irrelevant. The author might just as well be writing about identifying an ethnic minority by the size of their noses.

This article (as written) would be more appropriately posted to Urban Dictionary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by MoratGurgeh (talk • contribs) 02:06, 24 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree very much. The idea of an article about Big Beautiful Women is wonder and besides, the best encyclopedia should have a broad reach and scope. I think the article should stay. Lord Balin (talk) 04:51, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You're being somewhat defensive; no one cares what kind of woman you like. The term "BBW" has been around much longer than Urban Dictionary, and is quite well sourced. If you want it deleted, take it to AFD. Stop telling us how offended you are. --Golbez (talk) 15:13, 3 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
That's like asking for the article on racism to be deleted. Just because you're offended by it doesn't mean it isn't a real concept that exists in the popular consciousness. An encyclopedia is where somebody goes to learn more about a topic they encounter elsewhere.--109.90.212.28 (talk) 13:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mika's song

I don't know if it fits guidelines, but what about adding a reference to Big Girl (You Are Beautiful) (Mika's song)?

190.48.55.30 (talk) 22:58, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

SSBBW clarification

I would like to edit the criteria for SSBBW which seems clear-cut in the article but is actually a bit more complicated. It seems rather sparse in content. Littleghost (talk) 20:06, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

yes what is an SSBBW exactly? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.112.130.129 (talk) 09:21, 12 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

adding an external link...

Hey all, I just started a community site for BBW called www.mikebrockway.com

I just wanted to share my love of BBW and hopefully start a place where people can meet. Its completely free and theres no adds or anything, I just want to provide a community for people to find other people into BBW.

its www.mikebrockway.com

If we can add it as an external link id be incredibly grateful! Its not a big site now, but im pushing hard so some day itll be the premier site for BBW. Thanks a ton. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajlisowski (talk • contribs) 21:55, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Big beautiful woman

Singles' ads notwithstanding, beautiful and woman are not proper nouns. Per MOS:CAPS, this entry should be Big beautiful woman. Since I don't know the history of this article, and since it is currently move protected, I'm asking here. / edg ☺ ☭ 10:34, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. It's the same sort of terminology as "Men who have sex with men". --David Shankbone 13:50, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Should This be Deleted?

There are some porn images in here, and this is ideal for the deletion log.

Where in the world are you seeing porn images? I see only one image in the article, and it's of classical origin. TheWizardOfAhz (talk) 16:48, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Neologism ?

"Big Beautiful Woman" is not a neologism. It is just a phrase. A neologism is a new word. BBW is an acronym —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.247.21.6 (talk) 07:32, 8 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

submission of article

Does this article seem relevant to link to?

Polyamory: Open's Double Meaning http://yourtango.com/20086467/love-buzz/polyamory-opens-double-meaning —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dodi.Blow (talk • contribs) 22:15, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

alternative acronym/definition for BBW

I have also seen/heard BBW defined as "big breasted woman". Should we add this as an alternative acronym? biancasimone (talk) 01:13, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]