Because this is about clothing standards. Athletic bodies exist and deserved to be clothed too. What would you prefer I do? Stay quiet while others say I should be ashamed to be my size despite my own doctor, not a bunch of random forum posters, says I'm healthy.How people come in here and think mentioning they're super muscular and workout hours a week somehow applies to more than a small percentage of people is beyond me. Like, how could you possibly think your, fairly unique situation, is generalizable? Or even close to the average? Like were you just trying to brag or did you think this study was talking about people like you?
Not everyone who is size six is healthy. Not everyone who isn't is unhealthy. If shame was a fix to the obesity crises then why did it keep exploding through the mean as shit eighties? Banning clothing sizes is not the way.
Yeah, I get you. I might have misread.I don't think when they was referring to that when talking about it not being genetics, especially not larger bottom sizes due to muscles. That's just the age old BMI problem, there's nothing health wise wrong with having large muscular legs. Thei contention that it's not all genetics is having thighs with high body fat percentage. That's not genetics. You may be predisposed to having it but that fat is not going to appear from nowhere. That fat comes from eating and exercise habits. How it's distributed is genetics. The fact it's there generally is not.
Yes some people have higher metabolisms than others but that's not the defining difference between being overweight and slim.