>>933775The unfortunate truth is that until the past hundred years, obesity was nearly nonexistent and being any sort of fat was a sign of wealth, status and power. This should NOT be confused with female thickness as an indicator of fertility, which includes features like wide hips, thick thighs, and large breasts. Keyword here is thick- not bulging. However, there is absolutely overlap between thickness as a sign of femininity and thickness as a sign of eating too much and becoming fat. The issue is that humans aren't mentally "programmed" to understand the latter, and in a world of easy access to food, hundreds of thousands of years worth of evolution, experience and instinct has been turned on its head. For the first time ever in human history, obesity is the leading form of malnutrition, rather than undereating and starvation.
You are completely right. Fatness is not something humans as a species were meant to handle, especially not on this scale. Most unfortunate of all is that exaggerated, sexual thickness in art and ideals has become conflated with the significantly less appealing obesity epidemic, creating the environment you loathe. I don't think I'm explaining it very well at all since it's horrendously complex and I don't fully understand it myself, but the bottom line is that two concepts with overlaps have become blurred and bastardized to a degree never before seen in history or prehistory. I'd argue that for most of human existence, it would be advantageous to get with a thick girl because she'd either be fertile and able to bear lots of your kids, fat from wealth and you'd be marrying into higher status, or both. Only in recent history has this dynamic become shattered and abused.
The most important thing to remember is that art is exaggerated for the sake of idealism, but doesn't perfectly reflect desires in reality. [Something that people still don't understand today...] To get a better idea at what people generally liked, tone down the exaggerations and apply a bit of realism- sure those statues might have been someone's actual ideal gf back in 7,500 BC- but it's more likely that they emphasized features they found attractive. You also see this go in the other direction: humans are uniquely neotenous among animals, possessing youthful traits and being highly attracted to them- which gets exaggerated into stuff like lolicon or people marrying 14 year olds. So although there's always gonna be those desires amplified in art, reality is a lot more... ordinary. Average is average for a reason, and there's nothing wrong with that.
