Leida, I would encourage you to stop thinking about your tendency to indulge yourself as a "character flaw". It is merely a tendency that you are trying to change. The associated negativity and maybe even guilt is probably not helpful to you reaching your goal. To spew a meaningless phrase "it is what it is". It is a behavior, one shared by many. The energy and time you are putting forth are beneficial accomplishments in their own right.
No, I don't view it negatively or feel guilty, just trying to figure out the root causes, and work through them. I am not much of a psychology person, so I am grateful it is relatively simple in my case.
Yeah, I wouldn't see any of those htings as "character flaws" per se.
I do the same, and so for me, just clearing out treats or being more mindful, more consistently of what I'm eating (and really, it's just basic primal), then I tend to tighten up then as I want.
But, it's usually just a 5-10 lbs difference, so no big deal.
28 pages of thighs...and it really is sad that as women we all feel this need to fit into beauty magazine standards. I absolutely do this myself but try to recognize it stop it. It becomes this perpetuating negative behavior...we're happy when we are super skinny...we are depressed and miserable with 5 lbs on us, but we ARE beautiful women! Unfortunately society continues to perpetuate all of this by being proud of someone who through whatever means becomes really slender. "Oh you look so good!" THis was said to me over and over when I was sickest with IBS and down to my lowest weight of 118lbs. Even though I was a digestive disaster, everyone said how GOOD I looked---what women really mean is that I was REALLY SKINNY. That was the hardest thing to overcome...because now at a healthy 135...what am I to those people---fat? Hardly, but that's how those comments get construed in our media infused female brains.
Sorry to rant...
Yes, I hope I can have beautiful lean thighs, so I read this thread. But I would rather have a flat belly. More than that, I want to be as physically strong as I can be, and to be able to run, bike, hike and kayak without pain. Better than that... my skin is clear, my mood is stable, my GI issues are gone, and I have dropped 22 pounds in 6 months. Great thighs are a low priority for me, but I feel like I'm moving in the right direction, and now, at age 47, it finally seems possible.
Well, to be fair, the conversation has morphed and gone in several directions.
I would say that if Leida is reporting being 5 ft 7 and 128 -- my weight -- I do not consider that "too much on my frame." :) It's a good, low weight IMO. At 5 ft 7, 135 is the average weight at our height, and while I have weighed as low as 118 (that was when I was doing triathlon training and vegan), I find I'm much happier in the 120s.
I say that anywhere between 124 and 130 is really good for me, and so I'm happy at my weight and feel like I look great. So, no worries here. :)
I'm happy with my thighs, my waist, my breasts, and even my skin -- even though I have capillary breaks on my face. I don't mind them, and I don't think anyone else finds me less attractive for it. In fact, most people find me attractive anyway, and fi they get close enough to notice those small things, they might be just as OK with them as I am. :)
So, there it is. :)
Nice to hear zoebird---and from another thread...most men arent finding super skinny, thighless, women all that attractive either!
The common confusion is of 'thin' with 'tight'/'firm'. It is understandable in the female case, because we have smaller muscle and higher fat percentage, so to have the athletic look fat percentage has to go down significantly low to actually see the musculus and lose the flabby feel.
I have read that the biggest mistake the female body builders make is starting to lose fat too soon, without dedicating a few years to building up muscle mass. Which results in what most of us probably have experienced: a weak, flabby frame with fat still hanging at a minimal weight with an unstoppable hunger, mood swings, and perpetual exhaustion. And depression, because supporting this state is impossible.
For me fat loss still firmly correlates with the weight loss, but my wet dream is to experience the scale going up while inches going down/look better thinggie.
I am also not sure women can successfully and repeatedly go the men's way of bulking up and cutting, because firstly we do not put that much muscular mass on (i.e. 2 lbs of muscle a week which is doable for an untrained male is not an option for us) and I also suspect that we retain much more fat than males if we cycle, and, I suspect most of it on the thighs. Despite clean foods, yo-yo bulk-cut just doesn't seem a way to go.
Basically, for me the rule of thumb is that weight loss must not impact the shoulder. As soon as you start shredding the upper body, the weight loss has to stop because it does not improve the body, but does the opposite.
Anyway, the lagoon got opened downtown, so I officially kicked off the outdoor ice skating season. Wee! Skating is good for thighs and by far more friendly to a pear shaped me than the other favorite - the bike (can't take biking at all)
[QUOTE=zoebird;1036737]Well, to be fair, the conversation has morphed and gone in several directions.
I would say that if Leida is reporting being 5 ft 7 and 128 -- my weight -- I do not consider that "too much on my frame." :) It's a good, low weight IMO. At 5 ft 7, 135 is the average weight at our height, and while I have weighed as low as 118 (that was when I was doing triathlon training and vegan), I find I'm much happier in the 120s.[/QUOTE]
To be honest, I feel a little hurt when I hear women around my height describing anything under 130 as big. I'm 5'8" and 150 pounds. I hear in the way women speak about themselves that those women see my weight as enormous and unacceptable, and I feel like maybe if they saw me without my clothes, they'd think I was all the things they say about themselves. And yet I'm at a perfectly healthy weight for my height and my measurements and body fat levels indicate I'm in good shape.
I just can't comprehend how a woman who weighs (on average) 25 pounds less than me can be in any way described as a whale or fat cow.
That's because the weight (mass) is a poor indicator. As I said, it is my wet dream to weigh more and measure less. Because that would indicate gaining muscle and losing fat. In fact I am absolutely envious and drooling about your muscle mass compared to mine.
I am not fat because I weigh a lot, but because fat makes up too much of my body percentage wise. However for me, weight does correlate directly to fat increase, rather than muscular increase, thus I am concerned about gaining weight. If I were gaining at least 75% of muscle when I gain weight, I would be a happy camper. But I gain 75% fat. In other words, I am skinny-fat or overfat, while not being overweight.