>nearly three-quarters of lesbians are overweight or obese. The rate is 25 percent higher than heterosexual females and almost double the obesity risk of gay men
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/federal-eye/wp/2014/09/02/why-the-federal-government-spent-3-million-to-study-lesbian-obesity/
Congratulations. You reposted clickbait without knowing what the fuck you're talking about. Do yourself a favor, go to your local library, and look at the actual study itself. Or you could go halfway and just look at the last thousand fucking times we had this thread in the archives.
You're a fucking idiot, anon. That doesn't say what you think it says.
>>5655253
Not OP, but
>An Earlier Thread I observed: hurrrrrr LBD doesn't exist I am ANGRY
>this thread: durrrr Lesbians arent that fat I am ANGRY ROBBLE ROBBLE
Someone is very bootybothered, and annoying, to boot. So annoying, that they seem to be asking to be corrected. It almost sounds as if someone is trying to dodge, or downplay, ~<3~SCIENCE~<3~. But going down OP's rabbit hole leads us very, very quickly to this passage in an [abstract]:
"IT IS NOW WELL ESTABLISHED THAT women of minority sexual orientation ARE DISPROPORTIONATELY AFFECTED BY THE OBESITY EPIDEMIC, with nearly three-quarters of adult lesbians overweight or obese, compared to half of heterosexual women. In stark contrast, among men, heterosexual males have nearly double the risk of obesity compared to gay males."
https://projectreporter.nih.gov/project_info_description.cfm?aid=8875036&icde=21539564
The lesbian language is consistent with OP's popsci link, but they fudge something about gay men, but it's moot because the thrust, and the science, are the same: Lesbians are fatties!
Cursory internet searching turns up a Full, Browsable Article about ten years ago, drawing the same <3 FACT-BASED <3 conclusion: Lesbians are fat. The older study starts out the narrative even jucier:
"Adjusted multinomial logistic regression analyses showed lesbians have MORE THAN TWICE THE ODDS OF OVERWEIGHT (odds ratio [OR]=2.69; 95% confidence interval [CI]=1.40, 5.18) AND OBESITY (OR=2.47; 95% CI=1.19, 5.09) as heterosexual women. Bisexuals and women who reported their sexual orientation as “something else” (besides heterosexual, lesbian, or bisexual) showed no such increase in the odds of overweight and obesity.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874217/
Let's go into the latter study and find the meat on the bone: the numbers. The latter study from 2007 had a sample size of 5979 individuals.
For the math-challenged, let's glance at Table 2. The leading numbers in the central columns sum to 100%, so basically what we've got going on here is a 3x3 division of women into two metrics: straight-lesbian-bisexual, and normal weight-pudgy fatty but mite be fun for practice/hamplanet oh shit nigger what are you doing.
Notice how the "Lesbian" column has greater representation in the latter fatter nethers, at 35 and 34 percent. /Among the surveyed lesbians in this particular study, those of normal weight are the smallest group!!!/
As you might expect of an American study, when you average everybody out (bottom row), the resulting picture is a bunch of overweight women. But the lesbians retain the Fattest Of Them All distinction.
The RL takeaway? Americans in general are reprehensibly fat, but when your circumstances are such that you abdicate ALL pretense of getting a dicking from a decent man with functioning balls, you (as a statistical group) /will tend to care less about the bargaining power required to obtain such a quality dicking-cum-relationship/, from a /quality/ mate: which is always a pert, cute hardbody. To be free of men is to be free to look like Andrea Dworkin.
In the interest of intellectual honesty, once you dig a bit further on the older study, it turns out that they didn't take data from ~1900 straights, bisluts, and lesbians apiece. Rather, they wound up with a plausible number of straights relative to gays: that is, almost all the women were straight, while the non-straight women comprised a tiny sample: the straights in the data set numbered 5460, the bisexuals 180, and the lesbians, 87 individuals. There was a "special snowflake" category of 252 individuals as well, and these four numbers sum to the study's sample size of 5979.
>>5655602
Either way that study wasn't about finding out if lesbians are fatter than normal, that has already been studied and found true, the study was about finding out why they were.
Just because they failed to find why doesn't mean lesbians aren't a bunch of fatties.
>>5654605
We haven't been able to stop gay men from being disease-ridden drug-popping sluts even after decades of a terrible epidemic, so it's doubtful you're going to stem the tide of some dykes eating too much.
>>5654605
Sounds like people get complacent with their weight when they date women, regardless of their gender.
I'm a lesbian and I weigh 150 at 5'10 and it's all muscle. I think this is a problem mostly among middle aged/older women. most lesbians my age are a normal weight.
>>5656090
This. 5'7 and 138. I've seen fat lesbians my age, course I'm in one of the fattest cities in the US. But skinnier lesbians my age outnumber them and it's got to be better (at least in this city) then hetero girls since they're all fucking preggers right now.
Older dykes are a different breed than younger ones I notice. More into that politicking and strict femme/butch shit, plus usually fat but whatever I ain't fucking old ladies.
Most lesbians I know are kind of snobby about healthy food. Vegan/vegetarian, follow health food crazes, yoga, and /out/ shit like hiking and camping.
>>5656090
Same here. 5'4'' 110. I live in a very gay town, play softball with a bunch of lesbians, still haven't met many fat ones. The ones I have met are all at least 40-something and used to be active muscle builders until they got injured and nature took its course. Incidentally, none of them look nearly as old as they actually are. It's so weird...
>>5656227
Maybe there's actually a huge hidden cache of lesbians you have never seen though, they're just all too fat to go outside.
>>5656090
>all muscle
HNNG
>tfw no muscly gf to carry me and love me tenderly.
>>5654605
ugh, body shame much? fat != unhealthy. educate you're self
>>5656090
>I'm a lesbian and I weigh 150 at 5'10 and it's all muscle
Please post pics.
>>5656176
Hello again Bertha, your emotional libshittery is showing (why are you on this website?!)
You don't even seem to have differentiated between the two studies that I cited, instead using the singular article for "the" study (hint: this is important and actually matters to whatever rhetorical argument you might wish to mount, going forward from here). You seem to think that the conversation remains solely on the Washington Post's purported "singular" study (abstracted above).
The above links also provide very easy suggestions for other literature which bears out what both common observation and scientific analysis of data have already shown: LESBIANS ARE FATTER. Why so terrified?
You seem to be under the impression that people conducting studies are unaware of the problems of statistical interpretation (which is what their jargon is all about), which obliges you to Wow Just Wow it all away.
Here. have a distinct abstract which is easily found by poking around the above This time, both lesbian and bisexual young women are significantly more likely to be fatter than their straight counterparts. The central premise has yet to be refuted, much less with supporting evidence. Keep it up.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20670929
>>5655958
>Either way that study wasn't about finding out IF lesbians are fatter than normal, THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN STUDIED AND FOUND TRUE...
You are correctly reinforcing my central premise, hence my above caps. Thank you for that.
However, your support is dubious insofar as your reading comprehension is poor. Quite the opposite, since your post cited my thing in relation to my train of thought, your first clause is plain false. Witness the very first sentence of the previously cited link,
>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1874217/
which sentence IS:
"Objective. We sought to determine WHETHER (THAT IS, IF!!!) [ED]: lesbians have higher rates of overweight and obesity than women of other sexual orientations."
The earlier study I've spent some time looking at focuses on the if, and not the why. This is borne out by my above hate-fact posts >>5655470 >>5655553 . Scientists, being scientists, will be obliged to theorize the whys (I already explained that too), but it is clear to a person with reading comprehension what words and numbers mean.
>>5656794
I like it!
>>5654605
i always assumed the fat lesbos were the ones that decided to become lesbos, after they realized no man would ever fuck them.
>>5654605
There's nothing worse than a fat dyke. There's nothing I hate more than when I'm whacking off to some Lesbian porno and then some middle-aged looking, ugly as fuck fatso walks in with a strapped on Dildo. Like nigga that's disgusting as fuck.
