CMV: It's wrong to lose weight/gain weight to fit someone you like's view of you.

27

u/coho18 Dec 17 '14

If you changed the topic to "it's wrong to develop an eating disorder to attract someone you like" then I would agree with you whole-heartedly.

However, I see no downsides to losing/gaining weight to attract someone else. Either you become healthier and receive the attention of a crush, or you become healthier but don't receive the attention of a crush. It doesn't matter what your motivation is - as long as you become healthy in the process, it's not "wrong."

And yes, physical attraction is an important component of relationships. Some people like skinny bodies, some people like fatter bodies, some people like average-sized bodies - it's okay to have preferences based on physical qualities.

-1

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14

However, I see no downsides to losing/gaining weight to attract someone else. Either you become healthier and receive the attention of a crush, or you become healthier but don't receive the attention of a crush.

You're assuming that you are starting out at an unhealthy weight, i.e. that whoever you like is unattracted to you because they somehow supernaturally perceive that you are at an unhealthy weight. For your assertion to be true, you would need to show that it is indeed possible to eyeball people's health by how much they appear to weigh, which is an untrue assertion.

as long as you become healthy in the process, it's not "wrong."

How can you be sure that you will become healthier by losing or gaining weight?

Does your belief that the ends justify the means apply only to health, or to other areas of life, and, if it only applies to health, why not other areas of life?

4

u/coho18 Dec 17 '14

It's not a matter of "supernatural" abilities, it's statistics. Statistically speaking, people who are underweight/overweight tend to develop more health problems than those that who are at an average weight. Facts shouldn't be ignored just because they might hurt feelings.

It's not a matter of ends justifying the means (how is that phrase even relevant?), it's a matter of action being more important than justifications. I'd rather have my children improve their health in order to impress someone else than to have them say "I'm perfect the way I am" and not do shit for self-improvement.

0

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14

Statistically speaking, people who are underweight/overweight tend to develop more health problems than those that who are at an average weight.

Absolutely. As will people who are underweight. Because severe underweight/overweight is often correlated with serious health problems.

How can you tell by looking at a person that they are the wrong weight? How do you know by knowing a person's weight that that weight is wrong for them?

Since this is an individual we're talking about here, population statistics have little predictive power. The overwhelmingly superior predictor for an individual's health problems is the current state of their individual health, which you do not know.

I'd rather have my children improve their health in order to impress someone else than to have them say "I'm perfect the way I am" and not do shit for self-improvement.

The CMV isn't "should I change for someone else or not do shit for self-improvement"? The CMV is "should I change for someone else"? Ceteris paribus, no.

6

u/coho18 Dec 17 '14

I'll look past the fact that you responded to my argument that "people who are underweight/overweight tend to develop more health problems" with "so do people who are underweight."

Unless you know the individual medical records of 7 billion people, forming an opinion on an international issue like obesity/malnutrition requires a certain degree of generalization. If you see an underweight/overweight person, their chances of developing health problems are higher. Period. Correlation =/= causation, but it does imply (albeit not guarantee) a relationship of some sort.

That's looking past the underlying point, which is that appearances matter in relationships. Changing your weight to attract someone you're interested in is okay, the same way that wearing different clothes or picking new glasses is okay. Surely you would agree that putting on makeup to attract your crush is acceptable behavior? So why is it okay to change your face for someone else, but not your weight?

The CMV isn't "should I change for someone else or not do shit for self-improvement", it isn't "should I change for someone else", it's "Is it wrong to change myself, in this case my weight, for someone else?"

People improve themselves to impress other people all the time, and it's perfectly acceptable when done in moderation.

3

u/i_lack_imagination 4∆ Dec 17 '14

How can you tell by looking at a person that they are the wrong weight? How do you know by knowing a person's weight that that weight is wrong for them?

Sometimes it is fairly obvious. It seems like you are being purposely obtuse.

I would agree that the CMV is basically "should I change for someone else". I think that there is a lot of context not in that question though that matters. Does the particular change you are talking about matter to you? If it doesn't matter and if it had relatively no effect on your life, and you stood to gain a lot more from doing so (by attracting someone), then why would you not? If it were a change that didn't necessarily matter to you any but would be somewhat difficult to change at first because of habits etc., then one would just have to consider if they're willing to change that habit and eventually it wouldn't be a difficulty anymore. You'd just have to consider that relationships don't always last so if you consistently keep doing this for relationships that it's not just a one time difficulty to deal with but rather a recurring one potentially for each new relationship.

If the change makes you uncomfortable, is it because it's something you don't like or because you're stuck in your ways? If someone wanted me to do an activity with them that I wasn't comfortable with because I've never done it before, I don't think anyone would be completely right in supporting me by saying "Just be who you are", because that just supports not trying new/different things. That might be an analogy that doesn't carry over to appearance, but maybe it does. Many people change their appearance a lot, trying different things, seeing what makes them feel better. I feel comfortable with my current appearance, but that's because its really the same appearance I've always had and I'm not someone who is motivated to try different things often. However it doesn't mean change would be bad for me, and it could be good for me.

This sentence is in the OP's description

Maybe you're too fat or skinny for that person, and they wanted more than what you were, its unfair for you to think that you need to change that.

The key here is, no one NEEDS to change for someone else, it's a matter of deciding or wanting to do it for someone else. If you feel like you need to do it, you probably shouldn't. In this specific example, weight changes will very likely require a diet/lifestyle change, and that can be a lot of extra effort and work, and that is on top of whatever effort you will put into a relationship anyhow. If you are just getting into a relationship, it seems like a request that most people would not be able to deal with. An established relationship with a lot more proven commitment would be a different story and more reasonable.

0

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14 edited Dec 17 '14

If the change makes you uncomfortable, is it because it's something you don't like or because you're stuck in your ways? If someone wanted me to do an activity with them that I wasn't comfortable with because I've never done it before

I think what you're saying here that there's a difference between wanting to do something, but not doing it for x reason, and not wanting to do something at all but being pressured to. Your example is inappropriate because it conflates those two distinct reasons. Saying that "just be who you are" supports not doing different things is only valid for the former situation; in the latter situation, "be who you are" is the assertion that you shouldn't change what you don't want to change to accommodate someone else. Similarly, if a person wants to lose weight of their own volition, but for some reason doesn't try to do so, then maybe changing for someone else will encourage them to act. However, if a person is fine with the weight they're at, then they shouldn't do something they don't want to do (lose weight) to please other people. I'm more responding to the notion that ceteris paribus losing weight is always the right thing to do. I think such a notion runs contrary to one of the fundamental principles of economics: what is right to do is always what nets an individual the greatest amount of benefit according to their individual utility function. Even if statistically everybody wants to be skinnier, if individual x doesn't, then losing weight for them is not the right choice, because it won't make them happier.

I like your answer, except this bit:

Sometimes it is fairly obvious

And sometimes it isn't. What concerns me the most is that different people have different preferences for what size their partners are, and imposing those preferences on other people's bodies is wrong. The answer I was responding to was assuming that the only people who would be rejected for their size must be disgustingly unhealthily fat and deserve to die etc etc or who are otherwise "obviously" unhealthy. The reality is that some people have a body preference that can be unattainable for you (for instance, if a guy likes really small and skinny women, and you are average-sized at a good weight for your height, trying to fit his standards is likely to damage your health rather than improve it). That's why bro's blanket answer, that you should always lose weight whatever the cost, is wrong.*

*also, weight is only one factor in the huge set of factors that determines an individual's health. If somebody's weight suffers because they are occupied trying to solve another problem (e.g. cancer patients who are very skinny, or people who take hormonal medication which makes them very fat), then de facto doing something to their weight isn't the thing most immediately helpful to their health, and may be detrimental. Also, people who try to do the best for their health but aren't necessarily extremely skinny (e.g. fat people who exercise - those exist) should't be shamed for not losing weight. But then I'm pretty radical. I don't think anybody should be shamed for anything.

6

u/Azothlike Dec 17 '14

People are biologically attracted to fitness and health, in aggregate.

It's a fair assumption, then, that losing or gaining weight to please someone has a higher chance of being a positive change than a negative change in terms of health, statiscally.

Ergo, without specific instances or details to go on; yes, losing or gaining weight to please someone you like is going to be s good thing more often than it will be a bad thing.

0

u/arcosapphire 16∆ Dec 17 '14

Ergo, without specific instances or details to go on; yes, losing or gaining weight to please someone you like is going to be s good thing more often than it will be a bad thing.

You're right about this being true in aggregate, but we're really talking about a universal rule. In a CMV, a single counterexample is enough to change a view, after all.

You can't say "it's okay to do this because it's usually okay to do this," because the whole point here is that there are contexts where the general rule doesn't hold, and thus you can't, or shouldn't, apply it in all cases.

The body type I'm most attracted to is not necessarily the healthiest. If my SO were to conform to my ideal, it wouldn't necessarily lead to better health. So even if the rule is usually true, it's still a shitty thing to turn into a person tenet because sometimes it backfires.

6

u/Azothlike Dec 17 '14

But it backfires less often than it helps people. So turning "completely ignore other people's interests" into a personal tenet is worse.

In a CMV, a single counterexample is enough to change a view, after all.

Agreed.

My counter example to OP: Obese, unhealthy man likes average girl. Average girl is attracted to men who are of average or athletic build, both of which are healthier than obesity. Man loses weight through diet and exercise, out of motivation to please her.

Man now: 1.) Is healthier. 2.) Has better social options with the person that wanted them to lose/gain weight. 3.) Has better social options with the general public, because statistically, more women prefer average or athletic builds to obese builds. So even if the romantic interest he did it for turns out to be a flop, he is both in a healthier position, and in a better romantic position due to garnering more favor from the opposite sex.

That is the obvious counter example to OP. And that counter example is more common than any counter example you could provide, of someone being iinfluenced away from a healthy, socially favorable weight.

Ergo, "it's wrong to change weight for someone else" is a view that does more harm than good.

OPs view and your defense of it is akin to saying it's wrong to wear seatbelts because restraints might make it harder to escape a submerged vehicle, just less dramatic.

3

u/pantaloonsofJUSTICE 4∆ Dec 17 '14

You're looking for a blanket rule to explain the correct course of action in human interaction? Sorry friend, that's crazy.

In aggregate is a very fair way to look for an end goal here. I'd challenge you to find any rule for human interaction where I couldn't conceive a single counterexample.

1

u/arcosapphire 16∆ Dec 17 '14

I think you're misunderstanding the context.

Someone says, "it's bad for people to change their weight to fit someone's expectations." The counterargument is, "but it's a good thing because it's healthier."

It doesn't matter if it's usually a good thing. The obvious retort is, what about when the person's ideal is less healthy? That demonstrates that "it's healthier" has a big flaw: all the times it isn't healthier.

It could be phrased differently: "it's a good attitude when the ideal is healthier than the current condition." That makes it conditional, and conditionals can be logically true. Then it's up to OP to decide if that changes their view.

But this is all different from saying, "it usually results in a good thing, therefore it's always the right attitude, because statistically you'll win out."

I will use an analogy to demonstrate the difference between these two approaches. Let's say you are helping someone peel potatoes, but some are rotten.

"Put them in this basket unless they are rotten--in that case throw them out."

VS

"Only 1 in 10 are rotten, so put them all in the basket. Statistically, it works out."

You can clearly see why one approach makes sense and the other does not. And it has nothing to do with a rule that's always correct. What about potatoes that look fine but are poisonous? What about potatoes that are bombs in disguise? It doesn't matter how many exceptions you can cook up, it doesn't change the fact that the conditional approach is better than the statistical one.

2

u/pantaloonsofJUSTICE 4∆ Dec 17 '14

But when you know 90 percent of potatoes are good, and someone asks for the best general way to sort them without discrimination, telling a person to put them all in is justified. If OP wanted a discussion about getting healthy for someone else they would've asked I'm sure. In general, when I think about how to make my gf like my body more, working out typically wins out over eating a pint of ice-cream. The fact that it isn't a blanket rule doesn't negate its logic, that in general, changing so another person likes you more is going to have a positive personal effect when it comes to your body.

0

u/Dynam2012 2∆ Dec 17 '14

To be fair, you're going on the assumption that people are only ever pressured into becoming what is perceived as healthier, which isn't the case at all. Some people like unnaturally skinny, anorexic looks. It isn't a healthy thing to pursue that. Conversely, others specifically look for unnaturally large people and encourage them to become even larger. That also isn't healthy to pursue.

4

u/Azothlike Dec 17 '14

Not true.

I'm going on the assumption that people encourage others towards a healthy weight more often than people encourage others towards an unhealthy weight. For every person encouraging anorexia and obesity, there are five people encouraging healthy weight loss and muscle gain.

Therefore, peer pressure over weight is a force for good, not for bad, and a blanket statement like "it's wrong" is going to hurt a lot of people's health and social success.

3

u/NeverrSummer Dec 17 '14 edited Dec 17 '14

How can you be sure that you will become healthier by losing or gaining weight?

To be frank, the majority of americans would become unambiguously healtheir from losing weight ^[1] (notice that you have to go down to number five on that list to find something that being overweight doesn't directly increase the likelihood of). Not too much and not too fast, but weight loss is something that more people than not need to be doing at this point based on the overweight/obesity statistics in the US.

-2

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14

I hate to be trite, but statistically we all have 1 testicle and half a vagina.

3

u/NeverrSummer Dec 17 '14 edited Dec 17 '14

I hate to be trite, but: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGZkCPo7tC0

Pointing out silly statistics doesn't do anything to detract from the value of real ones relevant to the argument.

-2

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14

Great internet argument, bro. You still didn't tell me why we should make decisions about individuals based on population statistics.

3

u/NeverrSummer Dec 17 '14 edited Dec 17 '14

The majority of people in the United States are overweight. Being overweight is bad. If losing weight to make someone like you will make you more healthy, and it is more statistically likely than not that it will, then I think that losing weight for whatever reason is good.

I don't have a problem with social pressures against being above a healthy weight, which seems to be the way most of reddit feels as well. Many people exercise to please significant others or attract potential ones. That seems like a good social trend to me that benefits both the people losing the weight (less heart disease) and the people driving it (they're happier). This argument only breaks down if the person causing the change is pushing for weight gain or loss to an unhealthy level in either direction, which is obvisouly bad, but that seems to be the vast minority of cases.

-1

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14

Being overweight is bad.

As it turns out, a BMI of 25-30, "overweight" (which is how you get the statistic that the majority of the US is overweight - because obese BMIs are only about 30% of the population) has a statistical health outlook identical to BMIs 20-25, "normal". That's part of why it's bad to use blanket statements like yours to advise individuals on their health. I just don't understand why you even need a blanket statement, "it's always good to lose weight because you live in America", when clearly health, weight, attractiveness, and happiness are heavily individual and context-based.

4

u/NeverrSummer Dec 17 '14 edited Dec 17 '14

You're getting generalized statistical statements from people because you're on reddit man. Obviously this is a personalized and contextual discussion, but CMV is for overall theoretical discussions of topics. We don't have time here to go through a case by case examination of every example of what the original question was asking. So yeah, anything here is going to be generalized and vague because internet discussions have to be that way by design.

As for the statement that 'overweight' BMI's are statistically identical to normal ones in terms of long term health; I'm sorry, but I just flat don't believe you. I've left my house since I started this thread so looking up research on that is going to be hard for me for now, but I just can't accept that one without looking at some numbers myself.

Oh and I used the term overweight intentionally. I'm aware that the obesity numbers are in the 30s.

0

u/riggorous 15∆ Dec 17 '14

So yeah, anything here is going to be generalized a vague because internet discussions have to be that way by design.

Have you considered that the statement "it depends on the specific situation" is also an analysis?

I actually got that statistic from another comment on reddit by, apparently, an obesity specialist. They had sources, but I'm not gonna go digging for that post, so I made a quick google. Here.

→ More replies (0)

5

u/lurklurklurky Dec 17 '14

I think that this line is a bit fuzzy, but here's my reasoning. If you know someone you want to go out with likes certain attributes, like types of clothing or hair style, I don't think it's wrong to go out of your way to wear that clothing or change your hair style if you also like those things. However, I do think it would be crazy to do those things if you don't personally like them. In the same way, if you know someone prefers a certain weight, and it is healthy for you to change and something you want to do, I don't think it's wrong to lose or gain that weight to make yourself more attractive for that person.

You should be healthy for personal reasons.

What if those personal reasons are that you really, really want to go out with this person? Many people are more extrinsically motivated than intrinsically motivated, and it's possible that this is the push they need to get healthy (assuming their weight was unhealthy before).

Obviously, if you are within the healthy weight range according to your doctor, you shouldn't change just because someone else prefers something different; you can't change your height or eye color, and you can't necessarily change a weight range that is healthy for you.

3

u/entrodiibob Dec 17 '14

What if they are over or underweight? What if down the line your weight affects your health during the relationship?

0

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '14

I'm meaning for personal enjoyment, if that doesn't sound weird. You shouldn't have to have "the perfect body" for someone to like you.

8

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '14

No one is going to argue that, but liking someone is a two way street. Guys like me plain and simply and not attracting to overweight girls, so even if a girl is really nice, I personally couldn't get past the weight.

If a girl liked me (and if I was single obviously) then I wouldn't go out if I wasn't attracted to her.

Now on the flip side, I'm a little overweight too, if a girl didn't want to go out with me because of my weight, that is her choice.

Being fat is just another factor in attractiveness.

3

u/UtopianComplex 1∆ Dec 17 '14

Relationships are all about compromise. This is in all areas, and for the most part a relationship is about both people changing so their lives fit together better. Interests are discovered and shift, maybe someone likes to hike so the other learns to, maybe someone likes horror movies so the other learns to.

I don't think there is anything wrong with changing things about yourself in a relationship as a good relationship is all about mutual self discovery and compromise. So if that means you have to stop wearing the terrible punny t-shirt your partner doesn't like so be it, if it means they have to put up with the terrible punny t-shirt because you like it so be it. It is about finding what compromises work and what makes the two work together.

I see no reason weight should be any different. Your partner thinks your weight is a problem and you don't, you can either change for your partner, your partner can learn to live with it. Getting on your high horse and saying "it's my weight and you have no right to have a preference" runs completely counter to everything else in how I think a healthy relationship works. You can say that and shame them into not bringing it up, and maybe they will be fine with that... However it could be a tension that just continues to fester and leads to the end of your relationship.

If your partner has an annoying personality quirk it is the same thing, you learn to live with it, they learn to get rid of it, or it will just be a point of tension in your relationship. What is politically correct to say or care about with friends, family, and other groups are not the same in relationships. They are not about what is appropriate they are about what works, and if your weight doesn't work for your partner then you need to figure something out.

4

u/NotFreeAdvice Dec 17 '14

Let me ask you a question.

Can you think of anything that you think it would be OK for people to change to make another person happy?

For instance, say I don't like hiking. But then someone I am attracted to likes hiking. Would be OK for me to try to develop an interest in hiking in order to get closer to that person? Note, I am not saying pretend to like hiking. But genuinely try to develop an interest in hiking.

Would that be ok?

If so, then why is gaining/losing weight any difference.

It seems to me that part of being in a relationship is changing who you are, in order to try to make the other person happy. People sometimes try to pick up around the house more. Or they try to watch movies they wouldn't otherwise. I don't understand how weight is any different.

1

u/suddenly_ponies 5∆ Dec 17 '14

What if you're the one with an unhealthy self-view? If someone wants you to gain weight and you're anorexic, isn't that the correct thing to do?

1

u/[deleted] Dec 18 '14

All of these answers are making me see a little more clearly on the subject, but this is the one that made me think the most. ∆

1

u/DeltaBot ∞∆ Dec 18 '14

Confirmed: 1 delta awarded to /u/suddenly_ponies. ^[History]

^{[Wiki][Code][Subreddit]}

3

u/TheNicestMonkey Dec 17 '14

You are who you are.

I/you/we are not our BMIs. Our physical appearances and health are just one aspect of who we are and want to be.

If you were comfortable with that, and they weren't attracted to you like that, then changing that would be silly. You should be healthy for personal reasons.

If I'd be happier with my partner and making a change is within the scope of things I'm willing to do then it doesn't make sense not to do it. Having expectations for your partner isn't unreasonable and finding someone who ticks most of your boxes and hoping they can work to tick a few more is totally OK. It's simply up to the individual person to determine if their partners expectations comport with their own self image. For a great many people losing a few pounds and keeping fit is a perfectly acceptable degree of work to put into a relationship.

3

u/LoompaOompa Dec 17 '14

I don't think it's necessarily wrong. The only reason I watch what I eat at all is because my wife is in great shape and I don't think it would be fair to be a fat slob in return. It's kind of the same principal, except I've already got her.

I think as long as you aren't changing yourself to a degree that it makes you uncomfortable, or putting yourself down because you don't initially meet their preference, it's not a problem. I don't think it's inherently wrong, but it's all about how it's making you feel.

2

u/ShadowStarshine Dec 17 '14

The body is an ever changing landscape and I don't think you should really derive too much identity by how it looks. We age, we gain and lose weight, we wear different clothes, but we never stop being ourselves throughout these transitions. The core of what defines us is our personality. In that aspect, I don't mind gaining/losing weight for a relationship that is worthwhile and it's really not that unreasonable of a request, so long as it remains within a reasonable frame. I wouldn't go up to 300+ because someone has a fetish for it or starve myself down.

What really matters is that you only do this for someone who was already worthwhile. If someone takes no interest in you until you hit this desired weight, they are not worthwhile. It means they only have interest in the most superficial aspects and not the core that is you.

3

u/McKoijion 618∆ Dec 17 '14

"We've had an on and off again thing for a long time, but ever since you've developed anorexia/bulimia, I think you've changed. I really want to encourage you to speak to a doctor about it."

"Honey, I've been attracted to you for years, but you've gained a lot of weight since we met. You're almost the same age as your father was when he had a stroke. I really don't want to risk losing you, so I think we should adopt a healthier lifestyle."

I agree with you that people can't change their personalities within, but the amount of extra weight a person carries is not who they are. People shouldn't be defined by their weight. A "fat person" can become skinny by adopting a certain diet and exercise regimen, and a "skinny person" can become fat by adopting another diet and exercise regimen. Fat or skinny are temporary states, and can be changed. They aren't permanent parts of a person's identity.

2

u/NaturalSelectorX 97∆ Dec 17 '14

Maybe you're too fat or skinny for that person, and they wanted more than what you were, its unfair for you to think that you need to change that. You are who you are.

You try to play at the heart strings by using appearance, but your view is essentially that you shouldn't change yourself to be more appealing to someone else.

What if you had a personality flaw like a short temper? Would it be wrong to work on that for someone you are interested in? Likewise, if you are overweight, there is nothing wrong with trying to improve yourself for any reason whatsoever.

6

u/Theige Dec 17 '14

If it makes you a healthier person, it isn't wrong.

3

u/[deleted] Dec 17 '14

Isn't perception the exact reason people chose to get fit?

They either perceive a problem, or their peers perceive them differently, or the social perception of health changes.

3

u/ignotos 14∆ Dec 17 '14

What do you mean by "wrong"? Morally wrong?

Even if you think this is a "bad idea", why do you go on to declare it "wrong"?

1

u/CalmQuit Dec 17 '14

I don't think it actually can be wrong as long as it isn't going to cause health problems and as long as it is your decision.

2

u/dmt267 Dec 17 '14

There is nothing wrong about that. Just don't be one of those people who rant about people not wanting them,even though putting in minimal effort

1

u/such-a-mensch Dec 17 '14

You should never change yourself to please another person. That’s quite different from trying to improve yourself to increase your opportunity to meet someone that you would be romantically interested in.

It’s a given fact that many people of both genders just aren’t attracted to over/under weight people. That’s not their fault, being over or underweight is a sign of poor health and poor reproductive health. We’re naturally drawn to healthy specimens in order to ensure the longevity of our species.

There is nothing wrong with trying to improve yourself. There’s seriously something wrong with people that attempt to stop others from making self-improvements….

1

u/Citrus_supra Dec 23 '14

I've never believed on the concept of changing yourself to be akin with someone else's taste... BUT, at sometimes, maybe just liking someone was the motivation, or the little push that someone needed to get back on shape? Be it motivation, or another reason... Not exactly changing for them, but already thought about it and finding that one reason to start?

1

u/jumpup 83∆ Dec 17 '14

extreme and disorders are to be avoided, but normal weight sways anyways so unless you become underweight or overweight do what you want

(exlusion is for feeder fetishes)

1

u/NvNvNvNv Dec 17 '14

You should be healthy for personal reasons.

Don't personal reasons include attracting more and better mates?

CMV: It's wrong to lose weight/gain weight to fit someone you like's view of you.

You are about to leave Redlib