Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
It seems to me that on a subconscious level we understand that a fat animal does not pose a serious threat, because it is less mobile. And then we can afford not to think about vision for a while and prepare mimimeters
In my opinion, everything is simple. We are used to seeing predators/animals in a different form( cats are an exception), they must be in shape to survive banally, and here we see a “cute” ball of fur that barely moves its paws. Expectation is reality. And it certainly has nothing to do with the” grace ” of children (in what place are they even cute?)
Hello, everyone. I don't think they are cute, I feel sorry for them, they are not happy, they want to do like ordinary animals, well, for example, you can not feed much and makes you move, but you can not, you will be fat or for example you want love (s*ks) but how? If you are fat.
A fat animal means more fat. More fat is more nutritious. More nutritious – more satisfying. More satisfying – more energy. More strength – you survive in the wild and get the best woman.
I won't suggest anything about children, but I hope there is a different mechanism…
And I might be pelted with childfree tomatoes, but fat animals are like children. Babies are born plump on their own, because mothers like well-fed babies. And babies should be liked by their mothers, because having an adult enslaved by their mimicry is much easier to survive.�
Take a look at the video, it's interesting, there's not much about fat animals and a lot about children.
https://www.youtube.com/embed/wcdOdDDhLUI?wmode=opaque