Fat experiences

I'm encountering a strange phenomena as a guy who is attracted to overweight women. Although weight is not the deciding thing and I can accept her at nearly any weight, there is still a factor of attraction and what I imagine being the most attractive. The strange thing is how inconsistent it is what I'd find ideal, depending on her weight.
Just a few examples:
- If she was 150 lbs, I'd wish she only gained about 10-20 lbs
- If she was 200 lbs, I'd wish she gained 100
- If she was 350 lbs, I'd wish she only gained about 10-20
- If she was 400 lbs, I'd wish she gained 100 or more.

This seems contrary to what I see most FA want: they have a maximum limit, or an ideal weight, and if their partner is below it, they wish the partner jut reaching that limit. So if someone has 500 lbs as the desired limit, they'd want both a 200 lbs and a 400 lbs partner to just grow up to 500.

But for me it's not like that. It has always been in distinct ranges, and I have a resistance of someone moving from one range to the next.

I intuitively recognize size not as a spectrum, but in zones, each with its own lifestyle and identity:

- Zone 1 (curvy/fit): active, flexible
- Zone 2 (plus-size/BBW): Some of the most active hobbies become impossible, but most of day to day life is not affected too much.
- Zone 3 (super-sized): fatter than most things are designed for, problems with navigating a world not designed for such sizes

I find each zone beautiful in its own right—but I don’t want her to cross zones lightly. I prefer gain to occur within a zone, not between them. Crossing a zone boundary feels like a loss of identity, capability, or balance.

So, for me, it's about lifestyle changes. If she is near the top of a zone, I'd only want very small gains, but if she is at the bottom of the zone, I could be comfortable for her to go all the way to the top of the zone. As these zones represent different ways of life, crossing from one zone to the next means certain activities and abilities are being lost. But if she is already inside that zone, then the lifestyle changes already happened, so there won't be too many lifestyle compromises unless she crosses into yet another zone.

Are there others who think like this?

I can't say I've thought about it in exactly that way before. But it makes sense.

Crossing across these "zones" as you call them, can result in substantial lifestyle change. That is an enormous ask that I'm not sure anyone can really ask. Even if such an ask is made, I don't think anyone is entitled to it.

For example, suppose someone really, really enjoys playing volleyball, or going hiking and being in nature. Suppose also for that someone, it's a primary source of enjoyment and entertainment, which for some folks, it is. Some even like to run marathons, for reasons I don't really understand and is a view I don't personally share.

If this person were to cross into the supersize zone, this person would have to give that up. This source of enjoyment will no longer be available. Depending on the person, this could result in depression and misery. I would not want to wish that on anyone, and perhaps you don't either.

Someone already above that size, has likely already made peace with it or accepted it, or was never that interested in such activities the first place.

Lifestyle changes aside, it can also result in substantial change in public perception, which the individual might not be ready or prepared for. That too can be a big ask.

In way, it's at least in part why in real life, from a point of practicality and feasibility, I tend to prefer individuals who are already quite fat or at least, beyond these thresholds. Such questions, big asks, and potential crisis in identity, don't arise.

I could also see it as a matter of respect. To highlight that, I'll present an example that doesn't have to do with weight or size at all.

Sometimes, I like to play video games, albeit primarily single player. They don't overwhelm my life, or have a meaningfully negative impact on me. It's not always logical, and often have no practical value beyond entertainment.

I can go awhile without playing video games if a situation calls for it. If I play a multiplayer game, I'll give it my best shot, but if I lose, I don't take it seriously because it's just not that important at the end of the day. I won't do the digital equivalent of flipping the board by throwing a tantrum from losing. If it's not convenient to play a game, I'll save and then pick up where I left off before.

I think you get the idea. However, it is something I do enjoy, and I'll probably always play some video games for the rest of my life.

But apparently, some don't like that, and don't think I should play them at all. I don't know if it's because of stereotypes of preconceived misconceptions, but it doesn't matter. If a woman were to tell me to never play them anymore, I'm telling her to stick it where the sun doesn't shine. Why? It's all about respect.

This doesn't apply to just video games, it applies to just about anything else. Playing music, making art, writing, gardening, being a gearhead/working on cars (which actually has practical value), etc.

No one likes it when others try to substantially change them, and such relationships nearly always end badly. It's all about respect. Note this is not the same as compromise, having conversations, and working something out, a hallmark of any good, healthy relationship.

Not wanting to put someone into another "zone" because of the changes this could require, some of which might be unacceptable to the person, makes perfect sense.

I can follow the logic. Certain weights carry specific aesthetics and lifestyles. So even though you want the person to gain weight, you don't want to interrupt their aesthetic and lifestyle.