So, as I understand the heavy cream challenge, it has the following parameters:

- It takes place for a minimum amount of time, perhaps 2 weeks.
- Every day, you consume a minimum amount, perhaps 1 cup. It can either be alone, or mixed with something.
- If you miss 1 day, 2 more days are added to the countdown, effectively adding 1 additional day.
- The challenge concludes when you reach 0 days.

If you are very fat, or find it too easy, you could increase it to 2 cups/1 pint a day. But I don't think I can handle this daily. Not yet, anyway.

So far, I've been mixing 1 cup heavy cream with 1 bottle (1 cup) Equate Plus. This is the Wal-Mart knock-off brand of Ensure Plus, which provides about 1,150 calories in only a pint.

I've started the challenge on May 1st. Technically I did have a heavy cream weight gain shake as I described on the 30th, but I'm not counting that.

I already missed one day, so I had to push back the last day from the 14th to the 16th.

I'm trying this because I've had a hard time being consistent with it in the past. It's my hope this will be a fun way to keep it up consistently.


Has anyone else tried something similar? I wonder if this will get easier, or harder over time.

I'm kind of inspired since I think my long lasting plateau might have finally broken, assuming I haven't jinxed it by saying this.

No particular specific diet, other than mostly favoring high-calorie/calorie dense foods. I do try to maintain a daily calorie minimum and usually, a nightly dessert of some sort.

As nice as it is to have an epic eating day, that can be defeating if it means you eat next to nothing the day after.

It seems to be better to have a daily minimum you can slowly increase over time.

Is this a serious question?

No, just no. Don't do it. Don't even think about it.

The 1% of men who do this, do it SO much, that something like 1/3 of women have reported being exposed to such images when they didn't want to see that.

The problem even got so egregious, that a many if not most U.S. states have passed laws against this. The individual must give implicit or explicit consent to view such images. So now it's a misdemeanor charge in most states.

I'd imagine there's similar laws in other countries, provinces, and states.

But even if there's no such applicable law, it's just not a cool thing to do. It's unfortunate that such a law even had to be passed.

So yeah, just don't do it. If she wants to see it, she will say so. Otherwise, just assume they don't want to see pictures of that.

I've wondered about that too. I have a bit more gut and less ass than I prefer. In fact, if I get out a tape measure, the thickest part of the gut if larger around than my ass, and the waistline (where the wasitband sits) tapers in only a little bit.

Really wish I had more ass and thighs. I'm kind of afraid that if I continue I'll look like an inflated beachball with skinny limbs, which would not be a good look. It's been one of my disappointments so far.

Suppose I'll keep trying to gain more and see what happens, but I've sometimes thought this might be a showstopper. Maybe I should try the heavy cream challenge.

I don't think that's possible.

I have heard of someone gaining 100-120 lbs in a single year, or ~10 lbs a month.

I've also heard someone has been able to gain ~20-25 lbs in a single month, but it's not possible to sustain it.

I would also expect your body to rebel even if you could gain all that in only 3 months or so.

A voting/karma system like this with that kind of penalty would likely cause more problems than it causes. Imagine if there's a clique, and then someone gets on the "shitlist" of that clique for a petty reason.

One person could also try to open multiple accounts to try to game the voting system. You aren't supposed to open multiple accounts, and we crack down on this when discovered, but this isn't always right away.

That said, it does help when multiple users report the same troublemaker, and give as much detail as possible.

It's best if an administrator directly observes the behavior when it happens, though this isn't always possible.

We do wish to get rid of obvious troublemakers, trolls, and scammers. We also want to strongly discourage obvious, intent, disrespectful behavior. But we don't want to mistakenly remove someone because of petty, minor disagreements.

Tell me about it. I'm a few hours south in DFW, and it's a similar thing it feels like. And Texas isn't exactly skinny either. I thought everything was supposed to be bigger in Texas.

In fact, there was a historical paradigm and double-standard here that it's perfectly fine for men to be big and fat but women are supposed to be slim and trim. Though over the last 20+ years or so, the second part has been breaking down into "women can be fat too."

And goodness knows, there's no shortage of heavy folks here, and a local culture that prioritizes heavy, fattening, calorie-laden foods.

As a point of being practical and realistic, I think it's best to just try to find a lady who's already fat and has learned to accept it, even like it. That's far easier to find.

I see why you might think that's a good idea, but it's terrible for so many reasons.

It will cause fracturing, already in a community that doesn't have a huge following. I also feel like it may facilitate gossip. Walls need to be broken down, not constructed.

There's also something very archaic and kind of backwards about splitting the community this way. It makes me think of the Men's Clubs and women-only organizations of yore. Or the days of Jim Crow; white v. colored. It goes against the very notion of inclusiveness. I don't wish to go back 60+ years.

It makes me wonder what Martin Luther King fought for. What those womens' rights activists fought for.

Overall, I think it would send the wrong message.

I also don't really see a lot of point in separating by role, since not only can someone have more than one role (feeder and feedee for example), but sometimes those of other roles may nevertheless have useful advice or something to add.

It also wouldn't ultimately solve any problems, and likely cause more of them.

Despite our best efforts, scammers and those who misrepresent themselves do occasionally slip through, and it's often not possible to take action immediately. Out of fairness, there needs to be evidence or failing that, multiple reports and this doesn't always present itself immediately. While a serious problem, there's no simple or easy solution so we just do the best we can to remove them, while attempting to be as fair as possible with an extremely low rate of false positives.

With this sort of thing, scammers and troublemakers will have even more of an incentive to misrepresent themselves than they already do. The problems of harassment will only continue on as much as they have.

That's just my two cents on this, so far.

You just work with estimates, but that's more than good enough most of the time.

Also, I hope you don't expect perfectly linear results. You, or someone else, will probably not experience a consistent rate of weight gain.

The only thing that's consistent is if you can regularly "eat a lot," you will gain eventually. It's funny. Sometimes, you can eat a lot and nothing happens, then suddenly a few pounds end up out of nowhere. Everyone is a little different.

I suppose this would happen at some point, if you put on enough weight. I'm not there yet, but I can't help but think I might have to, eventually. I suppose this thread is similar to one I made awhile back about having to increase ring size because even fingers can fluff up from weight gain.

I can almost swear the shoes I have are just a little more snug than they were, though I think I still have a ways to go.

So, have you ever had to upgrade to a larger shoe size? About how much weight did it take, and how tall? I suppose it's wishful thinking to hope it's possible to estimate a need for larger shoes, perhaps based on difference of BMI.

If you had to upgrade shoe size, did you take the opportunity to phase out shoe laces in favor of slip-on shoes and side zippers?