I totally agree with what she has to say, but I do think some (young) women do naturally look like the cartoon picture, even when eating SAD. After a woman has been pregnant and given birth once or a few times and breastfed those babies, she may start to look more like the woman in the photograph (to me this is more "womanly", she has been through more woman experiences or however you'd like to say it). All of this is OK!
Are our bodies functioning well for us? Do we appreciate what we can do with them? Do we feel good? These are my criteria.

On the flip side of that blog post, is this one: http://www.functionalfitmag.com/blog/2012/01/31/top-10-ways-skinny-fat/

I was like...seriously? There are plenty of women who do those things and look "good." And plenty of women who don't and have tummies.

And this is supposedly a bad thing to be?

I honestly don't see what is so bad looking about that woman. Maybe she's had a baby? Paleo isn't some magic solution for not ever having a poochy stomach ever.

I really doubt you will get that kind of stomach bloat on a paleo diet. She probably has some sort of infection or has ton of gas. I also think its a hopeless battle to try to redefine masculine attraction.

I liked it as well. I think it shines some light on the unattainable body image women have for themselves, even Paleo women. I know that I have lost a significant amount of fat around my midsection, but I'm still not happy. I have love handles, a little tummy pouch I want to get rid of, and my boobs are saggy, but I have two beautiful children which I nurtured with my body.

I know I started Paleo for the wrong reasons, but I've stuck with it for the right ones. I think I've come a long ways in learning to be happy with the body God gave me and not chasing the illusive dream of a body like Elizabeth Hurley's.

Sadly, no Paleo is going to help my boobies... that's what Victoria's Secret is for ;)

P.S. Great post... I have never heard of this blog. Thanks for sharing it!

My apologies for butting into a estrogen-dominated thread, but I wanted to give a little from the man perspective. If it is unwelcome, please feel free to remove it.

For me confidence plays a big role. I've known and coached strongwomen competitors that could have passed for linebackers that were totally in love with their bodies and who's form followed function.

By the same token, I've know plenty of thin women that carried themselves well and weren't neurotic about diet and lifestyle, they just accepted it.

And for me, that is more attractive than any physical attribute.

Shunning all that, allow me to objectify for one second (as much as I hate to), for me personally the feminine ideal is probably a bit prehistoric, I do find voluptuous/curvy to be very pleasing to my man-brain. The woman that Melissa posted is very feminine and pretty. But, as I said before, the attitude that accompanies it trumps any physical attraction.

And I'm a married man anyway, so most of this discussion is null and void :-) .

Wow, great discussion guys! Thanks for all the feedback and keep it coming! :)

I liked it, save for this message: "Because any woman with body fat low enough to have that level of muscle definition would have long since lost her breasts."

While this may be true (assuming by "breasts" she means rotundness and size, not mammary glands) for some, or even the majority of women, it's not a universal truth and it really bugs me when people make outright claims about an astronomically broad subject, such as that which the word "woman" encompasses, as though they are irrefutable and there are no exceptions.

Some girls are going to have large breasts no matter what they do with their bodies, regardless of how "unnaturally massive" some people think they are.

Sure, I'll throw in my two cents.

Paleo, for men or for women, should be about optimising. I agree with GoKaleo that there is a lot of objectifying of women, even in the paleosphere. Or at least there can be. We're still moderns, even if paleos like me don't always like that fact.

So the question becomes, I think, what is optimal for a person, man or woman? There seems to be a reasonable amount of science that says some body fat is good, and a bit more body fat on women is natural. Personally, I like a curvy woman, but I'd rather she be strong and healthy than curvy just to please my tastes. And as for men, I'd love to be much more lean, even build muscle. But I'm not there yet. My goal though, has little to do with appearance, beyond boosting my own self-esteem. I really want to be able to do the kinds of physical activities I love, and some activities really that I never thought I'd be in shape enough to do.

Paleo, in the end, has to be about process, not product. You do what works for you. If a woman wants to look like that, then she should do so knowingly.

Every human body has it best and somewhat less great points.

Looking at your own body is like picking teams--I'll take my ears, my hands and feet, yeah my rib cage is pretty cool, my bold chin (looking coolly past the nose and big-boned hips and knees and short neck) etc., etc.

Depending on just how fat you were, I think it's more amazing that our skin is able to shrink as much as it does than disappointing that it can't shrink ALL the way. When I started this lifestyle last April, I joked to friends that I wanted to go from hippo to rhino to bloodhound. Yes, I have some sagging now as I've lost something between 40 and 50 pounds but, frankly, I'm amazed at how little sagging there is so far. It's now obvious I won't make bloodhound but I won't have tight skin either. I think "relaxed" is a good adjective. :-))

I can enjoy looking at beautiful men and women but if you read at all you know beauty doesn't guarantee character or behavior. Eating paleo doesn't guarantee any of the three.