Then why would you police my language and demand I use the exact same terminology for a very wide range of body sizes/masses?

> There's levels from fat to hambeast to "their movement influences tides".

And there's likewise levels from thin to fit to bulky to curvy to plump to fat.

> That doesn't make the first category acceptable.

And who, pray tell, are you to decide what is or is not "acceptable"?

I never said anything about the language you should use. I said "that is really fat though". This is all pure projection on your end.

> it's frankly an indictment of the US that people try to sweettalk this sort of behaviour with words like 'curvier' and 'plumper'

Your words, not mine.