I keep reading that fat frogs are good frogs, or at least OK, in some frogger's minds. I understand that many Dart species have a more rotund general appearance than others, but in what world is fat good?
I know that more times than not if you have a very fat puppy he/she most likely has a belly full of worms.
Anyone think of a situation where a proud owner of any animal says "hey check out my healthy, obese pet"?
Rich
hey rich,
i think part of the problem is semantics. i very recently posted about "fat and happy" frogs. only two of my frogs (out of 24) are actually fat, and they are both red amazonicus (2 out of 6). even so, i don't think that they are fat like some pics i've seen where the frog has a pot belly and fat neck, these two just have a very round 'belly shot' profile. i hope that these 2 'fat' frogs are just females which at +/- 6 months old are developing female figures.
so when i say 'fat', i mean that they are not 'skinny' looking in a way that, to me, would indicate wasting or poor health....i have seen, like i mentioned, pictures of people's frogs which are FAT. my goal is not to have fat frogs like in some pics. i'm certainly no expert at amphibian biology, but intuitively agree that 'fat' and 'healthy' are not the same, and pictures of frogs in their habitats seem to back this up.
so how do i indicate 'healthy and eating well' and avoid the word fat? i can see the danger of confusing the two states, but am personally lacking the vocabulary to better express this. i think that many folks like myself use the word 'fat' because it is used by other froggers in the sense of healthy. maybe a better word could be agreed upon. it seems that once a word or idea is introduced, folks are quick to pick it up (for example my amazonicus vs. vents). maybe robust? rotund? rubenesque
hock: ? interesting topic, what do ya'll think?