Misogyny/MRA is a sign of weakness
puddingmouse wrote:
Greb wrote:
You can't go much further without steroids. This is what looks one whole year of bodybuilding in a man, without chemistry involved.
Well, good. More built than that wouldn't look good.
Because it wouldn't feel natural. Someway the brain knows when bodybuilding goes further than natural (without chemistry) daily gym could bring it and rejects it.
_________________
1 part of Asperger | 1 part of OCD | 2 parts of ADHD / APD / GT-LD / 2e
And finally, another part of secret spices :^)
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Mmm... don't know for sure about % of bodyfat, (anybody else knows???) but I think that both the picture I posted (the 'after' one) and the picture of Tarzan you posted could be under what is considered healthy percentage of bodyfat for a man.
_________________
1 part of Asperger | 1 part of OCD | 2 parts of ADHD / APD / GT-LD / 2e
And finally, another part of secret spices :^)
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
Kurgan wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
I don't think women are deliberately putting pressure on anyone, they just like toned, handsome men. Same with guys liking slim waists and young looks. Neither sex needs to make excessive effort and damage their health to please the other. Most well-adjusted people can accept a few (or many) 'imperfections'.
I do think the media damages both men and women's self-esteem much more than natural selection does. I don't really see body image as a strictly feminist issue.
_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.
puddingmouse wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
I don't think women are deliberately putting pressure on anyone, they just like toned, handsome men. Same with guys liking slim waists and young looks. Neither sex needs to make excessive effort and damage their health to please the other. Most well-adjusted people can accept a few (or many) 'imperfections'.
I do think the media damages both men and women's self-esteem much more than natural selection does. I don't really see body image as a strictly feminist issue.
Are you telling that you don't agree with, for example, a claim like this one?
_________________
1 part of Asperger | 1 part of OCD | 2 parts of ADHD / APD / GT-LD / 2e
And finally, another part of secret spices :^)
Greb wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Most women I know who like the male physique for its own sake are more into, say, Sean Bean (if they like rarr, manly) or David Beckham (if they like metrosexual). I'm no expert on those things but I'd say their muscle percentage is probably within the healthy ideal. Hugh Jackman would be too much 'like shagging a brick wall' as my friend would put it. Google Sean Bean topless (it's always a good idea) - that is almost objectively hotter than any bodybuilder.
Also, Iggy Pop is a guy you often see topless. Most people I know (of both sexes) wouldn't say no to the Raw Power 70s version and he was skinny.
Also, Iggy Pop is a guy you often see topless. Most people I know (of both sexes) wouldn't say no to the Raw Power 70s version and he was skinny.
Well, Sean Bean is one of my top 5 favourite actors, and highly respected since the pub stabbing story. The question is if he's hot because he doesn't bodybuild or even though he doesn't bodybuild. Let's take a normal guy, before/after, and no face so there's not 'pretty face' stuff like in the 'Tarzan' picture you posted, just body stuff.
You're a woman. So tell me, which is hotter?
[img][800:375]http://i1129.photobucket.com/albums/m512/CockasaurusPecs/2-4Progress.jpg[/img]
The first one is more attractive to me as it's more realistic
I wouldn't be likely to get with the second man nor relate to him as hed be fitness and image-obsessed, which I'm not
so we are too different
He'd see me as fat and think why would I want a fat woman when I have made all this effort down the gym?
I would think 'What is he going to have of interest to talk about except how fmany times he went to the gym and what hair gel he uses??' His culture is the fitness one not the internet, bookish one like mine
The first man is more likely to be comfortable with himself and not obsessed with poncing himself up all he time ie he'd be
more interesting to talk to and more down to earth
A bit of chubbiness is sexier than all the hard muscles in my opinion; it's cuddlier
There would be just hardness off a muscled man, no soft flesh to cuddle so he wouldn't be very comforting
He'd be going on about how I could lose weight all the time and not to eat this or that - a complete tyrant!
Then all the hassle of other women (and men) looking at the muscled man all the time and giving me dagger looks like 'What's he doing with you?!' lol while I'd be thinking 'Take him! I'm fed up of him!'
Far too much hassle!
_________________
'Sentimentality is a superstructure covering brutality' C.G Jung
Greb wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
You can post pictures suggesting he looks like a Klingon cosplayer, but even if he did (and I doubt he does), he'd still be right.
Of course, Hugh Jackman is a gay idol as everybody knows

I have no idea who those people even are. The posted picture looks like your typical MRA.
marshall wrote:
Greb wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
You can post pictures suggesting he looks like a Klingon cosplayer, but even if he did (and I doubt he does), he'd still be right.
Of course, Hugh Jackman is a gay idol as everybody knows

I have no idea who those people even are. The posted picture looks like your typical MRA.
Hugh Jackman is a quite famous and hot-considered australian actor.
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0413168/
_________________
1 part of Asperger | 1 part of OCD | 2 parts of ADHD / APD / GT-LD / 2e
And finally, another part of secret spices :^)
puddingmouse wrote:
Sexual objectification is a slightly different issue to body image and beauty ideals. Men and women both have damagingly unnatural ideals in the media, but women do get objectified more.
At least you're aware of the fact that both genders are pressured—many radicals are not. Pressure itself is not necessarily a bad thing (in moderation, that is), as this inspires people to get of their asses and exercise.
Both genders are objectified roughly the same (using a man for an emotional tampon is objectifying him), but objectification of women manifest itself in worse ways (eg. rape).
MXH
Veteran
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain
Greb wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
I don't think women are deliberately putting pressure on anyone, they just like toned, handsome men. Same with guys liking slim waists and young looks. Neither sex needs to make excessive effort and damage their health to please the other. Most well-adjusted people can accept a few (or many) 'imperfections'.
I do think the media damages both men and women's self-esteem much more than natural selection does. I don't really see body image as a strictly feminist issue.
Are you telling that you don't agree with, for example, a claim like this one?

That issue goes far beyond some objectification. The reason why women are more sexualized and objectified in media is because it sells more. There is a bigger gain for those women and those magazines for making those shots than for making them with men. But to say that men aren't done the same ignores other shots that same magazine has of brad Pitt and other males posing shirtless.
http://nd01.jxs.cz/194/661/517425886b_39239576_o2.jpg
Condensing the thought here, women in those shots gain more by letting them be sexualized than men trying the same.
MXH wrote:
Greb wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
I don't think women are deliberately putting pressure on anyone, they just like toned, handsome men. Same with guys liking slim waists and young looks. Neither sex needs to make excessive effort and damage their health to please the other. Most well-adjusted people can accept a few (or many) 'imperfections'.
I do think the media damages both men and women's self-esteem much more than natural selection does. I don't really see body image as a strictly feminist issue.
Are you telling that you don't agree with, for example, a claim like this one?

That issue goes far beyond some objectification. The reason why women are more sexualized and objectified in media is because it sells more. There is a bigger gain for those women and those magazines for making those shots than for making them with men. But to say that men aren't done the same ignores other shots that same magazine has of brad Pitt and other males posing shirtless.
http://nd01.jxs.cz/194/661/517425886b_39239576_o2.jpg
Condensing the thought here, women in those shots gain more by letting them be sexualized than men trying the same.
Also it's conveniently illegal to show an erect male member so that cuts down on what can be shown
I'd have a bit more time for it all if things weren't so biased in men's favour
An erect penis should not be shocking to anyone in this day and age (except of course inadequate men with small dicks of course)
If the human body is nothing to be prudish about let's see some erect cocks please - and make them wide ones
_________________
'Sentimentality is a superstructure covering brutality' C.G Jung
puddingmouse wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
I don't think women are deliberately putting pressure on anyone, they just like toned, handsome men. Same with guys liking slim waists and young looks. Neither sex needs to make excessive effort and damage their health to please the other. Most well-adjusted people can accept a few (or many) 'imperfections'.
I do think the media damages both men and women's self-esteem much more than natural selection does. I don't really see body image as a strictly feminist issue.
I just wish everything was back the way it was in the 50s. In the 50s women didn't need to be size 2, and men could have a tiny bit of a gut and still be OK. Like look at a show like Leave it to Beaver....everyone looks...normal. Now men have to be mega super ultra ripped, and women have to be size 2.
Mind you, in black culture in America, there seems to be less body image type things going on, since "thicker" women are portrayed more often, but yeah.
But I've come to the conclusion women don't care about me being super mega ultra ripped. I now get really pissed when I see some fat slobby looking guy that looks like pretty much how I used to look, with some hot girlfriend. It pisses me off. Makes me realize how terrible of a person I must be.
MXH
Veteran
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,057
Location: Here i stand and face the rain
nessa238 wrote:
MXH wrote:
Greb wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
Kurgan wrote:
puddingmouse wrote:
So we can conclude about all that stuff about needing 8% bodyfat and steroids isn't true - at least not from women's point of view. I don't know about gay men and the media.
Men are under pressure from two edges, though. Pressured by other men to be as muscular as Crixus, pressured by women to have a handsome face and a low bodyfat percentage, like soccer players.
I don't think women are deliberately putting pressure on anyone, they just like toned, handsome men. Same with guys liking slim waists and young looks. Neither sex needs to make excessive effort and damage their health to please the other. Most well-adjusted people can accept a few (or many) 'imperfections'.
I do think the media damages both men and women's self-esteem much more than natural selection does. I don't really see body image as a strictly feminist issue.
Are you telling that you don't agree with, for example, a claim like this one?

That issue goes far beyond some objectification. The reason why women are more sexualized and objectified in media is because it sells more. There is a bigger gain for those women and those magazines for making those shots than for making them with men. But to say that men aren't done the same ignores other shots that same magazine has of brad Pitt and other males posing shirtless.
http://nd01.jxs.cz/194/661/517425886b_39239576_o2.jpg
Condensing the thought here, women in those shots gain more by letting them be sexualized than men trying the same.
Also it's conveniently illegal to show an erect male member so that cuts down on what can be shown
I'd have a bit more time for it all if things weren't so biased in men's favour
An erect penis should not be shocking to anyone in this day and age (except of course inadequate men with small dicks of course)
If the human body is nothing to be prudish about let's see some erect cocks please - and make them wide ones
First thing is first, its not illegal to show erect penis, that's why its legal for porn to exist. It is however considered "distasteful" to show genitalia. Which is 99% of the time defined as penis, vagina, and full female breast. Heck look at the pics of those three girls and notice how hard the poses are made to keep them as close to the taste line without crossing it.
Now what happens if you cross the taste line? companies stop buying your magazines to resell. and then gq loses money. all they can do to make money is keep with what people want to see.
secondly, it doesn't sound like you're much out to fix the problem, but more out for revenge.
