Post: #26

(09-14-2013 03:24 PM)Handsome Creepy Eel Wrote:  

Representing roughly the ideal physique for women. He is not a roid monster, but he is huge nonetheless.

I have literally never heard one girl mention Hemsworth. The teen girls all want his younger brother from the Hunger Games. The sexual heartthob who emerged from Thor for the 20-30 set seems to have been Tom Hiddleston, once again proving for me that bad boy status trumps the muscular white knight who will do anything for the women he loves.

Post: #27

Part of it is greed.

Some men figure, "if I get big", then they can get much more women than they need instead of "I can get enough while still being comfortable with themselves. I NEVER tried to get "huge". A nice trim, fit body AND a good wallet will net you enough women. I always liked being fast which was my strong points when playing sports. Usually, I never dealt with women who were into the muscles=protection mindset, so I could just be a "middleweight" and keep it moving.

Post: #28

(09-14-2013 02:48 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  Go to Google images and type:
renaissance art
greek statues

The idea male archetype/hero as being fit and muscular goes way back.

Women are soft. Men are hard. That's the natural order of things, anyway.

Well, the greeks were big on having their sculptures and art be the ideal representation. If you were to look at some Roman busts and sculptures you'll notice they weren't as big on idealism and more accurately represented a person.

But yeah, to be an action star in hollywood you pretty much need muscle. Even Robert Downey Jr. said he had to put on 20ish lbs of muscle to play Iron Man.

Post: #29

The muscle apologists and those saying get with the program on this thread must be Americans who are pretty immersed in the culture. Fact is, the pressure to be heavily muscled, as opposed to lean and strong, is a recent and particularly American phenomenon. Like how being blond and big-boobed was/is a thing for American women to aspire to. We can thank Hollywood for both.

Post: #30

(09-14-2013 05:59 PM)Hades Wrote:  Being big is a variable that is judged by everybody, can be done so immediately, attracts a lot of attention, and is indicative of a great achievement. If it was easy, everybody would look like Ronnie Coleman.

Of course, but Ronnie Coleman is not a good look, right? My question was, where's the limit from 'good' to 'weird'?

Post: #31

(09-14-2013 06:57 PM)TheKantian Wrote:  Well, the greeks were big on having their sculptures and art be the ideal representation.

Exactly why the genitalia on Hercules and David are so modest. Large penises were considered ugly and comic in cultured Greek Society. Small and thin was the ideal.

Post: #32

(09-14-2013 05:57 PM)Teedub Wrote:  Good points, as usual. However, there's "big" and then there's odd. Perhaps it's different in Europe, hence this thread, but you understand my point. What is ideally big?

It's good to clarify this. When I say "big" I don't mean every guy should strive to look like a roided out pro wrestler or IFBB bodybuilder. That's excessive and the look is unnatural. What I mean is that guys should put as much muscle on their frames as they reasonably can. Every guy should be able to carry enough muscle to physically convey to women that he's much stronger than they are. Every guy should carry enough muscle to make other guys recognize his physical presence. And it's not like this requires huge sacrifice. Three days a week in the gym at an hour per session will build an impressive physique.

A good example of what I'm talking about is the comedian Carrot Top. He's put on a solid amount of muscle over the years. Look at the difference in his appearance (ignore from the neck up, cuz he's a seriously strange looking dude).



Skinny Carrot Top looks like a complete pushover. He's almost boyish looking, which makes him non-sexual to women and non-threatening to other men. He therefore gets no respect from women or men. Muscular Carrot Top demands respect, whether you like him or not. But at the same time, he's not so big that he looks like a freakshow. He's just a strong looking guy who has come close to maximizing his natural frame.

A man with a strong looking body is not attractive to women because he's trendy looking like a male model or movie star. He's attractive to women in a primal sense, because his body itself demonstrates power. This is why, despite what women might say they are most attracted to ("I prefer guys who are slim and athletic") they almost always respond best to men who are muscular. It's just like game: women say they want a guy who is nice and listens to them, but they respond best to a more aloof, cocky style of interaction. So guys who complain or deny the advantages of being muscular are similar to the nice guys who complain about getting nowhere with women despite doing exactly what women say they want. At the end of the day, women are attracted to displays of power from men. And few displays of power are more primal and more effective than having your body itself appear powerful.

Post: #33

(09-14-2013 06:58 PM)RawGod Wrote:  The muscle apologists and those saying get with the program on this thread must be Americans who are pretty immersed in the culture. Fact is, the pressure to be heavily muscled, as opposed to lean and strong, is a recent and particularly American phenomenon. Like how being blond and big-boobed was/is a thing for American women to aspire to. We can thank Hollywood for both.

I love condescending posts like this, especially when it comes from a boy with "God" in his username.

I have lived in 3 of the top 5 tourist destinations in the U.S. I know quite well what foreign women (or at least those with the curiosity and means to visit America) want.

Women want big, brutal looking mother fuckers. They can't always get them, but that's what they prefer.

It's all very simple to understand. Women want protection. Skinny nerds don't look like they can offer protection.

Post: #34

(09-14-2013 07:03 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

(09-14-2013 05:59 PM)Hades Wrote:  Being big is a variable that is judged by everybody, can be done so immediately, attracts a lot of attention, and is indicative of a great achievement. If it was easy, everybody would look like Ronnie Coleman.

Of course, but Ronnie Coleman is not a good look, right? My question was, where's the limit from 'good' to 'weird'?

Who here is going to ever look or aspire to look like Ronnie Coleman?

Can we say, "Don't put the cart before the horse."

Put on some muscle, man. You'll find out whether it works or not.

Personal experience is what the muscle haters are lacking.

If you've only been skinny, you have no basis for knowing what women want.

Be skinny. Then work towards getting jacked. Then tell me what women want.

To a man, those who started off skinny and put on muscle have said, "Wow, this muscle stuff works."

So that leaves us to conclude only one thing about the haters.

Post: #35

Thank you for that detailed analysis. I think in the States, that's most probably true. It also makes sense on an evo-bio sense of the world. However, if you look at the models, fitness-models etc in a place like Germany, the men they are with are 'just' athletic (soccer players). Is this because that's all they've got to 'play with', or, because society in Europe is conditioned differently, despite biological drives toward larger men?

Post: #36

(09-14-2013 07:28 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(09-14-2013 06:58 PM)RawGod Wrote:  The muscle apologists and those saying get with the program on this thread must be Americans who are pretty immersed in the culture. Fact is, the pressure to be heavily muscled, as opposed to lean and strong, is a recent and particularly American phenomenon. Like how being blond and big-boobed was/is a thing for American women to aspire to. We can thank Hollywood for both.

I love condescending posts like this, especially when it comes from a boy with "God" in his username.

I have lived in 3 of the top 5 tourist destinations in the U.S. I know quite well what foreign women (or at least those with the curiosity and means to visit America) want.

Women want big, brutal looking mother fuckers. They can't always get them, but that's what they prefer.

It's all very simple to understand. Women want protection. Skinny nerds don't look like they can offer protection.

Indeed.

Foreign women in their local countries as well, from Latin America to East/Southeast Asia.

I am far more muscular than their average countrymen--yet I have never had a foreign girl say that I am too muscular--in fact, I am even more warmly-received physique-wise than I am in the states.

They (foreign and American girls alike) love squeezing your biceps, triceps, deltoids--they love the contrast between your hardened muscles and their soft, meek hands.

Girls love dominance, period--physical dominance included.

Post: #37

By the way, let me clarify. I'm roughly 5'10 - 5'11, so being 'big' doesn't really fit well with people my height. If I was, for example, 6'2, then yeah, I'd aim for a different size in terms of mass. I think, based on experience, that being 'athletic' (and I include a guy like George St. Pierre in my categorization) is a better look than being 'big', for men my height. I think that's a fair analysis.

Post: #38

(09-14-2013 07:30 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(09-14-2013 07:03 PM)Teedub Wrote:  

(09-14-2013 05:59 PM)Hades Wrote:  Being big is a variable that is judged by everybody, can be done so immediately, attracts a lot of attention, and is indicative of a great achievement. If it was easy, everybody would look like Ronnie Coleman.

Of course, but Ronnie Coleman is not a good look, right? My question was, where's the limit from 'good' to 'weird'?

Who here is going to ever look or aspire to look like Ronnie Coleman?

Can we say, "Don't put the cart before the horse."

Put on some muscle, man. You'll find out whether it works or not.

Personal experience is what the muscle haters are lacking.

If you've only been skinny, you have no basis for knowing what women want.

Be skinny. Then work towards getting jacked. Then tell me what women want.

To a man, those who started off skinny and put on muscle have said, "Wow, this muscle stuff works."

So that leaves us to conclude only one thing about the haters.

At one point I was 6'3" 180 (during my years of track) but now I'm 225. I started noticing that I was putting on muscle when random woman would comment on my physique. Even in jackets they would notice. I even notice woman looking me up and down now. More attention.

It works in the US.

Post: #39

Go shit bro. I went from6'3 170 when I started college to 210 as a junior and I notice the diff though I'm still not big

Post: #40

(09-14-2013 07:30 PM)Teedub Wrote:  Thank you for that detailed analysis. I think in the States, that's most probably true. It also makes sense on an evo-bio sense of the world. However, if you look at the models, fitness-models etc in a place like Germany, the men they are with are 'just' athletic (soccer players). Is this because that's all they've got to 'play with', or, because society in Europe is conditioned differently, despite biological drives toward larger men?

Have you ever been to a German gym? Nobody knows jack shit about what they're doing -- they don't have deadlifting platforms or squat racks, or even serious Olympic bars or weights over 25#. The biggest dumbbell I could find was about 40#. I'm not sure what those are in kilograms.

Their idea of a serious "pulling" workout is rowing 135# plyometrically with a curl bar. A serious pressing workout is bench pressing 95# with a guided bench press.

If anything I would bet that serious muscle game would work even better in Germany, where hugely muscled dudes are rare and gym culture is almost nonexistant. Over there I was considered a "big" or even "huge" guy at 185#.

Post: #41

(09-14-2013 07:09 PM)scorpion Wrote:  When I say "big" I don't mean every guy should strive to look like a roided out pro wrestler or IFBB bodybuilder. That's excessive and the look is unnatural. What I mean is that guys should put as much muscle on their frames as they reasonably can. Every guy should be able to carry enough muscle to physically convey to women that he's much stronger than they are. Every guy should carry enough muscle to make other guys recognize his physical presence. And it's not like this requires huge sacrifice. Three days a week in the gym at an hour per session will build an impressive physique.

A good example of what I'm talking about is the comedian Carrot Top. He's put on a solid amount of muscle over the years. Look at the difference in his appearance (ignore from the neck up, cuz he's a seriously strange looking dude).



Skinny Carrot Top looks like a complete pushover. He's almost boyish looking, which makes him non-sexual to women and non-threatening to other men. He therefore gets no respect from women or men. Muscular Carrot Top demands respect, whether you like him or not. But at the same time, he's not so big that he looks like a freakshow. He's just a strong looking guy who has come close to maximizing his natural frame.

Yeah but look, in the second picture he is pretty massive for "just a strong looking guy". What happened to that area in between two pictures, why is that not attractive? I agree that having nice muscles and always working on being strong is a goal everyone should strive towards. However, this sort of muscle is a mind-boggling requirement, no matter how "little" effort has to be put into it. Most human males in the world are not nearly this big - heck, most human males in all of history have not been nearly this big (even if they might have been functionally stronger due to the demands of their lifestyle). He looks like a clown, not a strong person.

Here is the famous strongman Joe Rollino:


Still smaller than Carrot Top


Mirko "Cro Cop" Filipović, a very successful MMA fighter, still smaller than Carrot Top


Jack LaLanne, comparable in looks to Carrot Top (though probably a lot stronger), but having dedicated a full-time job and his entire lifestyle to looking like that

It is not logical that women would suddenly start placing so much importance on this kind of physique just due to "women wanting muscles in general".

How to explain that? Well, my theory is that, due to the feminist destruction of masculinity, the average man is automatically presumed to be Beta nowadays. And given that assumption, how are you going to spot that dominant guy in the crowd and be reassured that he hasn't become Beta? Why, he must be the one with the biggest muscles (or the tallest one - another female ideal that has surged in recent decades).

Again, this is not to say that just because women have acquired this strange preference that they will only date this kind of guys. Of course not. Looks are still a minor variable no matter how much inflated their importance becomes. And of course, I'm not at all against the claim that men should always strive to be muscled and strong - both for their own and for pussy's sake.

Post: #42

(09-14-2013 07:53 PM)Teedub Wrote:  By the way, let me clarify. I'm roughly 5'10 - 5'11, so being 'big' doesn't really fit well with people my height. If I was, for example, 6'2, then yeah, I'd aim for a different size in terms of mass. I think, based on experience, that being 'athletic' (and I include a guy like George St. Pierre in my categorization) is a better look than being 'big', for men my height. I think that's a fair analysis.

GSP walks around between 190-195 with very little body fat. At 5'10", I would call that pretty big. Is he huge? No. Is he big by the standards of professional athletes? No. But compared to the average guy? For sure. He's definitely big enough to reap the benefits of what I'm talking about. Nobody, male or female, looks at a guy who is built like this and does not respect his physical power:



I think a lot of guys discourage themselves from hitting the gym hard because they think you have to look like a bodybuilder to get any benefit from muscle. That's completely untrue. Every ounce of muscle you add to your frame will improve your appearance. If the average guy off the street adds 20 lbs. of muscle and cuts his bodyfat down to 10-15%, he's going to notice an immediate positive difference in how people react to him.

Jay Cutler, four-time Mr. Olympia, is around 5'9", and is around 275 at his contest weight. That's not big. That's monster sized. You don't have to be at anywhere near this level of muscularity to benefit. The benefits the average guy would get from going from skinnyfat to looking like GSP are greater than a fit guy would get from going from GSP's build to Jay Cutler's. The average guy can also come close to looking like GSP naturally with a few years of casual weight training, while Cutler's physique is literally impossible to achieve without substantial steroid use and a lifestyle built around bodybuilding.

Post: #43

I'm going to sign up with the "build muscles" guys. Working out and building a strong body has never caused women to become less attracted to me. Being too slim has though.

Post: #44

^ most guys are going to get nowhere near St Pierres size of muscles *with* that level of BF. There are genetics involved and also very few dudes are gonna have that kind of nutrition discipline.

Post: #45

Girls and guys, girls especially have a 'type' they are into pretty much what cosmo and they see on tv is often that. However as has been stated being big, as in athletic, in shape not steroid big. Is always going to hit there DNA anchors; we are animals right take a look around nature, its basic ecology. Besides that the feeling you get when you exercise and lift can not be understated. If any of you guys have not put some serious effort into working out, try it and you will see why people are obsessed.

As Arnold explains.........

Post: #46

(09-14-2013 09:27 PM)Hades Wrote:  If anything I would bet that serious muscle game would work even better in Germany, where hugely muscled dudes are rare and gym culture is almost nonexistant. Over there I was considered a "big" or even "huge" guy at 185#.

My best mate recently moved to Hamburg for a job. He's seriously jacked. He's been complaining that the rules of the game have shifted for him. At his size and weight, coupled with his shaved head and tatts, he said they all seem to assume he's an ex-con, and that they really don't like rough thug types in Germany.

He said he'll adapt, but it's much more work than he was used to expending in Sydney.

Any advice?

Post: #47

(09-14-2013 07:28 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  I love condescending posts like this, especially when it comes from a boy with "God" in his username.

No, you don't "love" it. Quit the snarky language. And you don't come off well trying to talk down to me when I wasn't even addressing you specifically.

(09-14-2013 07:28 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  I have lived in 3 of the top 5 tourist destinations in the U.S. I know quite well what foreign women (or at least those with the curiosity and means to visit America) want.

Women want big, brutal looking mother fuckers. They can't always get them, but that's what they prefer.

It's all very simple to understand. Women want protection. Skinny nerds don't look like they can offer protection.

The man-hulk is only one archetype that can provide protection. Others include the capable father, the powerful gangster, and the (non-'roided) warrior. It's modern America that has elevated the puffed up look, thanks to chemical tech, Arnie etc. Sure it works, even on foreign women. It does push some evo psych buttons. But it's a fetish nonetheless. Like the desire for big breasts in women, it has an understandable basis, but in only a few times and places is it fetishized.

If that's your thing, fine. But it's not the only thing, and for outsiders the whole thing can seem pretty weird, in the extent to which pressure is now placed on men to shape up. Jay Cutler is a freak, and no doubt gets less (and poorer quality) pussy than a skinny European soccer player.

Post: #48

Men appreciate muscles more then women do. This thread has been detailed into a pure size thread and IMO is sorta mis leading because we all see time and time again that it's not he biggest dudes whom win out. Those big guys have a crop of women whom look for that look, it does not expand that crop though.

The women chasing those freak huge guys and NFL sized guys is static and small. Women don't like that shit because in reality super muscular dudes are frail and not as agile. What good is it you can bench 500lbs but have zero functional movement to chop some wood. Women in their back-mind see this and unless they desire the fetish will not view the huge dude as a desired mate for children raising long term.

Women favor the more lean built look. The Soccer player physique for instance comes to mind. David Beckham looks malnourished to me at times but women cream over his this build, same goes for many other soccer players. This gives you be balance of strength and functionality. IMO the "perfect physique" gives you the balance of both. Men could never get huge back in the day but they could still get strong. It's ideal to look healthy and strong more than huge IMO.

About American culture in general and it's obsession with big and huge shit, I am surprised nobody has pointed out the obvious. The obvious fact is that modern American culture is a complete creation by capitalists and consumerism - It's a corporate creation to sell shit. Americans want big cars and houses because some suits in a boardroom decided so to make
money for corporations. Nothing in modern American culture is real and prior to 1950 these types of stylings amongst the population were not typical. It waned into the 60-70s with the 80s being the last ride for any type of legitimate American culture. Anything 80's onward is corporate fluff tossed down to the mass to consume. Bodybuilding, cars, houses, food, waist sizes, etc all skyrocketed in the 90's. This all goes back to the illusion of freedoms and free choice. In a modern setup you don't have either, only the options given to you to select from with the rest purposefully hidden. Why has America gone away from its small 'Mom and Pop' shops where they could get anything they needed most of the time. Homes were modest back in the day as we're cars. Ego and power were shown in other ways that didn't rely on the size of the shit you owned.

I can say that it's all fake because of the fact I live in Canada. We are a shitty photocopy of Americans and fetishize American culture here. The same stuff of BIG everything creeps up here and people try and stunt with big everything to stroke the ego. But he thing is it goes against Canadian stylings. We are self-depreciating, humble, reserved, too polite, and
more modest. We can't fake the legitimate American bravado so we just end up looking like fools trying to emulate the "big" American culture. It's. It comparable with us but it has been forced on us by corporations whom just want people consuming shit.

Post: #49

There are no visible markers for capable father, or are there universal visible markers for gangster or 'non-roided warrior', in fact there can be an absence of visible markers.

What is being stated is that in an era where a fem-centric view writes the cultural narrative, intelligence and knowledge don't take precedence and more emphasis in placed on 'feelings'.

Most of us know a puffed up juicer may be quite incapable of offering up protection, but that's not the point. Perception is the point, and Mike is offering up his advise, in 3 out of 5 tourist destinations, where the perception of being a protector is enhancing a response from women.

He adds the 'tourist' bit because it demonstrates women from around the world, thus he can assume this is not a cultural construct. Women feel big guys are preotectors, and that will do.

Post: #50

I think most of the answers saying that women "naturally" prefer huge muscles are a bit off. What women like in a body fluctuates with time, the same way that fashion trends fluctuate. This year, being jacked is king; next year, thin is in.

Anyway, I think the current obsession with being big is just a reflection of what American culture has become. America is big and blown out of proportion, same as a roidhead. Funnily enough, I also think it's partially a byproduct of the 'castration' of the Western man. Back in the days of slavery in the U.S., slave owners didn't physically castrate their slaves like the Arabs did, they wanted to keep them as strong as possible for field labor. What they did was they kept the black man strong and weak while encouraging the black woman to become the leader of the family... The result is an essentially feminized culture among slaves, yet with enough dumb muscle to plow the fields effectively. Sometimes I feel like these insecure roidheads are the new 'buck' slaves of our feminized society; superficially strong, internally weak, etc.