Post: #701

So lift if you like it but don't go mad...

Post: #702

(02-16-2019 09:47 AM)Snag87 Wrote:  Anecdotally I should add that there was a status in a FB group I participate in that asked women their ideal male physique. Multiple women stated their least desired physique was heavily muscled, even over obese.

"I can't cuddle with a rock"

girlsaskguys.com had a ton of polls on this subject. The top choice is usually "ottermode".



Two things to consider though.

1. Preferences change for guys wearing clothes. You can't tell "ottermode" from a skinny dude who does not exercise

2. it's about supply and demand. If 30% of women prefer "college athlete" type of body that only 3% of guys have, that creates a 1:10 supply-to-demand ratio for them.

Post: #703

(02-16-2019 09:02 AM)asdfk Wrote:  The evolutionary response that proponents mention is mislabeled. It is not universal but cultural instead. And as we all know you do not need to go along with cultural aspects to get laid.

So by all means work out if you enjoy it. But forget all the evolutionary bullshit because it is a theory that does not hold up in practice. And even if it was so there are alternatives that require a way lower investment.

I object. Strongly!

Can you cite some empirical evidence rejecting correlation between male morphology and perceived attractiveness? The evidence is to the contrary, with what you're claiming. First, logically, why wouldn't be females hard-wired to strong men? Strong men had the biggest chance, evolutionarily speaking, to attack, feed, hunt, and protect fecund females and their offsprings. Just because your circumstantial evidence doesn't corroborate the fact, it doesn't preclude it to be true. And it's been tested ad nauseam empirically, just first, off the cuff, article: "Human Physique and Sexual Attractiveness in Men and Women: A New Zealand–U.S. Comparative Study" from Archives of Sexual Behavior, June 2010, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 798–806:

"[...] The female preferences for male somatotypes reported here confirm the findings of previous studies conducted in the UK, Sri Lanka, and Cameroon (Dixson et al., 2003, 2007b). A muscular (mesomorphic) male somatotype was rated as most attractive by women, followed by an average physique. [...] During human evolution, natural selection may have favored masculine traits underlying strength and endurance running as well as intellectual traits which are important for hunting and foraging. [...] Although the ecological factors which selected for such masculine traits are not as important in contemporary industrialized societies, sexual selection during human evolution may explain deep-seated female preferences for certain masculine somatotypes."

Post: #704

Quote:First, logically, why wouldn't be females hard-wired to strong men?

If you want to say something is true, the burden of proof falls on you. Just like "Why wouldn't be there a God" isn't an argument for the existence of a God.

The study you mention:

For our purposes, it is not relevant what women say they find attractive. It is relevant whom they sleep with and who they marry. This study does not provide any evidence for the theory that women are more likely to fuck buff dudes. It just looked at what women say they find "more attractive."

What women say in a laboratory and what they will do in the actual mating market are completely different things, The former is no evidence for the latter.

What evolutionary psychologists tend to do is to take these kind of studies where they ask people for their opinion and then explain these opinions by making an argument that evolution made us that way. It sounds clever, and it makes them sound oh so smart. However, it's just taking something that is generally accepted (evolution) and use it to make flimsy questionnaire analysis seem more legitimate. It's a rhetorical trick because when you say the word "evolution" people stop thinking.

If you look at the actual studies that employ a questionnaire design, they prove exactly nothing relating to the actual situation on the dating markets.

On the other hand, there is solid experimental evidence for social proof. But this is contextual and depends on the social setting.

Post: #705

This got out of hands...

Post: #706

(02-16-2019 05:40 PM)asdfk Wrote:  

Quote:First, logically, why wouldn't be females hard-wired to strong men?

If you want to say something is true, the burden of proof falls on you. Just like "Why wouldn't be there a God" isn't an argument for the existence of a God.

Indeed, very good observation.

(02-16-2019 09:02 AM)asdfk Wrote:  The evolutionary response that proponents mention is mislabeled. It is not universal but cultural instead. And as we all know you do not need to go along with cultural aspects to get laid.

I'll patiently wait for the proof of the aforesaid assertion.

Post: #707

If it is cultural is not relevant: the result stays the same. Getting buff is irrelevant for getting a gf but might provide social proof in selected markets.

Post: #708

(02-16-2019 05:40 PM)asdfk Wrote:  

Quote:First, logically, why wouldn't be females hard-wired to strong men?

If you want to say something is true, the burden of proof falls on you. Just like "Why wouldn't be there a God" isn't an argument for the existence of a God.

The study you mention:

For our purposes, it is not relevant what women say they find attractive. It is relevant whom they sleep with and who they marry. This study does not provide any evidence for the theory that women are more likely to fuck buff dudes. It just looked at what women say they find "more attractive."

What women say in a laboratory and what they will do in the actual mating market are completely different things, The former is no evidence for the latter.

What evolutionary psychologists tend to do is to take these kind of studies where they ask people for their opinion and then explain these opinions by making an argument that evolution made us that way. It sounds clever, and it makes them sound oh so smart. However, it's just taking something that is generally accepted (evolution) and use it to make flimsy questionnaire analysis seem more legitimate. It's a rhetorical trick because when you say the word "evolution" people stop thinking.

If you look at the actual studies that employ a questionnaire design, they prove exactly nothing relating to the actual situation on the dating markets.

On the other hand, there is solid experimental evidence for social proof. But this is contextual and depends on the social setting.

tl;dr Don't listen to what women say, watch what they do.

Post: #709

Maybe Body weight workouts with HIIT lead to a different result. Has anybody tried the spartacus workout?
https://www.menshealth.com/fitness/a19547311/spartacus/

Post: #710

(01-30-2014 11:35 PM)MikeCF Wrote:  

(01-30-2014 02:23 PM)Aliblahba Wrote:  Symmetry and being proportionate are important. If you guys want to know what women like, just ask them.

I don't need to ask them. Women don't have anything interesting to tell me about attraction.

I have banged girls as far as a 15 years younger than me and 10 years above my age. Banged a girl as quickly as 5 minutes.

When a woman outright comes and molests me (witnessed by McQueen and DVY), then I know what she wants. Not first time that has happened, either.

When I bang a girl within 5 minutes of meeting her at a pool part, I know what women want.

When I'm with my girl and get solicited for a threesome at a pool party or bar (has happened multiple times), I know what girls want.

When my friends who are more jacked than I get solicited for sex and threesomes, I know what women want.

When I am lounging with a friend who is "too big" by most forum guys standards and a hot girl comes up and says, "No offense to you [me], but you [my friend] don't even look real," then I know what women want.

When women come up to that same guy and say, "We just had to meet you," well, I know what women want.

It ain't skinny boys. It's men who look like gladiators with broad shoulders, narrow waists, and a dominant physical presence.

There's a point of diminishing returns, but less than 1% of guys need to "worry" about getting there.

That said, I don't know any man who is in the fitness lifestyle solely to get girls. You don't push yourself through the rigors of training to get laid. You do it for a whole host of other reasons (anger issues, a form of therapy, narcissism, the desire to have a project, a vision for yourself, and on and on).

Women are just a byproduct of the lifestyle.

Post: #711

(02-09-2014 05:51 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  

(02-05-2014 10:29 PM)dreambig Wrote:  I used to be the skinny guy who got laid anyway and argued that muscle doesn't matter.

Let's just say that I was totally wrong.

At 6'2 and 200 lbs I'm by no means "big", but the difference in attention is huge.

IMO the only guys with the right to comment are the ones who have made the full transition.

Personally, my biggest friends all get laid like crazy. And this is in Asia where muscles aren't supposed to matter.

We can't trust what women say they like in a man, especially as there's a lot research that shows that a womea's concept of what she likes is fluid, and largely-dependant on the man she's currently with. And I'd agree men need to experience both being 'fit' and being 'big' for themselves and go with whatever gets the notches for them.

I added about 10kgs (22lbs) of muscle in the back half of last year, which took me up to 220lbs. Girls kept calling me a 'beast'. The ugly 5-and-unders, and the overinflated, bitchy 6-7 range seemed to get resentful and pre-filtered themselves out from any real world conversations with me when they're with their friends, which was all right with me, but damn, do they look as they sip their frapps, and if you have to social interact with them isolated from their circle, then they're all big eyes.

Day game improved greatly. The prettier women were very friendly and polite. An 8.5 opened me in the Health Food Store, asking for 'nutritional advice', and swung that into a training session by the lake here and a few weeks of post-workout banging. Tiny-waisted women would talk to me in the supermarket, opening me by asking if I could reach something on a high shelf for them. Girl game recognised. A lot more pokes and jokey 'plausible-deniability' flirting from girls in my circle and on Facebook too.

There were also instances of random sexual come-ons where women would simply decide they wanted me to fuck them. This'll sound like crap, but I'm sure the bigger guys will recognise the random shit that happens.

- A chick rubbing up against my cock in an elevator. Didn't bang - ugly.

- At a concert, a tidy blonde walked past, looked at me, came back, threw her arms around me and said "I'm coming home with you." Saw no reason to argue. Banged.

- A girl stopped me in the street and said they needed a male stripper for a friend's bachelorette party, and would I be interested, but she'd need a 'private show' first to see if I was any good. Banged.

- The early 20's temp at work corned me in the copy room at my previous job and started talking how she was studying 'Reiki massage' and needed someone to practice on, if I'd like to come around one night, coupled with stroking my arms and arse, with me praying one of the lesbo haired HR bitches didn't wander past. It was literally the first time she'd spoken to me in 3 weeks of her working there, and that's what she opened with. Banged, but after she stopped working for us. I don't shit where I eat.

- A note tucked into the seat on my bike with a number promising 'the best blowjob of your life', which I never rang. Suspected it was a dude.

- A mate's neighbour takes in his washing during a dust storm, rewashes it for him, then hangs it on his line a few minutes after we both return. She bends to the basket and hangs, over and over, short summer dress with no-underwear. Her husband was at work. Didn't bang, but he did. Smokin' hot, but batshit crazy. She told him during sex she'd take on both of us if I wanted and she was into being beaten and autoerotic asphyxiation.

I suspect extreme size makes thirsty girls who hunger for dominance act out irrationally.

Slimmed back down over December for health reasons. Down to about 200 now with lower body fat. Life seems less like a porno.

Post: #712

Yeah, wow...

Some random ho rubbed on your cock? Cool story bro. I have banged his within five minutes of meeting them too while being disgustingly mediocre, what is your point?

Post: #713

(02-16-2019 09:47 AM)Snag87 Wrote:  Anecdotally I should add that there was a status in a FB group I participate in that asked women their ideal male physique. Multiple women stated their least desired physique was heavily muscled, even over obese.

"I can't cuddle with a rock"

Yeah but most seem to prefer getting pounded by one.

Post: #714

Why does it always come down to this? Why are sooooo many men opposed to maximizing their god damn potential? It's been said ad nauseum women like muscle, but no necessarily bodybuilders. Women like big muscular dudes and that doesn't equate to being a fucking bodybuilder. What that does mean is a 6'6 250lb Anthony Joshua and 6'5 240lb Rob Gronkowski are gonna be fucking a lot of bitches off pure animal instinct. Nobody with a half a frontal brain lobe thinks AJ or Gronk look like bodybuilders, but they are both mountains of men. Tall and wide and bitches from the most affluent blue blood to the most ratchet trailer trash or hoodrat will bend over backward to get an opportunity to ride their cock.

I will gladly put my 6'3 225lb lean frame against any slim, skinny fat or even lean slender dude here in a gaming situation. Doesn't matter the ethnicity or environment. My best friend is outstandingly handsome. He has a slim runner build. He can walk through a college grocery story or a boardwalk on a beach and never get touched 45 times out of 50. I throw on my tank top and im guranteed to trigger several women touching me depending on how long i choose to let the experiment go on. Again, I'll challenge any non lifter claiming muscles don't matter. I'm in the DC area so name the place and i'll meet you there with bells on.

Post: #715

Tom Brady shirtless.
Most decorated quarterback of his generation.
Hero to millions.
And no visible abs.
https://i.iheart.com/v3/re/new_assets/5b...uality(80)

Post: #716

(02-18-2019 08:37 PM)Savonarola Wrote:  Tom Brady shirtless.
Most decorated quarterback of his generation.
Hero to millions.
And no visible abs.
https://i.iheart.com/v3/re/new_assets/5b...uality(80)

that's a non sequitur if there ever was one bro

Post: #717

delete

Post: #718

(02-18-2019 08:49 PM)quaker13 Wrote:  

(02-18-2019 08:37 PM)Savonarola Wrote:  Tom Brady shirtless.
Most decorated quarterback of his generation.
Hero to millions.
And no visible abs.
https://i.iheart.com/v3/re/new_assets/5b...uality(80)

that's a non sequitur if there ever was one bro

Hey I didn't state an opinion. Just throwing it out to hear other people's comments.

Post: #719

It doesn’t make sense. Tom Brady has so much going on for him that if he was a fat slob he’ll still pick up top shelf

Post: #720

(02-19-2019 12:40 AM)ballsyamog Wrote:  It doesn’t make sense. Tom Brady has so much going on for him that if he was a fat slob he’ll still pick up top shelf

My only thought is that athletes don't need 6-packs.
Some have them, some don't.
It's the difference between functionality and aesthetics.

Post: #721

Being too jacked in some countries I have been to can be seen as undesirable. Being big commands attention and has a powerful presence which affects everyone around you, I don't disagree. Referring to mxb's male body type posted above, being anything over "athletic" will decrease the pool of women who would consider you as ideal, IMHO, depending on the type of women you are genetically attracted to.

Post: #722

(02-20-2019 12:31 PM)Jeptomf Wrote:  Being too jacked in some countries I have been to can be seen as undesirable. Being big commands attention and has a powerful presence which affects everyone around you, I don't disagree. Referring to mxb's male body type posted above, being anything over "athletic" will decrease the pool of women who would consider you as ideal, IMHO, depending on the type of women you are genetically attracted to.

This Sonny B Williams. He is a NZ Rugby player and stands 6'4 weighing in at 238lbs.

99% of all women would be attracted to his physique. No matter if they come from old money, the slums, royalty or the daughter of diplomats.

Does anybody refute this. He doesn't looks stocky. He looks undeniably athletic.

Post: #723

^He looks athletic because he is athletic. Professional rugby players (the backs, at least) are some of the best all-round athletes on the planet for their combination of strength + cardio endurance. Its extremely rare to find men as strong as they are, who're also able to do as much cardio as they are, in most sports. Usually most athletes skew either stronger but less cardio fit (most NFL players say), or fitter but much smaller and weaker (soccer players).

99% of men are also not going to get bigger than SBW mind you, at that level of bodyfat, without using gear. Its why theres absolutely no point in any man worrying about getting "too big".

Post: #724

(02-20-2019 12:31 PM)Jeptomf Wrote:  Being too jacked in some countries I have been to can be seen as undesirable. Being big commands attention and has a powerful presence which affects everyone around you, I don't disagree. Referring to mxb's male body type posted above, being anything over "athletic" will decrease the pool of women who would consider you as ideal, IMHO, depending on the type of women you are genetically attracted to.

Are you jacked?

Post: #725

In my experience women never seem to care about my body even though my weight has fluctuated about 80 lbs in the past several years. What they do care about is your functional strength - women are obviously much more turned on when I can pick them up and throw them around with ease, especially the thick & tall ones who have probably never been with a guy who could.