Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

believermag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 358 posts

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#111

Post by WalterBright »

gamblor956 wrote: post #50
CydeWeys wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people are quite aware of how prolific steroid usage in bodybuilding is. It's the movie actor physiques that people aren't as aware of.

Modern actors aren't as willing to sacrifice their health for muscle as their historical counterparts, especially because the lean look is preferred over the muscle-bound appearance of yesteryear. Thus, (with rare exceptions, like Christian Bale between The Machinist and Batman Begins ), what you see on screen today is hard-earned through hours a day in the gym, a very regimented diet, and hydration timing. Generally…

A friend of mine blew out his knee in a skiing accident. After his operation, he needed rehab, and went to the best he could find. It was where pro football players went for rehab. He said he couldn't believe how hard they worked out, so he asked one.

The guy laughed, and said something like: "If I don't get back in shape, I lose several million dollars and my career." They're highly motivated, to say the least.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#112

Post by nostromo »

rmah wrote: post #82

I usually don't read articles like this, but it was so well written that I was sort of sucked into it. What was most interesting to me was not the various controversies about body aesthetics or even health consequences. What stood out to me was the author's description in the early parts of the article of how much she seemed to crave the approval of strangers, especially men. It was thought provoking and I'm still pr…

... really?

You've never wanted to be attractive to whatever gender you're attracted to? I find it surprising that this can be "totally foreign" to any human that's not asexual.

Being the most attractive version of yourself that you can be isn't just about sex, either. It really does open doors socially and economically. Right or wrong, people enjoy the company of people who put thought and effort into their appearance. And if for no other reason, your partner certainly appreciates it!

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#113

Post by Herodotus38 »

rmah wrote: post #82

I usually don't read articles like this, but it was so well written that I was sort of sucked into it. What was most interesting to me was not the various controversies about body aesthetics or even health consequences. What stood out to me was the author's description in the early parts of the article of how much she seemed to crave the approval of strangers, especially men. It was thought provoking and I'm still pr…

This magazine is a great one for getting me to read long articles about things I didn’t think would be interesting. It seems like they attract writers that are more honest and human about their motivations than you see in other places.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#114

Post by nsajko »

Blikkentrekker wrote: post #98
actuator wrote: post #71

Except for winning competitions, is there any natural advantage of bodybuilding for both men and women? For both, for advantage in most sports and attractiveness the typical calisthenics physique, sort of gymnast/football(soccer) one seems like the ideal one to me, yet a lot of people seem to be obsessed with getting overly buff.

Leaving all the ridiculous gender politics aside, body building is very comparable to those so-called “ pro-ana ” models in how unhealthy it is, and I believe it should be treated the same, which is, of course: allow a man to do what he wants. However, it strikes me as a particular dual standard that some jurisdictions have tackled models whose body fat percentage is dangerously low, but who do not have steroid-built…

> some jurisdictions have tackled models whose body fat percentage is dangerously low [...]

What are you talking about here?

> unhealthily large muscles

Taking steroids and other activities related to bodybuilding and sports more generally can sure take their toll, but I'm pretty sure nobody has problems because of overly large muscles.

> most body builders are unhealthy low in fat

Source?

> But of course, that is not what they desire, for that falls under what they consider to be their conventional ideal of beauty [...]

Aren't you contradicting your point now? Or maybe I misunderstood what your point is?

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#115

Post by linspace »

kofejnik wrote: post #81
ardit33 wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By bodybuilding, you probably mean steroid-fueled muscle building. Most natural body-building will never reach that level. On the other way, there is plenty of good health reasons to train with weights, and build a good/solid muscle mass. It also improves a lot of other aspects in your life (social). So, weight-training, bodybuilding - lite is great. Steroid ladden/extreme body building one is probably not healthy.

> Steroid ladden/extreme body building one is probably not healthy. Steroids are not necessarily always bad, tho taking your body to the extremes of competitive bodybuilding probably is.

My reasoning is the following, and as someone who likes to do weight lifting I would love to be proved wrong: if steroids are not necessarily bad and we surely know they work wonders how is it possible that, in a world obsessed with looks and moving so much money in all kind of (absurd) products, they have not been legally commercialized somehow.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#116

Post by throw0101a »

actuator wrote: post #71

Except for winning competitions, is there any natural advantage of bodybuilding for both men and women? For both, for advantage in most sports and attractiveness the typical calisthenics physique, sort of gymnast/football(soccer) one seems like the ideal one to me, yet a lot of people seem to be obsessed with getting overly buff.

> Except for winning competitions, is there any natural advantage of bodybuilding for both men and women?

For the 'extreme' of what most competitors go through? Probably not.

But resistance/strength training more generally is probably beneficial:

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strength_training

For women especially, as they age about one-third suffer from osteoporosis, and lifting (heavy!) weights forces body adaptions that help strengthen bones. One also often hears about seniors slipping/falling and breaking hips, which can cause a downward health spiral: doing squats and deadlifts with respectable weights (1.0x to 1.5x your bodyweight) would probably help with that.

Some simple tests can reliably predict longevity: number of push-ups that can be done, speed of walking up stairs, and a sitting-rising test:

* https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/simple-sitting-test-...

All involved strength more than aerobic ability.

There's also the fact that strength is useful in life: from carrying children and groceries, moving (heavy) items, etc. It will also help in keeping one's independence when older: I see infomercials about electric chairs to help the elderly up and down stairs. That's completely unnecessary if one has sufficient muscle mass (which is harder to keep as one ages) for mobility and stability.

* https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/want-to-live-...

If one has a limited amount of time, the one activity that I'd do (and do personally) is weight training. The main disadvantage is that some equipment is needed, and with gyms closed nowadays it's hard to get much done. As a fall-back I have taken up running, but it's not my first choice (though I cycled to work pre-WFH).

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#117

Post by toyg »

actuator wrote: post #71

Except for winning competitions, is there any natural advantage of bodybuilding for both men and women? For both, for advantage in most sports and attractiveness the typical calisthenics physique, sort of gymnast/football(soccer) one seems like the ideal one to me, yet a lot of people seem to be obsessed with getting overly buff.

The "natural" footballer (soccer) physique is far from ideal: it's basically just thick legs and very rigid back. It's only in the last 20/30 years that footballers started training the whole body, mostly because "why not" - their physios are now well-educated professionals with degrees, they're already at the gym on most days, and it helps them look cool.

This said, they are definitely closer to "ideal" natural proportions than most bodybuilders. They are also more balanced than tennis/basketball/baseball players, who have to work quite hard in the gym to compensate for the extremely unbalanced efforts their sports require.

There is a lot to be said for the rugby physique; sadly the sport is insane on the grounds of personal safety.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#118

Post by Blikkentrekker »

nsajko wrote: post #114
Blikkentrekker wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Leaving all the ridiculous gender politics aside, body building is very comparable to those so-called “ pro-ana ” models in how unhealthy it is, and I believe it should be treated the same, which is, of course: allow a man to do what he wants. However, it strikes me as a particular dual standard that some jurisdictions have tackled models whose body fat percentage is dangerously low, but who do not have steroid-built…

> some jurisdictions have tackled models whose body fat percentage is dangerously low [...] What are you talking about here? > unhealthily large muscles Taking steroids and other activities related to bodybuilding and sports more generally can sure take their toll, but I'm pretty sure nobody has problems because of overly large muscles. > most body builders are unhealthy low in fat Source? > But of course, that is no…

> What are you talking about here?

Some jurisdictions do not allow models under a certain b.m.i. to be commercially featured:

https://www.euronews.com/2017/09/06/counties-fighting-underw...

> Taking steroids and other activities related to bodybuilding and sports more generally can sure take their toll, but I'm pretty sure nobody has problems because of overly large muscles.

They do, their low body fat can't support them and they suffer from a myriad of complications.

Even if they had the body fat to support them, such as in many professional athletes, the strain to achieve them is not particularly healthy.

> Source?

https://abcnews.go.com/Health/legendary-bodybuilder-died-bod...

As the article says, professional body builders often go in the 3-to-5% body fat range, which is very unhealthy.

> Aren't you contradicting your point now? Or maybe I misunderstood what your point is?

Not at all; — I'm saying that “health” is but a convenient excuse to ban what the authoritarian considers not socially desirable, in this case for an ideal of beauty, whereas he is fine with letting stand that which he considers beautiful, no matter how unhealthy it might be.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#119

Post by TeaDrunk »

Jtsummers wrote: post #76
noarchy wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>while Pratt spent nearly 6 hours a day, 6 days a week, for over 6 months on cardio activities to cut weight for the first Guardians movie (as he already had the muscle for the character underneath his excess bulk and just needed to reveal them). The problem is that they tell these stories, and people believe it. If he had really done six hours of cardio per day he'd likely disappear and have no muscle. Diet and exer…

Not all cardio activities exclude strength components that would discourage/diminish muscle maintenance and development. Rowing and swimming, for example, or lower weight/higher rep strength routines that can maintain a faster tempo leading toward a hybrid strength/cardio workout.

If this is the case why does Michael Phelps not have the same body shape as Brad Pitt?

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#120

Post by leshow »

> What was left was mostly tilapia and cod, kale, low-sodium broth, and colorless, calorie-free shirataki noodles. Sasha’s rules around food and training, handed down to him from other coaches as bodybuilding doctrine, were inscrutable to me. I found myself living in a world where green bell peppers were OK and red peppers were not

I just want to say that while this is representative of what some bodybuilders do. It's also completely wrong and not representative of how you can diet for a competition.

Modern bodybuilding is not "witch" magic. You count calories, macros, and your exercise output and manipulate those to lose weight. Anyone who is saying one bell pepper type is okay but another isn't doesn't know what they are doing, and it's not fair to judge bodybuilding based on that.

Post reply on HN