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

301–310 of 358 posts

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#301

Post by vidarh »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #271
b0rsuk wrote: post #264

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You'd be surprised. Male attractiveness is simply NOT TALKED ABOUT much, especially around older people. But my mother, who is quite reserved, once blurted out that in his early years father looked 'like a young god'. And yeah, I've seen a black&white photo. He looked pretty much like Clark Kent. Square jaw, glasses, swole from muscles... except he wore a linen shirt instead of a suit. He always enjoyed labor. I woul…

Women having sexual preferences and predilections is not at all the same thing as men getting a ton of social pressure from all quarters to look and act a certain way. A very attractive female actress once said "I dress for women. I undress for men." For that and other reasons, I'm not convinced that male sexual preferences really drive the female tendency to try hard to look good and dress well, even though that's t…

> "I dress for women. I undress for men."

A good demonstration of this can be showcased pretty heavily in the difference between how women are dressed in women's magazines vs. in magazines targeting men - whatever their state of undress.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#302

Post by lvturner »

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.

Yes.

The mental and physical requirements coupled with seeing the weekly changes in the mirror were damn near the only thing that kept me sane over a busy period of work, combined with lockdown, combined with my wife being away for over three months due to work/family illness and unable to see each other due to travel restrictions.

I also went from an unhealthy BMI, high but not yet dangerously so cholesterol levels to nearly stage lean (have since raised my weight to a saner level) and having excellent blood work all round to the point of my doctor being completely astonished. (Note, I did not take any androgenic substances, so I wasn’t expecting much other than positive changes in my blood work)

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#303

Post by Blikkentrekker »

3131s wrote: post #279
Blikkentrekker wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I'm sure you can produce a source that runs contrary to my own on that matter, because even searching with neutral phrases such as “ Is having a sixpack healthy? ” returns nothing but results to me with experts saying that it isn't, and that to achieve it one must go below the minimum recommended body fat percentage.

In countries that aren't undergoing an obesity epidemic it is completely normal for men to have visible abs. Any man who does aerobic and anaerobic exercise for an extended period of time (and doesn't eat garbage, like 90% of Americans) will develop a six pack without even trying. You cannot possibly think that men like this are malnourished... https://yorkshireccc.com/uploads/crop_image/260/270/20140516... ? https:/…

Not only do I do think they are, but I couldn't help but notice your lack of source as I asked.

They are very much malnourished and their body fat percentage is lower than is optimal for good health and they most likely suffer from the associated complications of too little body fat.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#304

Post by kevinarpe »

Herodotus38 wrote: post #113
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.

Thank you to share. If you have time, can you add links to other stories that caught your attention? I would like to read more!

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#305

Post by kevinarpe »

hn_user82179 wrote: post #257
rmah wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I have. But that's not what she described. From what I read it was a near obsession, consuming her thoughts on a near constant basis. THAT is what I found foreign. And of course being more attractive makes life easier. Did I say even once that it did not? That's blatantly obvious. But do you really actively think about if strangers that you happen pass on the street or in a store find you hot? This is what…

I think that's one of the points of the article, or at least an observation. Bodybuilding made her more attractive to men, then as she excelled, made her much less attractive to them. The world changed around her as she changed appearance, as men held open the door for her or ignored her, corresponding to her attractiveness. Bodybuilding for women was for years obsessed with making sure the competitors preserved thei…

Nice! Thanks for the last paragraph about "Dietland". I found a Wiki page about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dietland

I will try to read it!

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#306

Post by DoreenMichele »

vidarh wrote: post #301
DoreenMichele wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Women having sexual preferences and predilections is not at all the same thing as men getting a ton of social pressure from all quarters to look and act a certain way. A very attractive female actress once said "I dress for women. I undress for men." For that and other reasons, I'm not convinced that male sexual preferences really drive the female tendency to try hard to look good and dress well, even though that's t…

> "I dress for women. I undress for men." A good demonstration of this can be showcased pretty heavily in the difference between how women are dressed in women's magazines vs. in magazines targeting men - whatever their state of undress.

Many years ago, I read some article about some guy who was seeing two women and the two women found out about each other. Neither woman dumped him. Neither woman gave him an ultimatum of "It's me or her!"

No, both of them began dressing completely differently and the brunet dyed her hair blonde and the blonde dyed her hair red.

They both had this internal script that said "The way you win a man is with looks, by god!" and neither of them ever bothered to ask the man in question "So, what would it take to get you to myself? Is that even possible? Why are even seeing two women in the first place?"

He didn't care how either of them dressed. He continued to see both of them and was quietly amused by their completely ineffectual attempts to "win" him and get him to themselves.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#307

Post by edanm »

3131s wrote: post #279
Blikkentrekker wrote: post #246

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then I'm sure you can produce a source that runs contrary to my own on that matter, because even searching with neutral phrases such as “ Is having a sixpack healthy? ” returns nothing but results to me with experts saying that it isn't, and that to achieve it one must go below the minimum recommended body fat percentage.

In countries that aren't undergoing an obesity epidemic it is completely normal for men to have visible abs. Any man who does aerobic and anaerobic exercise for an extended period of time (and doesn't eat garbage, like 90% of Americans) will develop a six pack without even trying. You cannot possibly think that men like this are malnourished... https://yorkshireccc.com/uploads/crop_image/260/270/20140516... ? https:/…

> In countries that aren't undergoing an obesity epidemic it is completely normal for men to have visible abs.

Umm, which countries are you talking about here? I've been to several countries and I really don't think I've been anywhere where it's "completely normal" for men to have visible abs (let's say for definition's sake, I don't think I've been to a country in which >10% of the adult male population has abs). Not that I could necessarily tell most of the time, most people have shirts on during the day.

I do agree with your point though - I don't think visible as are unhealthy.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#308

Post by amanaplanacanal »

3131s wrote: post #247
nsajko wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

> I'm pretty sure nobody has problems because of overly large muscles. Well, you're wrong. Your heart has to work harder to pump blood whether you are 300 lbs of muscle or 300 lbs of fat, it doesn't matter. This is well-known, so maybe do a little research?

Is the amount of work your heart has to do at issue here? Can you point to some articles talking about this?

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#309

Post by throw0101a »

Kluny wrote: post #203
Guthur wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd strongly second resistance training, it doesn't really take that much time either. A simple program like Starting Strength will have you train for not much more than 60 minutes three days a week and you'll make significant strength gains up to 1.5x body weight easily.

For women reading this - beware, it's not that easy. I've followed Starting Strength a couple of times and I plateau at 1.3x my weight in deadlift and .75x my weight in squats. Sticking to the program doesn't get me past it. I have to shake it up a lot with more reps, smaller weight intervals, and nearly doubling my food intake. It was a great way to get started though, and I'm really happy about the changes my body…

For women, the Strong Curves is a popular program/book:

* https://www.bretcontreras.store/products/strong-curves

* https://old.reddit.com/r/StrongCurves/

I still think that SS is a good starter for the first 3-6 months, but once you can no longer jump by 2-5 pounds (1-2 kg) per workout, you've basically used up your beginner gains. (True also for men.)

SS isn't meant to be a long-term program, but mostly (a) getting people to actually do strength training with (b) proper form and (c) concentrating on the Big 5 movements that probably give the best bang-for-buck/time.

Re: The Feminine Physique: On Women's Bodybuilding

#310

Post by falcor84 »

porb121 wrote: post #280
falcor84 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Strong people are harder to kill Is that actually so? Looking at US homicide statistics, over 75% of cases involve firearms. Would a bodybuilder have better chances of surviving a bullet wound?

you can be killed by ways other than homicide

What approaches do you have in mind? War? Government enforced famine? Selling me cheap cigarettes? Something else? And how much will bodybuilding help me avoid getting killed by these?
Post reply on HN