I'm just interested in the different philosophies hanging around the site. Do you lift to get stronger or do you lift to look good?

I'm currently doing it for looks, but I guess when I get to where I want to like, I will do it for strength.

Strength only. As long as my bf is in the healthy range (less than 15%), then I'm happy.....don't care if I ever see my abs.

Both.

At 5'6" and extremely ectomorphic, I can't expect to move mountains. But... I do enjoy having the ability to lift more than the average person might believe me capable. Beyond that, I do this to look good naked. I just can't see the point in working as hard as we do to eat right, lift and do cardio - but remain less-than-aesthetically pleasing.

I strongly believe that aesthetics should always be considered given that most of the people who arrive on these forums come here specifically because they're living inside fat bodies that embarrass them.

'Course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong...

-R

I'm just interested in the different philosophies hanging around the site. Do you lift to get stronger or do you lift to look good?

All for looks baby. All for looks.

ClGy6zJs9F8

I strongly believe that aesthetics should always be considered given that most of the people who arrive on these forums come here specifically because they're living inside fat bodies that embarrass them.



This sounds like you are trying to tell other people what their goals should be. If one is within a healthy bodyfat range, and is interested primarily in athletic performance, than I don't see how one can argue that aesthetic considerations are a necessity. If that is what your goal is, then that is great -- But beyond health, no particular goal is an absolute necessity -- it is purely a matter of preference.

most of the people who arrive on these forums come here specifically because they're living inside fat bodies that embarrass them.

That's true, and it's also sad. Most of them should be more embarassed by what they lift than how they look.

I have goals surrounding both, although my strength training is normally centered more towards strength. I figure that if I get my diet where I know it should be and train hard for strength, the looks will fall into place.

What about health? I originally got back into lifting a few years ago for health reasons to recover from a medical problem. I enjoy being stronger (and that's healthy, too), and I want to look halfway decent, but walking upright and rebuilding energy/work capacity was the prime goal for me initially.

What about health? I originally got back into lifting a few years ago for health reasons to recover from a medical problem. I enjoy being stronger (and that's healthy, too), and I want to look halfway decent, but walking upright and rebuilding energy/work capacity was the prime goal for me initially.



Health for me.

That's true, and it's also sad. Most of them should be more embarassed by what they lift than how they look.

Agreed... I feel that the best measure of success are your numbers in the core lifts. I also agree with the BF comment, as long as its lower than 15% then there is nothing unhealthy there. I feel like its safe to say that no matter what reason you have for being in the gym, when you see a guy benching 400 lbs you have a little voice telling you how cool it would be to be able to do that.

I'm in it for health, strength and fitness, the aesthetics just come as a result of it. Getting to a sub %10 BF level isn't going to help me with the 1st three.

I have long term goals with both.

Like those old timey powerlifters that looked good:

http://www.criticalbench.com/images/Vince-Anello2.jpg

Or those old timey bodybuilders that were stupid strong:

http://img65.exs.cx/img65/6782/francodeadlift1ul.jpg

Health.

OTOH health leads me to be thinner then before and to work out more then before so stronger.

I'm no longer trying to get any thinner and to be honest I'm happy with my strength. But the end result of working out to stay healthy is me staying thin and being stronger then otherwise.

Lots of reasons. The first reason, the reason I why started, was because I was tired of being a skinny little bastard. So looks was the first reason, and still is to a certain extent. As I started lifting and realize how pathetically fucking weak I am even after a year and a half, strength has now become a goal as well. Through it all though, is health, which does sort of tie in to the first reason of being way too underweight. Eating right and working out leads to better health and I don't think anybody wants to not be healthy. Live long and prosper, you know?

I suppose since I'm young and have another 15 years at least of getting stronger and after 6 months of lifting hard 4 days a week I'm almost up to 1,500 lbs of total weight in 4 lifts; I feel like my main goal is certainly strength... As I get older I can totally see a transition from a barbell to a treadmill but for now there is a lot of potential to get massively strong in the years to come.

At first Health & Looks. Now that I have kinda achied my desired appearance. Health, Strength, & then (maintaining) Looks.

I suppose since I'm young and have another 15 years at least of getting stronger and after 6 months of lifting hard 4 days a week I'm almost up to 1,500 lbs of total weight in 4 lifts; I feel like my main goal is certainly strength... As I get older I can totally see a transition from a barbell to a treadmill but for now there is a lot of potential to get massively strong in the years to come.

You can make strength gains for a long time. I'm 36, and I plan to continue pushing to get stronger for as long as I'm breathing. Zen is 49, started deadlifting just a few years ago (correct me if I'm wrong Zen), and now he's pulling over 500 lbs. He's squatting some pretty good numbers too....so, definitely no need to make the transition from BB to treadmill when you get older. :cool:

You can make strength gains for a long time. I'm 36, and I plan to continue pushing to get stronger for as long as I'm breathing. Zen is 49, started deadlifting just a few years ago (correct me if I'm wrong Zen), and now he's pulling over 500 lbs. He's squatting some pretty good numbers too....so, definitely no need to make the transition from BB to treadmill when you get older. :cool:


Yeah, 15 years might have been an extremely low estimate on that... I'll only be 36 at that point. One thing I'm really looking forward to is never getting out of lifting from this point on, I, really interested to see what this will do for me as the years go on. Also, I was checking out some of Zen's videos on youtube and I just wanna say, very nice!

That's true, and it's also sad. Most of them should be more embarassed by what they lift than how they look.

Why should anyone feel embarrassed by what they can lift if they are lifting what they are able to lift at that time? I am sure you don't go around telling people what you lift? Bragging about it? Chance put you together so you and your brother both are able to lift heavy weights for high reps.

I can see you should be proud of your abilities but to be embarrassed if you weren't able to demonstrate strength, I don't see it. I stopped competing in sports years ago, I didn't feel the need to.

I go for looks, because when I have the looks. I will have bettered my health and strength as a results of measures required to gain the looks.

Zen is 49, started deadlifting just a few years ago (correct me if I'm wrong Zen), and now he's pulling over 500 lbs. He's squatting some pretty good numbers too....so, definitely no need to make the transition from BB to treadmill when you get older. :cool:

All true. In particular, it's important to start lifting before it's too late as opposed to giving it up. The treadmill is OK, but it's not enough.

Why should anyone feel embarrassed by what they can lift if they are lifting what they are able to lift at that time? I am sure you don't go around telling people what you lift? Bragging about it? Chance put you together so you and your brother both are able to lift heavy weights for high reps.

I can see you should be proud of your abilities but to be embarrassed if you weren't able to demonstrate strength, I don't see it. I stopped competing in sports years ago, I didn't feel the need to.

I go for looks, because when I have the looks. I will have bettered my health and strength as a results of measures required to gain the looks.

I think the point was that someone who has let themselves go to such a point where they are terribly weak, they probably feel a certain level of embarrassment over it. The idea is that just like someone should be embarrassed if they are grossly over weight, extreme weakness is just as bad. You don't have to go around bragging about how much weight you can put up because its a very solid case of actions speaking louder than words, everyone can see what you're putting up. I can't say I agree with your reasoning on Looks yielding strength... I could run 10 miles a day, do abs 'til I puked and eat skinless chicken breast every meal of the day and be cut and look good, but be extremely weak. To compare that idea to lifting so its oranges to oranges... I could do 300 bench reps with the bar and get cut and look good, but would not be pumping my 1RM and strength up considerably.

Why should anyone feel embarrassed by what they can lift if they are lifting what they are able to lift at that time?

Many people are not able to meet basic strength levels. For one reason or another, (false vanity, sloth, and ignorance, etc.), many people do not do any strength exercise at all.

And it is quite a bit easier to achieve basic strength levels than it is to "look good". Since the necessary investment is so much smaller, the embarassment of not achieving it should be correspondingly bigger.

All for looks baby. All for looks.

ClGy6zJs9F8

That has to be the coolest thing I've ever seen. Love the shirt. :tucool:

Looks. I light up a cigarette on the steps outside the gym. :cool:

All for looks baby. All for looks.

ClGy6zJs9F8


I just have to say that is an amazing shirt:tu:

I compete to be the best human specimen I can be. Fast, strong, and big

I could run 10 miles a day, do abs 'til I puked and eat skinless chicken breast every meal of the day .

I promise you, I have never done those things. Nor would I recommend them. Nor would I do 1maxreps and do demonstrations of my strength.

But as the guy said when he was told his friend hung himself - "I guess some cats swing that way."

Looks. I light up a cigarette on the steps outside the gym. :cool:
I know! Let's start a thread about workout music! :spaz:

No?

How about... what type of cardio is best?

I stopped competing in sports years ago, I didn't feel the need to.

...

I go for looks, because when I have the looks, I will have bettered my health and strength as a results of measures required to gain the looks.
Agreed.

I do not do this because I care what anyone thinks of my opinions, ideas, methodologies, or what I can lift at the gym. We all have our own reasons for harboring the goals we have. Mine have evolved, as has anyone who's been into fitness for more than just a few years. When I started out in '03, it was simply to reclaim myself from a sagging sack of embarrassingly fat skin.

Mission accomplished.

The bonus? Along the way I stumbled over amazingly good health. Significantly improved strength. Happiness. And a body I'm very proud of.

That is why I do what I do.

-R

The idea is that just like someone should be embarrassed if they are grossly over weight, extreme weakness is just as bad.

Could be. Before I started lifting I couldn't hold a girl, could barely walk a 19" tv down the three flights of stairs in my dorms, and there was a myriad of other, similar sad things. After a year and a half of lifting, my 3x5 working sets are 150 for flat bb bench, 140 for bb bent-over row, 75 for military press, 205 for deadlifts. I'm a lot stronger than I was before, but those are still pathetically weak shows of strength. Most guys out there are using those numbers for their first warm up set, if they're even going that low. I see guys that are smaller than me in both height and weight who are moving 300-400lbs in their heavier lifts after less than a year of lifting and I'm thinking "Goddamnit, WTF."

So yeah, strength is an embarassment for me these days; and looks no longer are. I'm starting to think that the ecto, meso and endo body types are less about weight gain/loss ability and are more about differing levels of appetite, base and max levels of strength, and strength gain ability. Even with the right diet and lifting programs, I see it as being a loooong while before my strength is worth talking about and becomes less of an embarassment.

Both.

I have been working out and dieting to get stronger. This adds muscle.
That way, when the urge strikes me, I can dip my BF down to 10% and go for the ripped look...

I know! Let's start a thread about workout music! :spaz:

OMGZ whut do u listen 2?! :spaz:

How about... what type of cardio is best?

HIIT ftw. LISS does nothing. :nope:

My path is a bit different to most of yours..

I used to lift for appearance and some strength, but struggled to get anywhere and part of me didn't really want to look muscled.
I'm not fit, nor do I like cardio. So that rules out fitness.

When I did my lifting towards the end (I don't do it now) I find myself doing it more for the meditative aspects. My focus is much more now on the mental, emotional and spiritual aspects. The same way that I do Yoga now for those things more than the physical.. :cool:

I guess I train primarily for appearance cos if it was purely about strength then I'd just go for the powerlifter look, strong but fat. But I much prefer to look lean which involves cutting and calorie restriction which will obviously limit strength gains. The easiest way to get strong is just to get fat.


So I guess in all honesty it's mostly about appearance for me. Although I'll be honest and say training purely for appearance and six packs is perhaps a somewhat nancy pursuit, spending time lifting a load of dumbells in front of a mirror with your training top and leg warmers on isn't going to help you much in a fight, that's for sure:lol:. I know some big guys in my gym who spend all week working out but it's purely an appearance thing for them, you wouldn't want them at your back in a ruck that's for sure, they'd have run a mile before the first punch was thrown:lol:.

So I guess if you want to toughen up a bit a boxing gym is the place to go. If it's purely about appearance a standard gym will suffice.

Strength -- form follows function.

I try to make myself look bad to get stronger. But, as long as I keep getting stronger, I only end up looking better.

I focus on strength though I'd hope to have a nice body along with respectable big 3 numbers in a few years time

Also, weight training is a nice alternative to drinking myself into a flabby stupor as some of my former primary school friends have done

hmmm it is hard to say which is more important to me, this may sound really lame but when i was around 12-14 years i had the reputation of being the beast of the school, in gym class i would flaten two people at once while playing football, throw people down in wrestling and impress the ladies as i tore apart a punching bag- i have to say that was one of the best feelings in the world, the fact is that i "bloomed" very early to say and now people have caught up to to me- i lift weights to get that feeling back of being the best and strongest,

i really love the feeling of walking around without a shirt and i hope to get more chisled to make that felling even better.

so i would have to say its around 50/50 for me.


But here is a question... if you could either be a fatty, like 30% bf and be incredibly strong or be a super chisled huge muscles and abs but be week as shit which would you choose? i would be the fatty and cut like crazy for a year lol.

Initially looks, but after a little while it was strength all the way. Athletic performance is my main training motivation.

But here is a question... if you could either be a fatty, like 30% bf and be incredibly strong or be a super chisled huge muscles and abs but be week as shit which would you choose? i would be the fatty and cut like crazy for a year lol.

I want to maximize strength while also being healthy, so your question gives me two options. 1) Be strong, and then cut down to a healthy bf, or 2) Be weak, and then eat/train my way to being strong.

I like eating and hate cutting, so I'd go with option number 2!

Both, and I find them mutually conclusive.

By gaining strength/muscle....I lose weight and improve my looks.

I think the idea here should be that being a 'strong' person, or a 'fit' person....is beneficial in SO many ways.

Looks mean nothing in the bigger picture. Your health does though.

The idea is that just like someone should be embarrassed if they are grossly over weight, extreme weakness is just as bad.

It's actually worse than that. Being grossly weak in most people is so much easier to fix than being grossly overweight.

It's actually worse than that. Being grossly weak in most people is so much easier to fix than being grossly overweight.



That simple fact still fails to get people off of the couch. I couldnt count on two hands and two feet the number of friends that I grew up with that don't get, on average, 20 minutes a day of physical activity in a week's time.

Could be. Before I started lifting I couldn't hold a girl, could barely walk a 19" tv down the three flights of stairs in my dorms, and there was a myriad of other, similar sad things. After a year and a half of lifting, my 3x5 working sets are 150 for flat bb bench, 140 for bb bent-over row, 75 for military press, 205 for deadlifts. I'm a lot stronger than I was before, but those are still pathetically weak shows of strength. Most guys out there are using those numbers for their first warm up set, if they're even going that low. I see guys that are smaller than me in both height and weight who are moving 300-400lbs in their heavier lifts after less than a year of lifting and I'm thinking "Goddamnit, WTF."

However, you've gained 40 lbs and have probably doubled many of your 1RMs from the day you started. Starting at 132 lbs as a grown man and moving to 170 and continuing to grow is fantastic progress... I havent weighed 130 lbs since probably 4th grade in elementary school and alot of the guys you see in the gym could say the same thing so comparing yourself to them is apples to oranges. Also when you see all of these guys busting out huge amounts of weight, they certainly have more than a year and a half under their belts. you've done some good work and you should be happy with where you're at and where you can be with respect to where you started.

However, you've gained 40 lbs and have probably doubled many of your 1RMs from the day you started. Starting at 132 lbs as a grown man and moving to 170 and continuing to grow is fantastic progress... I havent weighed 130 lbs since probably 4th grade in elementary school and alot of the guys you see in the gym could say the same thing so comparing yourself to them is apples to oranges. Also when you see all of these guys busting out huge amounts of weight, they certainly have more than a year and a half under their belts. you've done some good work and you should be happy with where you're at and where you can be with respect to where you started.

I am happy with my progress thus far, absolutely. I've gained weight which, before I was educated about proper fitness and nutrition, I never thought was possible. So I'm happy in that regard. Putting on weight, lean weight at that, is actually easy now that I know how to do it.

When it comes to strength however, I still feel pathetically weak. I've made plenty of progress since I started, sure. I remember about 4-5 months after I started, my roommate was spotting me on the bench press when I was doing 105 (3x5), when normally, on my own, I'd be doing 95. Now I'm doing 150, and both the previous 95 and 105 are no big deal. But I'm still unimpressed. At this rate it seems like it's going to be a lot of years before I hit numbers I consider personally meaningful. I'm just somewhat frustrated when it comes to the genetic hand I got dealt when it comes to strength.

I am doing both at the same time. When you have a lot of fat, you can get all of the nutrients you need for full muscle growth and STILL have a calorie deficit.

I am doing both at the same time. When you have a lot of fat, you can get all of the nutrients you need for full muscle growth and STILL have a calorie deficit.

That's almost true. When you run a big caloric deficit, your fat gives you the energy to keep going.

But there are lots of micronutrients you still need. Take a good multivitamin every day.

Recently, I took a long gaze back into my training history. I found that when I was concerned with looks I was 'unhealthy' in a way that I was completely absorbed in how I looked and I let it determine by attitude.


Currently, I only train for athletic purposes, but even if I didn't participate I would train for strength still.

I discussed this with another person on a different forum I frequent and I pretty much echo his reply:

"Cutting and bulking come from bodybuilding, a sport wherein naked oily men stand on stage and flex. That is gay. Men are not supposed to like doing things like that. Call me old-fashioned but I stand by my beliefs here.

The idea of gaining or losing weight is not necessarily bad, but you have to consider WHY you're doing it... IMO training priorities should be structured as followed:

1. Health
2. Strength/performance/reaching desired goals
3. Everything else

Bodybuilding, the way most do it, leads to destroyed self-image combined with an egotistical facade; it's not a healthy state of mind. This is not always true but for a lot of the guys I see in the gym, it is; Nothing becomes good enough, you never learn to like yourself.

"Bulking" has two purposes: Gain strength or change weight classes. Other than that there's not a lot of really good reasons to be huge.

The other side is, a lot of guys gain muss and lose fat to "get laid" or whatever... what a joke. All the guys I've known who got laid the most were stunningly average in most respects.

I'm doing paleo for health and reducing joint inflammation. Grains and dairy have always been a digestive bane for me, and removing them has made my stomach work much better. Fat loss has been a pleasant but unnecessary side effect of this. There's nothing wrong with being ripped, if that's your thing, but the main concern is when it affects your sense of self-worth."

That's almost true. When you run a big caloric deficit, your fat gives you the energy to keep going.

But there are lots of micronutrients you still need. Take a good multivitamin every day.

I will start doing that.

That simple fact still fails to get people off of the couch. I couldnt count on two hands and two feet the number of friends that I grew up with that don't get, on average, 20 minutes a day of physical activity in a week's time.

Personally I don't think you can get to a large portion of the overweight people and get them to lose weight by telling them how weak they are.

I started because I wanted to look good....now I'm doing it to be a stronger person.

I got started because of I hated the way I looked but now my goals are more strength/performance oriented. I think once you've achieved your aesthetic goals (if you have them), it's helpful to set performance goals because otherwise it's easy to slip into that "maintenance mode" mindset and start skipping workouts and letting your nutrition slip. Before you know it you're back to your old self.

Personally I don't think you can get to a large portion of the overweight people and get them to lose weight by telling them how weak they are.

I started because I wanted to look good....now I'm doing it to be a stronger person.


I wasn't speaking of just over weight people, but rather weak people in general, as Zen mentioned, basic levels of strength are unattained by a considerable amount of people despite the relative ease with which you can reach that basic level of strength. In fact, I agree that telling an overweight individual that they are weak would be totally ineffective in getting them motivated, however, even the prospect of some level of fitness with very little effort (30 minutes a day) isn't enough to motivate these people.

But, as long as I keep getting stronger, I only end up looking better.
Same here.

Personally I don't think you can get to a large portion of the overweight people and get them to lose weight by telling them how weak they are.

Part of the irony is that the heavier they are, the stronger their legs and back are. And the trouble is getting them to understand that they have that advantage if they work their legs and back. But many appear to think of lifting weights as bench press + curls and believe that if they put in a handful of reps they will get heavier.

And yet when you tell some overweight people that they have the advantage of strong legs and back; it doesn't usually have the direct effect of getting them to use that strength.

I'm not sure what people can lift should be "embarrassing" unless maybe they work in a heavy manual job or something. Nowadays we have machines to do most heavy loads for us anyway. Realistically most people in Western countries now work in sedentary jobs and most of those people don't do weight training i.e. most people aren't going to be particularly strong. But does this adversely affect them in their lives in terms of strength function ? Not really one iota beyond them being less efficient at moving sofas and other items of heavy furniture, something which people generally only do very infrequently anyway.

Unless one is weight training for some kind of sporting or athletic or occupational funtion (like bouncers, cops) functional trainers making up only a small minority of weight trainers) then as far as I can see the advantage of getting strong through weight training are as follows :-

1. Aesthetic improvement (although this won't be the case at a highish body fat, indeed if one gets too fat through eating to support strength gains via weight training one's aesthetic appearance can actually severely decline compared to being merely slim and of average build).


2. Being able to lift heavier weights in the gym itself.

I'm not sure what people can lift should be "embarrassing" unless maybe they work in a heavy manual job or something. Nowadays we have machines to do most heavy loads for us anyway. Realistically most people in Western countries now work in sedentary jobs and most of those people don't do weight training i.e. most people aren't going to be particularly strong. But does this adversely affect them in their lives in terms of strength function ? Not really one iota beyond them being less efficient at moving sofas and other items of heavy furniture, something which people generally only do very infrequently anyway.

Unless one is weight training for some kind of sporting or athletic or occupational funtion (like bouncers, cops) functional trainers making up only a small minority of weight trainers) then as far as I can see the advantage of getting strong through weight training are as follows :-

1. Aesthetic improvement (although this won't be the case at a highish body fat, indeed if one gets too fat through eating to support strength gains via weight training one's aesthetic appearance can actually severely decline compared to being merely slim and of average build).


2. Being able to lift heavier weights in the gym itself.

Maintaining strength levels as you age is critical in keeping you mobile, so I think you are missing a big part of the health equation in strength. Because of the sedentary nature of our world today, it's that much more important you do something to prevent sacropenia (age caused muscle loss) and maintain bone density and joint health.

So unless you want to fall down a lot, break some bones, and not be able to get out of your chair when you get old, work on strength.

Strength is important for much more than aesthetics and ego.

I'm not sure what people can lift should be "embarrassing" unless maybe they work in a heavy manual job or something. Nowadays we have machines to do most heavy loads for us anyway. Realistically most people in Western countries now work in sedentary jobs and most of those people don't do weight training i.e. most people aren't going to be particularly strong. But does this adversely affect them in their lives in terms of strength function ? Not really one iota beyond them being less efficient at moving sofas and other items of heavy furniture, something which people generally only do very infrequently anyway.

Unless one is weight training for some kind of sporting or athletic or occupational funtion (like bouncers, cops) functional trainers making up only a small minority of weight trainers) then as far as I can see the advantage of getting strong through weight training are as follows :-

1. Aesthetic improvement (although this won't be the case at a highish body fat, indeed if one gets too fat through eating to support strength gains via weight training one's aesthetic appearance can actually severely decline compared to being merely slim and of average build).


2. Being able to lift heavier weights in the gym itself.

Just having a desk job doesn't mean you shouldn't have a level of strength, the arguement that "I dont need to be strong because I dont get paid to be" is slightly ridiculous. I don't hit the gym because I'm going to be pounding railroad spikes the next day. I'm not saying everyone has to want to bench 400lbs but like was being said in a few posts up, the guy had trouble moving a tiny 19 inch TV across a few flights of stairs, which is a small task that any guy over 13 should be able to accomplish without too much trouble.

I lift because it feels good when I stop.

I thought that I began lifting and working out to enhance my looks, but that's not really it. I began lifting and working out to increase my confidence, balance my hormones, and feel better about myself. You can't really narrow that down to one of the goals in the OP.

Ironically enough, I've had greater aesthetic gains while training to increase strength, endurance, and nutrient intake than I have while training with the specific goal to enhance aesthetics.

IMO training priorities should be structured as followed:

1. Health
2. Strength/performance/reaching desired goals
3. Everything elseI used to think that too. But now I think that's a pretty egocentric way of looking at things. It doesn't matter what other people's training goals are, and whether they're the same as my goals or not. Some people don't want to put in the effort required to increase their longevity, or improve their mobility, or whatever, just as some people don't want to put in the effort to improve their manners, increase their knowledge, practice humanitarian efforts, or enhance their levels of concentration, memory, mood, etc.

It doesn't matter. Do what you think is important, and what you think will make your part of the world a better place.

Bodybuilding, the way most do it, leads to destroyed self-image combined with an egotistical facade; it's not a healthy state of mind. This is not always true but for a lot of the guys I see in the gym, it is; Nothing becomes good enough, you never learn to like yourself.
I've seen some pretty healthy looking bodybuilders.

Abdominator seems like himself a whole lot (http://www.skippypodar.net/sitemap.html). :D Watch out; he has a grand plan for world domination, and he's almost there!
The other side is, a lot of guys gain muss and lose fat to "get laid" or whatever... what a joke. All the guys I've known who got laid the most were stunningly average in most respects.Stunningly average guys don't "get laid" the most. The guys who get the most attention from women are those that demand it, either from being dynamic and interesting on their own, or by making women feel dynamic and interesting. There are various different characteristics that can enhance this interest. A nice looking physique can help, so can a broad range of interests, a well-developed sense of humor, self-confidence, strength, ambition, and energy.

Stunningly average guys don't "get laid" the most. The guys who get the most attention from women are those that demand it, either from being dynamic and interesting on their own, or by making women feel dynamic and interesting. There are various different characteristics that can enhance this interest. A nice looking physique can help, so can a broad range of interests, a well-developed sense of humor, self-confidence, strength, ambition, and energy.

Fucking awesome. :bow: :madpimp: :dreamy:

Just having a desk job doesn't mean you shouldn't have a level of strength, the arguement that "I dont need to be strong because I dont get paid to be" is slightly ridiculous. I don't hit the gym because I'm going to be pounding railroad spikes the next day. I'm not saying everyone has to want to bench 400lbs but like was being said in a few posts up, the guy had trouble moving a tiny 19 inch TV across a few flights of stairs, which is a small task that any guy over 13 should be able to accomplish without too much trouble.


The guy in question doesn't need to be able to lift the T.V. as it is not a matter of life and death, of course strength can be helpful in real life situations like these but in all honesty how often are people lifting heavyish objects in every day life in this day and age, not very often.

My point was about the use of the word "embarrassing" in relation to people's strength. We all have different abilities and interests, some avid readers for example might tell us that it's embarrassing that we don't all read a book a week. Not everyone has the inclination, or the time even to go to the gym to lift weights, same as we don't all have the inclination or time to read a book a week.

Unless one is weight training for some kind of sporting or athletic or occupational funtion (like bouncers, cops) functional trainers making up only a small minority of weight trainers) then as far as I can see the advantage of getting strong through weight training are as follows :-

1. Aesthetic improvement (although this won't be the case at a highish body fat, indeed if one gets too fat through eating to support strength gains via weight training one's aesthetic appearance can actually severely decline compared to being merely slim and of average build).


2. Being able to lift heavier weights in the gym itself.

You're right, except for leaving out sarcopenia, osteoporosis, sleep problems, injury from falls, ...

Why don't you get old without lifting weights, and then see what they were good for.

Some people don't want to put in the effort required to increase their longevity, or improve their mobility, or whatever, just as some people don't want to put in the effort to improve their manners, increase their knowledge, practice humanitarian efforts, or enhance their levels of concentration, memory, mood, etc.

And you want to buy them the scooter and lift chair?

http://www.germes-online.com/direct/dbimage/50294221/Electric_Mobility_Scooter.jpg

http://www.pridemobility.com/products/lift_chair/weight_lc.jpg

I'm actually a big proponent of national health care, but if we're going to keep beating back cancer and heart disease it will be better if people can keep their legs going for another ten-twenty years longer than their parents did. People that in the past would have died already will be getting help going to the bathroom because they didn't lift.

Personally, I am not interested in assisted living one day earlier than it is absolutely necessary.

The guys who get the most attention from women are those that demand it, either from being dynamic and interesting on their own, or by making women feel dynamic and interesting. There are various different characteristics that can enhance this interest. A nice looking physique can help, so can a broad range of interests, a well-developed sense of humor, self-confidence, strength, ambition, and energy....

My money's on long hair and a pink shirt with lightning bolts on it. :madpimp:

Fucking awesome. :bow: :madpimp: :dreamy:I feel so dynamic and interesting :love:

Of course, when your goal is to effectively attract and hold the attention of one special certain someone, it's most important to develop those features that she specifically admires, rather than those that "girls in general" are believed to be attracted to. It usually comes pretty naturally, and that might be why guys who get the girl are perceived to be stunningly average; because they're never trying to be someone they're not.

I'm not sure what people can lift should be "embarrassing"

A 165# man who cannot squat 115#, or deadlift 135#.

A 165# man who cannot press 60#, or row 115#.

If that's you? Time to hit the weights.

Pretty much if you can squat or dead your 1.25 x BW then you don't have to be embarrassed. You still have a long way to go before you're strong, but it's not embarrassing.

And you want to buy them the scooter and lift chair?I want them to stay home. :whistle:

Edit: No, you're right. I would like everyone to be stronger and healthier.

And more beautiful, and more intelligent, and more generous, and more friendly...

It's just so hard to choose. :cry:

The guy in question doesn't need to be able to lift the T.V. as it is not a matter of life and death, of course strength can be helpful in real life situations like these but in all honesty how often are people lifting heavyish objects in every day life in this day and age, not very often.


TVs are light today. Even the big ones. But I've yet to meet a girl who doesn't enjoy being picked up the odd time. Sweep a girl up in your arms and sit her down on the kitchen counter or carry her to well you get the idea. Who wants to be bent over with a stiff back after doing something simple like that?

You don't need to deadlift a car to do any of that but lots of little things every day do take some strength.

TVs are light today. Even the big ones. But I've yet to meet a girl who doesn't enjoy being picked up the odd time. Sweep a girl up in your arms and sit her down on the kitchen counter or carry her to well you get the idea. Who wants to be bent over with a stiff back after doing something simple like that?

Given that women, too, are getting more and more obese men will have to be lifting weights pretty seriously to accomplish that :D.

You're right, except for leaving out sarcopenia, osteoporosis, sleep problems, injury from falls, ...

Why don't you get old without lifting weights, and then see what they were good for.


I agree with that but that's bringing long term health into the equation whereas I just meant to restrict my post to matters of strength function, as it were, as the thread title refers to "strength or looks" so I thought bringing health considerations into it might be digressing a little.

Anyway I'm sure your points about health are perfectly valid and it might be better if people were encouraged to lift weights for health but I think we'd probably all agree that nowadays the whole gym and supplements industry nowadays gets promoted overwhelmingly by reference to aesthetics, and above all by implicit suggestion that lifting weights and getting "buff" will get one laid etc...... basically the industry, indeed like many other industries, is using sex to sell its products, same as sex is used to sell cars, shampoo, hair gel, whatever. I guess the marketing industry is always going to use sex to sell all sorts of products, cos it's easy, lazy, unsophisticated and panders to our baser instincts.


And I think realistically nowadays most people get suckered in by the sexual marketing and therefore most newbies nowadays probably start training as they think it will help them get laid, when probably as referred to above in that respect they'd be better off working on mental aspects like confidence, sense of humour etc. It's no doubt because of magazines like Men's "Health" with their ripped cover models that most newbies prioritise getting ripped and six packs over actually getting strong, as if exposing their abs will somehow magically transform their entire lives:rolleyes:. Reveritng to the title of this thread, how often do Men's Health reveal what their cover models can squat and bench press etc ? I don't think they do cos the entire magazine output appears to be geared towards the simplistic equation of "Get ripped fellas = get laid".

Ironically this is exactly the kind of marketing associated with gyms that puts a lot of people off going to them, particularly more arty sorts of people, who see gyms as places for shallow wankers with fake tans etc. Instead if a message of health was more prominently promoted as a reason for strength training, then such people would be more likely to engage in it I think.

So unless you want to fall down a lot, break some bones, and not be able to get out of your chair when you get old, work on strength.

Strength is important for much more than aesthetics and ego.

Yeh, but they don't have to take it to the point, Zen does to accomplish that. And there isn't any authority saying that we do. the studies usually reflect weights of about 25 lbs at the most were used.

Stunningly average guys don't "get laid" the most. The guys who get the most attention from women are those that demand it, either from being dynamic and interesting on their own, or by making women feel dynamic and interesting. There are various different characteristics that can enhance this interest. A nice looking physique can help, so can a broad range of interests, a well-developed sense of humor, self-confidence, strength, ambition, and energy.

You can have all that but throw in the good body and the ability to dance and you have a powerful package. Seriously, I have never been asked to squat or bench 300 lbs by anyone yet. Strength demonstrations are interesting but the transfer to real life is hard and rare to find.

Given that women, too, are getting more and more obese men will have to be lifting weights pretty seriously to accomplish that :D.


Ha ha, well agreed, the abundance of food available today in Western countries together with the sedentary lifestyles means there aren't as many dainty 7 or 8 stone women walking about these days as there used to be:D Bejeezus, I'd have crippled myself if I'd attempted to sweep one or two women I've dated down the years into my arms:eek::lol:

A 165# man who cannot squat 115#, or deadlift 135#.

A 165# man who cannot press 60#, or row 115#.

If that's you? Time to hit the weights.

Pretty much if you can squat or dead your 1.25 x BW then you don't have to be embarrassed. You still have a long way to go before you're strong, but it's not embarrassing.

Respectfully, this comes across as kind of condescending. It sounds like the "ego" aspect of lifting for looks has been replaced with ego regarding how much one can lift compared to others.

If anyone steps into a gym, regardless of reason, I think that person should be commended because they are trying to better themselves.

5ish months ago, I was fat and incredibly weak. 5 bodyweight squats would wind me. At this point, I'm doing SwoleCat's leg day and can complete those 20 reppers with weight on the bar. Judging me by the strength standards, I am still quite weak, but I am loads stronger then when I first started. Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?

The guy in question doesn't need to be able to lift the T.V. as it is not a matter of life and death, of course strength can be helpful in real life situations like these but in all honesty how often are people lifting heavyish objects in every day life in this day and age, not very often.

My point was about the use of the word "embarrassing" in relation to people's strength. We all have different abilities and interests, some avid readers for example might tell us that it's embarrassing that we don't all read a book a week. Not everyone has the inclination, or the time even to go to the gym to lift weights, same as we don't all have the inclination or time to read a book a week.

To be honest, my job doesn't require a phyiscally strong person. At least not to the degree of which I've gone to become stronger.

But that isn't the point.

The point is that being a 'strong' person with a healthy lifestyle is benefical in MANY more ways than just being able to do a job that is phyiscally demanding, if you have one.

I love weight lifting. It has taught my commitment, discipline, how to be a healthy person, and how to be mentally strong. Surely those are good things.

Respectfully, this comes across as kind of condescending. It sounds like the "ego" aspect of lifting for looks has been replaced with ego regarding how much one can lift compared to others.

If anyone steps into a gym, regardless of reason, I think that person should be commended because they are trying to better themselves.

5ish months ago, I was fat and incredibly weak. 5 bodyweight squats would wind me. At this point, I'm doing SwoleCat's leg day and can complete those 20 reppers with weight on the bar. Judging me by the strength standards, I am still quite weak, but I am loads stronger then when I first started. Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?

Nope.

Set it as a goal. I can't deadlift or squat 1.5x my body weight either.

Yeh, but they don't have to take it to the point, Zen does to accomplish that

Well that's true. I could cut my lifting in half and be strong enough for most purposes. But I want to raise the intensity of my workouts for metabolic reasons as well. The strength endurance and metabolic goals are the bigger driving forces behind my workouts.

On the other hand, it did happen yesterday that I had to lift my sister in law's big 80 pound suitcase overhead on a train. It was easy. It is unusual for overhead strength to be part of my daily life, but it just goes to show that daily life is easier if you are stronger.

I actually do have a bigger strength requirement than a lot of people with office jobs like mine, because I do my own firewood. Since I have a wide fireplace, I can deal with longer chunks - up to about 36", although we usually cut them in the 30" range. And when that is a round with a decent diameter (like 30") that gets you into the 200#-300# range. We have a hydraulic splitter now, so those rounds have to be lifted up about 30" onto the rail, so it's like a mini Atlas-Stones workout. Now that I have sufficient strength for this, it's actually fun hauling a bunch of wood around the back lot.

The only thing I am not strong enough for which comes up in the normal course of my events is wrestling with the hydraulic connections on my tractor. That's because it's an awkard position - I have to push my hands together between the loader arm and the engine so it's hard to produce a lot of force and so I have to really get the backpressure down to almost nothing to make the connections. I'm going to do something about that though - those connections are supposed to be easy. I have to do that this weekend too.

The guy in question doesn't need to be able to lift the T.V. as it is not a matter of life and death, of course strength can be helpful in real life situations like these but in all honesty how often are people lifting heavyish objects in every day life in this day and age, not very often.

My point was about the use of the word "embarrassing" in relation to people's strength. We all have different abilities and interests, some avid readers for example might tell us that it's embarrassing that we don't all read a book a week. Not everyone has the inclination, or the time even to go to the gym to lift weights, same as we don't all have the inclination or time to read a book a week.

Again, I'm not saying everyone needs to bench 400 lbs, however, basic levels of strength should be attained just like people should pick up the newspaper or read a book. An avid reader should be able to move his TV and a body builder should be able to sit down and enjoy a novel. I'm not speaking in extremes, just basics that people fail to attain through their own laziness.

I can't deadlift or squat 1.5x my body weight either.

Yeah but the difference is that you know it, and you are working on it. You will achieve those goals.

it's actually fun hauling a bunch of wood around the back lot.



Next winter when I've got the wood range installed I'm going to remember this when I'm spliting wood for the tiny firebox or hauling it up three flights
:lol:

Respectfully, this comes across as kind of condescending. It sounds like the "ego" aspect of lifting for looks has been replaced with ego regarding how much one can lift compared to others.

If anyone steps into a gym, regardless of reason, I think that person should be commended because they are trying to better themselves.

5ish months ago, I was fat and incredibly weak. 5 bodyweight squats would wind me. At this point, I'm doing SwoleCat's leg day and can complete those 20 reppers with weight on the bar. Judging me by the strength standards, I am still quite weak, but I am loads stronger then when I first started. Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?


I fairness to Zen I don't think he's promoting "ego lifting" or trying to put off newbies:D.

"Ego lifting" isn't a great idea, particularly with newbies as it leads to bad form and possible injury. It's a trap that probably most newbies fall into at some point, heavier weights at the expense of form. Newbies will often be self conscious when they first enter gyms and might fixate too much on what the bigger guys are lifting when they should not bother about what others are llifting and should simply lift what weights they are capable of with strict form.

Yeah but the difference is that you know it, and you are working on it. You will achieve those goals.

All because of you and everyone else. :D

Education goes a LONG way, IMO. If schools would teach proper weight lifting routines in physical education class, a bigger part of the younger generation might get invovled.

Another thing....look at the percent of the population that has back trouble. Think about how many people could avoid that by doing deads and other back related exercises.

Respectfully, this comes across as kind of condescending. It sounds like the "ego" aspect of lifting for looks has been replaced with ego regarding how much one can lift compared to others.

If anyone steps into a gym, regardless of reason, I think that person should be commended because they are trying to better themselves.

5ish months ago, I was fat and incredibly weak. 5 bodyweight squats would wind me. At this point, I'm doing SwoleCat's leg day and can complete those 20 reppers with weight on the bar. Judging me by the strength standards, I am still quite weak, but I am loads stronger then when I first started. Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?

Great response.:claplow:

Education goes a LONG way, IMO. If schools would teach proper weight lifting routines in physical education class, a bigger part of the younger generation might get involved.

Agreed.

Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?

Both. It's not impossible to acknowledge the great effort and great progress that someone has made, while at the same time acknowledging the fact that they are still physically weak.

I want to be in shape for health mostly but I do enjoy getting stronger. Moving things around the house is much eaiser and I don't get winded nearly as easily.

I also want to be in shape so that I can be more active and enjoy more outdoor activities. I love biking, camping and kayaking and my weight makes all of that harder and less enjoyable.

Great response.:claplow:

115 lbs is 5lbs lighter than 2 bags of water softener salt... Wouldnt being able to dead lift that and squat at least that make carrying them to your basement alot easier? Having legs and a back in such a condition to where you can't stand up with your own body weight is pathetic. To grow complacent and not do something about that is even worse. Stepping into the gym with set goals in mind is the first step, but when you achieve those goals you deserve commendation.

Average looking guys get laid all the time. Even guys who don't work out at get laid all the time.

If the criteria for getting laid was "you have to look like Dorian Yates..",
most of the population would be staying home on the weekends.

IMO personality and basic genetic looks are what determines whether you're going get some...

In some studies it has been shown that the Dorian Yates look actually turns many women off.

You can have all the muscles in the world...but... if you're a dork with no sense of humour who smells badly and doesn't have any social attributes coupled with the mind of an amoeba, your choices will be limited.


I think that a lot of guys rationalize like this:-
" Women aren't interested in me...it must be because of my looks...if I work out and look like Arnold, then they'll want me..."

The reason they don't want you is because you are a boring, mindless, unfunny jerk. Now you will be a boring, mindless, unfunny jerk with muscles. You may gain a percentage point or two...but once they see who you are they'll be gone to greener pastures.

If you have a face like Brad Pitt,a body like Ronald Coleman, drive a Maserati, all your clothes are made by Gucci and you have a six-figure bank account, the above observations do not apply....you are exempt.

o.k....that rants out of the way.....

I don't lift for strength per se...but it has a lot to do with it. I don't lift for looks per se either...although it has a lot to do with it.

A lot of my lifting goals have to do with the way I feel about myself in terms of "results" in increased abilities.

Early on I analyzed my genetic potential in terms of muscle belly length, skeletal structure, bone proportion, body type, and my athletic abilty in general. I work within that structural reference. I don't work within the structural reference of champion lifters in magazines. Because I am never going to be one of them.

At the end of the day if I can look in the mirror and see improvement for me, know that I have much more functional athletic ability than before and achieve some goals I've set for myself then I'm happy.

So what if I can't deadlift 550lbs. When I started off I couldn't Deadlift 100. Sice then I've improved greatly....in all other lifting areas as well.

But you have to ask yourself what you're trying to get out of all this.

I don't want to be a Powerlifter. I like speed and fighting ability. I also like looking good.

I like it when I can sprint up a long flight of stairs in seconds. How big my Quads are isn't all that important. I'd rather be able to sprint up a flight of stairs than have huge muscles with no athletic ability.

But I don't want to look like a bean-pole either.

A lot of people do want to look good...and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

But the goal of my program isn't just to look like a clipping out of a magazine.

I'll settle for looking like George St.Pierre, Matt Hughes, Randy Couture, or Rampage. Along with a decent amount of athletic ability.

. Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?


I would say neither on this point. Nobody should feel "embarrassed" about what they can or can't lift in my opinion, that's like saying people should feel embarrassed cos they can't ballroom dance or play chess, we all have different interests, pursuits and hobbies.


Re "commended", I don't think people should be commended, nor feel the need to be, about taking up weight training so they look better, after all it's a personal thing which only really benefits the person himself/herself. I think folk should more generally be commended for helping others, if you were talking about a lifestyle change like conquering a drug or drink addiction, maybe that's different but taking up training to improve one's appearance I don't think is something which merits "commendation". I'd say it's a personal thing that one should either do or not do, no commendation should be required or sought. Just my 2 cents worth.

Education goes a LONG way, IMO. If schools would teach proper weight lifting routines in physical education class, a bigger part of the younger generation might get invovled.

Another thing....look at the percent of the population that has back trouble. Think about how many people could avoid that by doing deads and other back related exercises.

My county and most of the state provides a good lifting program in our high schools, but not for girls. That is a big mistake, on balance. they need it more than guys.

Now lets don't stretch it too far, a large number of competitive lifters and bodybuilders have back, shoulder, and knee injuries or problems. Our bodies can be subjected to too much of a good thing. Our genes sometimes sets a destination for our bodies from the word go. No amount of exercise can stop that train once it gets started.

Average looking guys get laid all the time. Even guys who don't work out at get laid all the time.

If the criteria for getting laid was "you have to look like Dorian Yates..",
most of the population would be staying home on the weekends.

IMO personality and basic genetic looks are what determines whether you're going get some...

In some studies it has been shown that the Dorian Yates look actually turns many women off.

You can have all the muscles in the world...but... if you're a dork with no sense of humour who smells badly and doesn't have any social attributes coupled with the mind of an amoeba, your choices will be limited.


I think that a lot of guys rationalize like this:-
" Women aren't interested in me...it must be because of my looks...if I work out and look like Arnold, then they'll want me..."

The reason they don't want you is because you are a boring, mindless, unfunny jerk. Now you will be a boring, mindless, unfunny jerk with muscles. You may gain a percentage point or two...but once they see who you are they'll be gone to greener pastures.

If you have a face like Brad Pitt,a body like Ronald Coleman, drive a Maserati, all your clothes are made by Gucci and you have a six-figure bank account, the above observations do not apply....you are exempt.

o.k....that rants out of the way.....

I don't lift for strength per se...but it has a lot to do with it. I don't lift for looks per se either...although it has a lot to do with it.

A lot of my lifting goals have to do with the way I feel about myself in terms of "results" in increased abilities.

Early on I analyzed my genetic potential in terms of muscle belly length, skeletal structure, bone proportion, body type, and my athletic abilty in general. I work within that structural reference. I don't work within the structural reference of champion lifters in magazines. Because I am never going to be one of them.

At the end of the day if I can look in the mirror and see improvement for me, know that I have much more functional athletic ability than before and achieve some goals I've set for myself then I'm happy.

So what if I can't deadlift 550lbs. When I started off I couldn't Deadlift 100. Sice then I've improved greatly....in all other lifting areas as well.

But you have to ask yourself what you're trying to get out of all this.

I don't want to be a Powerlifter. I like speed and fighting ability. I also like looking good.

I like it when I can sprint up a long flight of stairs in seconds. How big my Quads are isn't all that important. I'd rather be able to sprint up a flight of stairs than have huge muscles with no athletic ability.

But I don't want to look like a bean-pole either.

A lot of people do want to look good...and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

But the goal of my program isn't just to look like a clipping out of a magazine.

I'll settle for looking like George St.Pierre, Matt Hughes, Randy Couture, or Rampage. Along with a decent amount of athletic ability.



Great post with a lot of good points. Re Dorian Yates, I think the large majority of women would be turned off by the extreme muscle development of pro bodybuilders, and most guys don't want to look anything like that anyway. All the surveys you read about this that women prefer the, yes you guessed it, "cover model" look.

I think your goals probably represent those of your average gym going guy - a combination of looks, strength, speed and athleticism. The easiest way to get strong is just to eat, eat and eat and get built like a powerlifter - but that's at the cost of speed and agility which a lot of guys want for sporting activities. A powerlifter look with a high bodyfat will also certainly be at the expense of one's looks - and presumably there's an evolutionary type reason why women find a lower bodyfat in men more attractive - presumably a lower body fat = faster = more proficient hunter (or whatever:blank:).

And also fighting ability as you mention - being too heavy will slow you down, fighting being as much about speed as strength.

and presumably there's an evolutionary type reason why women find a lower bodyfat in men more attractive - presumably a lower body fat = faster = more proficient hunter (or whatever:blank:).



I doubt it. Being lean is a modern thing. Big used to mean wealthy. You couldn't get big in any sense and not be relatively well off.


Much of the modern ideal is at odds with the past ideals. Tans used to mean field labourer. Thin meant you couldn't afford enough food.

I doubt it. Being lean is a modern thing. Big used to mean wealthy. You couldn't get big in any sense and not be relatively well off.


Much of the modern ideal is at odds with the past ideals. Tans used to mean field labourer. Thin meant you couldn't afford enough food.


Yeah, I aint claiming to be an anthropogist or anything:blank:

But at the same time I'm guessing that the ideal physiques promoted today are merely pandering to what people instinctively attractive, rather than the other way about i.e. an ideal physique type being promoted by our media and people then being socialised into finding that attractive, I guess it's a kind of chicken and egg situation, what comes first ?

Re lean being a modern thing, what about Greek and Roman statues, the guys depicted thereon actually have similar physiques to those on the cover of the dreaded Men's Health magazine:)

My county and most of the state provides a good lifting program in our high schools, but not for girls. That is a big mistake, on balance. they need it more than guys.

Now lets don't stretch it too far, a large number of competitive lifters and bodybuilders have back, shoulder, and knee injuries or problems. Our bodies can be subjected to too much of a good thing. Our genes sometimes sets a destination for our bodies from the word go. No amount of exercise can stop that train once it gets started.

Hence the part about educating them.

I don't think many of the greek or roman ideals were that lean.

One thing that hasn't changed is the idea that wealth is good. Who can afford to sit around the pool and go to the gym today is more likely to look "good" the same way somebody who 300 years ago could stay inside out of the sun and eat whatever they wanted. Looking rich looks good :lol:

Respectfully, this comes across as kind of condescending. Should I be "embarassed" because I cannot squat 1.5 times my weight or commended for changing my unhealthy lifestyle for a positive one, irrespective of how much I currently lift?

I don't actually care how it "comes across"; the fact of the matter is that life is full of embarassments, and we all experience many of them. Pretending that they aren't there when they are is a simple mistake.

I don't know if you should be embarassed for being unable to squat 1.5 times your body weight. It's possible; I would put the borderline a bit lower than that. And of course, there are some legitimate reasons why someone might not be able to squat - spinal chord injury, not having legs, etc. But yeah, there is an amount below which an otherwise healthy man should be embarassed to find his 1RM squat, because even a very modest application of strength exercise would result in better performance.

It is important to understand that these levels are very far below anything which passes for impressive. For example, it is difficult to have an impressive deadlift - you have to be pulling at least close to three times your body weight if not more, before deadlifts become impressive. Let's be as realistic about that as we are about what is embarassing. According to the exrx standards, for a 165# man to have an "elite" deadlift he has to pull 518# (http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/DeadliftStandards.html). So make no mistake - there is a long, long distance between "embarassing" and "impressive". So it is hard to see where "ego" gets fed that much simply by avoiding embarassment.

You can also be commended for recognizing the possibility of change, and, if you stick with SGX, you will almost surely have little (if anything) to be embarrassed about in a very short amount of time. The truth is that anyone with an embarassing level of fitness, but otherwise healthy, will progress beyond the embarassing stage very quickly on almost any reasonable program. That's actually what is embarassing about the embarassing level of lack of fitness - just like an impressive level of fitness is only maintained by constant application of serious effort, the embarassing level of fitness can only be maintained by constant application of serious neglect.

I doubt it. Being lean is a modern thing. Big used to mean wealthy. You couldn't get big in any sense and not be relatively well off.

Actually muscular and tanned males meant low class in the last few hundred years as those tanned and muscular men were generally the laborers, not the upper class/nobility.

"Exercise" for gentlemen generally involved walks through gardens or sport hunting.

Agreed.


We had weight training as part of P.E. but it was all machine work, no barbells - basically worthless, and the teacher was an out-of-shape slob.

We had weight training as part of P.E. but it was all machine work, no barbells - basically worthless, and the teacher was an out-of-shape slob.

I think we went to the gym 'once' in the 3 years of high school.

And while we were there the egotistical morons in my class hogged all the machines.

Idiots.

P.E. has become more about classroom teaching kids than letting them learn through playing.

I don't think many of the greek or roman ideals were that lean.



Nah, Rome is pretty close to me and I've been a few times, the Capitoline museum on the hill behind the Victor Emanuelle monument is worth a visit, it's full of classical statues, a great deal of the sculptures depict men who are "ripped" as it were. So I guess there must have been some muscular ripped guys walking around in togas back then:D

We had weight training as part of P.E. but it was all machine work, no barbells - basically worthless, and the teacher was an out-of-shape slob.

That exactly describes my weight training part of P.E., including the teacher part.

Although, after we did the required part of the class each time, we were left to our own devices for the rest of the class period, during which he opened up the free-weights area.

I've seen some pretty healthy looking bodybuilders.

You use the word 'seen' just because someone appears healthy does not mean they are healthy.


Stunningly average guys don't "get laid" the most. The guys who get the most attention from women are those that demand it, either from being dynamic and interesting on their own, or by making women feel dynamic and interesting. There are various different characteristics that can enhance this interest. A nice looking physique can help, so can a broad range of interests, a well-developed sense of humor, self-confidence, strength, ambition, and energy.


Stunningly average was used in the context of body composition, not personality. My post was referring to those who pick up weight training to improve their physiques for the sole purpose of outward appearance and thinking it gives them a better chance with the ladies.

Average looking guys get laid all the time. Even guys who don't work out at get laid all the time.

If the criteria for getting laid was "you have to look like Dorian Yates..",
most of the population would be staying home on the weekends.

IMO personality and basic genetic looks are what determines whether you're going get some...

In some studies it has been shown that the Dorian Yates look actually turns many women off.

You can have all the muscles in the world...but... if you're a dork with no sense of humour who smells badly and doesn't have any social attributes coupled with the mind of an amoeba, your choices will be limited.


I think that a lot of guys rationalize like this:-
" Women aren't interested in me...it must be because of my looks...if I work out and look like Arnold, then they'll want me..."

The reason they don't want you is because you are a boring, mindless, unfunny jerk. Now you will be a boring, mindless, unfunny jerk with muscles. You may gain a percentage point or two...but once they see who you are they'll be gone to greener pastures.

If you have a face like Brad Pitt,a body like Ronald Coleman, drive a Maserati, all your clothes are made by Gucci and you have a six-figure bank account, the above observations do not apply....you are exempt.

o.k....that rants out of the way.....

I don't lift for strength per se...but it has a lot to do with it. I don't lift for looks per se either...although it has a lot to do with it.

A lot of my lifting goals have to do with the way I feel about myself in terms of "results" in increased abilities.

Early on I analyzed my genetic potential in terms of muscle belly length, skeletal structure, bone proportion, body type, and my athletic abilty in general. I work within that structural reference. I don't work within the structural reference of champion lifters in magazines. Because I am never going to be one of them.

At the end of the day if I can look in the mirror and see improvement for me, know that I have much more functional athletic ability than before and achieve some goals I've set for myself then I'm happy.

So what if I can't deadlift 550lbs. When I started off I couldn't Deadlift 100. Sice then I've improved greatly....in all other lifting areas as well.

But you have to ask yourself what you're trying to get out of all this.

I don't want to be a Powerlifter. I like speed and fighting ability. I also like looking good.

I like it when I can sprint up a long flight of stairs in seconds. How big my Quads are isn't all that important. I'd rather be able to sprint up a flight of stairs than have huge muscles with no athletic ability.

But I don't want to look like a bean-pole either.

A lot of people do want to look good...and there's nothing wrong with that at all.

But the goal of my program isn't just to look like a clipping out of a magazine.

I'll settle for looking like George St.Pierre, Matt Hughes, Randy Couture, or Rampage. Along with a decent amount of athletic ability.

amazing post... agree 100%

Just some food for thought...

I actually used to work as a mover when I was 19. At that time, I wasn't really fit or unfit (alright, more likely on the unfit side), just kinda the average late teen (drinking, partying etc). Not particulary strong or weak. Well, after a few weeks, I got pretty good at the job. The company I worked for hired some day labourers for a commercial move. One day labourer was huge. Definitely spent time in the gym. Of course, I can't judge how strong the guy was, but he was most definitely stronger then me. I can safely say that he could easy double or triple whatever I could have lifted in a gym (at that point, I never really lifted seriously). Thing is, I could move heavy stuff much much more efficiently then this guy. He was sweating and huffing, and I was taking 2 filing cabinets for every 1 he was. It wasn't a matter of strength. It was a matter of technique. So you can dead and squat a metric ton, but when it comes to doing practical things like moving, technique will make up for a lot.

I don't actually care how it "comes across"; It is important to understand that these levels are very far below anything which passes for impressive. For example, it is difficult to have an impressive deadlift - you have to be pulling at least close to three times your body weight if not more, before deadlifts become impressive. Let's be as realistic about that as we are about what is embarassing. According to the exrx standards, for a 165# man to have an "elite" deadlift he has to pull 518# (http://www.exrx.net/Testing/WeightLifting/DeadliftStandards.html). So make no mistake - there is a long, long distance between "embarassing" and "impressive". So it is hard to see where "ego" gets fed that much simply by avoiding embarassment.

you will almost surely have little (if anything) to be embarrassed about in a very short amount of time. The truth is that anyone with an embarrassing level of fitness, but otherwise healthy, will progress beyond the embarrassing stage very quickly on almost any reasonable program. That's actually what is embarrassing about the embarrassing level of lack of fitness - just like an impressive level of fitness is only maintained by constant application of serious effort, the embarrassing level of fitness can only be maintained by constant application of serious neglect.

Zen, You missed the point, you think someone should be embarrassed, while there are people like me that aren't embarrassed at all because I might not reach your standards. It is possible that the vast majority of forum members will not reach them. And they won't be embarrassed for not doing so, no matter how much you think they should. The elite in lifting, bodybuilding, or any major sport make up far less than 1% of the population.

I marvel at some of the things you do in your videos. I have never had the slightest desire to go down the path that you have chosen in weight training for my entire life and I am not embarrassed about it. As I assume you aren't embarrassed by not looking like a Franco Columbo. The same thing as I see it.

I lift because I like lifting. It's my hobby. None of my numbers would impress anyone, but they make me happy. I like the feeling of giving everything I've got to move some iron. It's fun!

I started out trying to look good for the sake of a little self-confidence. But the confidence came before I met my aesthetic goals, so I abandoned those goals in pursuit of moving heavier weights for fun. Life in general has just been easier and more enjoyable since getting stronger, which only encourages me to keep going.

I have appearance related motives, but women have nothing to do with it (not that men do, I just have no interest in a romantic relationship right now).

And as far as the embarrassment thing - screw social pressures. Embarrassment stems from not conforming to someone elses ideas of what you "should" be. Society tells me I should be embarrassed for all sorts of things, from my skin color to my beliefs. Well, society be damned, I'm happy as I am.

I have to agree with Rtestes. If someone felt I should be embarassed for what little weight I could left then I'd think they had a far too narrow focus in life. There is so much more to life than what you can lift. :)

I doubt it. Being lean is a modern thing. Big used to mean wealthy. You couldn't get big in any sense and not be relatively well off.

Actually muscular and tanned males meant low class in the last few hundred years as those tanned and muscular men were generally the laborers, not the upper class/nobility.

"Exercise" for gentlemen generally involved walks through gardens or sport hunting.
I'm pretty sure he recognizes this. He's comparing lean to big, which is a comparison between levels of body fat. In other words, "fat used to mean wealthy. You couldn't get fat in any sense and not be relatively well off." That last bit, of course, isn't always going to be true, but the fat laborers are going to be few and far between.

Zen, You missed the point, you think someone should be embarrassed, while there are people like me that aren't embarrassed at all because I might not reach your standards. It is possible that the vast majority of forum members will not reach them. And they won't be embarrassed for not doing so, no matter how much you think they should. The elite in lifting, bodybuilding, or any major sport make up far less than 1% of the population.

I marvel at some of the things you do in your videos. I have never had the slightest desire to go down the path that you have chosen in weight training for my entire life and I am not embarrassed about it. As I assume you aren't embarrassed by not looking like a Franco Columbo. The same thing as I see it.
Rtestes, respectfully, I have to disagree. I think you have missed the point. Reread this post by zen:

A 165# man who cannot squat 115#, or deadlift 135#.

A 165# man who cannot press 60#, or row 115#.

If that's you? Time to hit the weights.

Pretty much if you can squat or dead your 1.25 x BW then you don't have to be embarrassed. You still have a long way to go before you're strong, but it's not embarrassing.

There is absolutely no reason a healthy 165# male should not be able to achieve a 205# (1.25x BW) maximum squat or deadlift -- that's about eight reps with bodyweight on the bar. This is far from an amazing feat. It is a very basic level of physical fitness. While I don't know if someone who has not achieved this should be embarrassed, I do know that this accomplishment is achievable with a minimum amount of work.

Fucking awesome. :bow: :madpimp: :dreamy:

Agreed. Listen to Guava, she knows what she's talkin about.

Rtestes, respectfully, I have to disagree. I think you have missed the point. Reread this post by zen:

There is absolutely no reason a healthy 165# male should not be able to achieve a 205# (1.25x BW) maximum squat or deadlift -- that's about eight reps with bodyweight on the bar. This is far from an amazing feat. It is a very basic level of physical fitness. While I don't know if someone who cannot achieve this should be embarrassed, I do know that this accomplishment is achievable with a minimum amount of work.

The problem I have from the beginning is to say that if you don't lift this, you should be embarrassed. Not that you need improvement or you can quickly achieve it. But you should be embarrassed. That has aways been my point.

There are many that I have heard from over the years in PMs within the group that do not squat with bodyweight for reps. We tend to forget, we all aren't created equal in physical matters. His remark about the elite left the impression that They are in large number. If they were, they wouldn't be elite.

You know I have a fair size collection of fitness mags and books that I have picked up over the last 50 or so years. It is rare to see any of the name bodybuilders lifting real heavy weights. You look at their workouts, you won't see deadlifts mentioned very often. I wonder what brad Pitt lifts since a large number wants to look like him? Does he even deadlift? Hear what I am saying? What do people want to achieve? What should they do to achieve it? When should they be embarrassed?

BTW Chic, you are beginning to look good in your latest pictures. You might be a model for many. Somehow you have build a body doing a number of the compound exercises.

It is rare to see any of the name bodybuilders lifting real heavy weights.
It might be rare to see it in those magazines and books, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I don't think it's as rare as you think.

That last bit, of course, isn't always going to be true, but the fat laborers are going to be few and far between.

Then why do I always see fat peasants in movies set during medieval times? Oh yeah, checkmate baby.

The problem I have from the beginning is to say that if you don't lift this, you should be embarrassed. Not that you need improvement or you can quickly achieve it. But you should be embarrassed. That has aways been my point.


Would you also apply this logic to physical appearance as well? Just curious.....

Then why do I always see fat peasants in movies set during medieval times? Oh yeah, checkmate baby.
:lol:

It might be rare to see it in those magazines and books, but that doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I don't think it's as rare as you think.

I am sure they do or capable of doing it. I do have a book with a number of Zane's workouts showing his workouts, they were low weights except for the last set where he did 5 reps. I will have to look at it. He had no reason to lie about using low weights. They usually go to high side.

I am sure they do or capable of doing it. I do have a book with a number of Zane's workouts showing his workouts, they were low weights except for the last set where he did 5 reps. I will have to look at it. He had no reason to lie about using low weights. They usually go to high side.

How many times must it be said that its not a matter of the elite lifters and everyone needing to do multiple times their body weight? Smply that people, just as they shouldn't be overweight, shouldn't be frail and weak when it takes so little effort not to be. Frank Zane may not have been a world record setting powerlifter (mainly because he wasnt a powerlifter), but thats not to say he couldn't move weight around. The people in question are the ones that have let themselves reach a point where weights that are mere fractions of their own body are too much to tackle. It was totally baseless to bring a body builder lifting low weights as part of his routine into a conversation about people that do absolutely nothing and can barely do 1 rep of a weight far below their own body weight... or to put it into a realistic perspective, people that cant move a Tv or that might have trouble with a bag of dog food up a few flights of stairs. Lifting weights in the gym translates to Tvs and dog food in real life, or a car tire, or wood pellets, or groceries, or firewood... How about your house catches on fire and your 13 year old son is unconscious but you cant support 130 lbs in your arms or on your back... what do you do then? The point I'm trying to make, is that these low beginner weights are things that can and do come up in every day life and being frail and weak (by choice or lack of action) can hinder or make impossible these simple day to day tasks.

I am sure they do or capable of doing it. I do have a book with a number of Zane's workouts showing his workouts, they were low weights except for the last set where he did 5 reps. I will have to look at it. He had no reason to lie about using low weights. They usually go to high side.
I am sure some don't train heavy too. But your post said it was rare to see a big name bodybuilder training heavy, and I do not think it is quite so rare.

You mentioned "big name bodybuilders," but some of the biggest names are also known for putting up impressive weight. Ronnie, Arnold, Dorian, Franco, JOJ, Priest, just to name a few.

How many times must it be said that its not a matter of the elite lifters and everyone needing to do multiple times their body weight? Smply that people, just as they shouldn't be overweight, shouldn't be frail and weak when it takes so little effort not to be. Frank Zane may not have been a world record setting powerlifter (mainly because he wasnt a powerlifter), but thats not to say he couldn't move weight around. The people in question are the ones that have let themselves reach a point where weights that are mere fractions of their own body are too much to tackle. It was totally baseless to bring a body builder lifting low weights as part of his routine into a conversation about people that do absolutely nothing and can barely do 1 rep of a weight far below their own body weight... or to put it into a realistic perspective, people that cant move a Tv or that might have trouble with a bag of dog food up a few flights of stairs.
Yeah, we are getting a little off topic and I may be partially to blame, sorry. :)

Would you also apply this logic to physical appearance as well? Just curious.....

I try not to. It would be like saying- You look like a fat slob, at 5'7" you should be at least down to 165lbs. You should be embarrassed to walk down the street.


It would be better to say- it is very hard to maintain the proper Fat% if you exceed 200lbs and are less than 6ft. Lets look at what your height reflects in a weight table. You might want to take off some pounds and get to your "fighting weight". :tucool:

I try not to. It would be like saying- You look like a fat slob, at 5'7" you should be at least down to 165lbs. You should be embarrassed to walk down the street.


It would be better to say- it is very hard to maintain the proper Fat% if you exceed 200lbs and are less than 6ft. Lets look at what your height reflects in a weight table. You might want to take off some pounds and get to your "fighting weight". :tucool:

If you go through the media gallery and see the transformations that people who were overweight have undergone its amazing... Now do you think that is because someone gave them a sugar coated line about their fighting weight and offered them a hand, or because they were embarrassed to even look in the mirror or take their shirt off on a hot summer day? Think about that. The same would go for strength, how would it make you feel to not be able to accomplish simple tasks due to your lack of strength, that your peers can easily complete.

If you go through the media gallery and see the transformations that people who were overweight have undergone its amazing... Now do you think that is because someone gave them a sugar coated line about their fighting weight and offered them a hand, or because they were embarrassed to even look in the mirror or take their shirt off on a hot summer day? Think about that. The same would go for strength, how would it make you feel to not be able to accomplish simple tasks due to your lack of strength, that your peers can easily complete.



Are you saying tell them they should be embarrassed to walk down the street? They decided to be embarrassed or whatever, that is their choice. But to say they should be embarrassed by some standard is wrong.

I don't think anyone should be told they should be embarrassed. You might tell them a story about carrying their 130 lb 13 year old out of fire. Scare them. Or just get them to think about their problem.

Are you saying tell them they should be embarrassed to walk down the street? They decided to be embarrassed or whatever, that is their choice. But to say they should be embarrassed by some standard is wrong.

I don't think anyone should be told they should be embarrassed. You might tell them a story about carrying their 130 lb 13 year old out of fire. Scare them. Or just get them to think about their problem.

Embarrassment is something thats based one what other people think... If everyone accepted being 500 lbs, there wouldn't be any embarrassment in it. Whether you directly tell them or they recieve the message implicitly, the embarrassment is still there and is certainly not of their own choice. To answer the question, I'm all for minding my own business but if asked my opinion, I would tell them that I would be embarrassed to be in their condition, be it weakness or obesity. Its the real world we live in, not candy land.

Zen, You missed the point, you think someone should be embarrassed, while there are people like me that aren't embarrassed at all because I might not reach your standards.

I don't miss your point, I simply don't accept it.

I don't miss your point, I simply don't accept it.

Sometimes I sign on in hopes that you've posted something Zen.

Is it embarrassing when a guy who can bench 350lbs and likes to boast about his strength cos he thinks it makes him a big man then runs a mile from a fight cos he has less balls than a 12 year old school girl ??


I'd rather measure a guy by balls and character than what he can lift in a gym, which in any event as has already been pointed out has only very limited transference to real life situations.

Personally, I started working out for looks. Strength will come as the fat falls off. I am already quite a bit stronger now than when I started a few weeks ago. I can bench my bodyweight, but I'm not sure about squats or deads. My strength is low, and I'm working on building it. Until I get to that point, I just want below 10% BF. Considering I started in the low to mid-30s, and am now at the low 20s, I am making progress. But looks is definitely my main motivation at this point.

Fat is a relative thing....

A 500lb. Japanese Sumo wrestler isn't embarassed about his weight.

This the normal standard for them.

In European countries of old, thin women were regarded as "weak".

Fat laborers these days?.....there's more of them around than you can shake a stick at.

In a recent study it was shown that fat people survive disease better than thin people on average.

In nature, bears and other animals fatten up to super-obese proportions to help them get through winters. A ripped and shredded bear won't survive too long in that continual state.

By admission from some of the better known lifters here....if you're at 6% bodyfat, you'd better stay out of physical altercations due to intestinal/organ protective issues.

I doubt that the cavemen of old were at 6% bodyfat....simply because for unguaranteed survival in those times, 6% would be too risky for situations of food scarcity.

Am I sticking up for fat?...nope....tons of research demnstrates that obesity is bad for you in many ways regardless of whether you're embarrassed or not.

Ours is a visual impact society though basically. Looks speak volumes about the person.

If a friend of mine goes from normal to 150lbs. overweight, it won't change my friendship but it will be sending me a hoard of sub-concious messages (which will be negative).

Excessive fat on the average person immediately makes them look slobbish and lazy. It also says" I don't care about myself" or " I'm happy being a fat slob ".

I take an example like the singing group from back in the day called The Mamas and The Papas.

The female singer in that group (Cass Elliot (sp?)) was always obese and overweight it seemed. While she had a beautiful voice she was to me ,plain and simple, physically unattractive.

She might have been happy the way she was, but no amount of rationalizing and compassion and acceptance on my part could change the way I basically felt....which was:- "You're too damned fat!!".

If she didn't care about input like this from the public,well, that's fine for her. But the first visual message I got whenever I saw her was " Oh....you're one of those fat people that sits around all day and stuffs your face.."

Maybe if I'd been a 500lb. Sumo wrestler at the time I would have written her love letters.......:dreamy:

Is it embarrassing when a guy who can bench 350lbs and likes to boast about his strength cos he thinks it makes him a big man then runs a mile from a fight cos he has less balls than a 12 year old school girl ??


I'd rather measure a guy by balls and character than what he can lift in a gym, which in any event as has already been pointed out has only very limited transference to real life situations.


His strength is just one measure... Lifting alot won't solve all of your problems. Lifting weights doesn't make you smarter, reading a book doesn't make you stronger. If a strong person can't read, they should be embarrassed, If a smart person can't support their own body weight, they should be embarrassed. However as for fighting, its a pretty childish behaviour that doesnt really accomplish anything other than scraped knuckles and a black eye so in the situation of running from the fight even though he could bench 350 lbs, he must have also had some brains on him.

If fighting is "childish behaviour" then our society must indeed be sick as sick can be.

Is fighting "childish"? Or is it an ingrown part of the human psyche?

Everywhere adults are encouraged to participate in some kind of fight.

Fight for your rights,fight to win,fight the good fight (war)..

How many times have you heard the expression "I like him...he's a real fighter".

If fighting is childish, the average public isn't buying it...record sales attendance for every sport where somebody physically hits another in some way.

Even sports that aren't primarily pugilistic have players that are idolized for their brutality....NHL Hockey for one.

Big money in movies that feature one guy beating the crap out of another under the umbrella of righteousness.

Even kids movies feature fighting in a veiled form....Lord Of The Rings, Harry Potter etc.etc.

Fighting is surreptitiously fed to us on a daily basis by those that manipulate the culture...(media, television).

We hate bullying in schools...but at the same time we encourage our kids to "get out there in the game and take no crap...if you're hit, hit back".

If the kid is admonished by the ref, dad will jump in and attempt to smack the ref upside the head.

In the old days,Karate was considered a formidable form of fighting.

Now every kid on the block, girls and guys alike, is driven to karate school by soccer-moms that think nothing of it. Almost like a rite of passage.

One of the most popular cartoons of alltime (Popeye) was all about fighting. That's basically all he did every epeisode...retaliate against Brutus.

The message in that cartoon being....fighting is not childish or evil if you are doing it on the side of right. This the determining factor....it's o.k. to fight if you're right.

It's not about being childish...it's all about whether you're wearing the white hat it seems.

If a friend of mine goes from normal to 150lbs. overweight, it won't change my friendship but it will be sending me a hoard of sub-concious messages (which will be negative).If you have a hoard of negative sub-conscious messages going through your head about your friend, then it almost certainly changes your relationship with him.

Maybe if I'd been a 500lb. Sumo wrestler at the time I would have written her love letters.......:dreamy:Or maybe if you'd listened to the music on tape, LP or whatever format it came in, instead of going to the concerts, you would have written her love letters.

Deeply engrossed in my audio cocoon, I could absolutely see myself writing love letters to Meatloaf (http://www.kitchengardeners.org/pics/meatloaf01.03.06.JPG). "On a hot summer night...." :dreamy: Though he is far from my physical ideal, there are still a lot of things that are extremely sexy about him.

But you're probably right. It's a very few people who don't give their visual perception of someone greater weight than other characteristics. I was friends with a guy in University who once declared that "every woman looks good in spandex". It was a really weird thing to say, so I asked him for examples. He was able to describe exactly how the right items worn in the correct proportions can be particularly flattering. He had a gift for seeing beauty where others don't. (He was a musician, so maybe we have a theme here.;))

I'd rather measure a guy by balls and character than what he can lift in a gym, "Balls" don't mean much to me, and strength of character is measured differently by different people. I would call a person weak who resorts to physical confrontations in cases where conflicts could be resolved with cooperation or other nonviolent intervention. Sure, it's important for a man or a woman to be able to protect himself or herself, but the ability to win a randomly initiated physical fight is pretty much irrelevant where I'm concerned. It takes a stronger person to walk away.

...it's o.k. to fight if you're right.


A good thing to remember:

Don't pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he'll just kill you.

Sure, it's important for a man or a woman to be able to protect himself or herself, but the ability to win a randomly initiated physical fight is pretty much irrelevant where I'm concerned. It takes a stronger person to walk away.
Excellent point!

Looks. Strength is a bonus.

Both. But If I HAD to choose, I'd probably choose strength now that I'm married :lol:

Touche on the fighting comment, I would like to say, I draw a line between getting into a brawl with some dude and sports. For the most part of that post, I agree with you but just because humans have always fought doesnt mean they always need to, we also used to enslave other races, burn women at the stake, and drown witches.

To revisit my original post. I like to look good, but when I go to the weight room my goal week to week is to get better at every single lift I do, from bench to toe raises. 6 pack abs are totally useless to me unless I them by holding a 45 while doing sit ups... A big back, big legs, big shoulders, big arms, big neck all come from getting strong. Looks is my bonus, strength is my goal.

Guava...every woman does not look good in spandex believe me...and I'm a musician to a degree.

Of course the longer you stay in the bar and the more you drink, the better they look.

The fact that I might be harboring negative thoughts about my friend's colossal weight gain does not mean it's going to change my friendship.
I might be wishing he'd drop some blubber though.

If I only listened to Cass and started writing love letters and got a positive response, at some point I would have to see her in reality.

This would sort of be like a blind date, where previously you had only communicated with the person through channels that did not provide a visual reference.

So we meet at a cafe at a predetermined time. I walk around the corner from across the street and see this huge cellulite-encrusted female sitting at a table by herself.

My first thought is going to be:- "Please dear Lord....oh no...say it isn't so....."

My second thought will be:- " Well..I can't be so shallow as to immediately dismiss this encounter...so I'll go across the street and introduce myself and get to know the person"

Next:- a little voice someehere in the back of my head will be screaming "Abort!!!..you fool!!"

Next:- I will tell myself I'm bigger than just skulking away like a coward.

Next:- The voice will say "Bulls**t!.....cowardice has nothing to do with it....put your sunglasses on and look for the nearest taxi!!"

Then:- being ever the chivalrous do-gooder at heart I will go over and make the acquaintance, on my best behaviour. This is when I'll tell her
I love her voice and music and that I listen to it often on my Mp3 while I'm being treated at the clinic for Ebola,AIDS, and Herpes.

I will at all times during the conversation heap praise upon her for her work, at no time demeaning her in any way for her size. However I'll finish off with " due to my afflictions ,the doctor has only given me three months to live and I just wanted to meet you in person before I die..."

This would be the gentlemanly thing to do IMO....:o

Happy Monster...it doesn't take a stronger person to walk away. All it takes to walk away is knowing that if you don't, you'll get the tar wupped out of you. If you had the power to meet the threat you would then have options....the options would be determined by what you think your role in society is and also the legal ramifications involved.
If you retaliate,regardless of the outcome, you could end up in court with a charge of some kind, depending on what the witnesses who saw it say.
It would also depend on the situation. If somebody says something and you get into a fight, that's one thing. If your child is being abducted right in front of you, are you going to walk away from that?, Even if the guy doing it is big enough to wipe the floor with you?

While negotiation and patience plus a healthy sane adult attitude are totally desirable attributes, there are times in life now and again.........

Not that I'm condoning flying off the handle at every little thing....social skills are a very valuable asset.

"every woman looks good in spandex".

And a ponytail!

I started because of the health. I came to realize I would like to get stronger. I don't like the fact that looks started to matter as well (but they did).

I don't like the fact that looks started to matter as well (but they did).
Why don't you like that fact? I don't see anything wrong with wanting to look good. :cool: :)

Why don't you like that fact? I don't see anything wrong with wanting to look good. :cool: :)

Well, I always thought I'm above judging people by their looks, and suddenly I care about it that much as to invest so much effort into looking good myself (even though I DO realize I do it mostly for health and strength). It's just one of those things one has to adjust to, I guess, as one sheds some fat and gains some lean - like realizing you DON'T have to be cautious while bending over to pick something up from the floor, or while running some distance instead of walking - just for the heck of it.

Well, I always thought I'm above judging people by their looks, and suddenly I care about it that much as to invest so much effort into looking good myself (even though I DO realize I do it mostly for health and strength). It's just one of those things one has to adjust to, I guess, as one sheds some fat and gains some lean - like realizing you DON'T have to be cautious while bending over to pick something up from the floor, or while running some distance instead of walking - just for the heck of it.
Don't be hard on yourself. You can care about YOUR looks and still NOT judge others by theirs. I try to do that every day. :)

Don't be hard on yourself. You can care about YOUR looks and still NOT judge others by theirs. I try to do that every day. :)

Well, as I said, it's a new idea that takes some getting used to :). I'll get there in the end (possibly, once I see my abs :)).

Well, I used to get more dates when I was scrawny and 135 pounds, so I certainly don't work out for the looks. Don't get me wrong, I like keeping my body fat below 15 percent, and looking fit, but I'm not going for washboard abs or a model body.

For me, I like moving heavy weight. I like seeing numbers go up, up, up. I like being better at something than 95 percent of the population. I like to set goals and smash them. I like to improve myself. And I just like the feel of putting more than I weigh above my head and standing there with it. Now that's a sense of accomplishment


Plus, working out is fun, annd it's good for your mental health. I don't think I've been depressed or had so much as a depressing thought in years. Lifting makes me feel like a million bucks.