[quote]bigmike88 wrote:
p.s. im going for more of the brad pitt in “fight club” physique…which i dont think anyone in this forum can make fun of in any way…[/quote]
Oh… oh, geez, kid. You’re even newer than I am, aren’t you? 
Given some of the threads from just a couple months back, that statement rates Comedy Gold.
haha well obviously my goals dont fit your approval but thats okay…to each his own, right?..at least i have goals unlike most kids my age lol give me some credit =/
[quote]bigmike88 wrote:
haha well obviously my goals dont fit your approval but thats okay…to each his own, right?..at least i have goals unlike most kids my age lol give me some credit =/[/quote]
Exactly!
People have different goals.
Not everyone wants to be a bodybuilder.
Really.
Deal with it.
If a guy like to run marathons and weight 150 lbs, well more power to him.
If a guy wants to be a cut 170 lbs, that is great.
People are different. They want different things.
Deal with it, seriously.
Unless the guys are being pricks mind your own business.
Here’s my $.02 (or a little rant, whatever you want to call it)
There is always some degree of fitness or personal appearance fad in the US, usually fed by Hollywood and the other media.
1920s-Girls with small breasts were considered the most physically attractive. I’m not knocking it, but that goes against most male instinct. I know the saying “More than a mouthful’s a waste”, but really…I mean, come on, most men want at least a pair of C cups staring back at them.
1940s-Hard to judge since most of our Alpha Males were killing Nazis, Fascist Italians or Imperial Japanese. Only be offended if you are a Nazi, a Fascist, or Imperialist. Way to go Grandpa.
1960s-Lots of testosterone-killing pot smoking and lack of hygiene was the pop fashion. Smoking enough pot causes man boobs (the 1920s guy may have been pleased with his own set of A cups). Once again, lots of alpha males overseas. Way to go Dad and Uncle Ted. No further comment on that topic.
1970s-Triple-canopy-jungle hair below the belt. Hmm, I think not.
1980s-Who’s popular? Coked out skinny dudes and Flock of Seagulls. Of course, developing alpha males could look up to men like Mark Gastineau, until the point where Red Sonja messed up his life. I know…I’m gonna get flamed by the Jets haters and the Red Sonja lovers. Whatever.
1990s-Who’s popular? Smacked out skinny dudes on heroin. By the way, where is my Nevermind CD?
But look, what is the real constant?
Strong men have always been at the top of desirability for most women and admired by other men in a non-gay way regardless of what passing mold Hollywood or other media try to sell. Take all the body builders from the 60s-on for example. I won’t name any, cause someone will flame me for not mentioning their personal favorite. (Somebody will probably flame me for not mentioning anybody. You’re right, I suck. Whatever.) I digress.
For another example, look at Cromagnon and Neanderthal. Whether women admit it or not, they are programmed instinctively to want big “mate-worthy” alpha-males. Yes, I know Neanderthals died out. But recent evidence shows it was because they simply were so ripped, strong and testosterone driven, no females of the species could withstand the process of mating with them. Many younger females today just haven’t developed this instinct, or they have some daddy issue…“I hate my dad and he’s a big and in shape, so I’m gonna let this skinny kid do me to get even.” or worse “My daddy is so fat and lazy, but Billy is so thin, well defined and energetic, he’s better than my dad.”
It’s actually fine with me if the pre-18 year olds don’t get the whole Alpha Male thing, cause the last thing this 36 y/o needs is yet another infatuated jailbait neighbor girl hounding me on her bike while I do walking lunges with a 135lb BB up and down the street. (Yes, that’s a joke. It’s more like 185)
My point; this is a fad, let it go. There will be another one in a few years that will be just as annoying. If we continue to get and stay strong as Alpha Male studs with 15% or less BF and able to lift multiples of our body weight, we will continue to be considered the truly dominant specimens of our species.
Plus, the little guys will never try doing bar curls on the squat rack in the middle of our sets. It helps that I mark it lion-style as soon as I get to the gym (urine and a freshly-killed half-eaten gazelle draped over the bar).
Lastly, ALL BIO-TEST PRODUCTS ARE AWESOME AND EVERYBODY SHOULD TAKE EVERYTHING! There, now I know TC and all the other T-Nation high-priests will support my post on this.
It would be my sincere hope that if you are over 35, age and experience would allow you the good grace to let them get on with it.
You are not supposed to “get it”…you are too old!
Ran
[quote]thuderliger7134 wrote:
People have different goals.
Not everyone wants to be a bodybuilder.
Really.
Deal with it.
If a guy like to run marathons and weight 150 lbs, well more power to him.
If a guy wants to be a cut 170 lbs, that is great.
People are different. They want different things.
Deal with it, seriously.
Unless the guys are being pricks mind your own business.
[/quote]
This is a bodybuilding forum. Naturally, on a bodybuilding forum, bodybuilding will actually be emphasized. This is no different than discussing the supremely obese people walking around Walmart.
No, it does not make sense to go to the gym on a regular basis to look like Eminem. If that look takes that much time and effort, there is something either wrong with you or your ability to simply get out of bed under your own control.
[quote]Patrick Williams wrote:
Smoking enough pot causes man boobs (the 1920s guy may have been pleased with his own set of A cups).
[/quote]
Hahahaha, this is hilarious! Where did you get this tid bit of shit info?
[quote]BIGRAGOO wrote:
Patrick Williams wrote:
Smoking enough pot causes man boobs (the 1920s guy may have been pleased with his own set of A cups).
Hahahaha, this is hilarious! Where did you get this tid bit of shit info?[/quote]
Larsen: Williams Textbook of Endocrinology, 10th ed., Copyright ? 2003 Saunders, An Imprint of Elsevier, p 1187
Harmon J, Aliapoulios MA. Gynecomastia in marihuana user. N Engl J Med 1972; 287:936?1080.
And it reduces testosterone levels read;
Kolodny RC, Masters WH, Kolodner RM, et al. Depression of plasma testosterone levels after chronic intensive marihuana use. N Engl J Med 1974; 290:872?874.
Mendelson 1974; Vescovi 1992
Life Sci. 1985 Oct 14;37(15):1425-33.
Effects of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol on testosterone production in vitro: influence of Ca++, Mg++ or glucose.
Dalterio S, Bartke A, Mayfield D.
There are contadictory opinions out there, of course.
Perhaps we could ask one of the in-house T-Nation guys to chime in. David Barr? Chad Waterbury? Dr. Berardi-with Canadian experience, surely he has an opinion. Anyone?
[quote]Patrick Williams wrote:
BIGRAGOO wrote:
Patrick Williams wrote:
Smoking enough pot causes man boobs (the 1920s guy may have been pleased with his own set of A cups).
Hahahaha, this is hilarious! Where did you get this tid bit of shit info?
Larsen: Williams Textbook of Endocrinology, 10th ed., Copyright ? 2003 Saunders, An Imprint of Elsevier, p 1187
Harmon J, Aliapoulios MA. Gynecomastia in marihuana user. N Engl J Med 1972; 287:936?1080.
And it reduces testosterone levels read;
Kolodny RC, Masters WH, Kolodner RM, et al. Depression of plasma testosterone levels after chronic intensive marihuana use. N Engl J Med 1974; 290:872?874.
Mendelson 1974; Vescovi 1992
Life Sci. 1985 Oct 14;37(15):1425-33.
Effects of delta 9-tetrahydrocannabinol on testosterone production in vitro: influence of Ca++, Mg++ or glucose.
Dalterio S, Bartke A, Mayfield D.
There are contadictory opinions out there, of course.
Perhaps we could ask one of the in-house T-Nation guys to chime in. David Barr? Chad Waterbury? Dr. Berardi-with Canadian experience, surely he has an opinion. Anyone?
[/quote]
Hell, I have posted research on this several times and no recent studies past the 70’s have found any negative effect on testosterone levels. That leads me to believe that earlier studies were biased. That isn’t surprising considering the “Marijuana Madness” media of the time period.
I am trying to understand how kids/men can look at these figures and want to be that way?
What ever happened to wanting to be built, wanting to be massive?
I am in the “Brad Pitt” generation, I seen all the girls go goey over his abs and massive 145 lb frame. Yet, I still had a desire to be the guy that walked into a room and everyone said to themselves, we better not fuck with him.
Just trying to understand new kids.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Hell, I have posted research on this several times and no recent studies past the 70’s have found any negative effect on testosterone levels. That leads me to believe that earlier studies were biased. That isn’t surprising considering the “Marijuana Madness” media of the time period. [/quote]
Funny, while you were responding to this, I was reading your well thought out and well stated remarks from Jul 05.
http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=678890
You are clearly intelligent and adept at accessing clinical research. There are studies from the 80s which suggest depressed T levels from THC use, but I have not found anything more recent in a cursory web search. I can’t argue with your point without them. You conclude the earlier studies are biased. Maybe. Maybe the newer studies are. Who am I to say.
That said, don’t let me keep you or anyone else from firing up a bud or lighting up a bowl before, during and after your training. It’s your business. If it doesn’t cause you to lose lean mass, have FLKs, or any other side effects, then have fun.
Does anybody know any well known body builder (not chemically enhanced) who regularly uses pot? Canadians? Dutch? Germans? I’d look forward to checking out their stats.
Anyway, what the hell was this thread originally about?
[quote]Patrick Williams wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Hell, I have posted research on this several times and no recent studies past the 70’s have found any negative effect on testosterone levels. That leads me to believe that earlier studies were biased. That isn’t surprising considering the “Marijuana Madness” media of the time period.
Funny, while you were responding to this, I was reading your well thought out and well stated remarks from Jul 05.
http://www.T-Nation.com/readTopic.do?id=678890
You are clearly intelligent and adept at accessing clinical research. There are studies from the 80s which suggest depressed T levels from THC use, but I have not found anything more recent in a cursory web search. I can’t argue with your point without them. You conclude the earlier studies are biased. Maybe. Maybe the newer studies are. Who am I to say.
That said, don’t let me keep you or anyone else from firing up a bud or lighting up a bowl before, during and after your training. It’s your business. If it doesn’t cause you to lose lean mass, have FLKs, or any other side effects, then have fun.
Does anybody know any well known body builder (not chemically enhanced) who regularly uses pot? Canadians? Dutch? Germans? I’d look forward to checking out their stats.
Anyway, what the hell was this thread originally about?
[/quote]
I think you would be surprised to know that I don’t smoke and never have. I simply see no point in it being illegal and am not blind to friends I have had in the past who have engaged in the activity, most of which are successful.
[quote]maxx power wrote:
I am trying to understand how kids/men can look at these figures and want to be that way?
What ever happened to wanting to be built, wanting to be massive?
I am in the “Brad Pitt” generation, I seen all the girls go goey over his abs and massive 145 lb frame. Yet, I still had a desire to be the guy that walked into a room and everyone said to themselves, we better not fuck with him.
Just trying to understand new kids.
[/quote]
I bet if a survey was taken, 95% of women of all ages would prefer a man with a “Brad Pitt” build than a Mr.O build. Besides, Brad looked pretty good in Troy. Why don’t you see really muscular guys on the cover of magazines (except muscle mags) or in advertising? Because it’s not a popular look. Sure, a muscular guy will attract attention (but mostly from other guys), but the lean and athletic look still gets the women excited. Yes, this is a bodybuilding website, but I’d rather be 170lbs with abs than 200lbs and a gut. Just my opinion.
Great last 2 responses. Finally back on topic.
OP was regarding Eminem wannabes. None of the Eminem wannabes have the build of Pitt in either Troy (great shot) or Fight Club. Granted, yes he’s lean, and relatively not as massive compared to other admired guys on this site, but he still isn’t in bad shape when he’s shooting a movie. I agree, I’d rather be 170 with a 6-8 pack than a gut. I’d really rather be 210 with a 6-8 pack, and the shoulders, thighs, lats and everything else.
There is more to it than just the physique. There’s style, class, the way you speak, dress, the job, a few material things, etc. When the girls “go gooey”, it’s because he APPEARS to have all the rest going for him, too.
I’d submit, a 8-10% BF guy weighing 210’ish, strong enough to lift at least 1200lbs in the big-3, who treats a lady right, treats other people right, and is intelligent (even if uneducated) would have Pitt or anyone else outdone in the desirability department. Once again, I am only speaking of adult, intelligent women worthy of this quality of a man. They are the challenges to impress. As far as impressing guys, if you’re not in a popularity contest, who cares what other men think.
Also on this topic. I think it’s mostly the high-maintenance women and drama queens who really like a smaller guy. Bigger guys are often mistakenly thought of as spending 4 hours or so a day in the gym. Also, a built, Alpha Male, savvy guy is going to appear as if he is somewhat in control of his surroundings, especially of himself; not swayed by whatever whim some cutie has. A high maint/drama queen doesn’t want those qualities. They want a lap hound who will cater to them and partake of their shallow daily drama. Unless they see him as a ride at the amusement park. Like the personal trainer who makes home consultations. They’re there for fun.
As for me, I’m still stuck at getting to the 1200 pounds and 10% BF. For the rest of you, have fun playing personal trainer.
Just wondering… all you muscle studs with 19 inch arms…what’s the ratio of guys to girls that come up to you and want to touch your arms? I ask because a friend of mine is freakin’ huge and ripped (his arms are unreal). He goes to the bars and it’s the guys who always come up to him and say “dude, your arms are awesome!”. Girls could care less.
Overall, if you’re trying to impress girls, personality will beat musculature every time (unless you’re a big fat sweaty slob). Combine muscles and personality for best results. Even the shallow girls want a little personality.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Just wondering… all you muscle studs with 19 inch arms…what’s the ratio of guys to girls that come up to you and want to touch your arms? I ask because a friend of mine is freakin’ huge and ripped (his arms are unreal). He goes to the bars and it’s the guys who always come up to him and say “dude, your arms are awesome!”. Girls could care less.
Overall, if you’re trying to impress girls, personality will beat musculature every time (unless you’re a big fat sweaty slob). Combine muscles and personality for best results. Even the shallow girls want a little personality. [/quote]
Women make comments and approach me a lot. Guys may make comments from far off or ask me what I do in the gym, but girls are the only ones who grab. I don’t know what world you guys are living in where women don’t like muscle mass. I will add that the super ripped look will probably turn some women off because you look either high maintenance or like you ONLY care about lifting. I’m not “ripped” and women don’t seem to give a shit.
[quote]PGJ wrote:
Just wondering… all you muscle studs with 19 inch arms…what’s the ratio of guys to girls that come up to you and want to touch your arms? I ask because a friend of mine is freakin’ huge and ripped (his arms are unreal). He goes to the bars and it’s the guys who always come up to him and say “dude, your arms are awesome!”. Girls could care less.
Overall, if you’re trying to impress girls, personality will beat musculature every time (unless you’re a big fat sweaty slob). Combine muscles and personality for best results. Even the shallow girls want a little personality. [/quote]
I dunno, my cousin has decent size compared to most kids his age and he gets attention from all types - jealous guys and infatuated women. I’m not saying he’s huge or anything.
I’ve given up complaining about other guys and how they act in the gym and out. My friend and I now just shout “METRO!” at every guy we see wearing a pink article of cloting. It’s great, Londoners are the most placid people ever - no one ever says anything back - they just keep walking ;).
[quote]Patrick Williams wrote:
Great last 2 responses. Finally back on topic.
OP was regarding Eminem wannabes. None of the Eminem wannabes have the build of Pitt in either Troy (great shot) or Fight Club. Granted, yes he’s lean, and relatively not as massive compared to other admired guys on this site, but he still isn’t in bad shape when he’s shooting a movie. I agree, I’d rather be 170 with a 6-8 pack than a gut. I’d really rather be 210 with a 6-8 pack, and the shoulders, thighs, lats and everything else.
There is more to it than just the physique. There’s style, class, the way you speak, dress, the job, a few material things, etc. When the girls “go gooey”, it’s because he APPEARS to have all the rest going for him, too.
I’d submit, a 8-10% BF guy weighing 210’ish, strong enough to lift at least 1200lbs in the big-3, who treats a lady right, treats other people right, and is intelligent (even if uneducated) would have Pitt or anyone else outdone in the desirability department. Once again, I am only speaking of adult, intelligent women worthy of this quality of a man. They are the challenges to impress. As far as impressing guys, if you’re not in a popularity contest, who cares what other men think.
Also on this topic. I think it’s mostly the high-maintenance women and drama queens who really like a smaller guy. Bigger guys are often mistakenly thought of as spending 4 hours or so a day in the gym. Also, a built, Alpha Male, savvy guy is going to appear as if he is somewhat in control of his surroundings, especially of himself; not swayed by whatever whim some cutie has. A high maint/drama queen doesn’t want those qualities. They want a lap hound who will cater to them and partake of their shallow daily drama. Unless they see him as a ride at the amusement park. Like the personal trainer who makes home consultations. They’re there for fun.
As for me, I’m still stuck at getting to the 1200 pounds and 10% BF. For the rest of you, have fun playing personal trainer.[/quote]
yup! what he said.
Considering that something like 1 in 3 kids in this country are overweight or obese, I suppose it’s at least good that these kids are in the gym at all.