Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
> > No offense but I'm guessing your definition of muscular is rather low. I've been involved with sports/fitness/bodybuilding many years and have never encountered a natural female athlete who had 'huge' biceps. > > Link to these 'papers' ? > > Appearance alone does not reveal someone is using PEDs > > Go to a gym and the number of people (men/women) taking PEDs who don't look like they take PEDs will surprise you.
I can't link the papers since I read them like 5 years ago, if you don't want to trust me then it's fine, I don't have proof.
As for your other points. You're basing your "facts" on the people you see at the gym. These are people who go their with the intention of growing, they're the ones most likely to use PEDs. However, from my experience, the majority of muscular women don't go to the gym, they just develop their muscles by playing sports or working physical jobs. I'm not basing my judgement on looks, I'm basing it on logic. Why would someone who doesn't go to the gym want to risk the side effects of PEDs when their goal isn't to grow muscle?
My definition of muscular is bigger than the average man. I'm 5'10 160 lbs with 14 inch arms. This is textbook definition of an average man. If a women is bigger/stronger than me, then that's bigger/stronger than average.
My sister-in-law was borderline anorexic when I first met her 4 years ago. She never went to the gym and has no reason to take PEDs. But she spends most of her free time moving furniture and doing repairs around the house, and she's now the same size as the smaller figure competitors you see on here.
The PEDs mainly don't even increase muscle size. They mostly reduce body fat and increase muscle definition. Women with healthy levels of body fat (15-20%) who develop muscle naturally have big muscles but they lack the definition needed to compete. Because of this lack of definition it looks like they have developed muscles and at first glance you would just assume they're fat. But if you pay attention you'll notice their face, fingers, etc. are all skinny and only parts that are big are where there's developed muscles.
The same applies to men. Men who naturally develop muscles by doing physical work look "fat" because they don't have definition. But by paying attention, you notice they're not actually fat, they're just well built.
Basically what the kind of look I'm referring to is how powerlifters tend to look, but smaller.
You can't link the papers because they don't exist.
You gave away the game when you said that PEDs don't mainly increase muscle size. This is a good time to walk away from the discussion because you've proven beyond any doubt that you do not know what you're talking about.
Your claims about the frequency of natural, muscular women that you see are just comical. I've lived in Rio, I've lived in Miami, I've lived in Los Angeles. You know, places where you'd actually see a higher than average number of muscular women and even there, your claims don't hold water.
I'm honestly a bit stunned at just how much misinformation you've packed into one post. Kind of impressed tbh.
You can't link the papers because they don't exist.
You gave away the game when you said that PEDs don't mainly increase muscle size. This is a good time to walk away from the discussion because you've proven beyond any doubt that you do not know what you're talking about.
Your claims about the frequency of natural, muscular women that you see are just comical. I've lived in Rio, I've lived in Miami, I've lived in Los Angeles. You know, places where you'd actually see a higher than average number of muscular women and even there, your claims don't hold water.
I'm honestly a bit stunned at just how much misinformation you've packed into one post. Kind of impressed tbh.
I have coined that kind of thinking "schmoe logic"
For me I start losing interest when side effects start to become apparent.
There's probably a point where they're taking roids but I have no idea, as side effects aren't yet visible but they are getting a nicer physique as a result. Or, to use MSPaint:
this graph sums it all for me as well, this is the limit of real life and the reason why i like and draw musclegirls art.
in drawings, girls can have muscles and still look girly, which is the perfect fantasy in my mind.
I kinda like some -- and please note that "some" -- of the side effects. A deeper voice doesn't scare me, and I think with a little hair-care regimen, even Anastasia Korableva could have a decent look. Acne and roid-rage are a no-go, on the other hand. A lot of it comes down to genetics.
I don't know... I disagree with the idea that if a girl is stronger than an "average guy", she HAS to be on PEDs. I'm talking about an average guy... not those tiny guys in fetish videos. I'd say a theoretical girl who's 5'10 160lbs, works out 5-6 days/week for years and not on gear, will be stronger than a guy of the same size (or even 10-20lbs heavier) who doesn't work out. Assuming she eats the right food, takes the right supplements, etc. Everything short of PEDs. Obviously, if the guy starts working out a lot, he'd quickly catch up and overtake the girl in the strength department.
I can certainly agree with the idea that the (vast) majority of GWM here are on the gear. But to say that there's no such thing as a girl who gets really strong from just working out hard, I don't know if I can go that far as agreeing with that premise.
5'10 is not average for a woman.
GwM Possible to be natty
Big muscle = 0.0001% low fat = 0.0001% Big muscle + low fat = 0.00000000000001%
You can’t just make up two numbers then multiply them and expected to be anything. You’re also not accounting for the fact that the same genes that might cause that are muscle growth also have a tendency to make you leaner.
I agree that most of the women here may be on supplements. But it’s not as hyperbolically rare as you’re suggesting.
I voted natty, however a woman can use PEad if she wants and I would date her as long as she stays feminine. Too many deep voices and manly features on some ladies. I wouldn't date anyone that uses PEDs to that extent.
To all the guys saying, "I would date her", either way, can you give one good reason why she would date YOU?
To all the guys saying, "I would date her", either way, can you give one good reason why she would date YOU?
You say that as if stalking them on instagram isn't enough
Someone needs to post a poll asking what percentage of GWM members are socially awkward. I’d hazard a guess based on some of the comments and questions posted that it approaches 40-45%!
Lol that’s mean.
And nothing wrong with being socially awkward, but there is a different with being awkward, and being completely unable to talk to women as anything other than a fetish object. I dare say that quite a few members here have trouble with that particular matter
The problem with this poll is that it's binary: it's either roids or not. My preference graph is similar to Chainer's, but the upward part of the line would go a little farther past the side effects line, and then would drop off a little less steeply. For instance, Aimee Cringle's face has been getting a bit harder and sharper lately; this combined with the fact that she's getting very thick through the chest make me believe that she must be taking at least small quantities of drugs. That being said, she still looks very feminine, so I don't mind. Same thing with Slava Galagan: her face may be 5% less attractive then it was before she started taking drugs and her arms are somewhat hairier, but she's so incredibly beautiful that those don't matter much, and are more than compensated for by the 300% increase in the attractiveness of her body. There are also some women (shan't name names here) who didn't have very pretty faces to begin with, so I don't care so much if they get manly if I like what they do with their bodies. There are definitely some women, however, who were very pretty to begin with but have overdone the drugs and are no longer very attractive even if they have ripped bodies.
As far as awkwardness and schmoeing and stalking and so forth, I am under no illusions about my chances of even meeting any of these women, much less being attractive to them. This is totally about fantasy, and so I don't mind if the way that fantasy has been produced is somewhat artificial (although as I've said before, I will also never complain about a woman giving up drugs if she doesn't like the effects they have on her.) Of course, pictures of traditionally hot models are also often quite artificial, given all of the plastic surgery, makeup, lighting, digital editing, etc. that goes on.
this graph sums it all for me as well, this is the limit of real life and the reason why i like and draw musclegirls art.
in drawings, girls can have muscles and still look girly, which is the perfect fantasy in my mind.
Those first few years when they achieve peak musculature and before the roids destroy their facial attractiveness are best. Some women show no signs, others you can see changes immediately. But eventually so many overdo it
As I've mentioned elsewhere, Ana Leonova's face, for instance, is really starting to puff up. But for me, the question is whether it's roids or simply getting older.
Same thing with Slava Galagan: her face may be 5% less attractive then it was before she started taking drugs and her arms are somewhat hairier, but she's so incredibly beautiful that those don't matter much, and are more than compensated for by the 300% increase in the attractiveness of her body.
Slava is a very interesting case in my view. Right now she's still quite attractive and she's got one of the prettiest faces and smiles on GWM. Just hope roids doesn't ruin it.
Ok, well, all of that is wrong. The entire paragraph. Just so you know.