Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Of course this site ruined my expectations. Before GWM , if i see a hint of muscle in a girl I got excited. Now unless I don't see Lindmark/Galagan proportions I don't feel anything. There are many fit girls at my gym that 10 years ago I would have fallen in love with but now I only consider them above average
I think so. If I met a girl twenty years ago who had the muscularity of today’s bikini pros, I would have been totally agog. But now I feel like they are a little small for my tastes. I think my standard for what I consider to be muscular is set at Figure-level. It’s shameful that I have become so shallow.
I'm sure this site and others like it, definitely screw with our expectations. I've had relationships with women however, who never did PEDs and developed a considerable amount of muscle. Not to the level of many of these women but easily enough to keep me interested.
I grew up in an era, when muscular girls in my high school, were teased and made fun of. They obviously had great genetics and excelled in sports. I'll never forget a girl who sat in front of me with amazing, peaked biceps, in the 9th grade. There is no way she did PEDs.
Nearly all of what we're exposed to, in regard to muscular women is visual. If you find your self in a relationship with a woman who does lift, at least somewhat seriously, you'll be more than happy with her results. Maybe she won't be huge and ripped but feeling her firm, hard muscle can't help but make you happy.
Desiring buffed women period...has messed me up more than this site ever could. The way I'm wired, a woman with zero muscle, no matter how beautiful, just won't do it for me. On the other hand, a plain looking woman, with muscles, who wouldn't get any interest from nearly everyone else, would get my complete interest.
Resounding yes and not just this site, pretty much the internet in general.
The answer to the question seems to be yes for a lot of members. I wasn't aware this was so much of a thing until I became more active here on GWM and started reading the comments. Sometimes I feel like I'm swimming upstream whenever I point this out because in my mind I still compare all of these ladies to the average woman I might see around town. Recently I've just been biting my tongue thinking that its not worth the effort of pointing out that a woman who works out for health isn't going to look like a competitor.
When it comes to PEDs, it's can be broken down to bulk and leaness. This isn't as true for guys, but it's a rule of thumb that I've learned over the years. Women who can genetically gain muscle mass fairly easily have a hard time getting very lean without some chemical assistance, and women who are naturally leaner and slimmer can naturally get their bodies fairly lean(near competitor lean) with the proper diet, but have a hard time gaining real mass... without chemical assistance.
I've dated a few ladies who worked out seriously and like a previous poster said, feeling that muscle, natural or not is a whole experience all by itself. A woman doesn't have to be striated lean or muscle monster huge to get me excited comparing how her body feels with what's "normal". I've dated exactly 2 women who I know for a fact used some performance enhancers, one to gain mass and the other to lose fat. Both had dreams to competing on stage one day.
I've also dated women who on this site wouldn't be thought of as muscular at all, but I can still get interested in hints of muscle. Heck I wrote a whole story about that years ago. I've said it before, but every now and then its good to stop, look around at the world outside of our favorite niche and realize just how niche it is. And while you're look around, take a moment to appreciate just how hard the ladies featured on this site work and what they sacrifice to look the way they do.
As I stated earlier. If the woman in your life is firm and hard, regardless of the level of muscle, you should be thrilled. I dated one woman who had fantastic calves but no muscle anywhere else. Another woman used her hands a lot in her job and developed muscular forearms but no real muscle elsewhere. Both women were very exciting to me because I could actually touch my hot spots and not just watch someone online. Incidently, both of them thought I was a wacko for getting turned on by their muscles but at the same time we're very flattered and accommodating!!
No. 90% of these women are on PEDs, which are not easy for normal people to get access to, and few normies would ever think of taking them, even if they are into working out. I find that I am still plenty interested on women in real life. It would be nice if more took up bodybuilding, but a muscle that is toned from merely regular exercise is still enough to get me excited in real life.
Yes, but so does everything else nowadays.
Anime, instagram, other social media, etc does almost as much IMO.
Your question reminds me of the whole "violent crime in video games causes violent crime in the real world" argument. Very simply put, it doesn't. That's been debunked.
People are able to discern fantasy from real life.
Those that say they can't are either lying, mentally ill, or some combination of both.
The femuscle community has always had people that are in it for the roleplay fantasy and are unwilling to ever break character. They fit one of the three above categories. They also come with varying degrees of unreality.
Remove them from the equation and you may never have had this question occur to you in the first place. Effectively, their presence creates it's own form of gaslighting. It can skew your own perception of how an interest in femuscle affects the lives of others. Don't let yourself be gaslit.
Violent crime in video games doesn't make people commit violent crimes in real life. The people that commit violent crimes would do so regardless of ever having played a video game.
Seeing femuscle, or "morphs", or giant breast implants, or supermodels, or a brown wart over the left eyebrow, or whatever else someone sees on the Internet is understood for the fantasy that it is by any reasonably sane person... and it's pointless to make any evaluation based on anyone not reasonably sane.
I like what I like. I don't consider my preference for femuscle a fetish anymore than someone else that prefers green eyes.
This could've been a site and forum dedicated to Girls With Green Eyes. Would you have asked the same question about being ruined by green eyes on the GWGE forum? (Green eyes are the rarest. Only 2% of the population. By contrast, even counting only women that juice is greater than 2% of the general populous. (Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations... ))
People are able to discern fantasy from real life.
This isn't a apples to apples comparison since this isn't a video game or a movie. These are real flesh and blood women. Michaela Aycock really can get that ripped. Andrea Shaw really does have those proportions, even if you saw them face to face with your own two eyeballs. The only things the pictures don't easily show when it comes down to it is height and relative size unless there is something or someone else to compare them to. Morphing and other photo manipulation isn't allowed and is weeded out as best as possible on GWM, so the women on this site are women you could actually meet and and interact with. For instance I could meet Sigourney Weaver, but I could never meet Ripley.
thankfully i am able to separate online from real life. i see a fine looking woman in real life who may not even be muscular (even though muscles are such a fetish of mine) and i still find her attractive enough to make the effort to talk to her. of course, however, i would much rather these online girls show up more often in my life. i've only ever been blessed enough to see 4/5 GWM sized girls in person.
Unrealistic expectations are definitely created, especially in regard to what constitutes a "muscular" physique, and where natty limits lie.
In both cases, seeing a certain type of physique all the time has a normalizing effect. As a result, the baseline of what is "normal" goes higher and higher, and what would have been described and perceived as an "outstanding physique" twenty years ago is rather mundane or lackluster today. This goes hand in hand with PED usage, as in order to meet such higher standards, PED use is required. At the same time, there is often the "common sense" assumption that not everybody can be on PEDs, and when physiques of a certain level are ubiquituous, people tend to assume that these physiques are still within natty limits, and only the likes of Chris Bumstead would have to resort to PEDs to attain them.
This of course makes matters particularly dire for actual natty lifters, as their nominally impressive physiques are perceived as unimpressive (including by themselves), in turn increasing the incentive to hop on gear eventually, just to satisfy these warped (and often self-induced) perceptions. Inexperienced lifters in particular may be puzzled how they have such a hard time replicating the physiques of all those "natty" lifters, potentially discouraging them from taking natty lifting any further.
In short, the unrealistic expectations extend to several levels: In regard to what an individual lifter can achieve naturally, what can be achieved naturally objectively, and which percentage of the physiques available online are enhanced or not enhanced. The only ones typically able to see through this are the experienced lifters, who are more likely to understand the implications and limits of muscle building. However, given that there is a never ending supply of inexperienced lifters (or non-lifters altogether), I feel that this cycle will continue indefinitely.
Maybe if you are low IQ or live in a place with many fbbs .but in my entire life i have seen 1 or Maybe 2 women who would be worthy of being on this site and they are on the low end .one was too busy to talk to me .i saw the other one when i was a kid and i am not sure if it was even real since i was too young. so i know women like this are super rare and they are spread all over the world.
Yes, but so does everything else nowadays.
Anime, instagram, other social media, etc does almost as much IMO.
THIS.
We're drowning in unrealistic expectations due to highly curated and intentional social media.
In terms of GWM and muscle women content on Instagram: you're absolutely right. I train at Golds in Venice Beach, which might have the biggest population of "girls with muscle" out of any gym. And even there, I might see five or six women in total who could be on this site. Most of the members are just "normal" women.
But spending a lot of time on social media will also convince you that other people are unrealistically happy, wealthy, and successful. It's an exaggeration at best and an outright lie at worst.
In my case I can say "not really."
My girl works out but I know she'll never me at the level of girls on this site. I don't "expect" that from her. I just appreciate that she makes an effort to keep fit because she has a full time job that means that she is simply not able to dedicate her life to having a "perfect" body. I work out so as long as I continue to, I believe she'll try to be on par with me and that's enough for me.
I'll also add that I appreciate any woman who works out regardless of what level they are at. If she's ripped then yay I guess but after dating a few fitness instructors, I can say that fantasy does not equal reality.
This isn't a apples to apples comparison since this isn't a video game or a movie. These are real flesh and blood women. Michaela Aycock really can get that ripped. Andrea Shaw really does have those proportions, even if you saw them face to face with your own two eyeballs. The only things the pictures don't easily show when it comes down to it is height and relative size unless there is something or someone else to compare them to. Morphing and other photo manipulation isn't allowed and is weeded out as best as possible on GWM, so the women on this site are women you could actually meet and and interact with. For instance I could meet Sigourney Weaver, but I could never meet Ripley.
*facepalm*
I honestly can't remember the last time someone so completely failed to understand what I wrote. I find it very hard to believe you misunderstood, and instead I suspect you intentionally misrepresented what I said... though I'm unsure what you thought doing so accomplished.
Obviously the women on GWM are real people, just as women with green eyes are real people. But femuscle is a small percentage of the general populous... green eyed women are an even smaller percentage than femuscle. Giant breast implants, and supermodels are also a small percentage of the population.
Any rarity that is featured and amplified on the Internet is a fantasy. Why? Because you're far less likely to encounter the rarities, and even less likely to ever hookup with a woman with green eyes, femuscle, giant breast implants, or a supermodel. The improbability of the hookup means you most likely can only... and here's that word... fantasize about having sex with any of these rarities.
"Morphs" was another example of fantasy... of unreality. No human can ever attain the proportions of a "morph". It is a fantasy that is not merely improbable, but impossible. You understood I wasn't implying that the femuscle women on GWM were "morphed", just as you understood that none of them are supermodels. Funny how you didn't try claiming that I was calling the women on GWM supermodels as you did about "morphs". You also didn't defend women with green eyes as being real people. You were cherry picking because you thought you'd sound clever. Oops. You failed.
And as for it not being "a video game or movie". It's not. But video games and movies are improbable or impossible fantasy, femuscle is improbable fantasy... and sometimes they meet with realistic femuscle being featured in video games or movies.
Rachel McLish was in Pumping Iron II (nonfiction), and also in Iron Eagle II (fiction). And yes, she's real and you can meet her. But good luck getting her to have sex with you... except, you know, in your fantasies.
Gran Turismo is a video game simulation of race car driving. You can play it all day, every day, and never be good enough to become an actual race car driver. It's fantasy. But for Jann Mardenborough, fantasy became reality because while his fantasy was improbable, it wasn't impossible.
You started your reply by quoting me:
phenoms:
People are able to discern fantasy from real life.
Then you ended your reply by proving me correct:
demented20:
For instance I could meet Sigourney Weaver, but I could never meet Ripley.
Interesting discussion...here is an article published in 2020...I will try to find something more recent.
Your question reminds me of the whole "violent crime in video games causes violent crime in the real world" argument. Very simply put, it doesn't. That's been debunked.
Can you provide us with an article or paper which supports your claim Phenoms. From what I have found so far, the exact opposite to your claim appears to be the current concensus.
I have noticed that every so often a "natty or not" topic will be created which will of course generate intense discussion. It's sometimes worded as "who on the site is actually natty?" or, most recently, "Which women would be mistaken as natty?" but the result is always the same: the same posters (usually those with a background in lifting and strength sports) will say that the vast majority of women here are not natty, other posters will insist that they are wrong and don't "acknowledge" genetics and dedications, and other posters will post pictures of a clearly enhanced woman and claim that they are natty "because they still look feminine" with basically no minds changed.
Which leads me to wonder: do sites like this generate unrealistic expectations on what is achievable naturally, along with the effort it takes to get the physiques like we see from the ladies featured here? It makes me think of social media algorithms: if you are into muscular women, then Instagram/tiktok/twitter/facebook will insure that muscular women are ubiquitous in your feed (we have had some people here claim that since they see muscular woman on social media all the time that they are everywhere in the "real world."
And do those unrealistic expectations have negative effects? For an example, let's say that you have a guy who is into muscular women but is dating someone who isn't. His partner then decides to hit the weights, but using PEDs is an absolute no for her. Even if she progresses well as a natural, would that be enough to make him happy if all he sees are these incredibly jacked women on this site, or would he think that she is not trying hard enough because he thinks what he sees here can be achieved as a natural (or as someone who finds time to lift when having a fulltime job and/or family to raise as compared to a fitness influencer who doesn't have an actual 9-5 and can put in 3-4 hour days at the gym?
Lastly, does the confirmation bias that we establish from hanging out in sites like this diminish or perception of a natural lifter's progress and physique? I have seen quite a few comments from guys who claim that a woman doesn't or barely lifts, or is "fat" and "out of shape," when in reality the woman actually does lift and has been lifting for awhile, but doesn't take PEDs. I see those comments a lot in retired bodybuilders: they look at pictures of what they look like now compared to at their peak and say things like "ugh she let herself go" or whatever, when it's clear that they are still fit and active, but don't take drugs and don't punish themselves in the gym as much as they did when they competed.
Would love to hear your thoughts on this!