I can bring that if you bring your leggings. Jeggings, skinny jeans, leggings, are all amazing.
I have arrived at the controversial view that nearly all women are attracted to strong men with visible muscles, but that they deny it. Women don’t know what they want. You ask them, and they say “confidence”, but if you look at what they actually go for, being tall, rich, and muscular all seem to be huge factors…
In my younger days when I was very muscular I noticed women were attracted. It appeared to be more of an attraction as the women got a little older, 30 and up perhaps. For some brief time I was overly muscular and I think began to look frightening to women and men. I couldn’t maintain the muscle tone over time though, I sagged, got fat, and an occasional compliment about my arms was obviously insincere flattery because there was no way to ignore my bulging abdominal muscles.
Any and all would be good.
ETA: This is a serious request. I’m interested in seeing a medical, fact-based discussion of the psychiatric side effects of steroids.
I disagree, women are bad about short men, just as men are bad about fat women. But I’ve never got the sense that women give a shit about a little flab. Or baldness for that matter.
I didn’t mean that. For a short time I had very impressive physique, later when I wasn’t quite so fit I think comments on my big biceps were just because there was nothing else to compliment physically. That’s ok, that means they must have seen something else in me besides just being a body.
All women are different. My ideal man is on the short side. I’d rather date a guy who was 5’4’’ than 6’4’'.I don’t know about overly muscled men, but I find very tall men to be kind of frightening.
We don’t MEAN it.
If I knew “what women liked”, I can honestly say I’d spend an awful lot less time posting.
Does that make me a bad person…?
(No, everything you hate about me posting over the years makes me a bad person. This just makes me Worse.)
And men are all attracted to porn star style bimbos with enormous fake boobs. The faker, the better. We just deny it. Because when I see what men actually go for, it’s usually reasonably nice looking women, who have boobs. So I just extrapolate from there.
Q.E.D.
Sorry, that came off a bit dickish.
Because, obviously, you’re right. It’s not exactly unreasonable to assume that women are attracted to the most obvious attractive male attributes: Strength and money. Just as it’s not unreasonable to assume that men are attracted to beauty and youth.
The part that doesn’t work is to think that if a person is attracted to these qualities, it scales, and they must be all the more attracted to bizarre, extreme cartoon versions of them. And that these qualities swamp everything else.
I mean, in theory, maybe it should work like that, from the perspective of a Martian anthropologist. But humans, like cats, are pretty freaking weird.
(That said, I am reminded of a Louis CK bit, about ugly people. When it comes to actual partner choice, we’re all assholes. And all honest. “Oh, you feel sorry for the ugly people who can’t get a date? Well, you go fuck one then. Right, I didn’t think so.” Or words to that effect.)
Yes, what I was getting at wasn’t that Ronnie Coleman was the optimal male form. I was trying to say that a man carrying quite a lot of muscle, with low enough body fat that the portion on his abdomen is exposed, is favored by women. You see that in actual couples out in the world, and you see women talk about things like that if you pick up a Cosmo and skim the articles. (funny thing about a magazine like Cosmo - you find more scantily clad, beautiful women in the pages than a Maxim)
And I was also saying that women are always quick to claim they aren’t shallow or superficial, that every guy has a chance with them, when that is just not true. Every guy does not have a chance, and for every “breedable” woman (someone 18-35 with low BMI who is legitimately capable of making healthy babies and also looks pretty good), there are probably 10 or more guys she has to choose from.
It all counts as a result. The reason women ***imply ***that everyone has a chance, I feel, is that
a. Women want to keep you guessing. The very woman you are talking to has possibly rejected you in the first 30 seconds of meeting - that’s what women say they actually do - but wants to lead you on so that you will possibly do her favors, etc.
b. It’s sort of “trendy”, just like drinking Kale smoothies and doing Yoga, to claim that they don’t use superficial factors in their selection of mates.
Women all lead you on? I dunno. Going from personal experience… it’s more like about 20%.
And, anyway: Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on you. Fool me three times, I should probably be a bit more proactive about this shit.
I can see why it happens, though. I’m no stud, don’t get me wrong, but once (once) I was in a situation where I was the more attractive partner, and in a position to string a woman along. And, holy shit, the sense of power was insane. I felt like I got a glimpse into the every day life of attractive women. And let me tell you, they’re better people than me (or, as I said, at least 80% of them). It was incredibly eye-opening. I also felt like taking a shower and having some therapy afterwards, because I didn’t like the person I became.
Anyway, maybe it’s not fair to blame women for biology. We could try to roll with the punches.
Hmm.
Hits the gym, starts figuring out ways to make lots of money
Lots of women are attracted to lots of different things. Whatever your physique, there is a woman out there who digs it.
Same for men, I think. There are men who like curvy women, skinny women, bodybuilders, tall women, etc.
I happen to like one kind of man to look at* and another kind to marry*, apparently.
*Not body builders in either case
Good point.
In my case: There is one category of women who push all my buttons, and turn me into that howling wolf from the cartoons. There is another category of women that i can be in successful and happy relationships with, for any length of time at all.
The Venn diagram of the two are basically just two completely separate circles.
You are operating from a false premise.
There is no one criteria that “women” find attractive. SOME women like muscular guys. SOME women like skinny guys. SOME women like chubby guys.
Women are individuals, with individuals tastes, likes, and dislikes. It’s a bit insulting for you to imply they’re all alike.
That will come as a shock to my short, poor, and disabled spouse!
The attraction of muscles is the attraction of health - in addition to confidence/money/hair/bald/eye color/whatever being healthy is an attractive trait. Muscles are an indication of health Most people find it appealing because of that association. It is not, however, the make-or-break trait. There is no one trait that will guarantee a particular woman will find a man attractive. It’s one thing among many.
Do you even lift?
:D:D:D You’re in luck. The winter uniform (legging/skinny jeans, sweater, boots) will be back in rotation very, very soon!
Okay. Here. Here. Here. And here, to start. Individual sensitivity to aggression side effects may vary. The data goes way back.
From just one of the articles:
The short summary:
By self-report men on steroids are more aggressive and in studies that document steroid use and correlate with aggressiveness.
Withdrawal also causes problems and steroid abuse sets up polypharmacy abuse as other drugs get used to alleviate steroid side effects.
The modeling in animal models is overwhelming across multiple species. It is of course difficult (no impossible) to ethically do multiple controlled double-blind studies in which we knowingly give a substance we know is harmful (in many ways) even to those who want it, but to presume that humans alone are exempt from these behavioral and neuropsychiatric impacts is silly.
These are not benign compounds.