I know who Paul Robeson is, but I’m not sure what you’re going for, either, Green Bean. Ronaldo’s muscles are about as important to him as anybody’s muscles are to anybody, so I can’t figure out what the “gym muscle” problem is or where the imbalance comes in. I mean, I know about the guys who do nothing but blast their pecs every day, and they look like circus freaks, but Ronaldo’s muscles are very close to the most useful muscles in the world, considering what he’s accomplished with them.
Also, Robeson doesn’t have anything like the body these guys have. Which isn’t a point against him or anything, it just adds to the mystery here.
As far as how sexy he is and why, Ronaldo’s always struck me as a pretty stupid guy. I think the relative lack of brains maybe comes through in his woodenness. It’s not like modeling’s his job, so it’s really no surprise he doesn’t have any idea what he’s doing, and if he isn’t a real fast learner as I suspect, maybe that explains why he looks like his head is poking out from behind a cardboard cutout of his own body.
They say that too much dairy gives some females a migraine? And those photos are plenty cheesy.
Don’t most women prefer it when males act at least sort of normal? In pictures as much as in real life? My wife would slap me hard if I danced around in my undies pulling those poses. Plus the one of him lying down with the jeans on has the deer in the headlights look as though he just got snapped by his mate mid “special *alone *time”
That picture of Paul Robeson was taken in the 1920s. “Gym muscles” didn’t exist back then. I was including him as an ideal male body that was virtually guaranteed not to have been shaped by endless reps.
Even weightlifters of that era didn’t have “gym muscles” because they weren’t aware of all the excercises and foods (and steroids) that are specifically designed to build muscle mass. Those guys were more into building strength rather than the appearance of strength. They showed off their bodies because their muscular development was evidence of pure man-strength.
Which is EXACTLY why those Armani ads suck so bad. I was surprised to discover that he was an actual athlete, because the photos made him look like a generic prettyboy model.
And generic prettyboy models, by definition, have gym muscles–developed in order to look a certain way.
To sum up: The photos make Ronaldo LOOK like he has “gym muscles.” And that is not sexy.
Look at the difference between the shots of Cristiano Ronaldo and David Beckham about 2/3 down the page in the OP’s link. Cristiano Ronaldo is so awkwardly reclining and tense that my back aches sympathetically. Beckham smoulders. His pose is completely natural and he has a mysterious air that draws you in completely and gives the feeling that he’s comfortable in his own skin. You look at the first shot and see a boy, all surface. You look at Beckham and see a man. fans self
I think he’s fine as hell. You know, if this were a woman in these pictures, and a thread came about where everyone was bashing a perfectly beautiful woman in the same way that they’re bashing him here, you’d have a very vocal minority saying that people were being sexist. But apparently because he’s a dude, nobody has a problem with bashing the way he looks, even though he looks fan-friggin-tastic.
Nah. It’s the photos people are criticising, and his poses, not his entire self. On a similar thread about a woman, if an oversensitive minority claimed it was sexism then there’d be a load of other people arguing against them.
I mean, why would you not want to be stronger, fitter, and more attractive? You don’t have to put on a silly Zoolander pout; just wear a normal suit of clothes and you’ll look great.
Come to think of it, there’s a thread right now that’s discussing the Olsen twins in a much more derogatory way, and no accusations of sexism have come up.