Would you hit it? - be honest

[ClemsonDevil]

Slop101... you are a trip. But may I ask a favor? Take out the 2nd and 3rd pictures you just uploaded. I really prefer her in the off season after seeing her in the competition.

Also, what happened to those Cory Everson pics?

[slop101]

Originally posted by ClemsonDevil
Slop101... you are a trip. But may I ask a favor? Take out the 2nd and 3rd pictures you just uploaded. I really prefer her in the off season after seeing her in the competition.

Also, what happened to those Cory Everson pics?

I hope you realize that I'm also being kind of facetious here and playing just a little bit of devil's advocate.

That being said, I'm leaving those contest pics of her up, since I want people to see both sides of these women.

Here's some pics of Cory (who I don't think is particularly hot - she is pretty, but sort of innocuous):

[sarafina]

I wouldn't say they disgust me, I would have no problem hanging out with them and be good friends, but I'm not really physically attracted. I must admit I love a woman to be smaller than me, I don't mind if she is stronger, but it just does not turn me on all those muscles. (Even male BB do not turn me on)

I like a girl to be in good shape, and even if she's not so thin it wouldn't bother me. I like a more.... Natural look... I like normal woman from everyday. Not a top model either, they are just too skinny.

The blond one, in the more "relaxed " position is more attractive to me than the other with too much tanning et oil all over their body, it doesn't look natural.

But I do see your point, and I can see why you could be attracted to them. In fact, maybe, if I get to knew them closely I could get to feel something, but it would need time and she would have to be a very nice person. Also, I wonder what those women look like in real every day life.

Those pictures shows them trying to show off as much muscles as possible, but, what if they were wearing normal clothes, jeans and nice top... and not trying to show us their body, maybe they would look better... more natural.

[slop101]

Originally posted by sarafina
...Also, I wonder what those women look like in real every day life.

Those pictures shows them trying to show off as much muscles as possible, but, what if they were wearing normal clothes, jeans and nice top... and not trying to show us their body, maybe they would look better... more natural.

Since you aked...

I first met the women bodybuilder I dated at a Christmas party put on by a mutual friend. We got to talking and we hit it off - she was wearing a sweater, with a jacket and some baggy pants - I had absolutely no idea what she looked like underneath - I actually thought she may be a tad over-weight, and she was - just not in the traditional sense. So basically, they can look very normal, but if you're being perceptive you'll be able to tell something's different, but not exactly what. Then there are the women who constantly flaunt their muscles - I find them to be obnoxious. I think you'd be surprised at how well a really buff woman can blend in when she wants to - conversely, when they try to stand out, they stand out more than anything you can imagine.

Something else that affects how "normal" these women's faces look is their diet. The drastic diet they go on during contest time (when their trying to get close to 0% body-fat) affects each of these women's faces differently. For the most part their faces get sucked in and the bone structure in their face becomes more prevalent - this can actually make some girls look better, but for the most part, they look better when their faces aren't sucked in - it can get so extreme sometimes that you can see striations in their face when they smile. For some girls, the diet doesn't effect their face at all.

Here's the good news - they have to work really, really hard to look like this. To look normal, they pretty much have to do nothing - and they all go back to looking pretty normal eventually.

[boredsilly]

Originally posted by slop101
You totally misunderstand me. Having dated a female bodybuilder for almost two years, I know, much more so than you, that a lot of men find these women unattractive. "Period." What I'm trying to do here is kind of brain-storm and understand the reasons why. Mostly because it's been such an overwhelming level of hatred and disgust over them so far - much more than I had thought there'd be.

When you say you don't have insecurity issues when it comes to these women, I believe you and say good for you - but everyone is different. I'm sure a lot of people have different reasons as to why, and I'm sure insecurities and especially unfamiliarity are the reasons for many.

The same reason why a lot of men find overweight women unattractive(even by as little as 30 lbs). "Period". People are conditioned to find certain body-types attractive (and though it varies a bit) for the most part people gravitate towards the norms that they're used to.

Now personally, I don't like overly muscled women because I prefer a softer look to girls (which usually comes in chubbier women).

[slop101]

I'm gonna kind of wrap this up by asking if it's possible to be attracted to these women despite their bodies (and are they really as repulsive as a woman that's 100 lbs. over-weight)? I really think that generalizing, and saying that every single one of them is gross mostly because of their muscles is just as odd as saying every single one of them turns you on mostly because of their muscles. They are all different, as are our tastes.

I also want to point out how not all these women are anywhere near the ideal that I've painted them as. Some of these women, being competitive bodybuilders, are obviously extremists. It's the same obsessive compulsive behavior that you see in anorexics, alcoholics, bulimics, drug addicts, compulsive gamblers. They can lose sight of what's really happening to their bodies and to their lives. With the bodybuilder, the only thing that matters is getting bigger, harder and leaner, regardless of the consequences.

Some of these women are taking certain drugs and suffering from these side effects. And once they grow facial hair or a penis-like clitoris they are stuck with it for the rest of their lives. A woman can stop taking the drugs but her body may never return to its feminine state.

The scariest thing is that because steroids are illegal, no one admits that they take them and no research has been done on their long-term effects.

You can see this same self-destructive behavior in other sports: the ballet dancer who starves herself and ruins her body for a career that will be over before she's thirty; the football player who continues to play with a serious injury even though he knows he may be crippled for life. Athletes in lots of sports use steroids now. Consequences aren't important—all that matters is winning.

There are a million reasons why a woman might go into bodybuilding. The one thing that most of them have in common is that they live in an altered state of reality. Bodybuilders are a different breed. One of the issues I had dating one was that her and a lot of her friends couldn't really relate to "normal" people. It was like bulls and rabbits. Bulls don't notice rabbits; rabbits don't have anything to do with their world.


Now, here's an excellent essay that touches upon a lot of the issues discussed in this thread (actually, in some of my posts I tried to paraphrase some of this essay, but I figure I'll just post it and let it speak for it self) - I look forward to further comments...



"WOMEN, MUSCLES & FETISH"

IN ANIMALS LIKE DOGS and cats, sexually receptivity is advertised by odor. But humans are primarily a visual species. Visual clues play an extremely significant role in determining who we find sexually attractive. In some types of monkeys, our close cousins, the genitals of females become red and swollen during estrus. Human females are physiologically receptive to sex at all time, not just once a month. So the visual aspect of sexual attraction has become much more subtle and sophisticated.
There is a difference in the type of visual input that human males and female respond to. Women seem to look for signs that a man will make a good father and provider. Hence a less physically attractive man driving a Porsche has certain advantages over a better looking guy in a Chevy. Men, on the other hand, tend to respond to women as "sexual objects," that is to things like the beauty and shapeliness of the body, the curve of the breast and buttocks, the wearing of sexy clothes or lingerie. One anthropologist has even suggested that the size of the human female breast, which is much bigger and rounder than it needs to be and far larger than that of other primates, evolved as humans began to stand erect in order to duplicate the stimulating effect on males of a big, round rear end.

Every man has certain things that are particular turn-ons. We all respond best to certain physical types---taller, shorter, blond, dark, lean or full-figured, large or small breasted, specific ethnic types and so forth. Europeans are less erotically focused on large breasts than Americans, and more accepting of body hair and natural body odors. Nudity in an of itself is more stimulating to Americans than Europeans, but in cultures in which women are totally covered in public all the time even wearing even shorts or sleeveless blouses is considered outrageously provocative. When most of the women you meet wear veils, the eyes take on particular significance in conveying sexual signals.


Individual preferences in turn-ons can be taken to the extreme. When some object, part of the body or type of sexual behavior becomes a necessity, something without which full sexual arousal is impossible, this is called a fetish. A fetish is a sexual fixation. It can involve a part of the body, such as the feet. Or an object such as a shoe, lingerie, leather or plastic. Or a behavior such as bondage, spanking, "peeping," urination, exhibitionism, penetration by objects or anal intercourse.

There have always been men who found the athletic female body a particular turn-on. Certain female athletes, including those involved in everything from track to swimming to dancing, can develop lean, shapely bodies that radiate health and energy, which can be attractive and sexy. But there is a considerable difference between the degree of muscular development achieved by women athletes in general and the extreme degree of mass and muscularity that characterizes the modern, elite female bodybuilder. The bodies of these women are so different and so extreme that it is difficult for men to relate to them sexually in any "normal" manner.

Bodies like this never existed in all of history before the late 1970s, and even then the degree of development exhibited by the first female competition bodybuilders was nothing compared to what is seen today. There is no precedent in human history for this kind of body. It has no history. This means that most males have no familiar visual signals to respond to when dealing with one of these women. They look like other women to some degree, so they send out visual signals that men respond to. But these signals are so different, so strange, so bizarre that men often respond in very conflicted ways---both positive and negative.

When you take a type of body this unusual that is also beautiful and excites in bizarre ways you have to stuff of fetish. And, indeed, that is how many men respond to the female bodybuilding physique. They often fantasize about being dominated by these women, physically overpowered, taken sexually by force. They hire them to do private wrestling sessions, which is the bodybuilding version of lap dancing. They become sexually aroused imagining hard, defined abdominals, powerful muscular glutes and flaring, striated thighs. Tits and ass becomes pecs and glutes.. Female biceps become sex objects: "Flex your arms, dear….I’m cumming."


This doesn’t mean that everyone who finds these women attractive and sexy has developed a fetish. Some of them are quite attractive by conventional standards, once you get used to the difference in scale. After all, really tall girls of six feet or more used to find themselves without a date on Saturday night, while now they become supermodels. Fashions in what kind of bodies are attractive change. Women bodybuilders like Rachel McLish, Cory Everson, Lenda Murray, Anja Langer, Tonya Knight, Yolanda Hughes and so forth have been lauded as much for their sexy looks as for their bodybuilding excellence. But when you look in some physique magazines and see photos of short, thick, troll-like women, with thick rope-like muscles, hitting most muscular shots while wearing short sleeveless dresses and high heels---you might just be looking at a fetish photo.


Is there anything wrong with this? Not necessarily. At least, not unless it becomes a problem for the individual with the fetish. A man who collects women’s shoes or finds it necessary to occasionally put on a bra, but whose life is otherwise successful, hasn’t really got a problem. A man who steals women’s shoes and underwear does. A fetish for blondes creates far fewer problems than a total fixation on little girls. The danger of being too much in thrall to a sexual fetish is that it may cut the person off from normal, fulfilling sexual relationships. Fetishism can lead to a sex life that exists totally in fantasy. And while an individual can live an entire lifetime relying almost totally on masturbation for sexual satisfaction (a recent biography of artist Salvador Dali describes his sex life in these terms) there is something profoundly sad and unrewarding about this prospect.


However, as discussed above, it is also possible to simply find females with muscle attractive because they are women with beautiful bodies. The strangeness of this type of physique passes once you get used to it. When you are familiar and at ease with the highly developed female physique, you may like it a little or a lot or dislike it a little or a lot, but you will no longer find it bizarre or "unnatural." After all, the women who develop their muscles for physique competition are not doing it to become sex objects; the purpose of their efforts is to become athletic champions, not to attract men. But as strongly as humans hold to ideas of body conformation and gender identity, it will likely be quite a while before people in general accept this kind of physique in an unqualified way. In the meantime, it will still tend to anger and alienate some, and to become the object of sexual fetish for others.

[CaptainMarvel]

Originally posted by slop101
I'm gonna kind of wrap this up by asking if it's possible to be attracted to these women despite their bodies (and are they really as repulsive as a woman that's 100 lbs. over-weight)? I really think that generalizing, and saying that every single one of them is gross mostly because of their muscles is just as odd as saying every single one of them turns you on mostly because of their muscles. They are all different, as are our tastes.

Honestly, I suppose it would theoretically be possible to be attracted to one, with two provisos:
1) She would have to just barely be over the "fitness" line... and nowhere near the competition pictures you've shown, AND
2) She'd have to have the best personality in the world (better than anybody I've met to this point in my life, for sure). It reminds me of Pulp Fiction:

Vincent: Want some bacon?
Jules: No man, I don't eat pork.
Vincent: Are you Jewish?
Jules: Nah, I ain't Jewish, I just don't dig on swine, that's all.
Vincent: Why not?
Jules: Pigs are filthy animals. I don't eat filthy animals.
Vincent: Bacon tastes gooood. Pork chops taste gooood.
Jules: Hey, sewer rat may taste like pumpkin pie, but I'd never know 'cause I wouldn't eat the filthy ************. Pigs sleep and root in shit. That's a filthy animal. I ain't eat nothin' that ain't got enough sense enough to disregard its own faeces.
Vincent: How about a dog? Dogs eats its own feces.
Jules: I don't eat dog either.
Vincent: Yeah, but do you consider a dog to be a filthy animal?
Jules: I wouldn't go so far as to call a dog filthy but they're definitely dirty. But, a dog's got personality. Personality goes a long way.
Vincent: Ah, so by that rationale, if a pig had a better personality, he would cease to be a filthy animal. Is that true?
Jules: Well we'd have to be talkin' about one charmin' mother****in' pig. I mean he'd have to be ten times more charmin' than that Arnold on Green Acres, you know what I'm sayin'?

[slop101]

That actually helps me with my point - you may find pork filthy, but once you have a good rack of BBQ baby-back ribs, you won't care.

[ClemsonDevil]

A Pulp Fiction quote on a female bodybuilding thread... my life if complete now.

[Roto]

Bodybuilders? No. Fitness models? Hell yes

[FuzzyBallz]

WTF's this? The fugly chicks contest?

[slop101]

I was kind of hoping there'd be some more discussion, especially about the article I posted above.

If you guys are intersted in a discussion, I'd really like to move beyond the "she's hot" / "she's not" diatribe.

What do you guys think about that article?

Also, here's another really good essay which is about how these women's development challanges our assumptions of what a woman can be:


Women Bodybuilders: Something New Under The Sun?

"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is thatwhich shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun. " Ecclesiastes 1:9

Change happened slowly, if at all, in the time of Ecclesiastes. But today change happens at such an incredible pace that most of us live in a perpetual state of culture shock.

It's clear that we live in an age of miracles and transformation unlike any that has gone before. Nothing new under the sun? Computers. Heart transplants. Gene splicing. Atomic fission and fusion. In-utero fertilization. The Internet and the information highway. In the modern era, the sun never rises on the same world twice. Don't worry about missing the revolution. There'll be another one along any minute.

The Acceptable Image

Nonetheless, in all this chaos, certain ideas and concepts have persisted unchanged over time. Take, for example, the image of the athletic male. The Greeks would have instantly recognized and accepted the athletic male body as portrayed by Michelangelo in paint and sculpture or Arnold Schwarzenegger (following in the footsteps of his idol Reg Park) in the movies. Even today, a well-built, muscular young man is said to have the physique of a "Greek god." When it comes to the male body, at least, plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose. But while there has been some consistency among cultures as to the ideal configuration of the male body, the same has not been generally true for the female.

The acceptable image and behavior of women has often been defined in terms of "femininity," which is essentially a form of fashion. The culturally-endorsed image of women may be slender or not, willowy or fleshy, coifed and appareled this way or that according to the style of the age. But certain constants have tended to hold true. For example, the female body has almost always been perceived in terms of its sexual attraction to men. Explicit erotic images have been found painted on the walls of caves by our prehistoric ancestors, sculpted on the walls of the temples of ancient India, drawn on Chinese scrolls and papyrus from the Egypt of the pharaohs.

The female body has also been seen as a symbol of fertility as well as sexual attraction. Statues and drawings of females with ponderous, full breasts, swollen bellies and bulging thighs are common in so-called primitive tribal art from all parts of the world down through the ages. But one female body-image almost never seen is that of a woman with highly-developed, well-defined muscles. Big women, yes. Even strong women. After all, most women throughout history, and most men as well, have been peasant farmers, not aristocrats, and they have needed to labor long and hard to survive. But these labors never produced females with the kind of highly-developed muscularity that has virtually always been associated with the masculine physique.

This accounts in large part for why the emergence in the past few years of the modern female bodybuilding physique has had such power to shock and disturb. These women are not just big and strong---they are muscular, some extremely so, with a hard, well-defined development designed to have the maximum visual impact possible. As a result, the contemporary, muscular female represents a genuine revolution in human culture. There is no precedent for this phenomenon. Charles Gaines, author of Pumping Iron, and Pumping Iron II: The Women, has described the muscular female physique as a "new archetype."

The development of the modern female bodybuilder has been indirectly but assuredly linked to the gains made by the women's movement. Until recently, it was not considered appropriate for women to be competitive athletes. It was considered unladylike and unfeminine for a woman to try too hard at athletic games. Young girls with an athletic inclination were called "tomboys," and encouraged to grow out of it.

Once women in general were allowed and encouraged to be athletes, it didn't take long for them to discover a rule that male athletes have known for some time---a stronger athlete is a better athlete, and the best way to develop the kind of strength needed to improve sports performance is with a program of progressive-resistance training. Once women discovered the weight room, the emergence of the hard-core female bodybuilder was only a matter of time. Today, the athletic female body has become increasingly accepted. Women nowadays not only excel at sports but are emerging as cultural icons in the process.

Olympic stars like Florence Griffith Joyner or Marion become household names. Female champions like Serena Williams in tennis or Anna Sorenstam in golf are sought after for commercials and product endorsements. But as fit and athletic as these women may be, the type of bodies they have are not perceived as extreme or unfeminine, not considered freakish or grotesque. But take a look at the size of Serena or the arms and shoulders on Marion Jones. You don't think they developed this degree of muscularity playing tennis or running, do you?

However, although many of the top women athletes are bigger and more muscular than the early female physique stars, they can hardly be compared to the muscle mass and definition we see in today's elite female bodybuilders - who appear on a bodybuilding stage looking like some kind of New Age anatomy chart. Of course, looking at photographs, people often think female bodybuilders are much bigger than they are. For example, in photos Ms. International winner Dayana Cadeau looks so massive that even most of the physique magazines are reluctant to feature her. In reality, she competed at the 2003 Ms. Olympia weighing a mere 127 lbs. As the late bodybuilding "guru" Vince Gironda was known for saying, "bodybuilding is illusion."

The Truth

In actuality, female bodybuilders are often not much heavier than other women of the same basic size, but they do differ tremendously in body conformation and composition. Picture the difference between a 135 pound woman whose body is 30% fat, and a bodybuilder of the same weight with a relative body fat of 12% or lower.

An even more dramatic comparison can be made between champion women bodybuilders and their male counterparts. The biggest men are incredibly huge compared to the women. In recent years, while the Mr. Olympia winner has been a massive 250 to 290 pounds, the Ms. Olympia winner has weighed less than 150 pounds. (There are, of course, bigger and heavier women in the sport but none so far has been a serious contender in top professional competition.)

Nonetheless, the advent of the world-class female bodybuilder onto the scene has called into question many of our assumptions regarding the physical capabilities of women and, indeed, the very nature of the female body itself. For example, if it is so easy for at least some women to create such impressive, muscular physiques, why has it never happened before? And if women are capable of developing so much more muscle so much more easily than we believed, why has the stereotype of the woman as weak and helpless persisted for so long? What does this new perception of the female body say about the level of physical development of most women in our culture? Are women so much the "weaker sex" because we've made them that way?

Furthermore, if women who were evidently designed by nature to be strong---at least, stronger than we've allowed them to be---are kept physically weak and encouraged to believe that nature and evolution intended them to be weak, how does this affect their self-image? Their feelings of confidence and self-esteem? Their overall state of health and fitness? Their sexuality? The degree to which their bodies deteriorate with age? Their ability to function independently in daily living? Their quality of life?

Women nowadays have been at least partially liberated from stereotypes that put unwarranted limitations on their abilities and achievements in the past. But they are still imprisoned to some degree by an old-fashioned view of their bodies. The existence of champion female athletes in general and women bodybuilders in particular presents a serious challenge to that view. In fact, bodybuilding for women has become the basis of an entirely new examination, exploration and appreciation of capabilities and aesthetics of the female physique, as well as a direct challenge to many deeply held beliefs concerning "femininity," body image, and gender identification.

Fortunately, as these stereotypes of femininity continue to fade away more and more women are encouraged to change the way they look and feel with weight training. Bodybuilding as a sport is one thing. But even more significant is the fact that the right kind of weight training allow women to look better, remain physically younger and more stay healthier and more fit throughout their lives, totally revolutionizing our idea of what aging is necessarily all about.

[Houstondon]

Originally Posted by slop101

That actually helps me with my point - you may find pork filthy, but once you have a good rack of BBQ baby-back ribs, you won't care.

Those would taste sooooo good right now. As far as the bodybuilders though, I'd have to like one of them personality-wise before even considering "hitting it" (and I'm allegedly the guy that would fuck a woodpile if I thought there was a snake in it, generally known for accepting "limbs as optional" as a condition for a gal, and rumored to be the "mercy fuck king of Houston").

[greg9x]

Zombie thread !!!
Wow, has it really been since 2004 for the campaign for manly looking women ?? Think only 'man on man action in straight porn' got fewer converts !

[nanxy3x]

better fit girls

[undergirl]

These girls aren't for me

think unless you are huge maybe bigger than those girls

they going to sux your cock intheir pussy

you cock might break if you push too hard

that will be ... o god

and if they are on top of you
o m g

you will get kill by their movement haha

the point is ... they are not girl like anymore

they are ... bull that kills

WE WANT A REAL GIRL NOT MUSLE WOMEN OR MEN LIKE GIRLS
thats gay if you .... let you finish the rest

[gamerman]

Number 2 defentliy....

[pornpornporn]

no way! id be too worried at what i would find!

[moore44893]

I don't like that much muscles on a woman; even not on a man.

[weishenme]

the pics don't show up in my browser

[legendury]

Maybe after 5 bottles of tequila. Then get back to me.

[cajena]

nope