Who thinks women with muscles are sexy?

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

Hilarious since 1948 humans have evolved have they?

If Im dumb your dumber and isn't that personal abuse

oh my god!!!

man evolution happens every second every millisecond of every day, thats why its called evolution

we have evolved since may 6th 2008 and we are ever so more differnt since may 2007 as we are differnt since may 1967

man read a few book
u dumbass
evoution doesnt suddenly happen
man o man
most female bbers are smarter than u and they are "muscle heads " apparently ha ha

good night and good luck

guile45

Sleepy wrote: »

Am I the only one that read this and thought "but a woman with no muscles wouldn't be able to move?"

touche!!!

Xavi6

guile45 wrote: »

you sayin u wud say no this to this girl if she chatted you up
because u find her muscle unattractive?????

The one on the left is butch so yeah I'd say no to her. The one on the right is more my cup of tea. Toned, not manly.

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

evolution mate?
people today are statisically taller we live longer etc etc

What has taller got to do with steroid produced muscle

What has living longer got to do with muscle neither of those freask I showed looked like they were very old so its not a lifetime weight training that is responsible.

I know what has evolved since 1948 humans ability to make synthetic substances that when taken can produce those differences

Voodu Child

guile45 wrote: »

evolution mate?

LOL

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

What has taller got to do with steroid produced muscle

What has living longer got to do with muscle neither of those freask I showed looked like they were very old so its not a lifetime weight training that is responsible.

I know what has evolved since 1948 humans ability to make synthetic substances that when taken can produce those differences

u are a spa!!!! they are examples of how we have evolved physically, therefore ergo ha ha ha we have also evolved in our methods and developed better ways of workin out and building muscles, we have learned much much more about the body, how foods are broken down, what is needed not needed to assist muscle growth....u made a point of comparing a female bber to a classic 1950s bber on some site u listed, i am givin u the reaction u desire and the answer maybe u dont desire why providin u with a reason how a woman in the 21st century can achive such muscalirty compared to a man back in the 1950s and dont be a twat and just reply steriods, cos there are so many factors, have u though about social factors??? that these men worked long days and long weeks to put food on their tables perhaps in post war america etc and wherby a lot of the bodybuilders i have posted here are (badly paid) but paid professionals???? how many personal trainers were around back then u reckon?

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

oh my god!!!

man evolution happens every second every millisecond of every day, thats why its called evolution

we have evolved since may 6th 2008 and we are ever so more differnt since may 2007 as we are differnt since may 1967

man read a few book
u dumbass
evoution doesnt suddenly happen
man o man
most female bbers are smarter than u and they are "muscle heads " apparently ha ha

good night and good luck

plural of book is books, so maybe I'll read some books.
Actually just because you questioned my intelligence I was going to note your spelling errors but there are too many.

But back on topic and away from the personal attacks your getting into, nothing and I mean nothing natural can explain the difference between modern body builders and that picture from 1948.

You cannot produce one piece of sound scientific evidence that will back up your claim that that is a natural evolutionary step because its not.

I would also argue that evolution does not happen continuously but in evolutionary bounds, a species encounters a new habitat or some other reason that they must evolve and evolves to suit it but we do not continuously keep changing.

guile45

guile45 wrote: »

u are a spa!!!! they are examples of how we have evolved physically, therefore ergo ha ha ha we have also evolved in our methods and developed better ways of workin out and building muscles, we have learned much much more about the body, how foods are broken down, what is needed not needed to assist muscle growth....u made a point of comparing a female bber to a classic 1950s bber on some site u listed, i am givin u the reaction u desire and the answer maybe u dont desire why providin u with a reason how a woman in the 21st century can achive such muscalirty compared to a man back in the 1950s and dont be a twat and just reply steriods, cos there are so many factors, have u though about social factors??? that these men worked long days and long weeks to put food on their tables perhaps in post war america etc and wherby a lot of the bodybuilders i have posted here are (badly paid) but paid professionals???? how many personal trainers were around back then u reckon?

READ DUMBASS FOR YOU ANSWER TO ABOVE QUOTE
AND BY THE BY I AM AWARE OF MY SPELLING MISTAKES, BUT THIS AINT A THESIS SO DEAL WITH IT, SURE I AM SO F*CKED UP ON PROTEIN SHAKES I DONT NO WHAT I AM DOIN

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

READ DUMBASS FOR YOU ANSWER TO ABOVE QUOTE
AND BY THE BY I AM AWARE OF MY SPELLING MISTAKES, BUT THIS AINT A THESIS SO DEAL WITH IT, SURE I AM SO F*CKED UP ON PROTEIN SHAKES I DONT NO WHAT I AM DOIN

Im sorry I thought that was your personal opinion I didn't know it was scientific fact :rolleyes::rolleyes:

One accredited medical society who back your claims one thats all I ask!

guile45

You Need To Take Into Account Not Just Physical Evolution But Social, Economic Etc Etc

Xavi6

guile45 wrote: »

READ DUMBASS FOR YOU ANSWER TO ABOVE QUOTE
AND BY THE BY I AM AWARE OF MY SPELLING MISTAKES, BUT THIS AINT A THESIS SO DEAL WITH IT, SURE I AM SO F*CKED UP ON PROTEIN SHAKES I DONT NO WHAT I AM DOIN

Yep so fucked up on them shakes you neglected the bit in the charter about personal abuse.

guile45

What U Mean Medical Society??? Are U Sayin Environment Doesnt Induce Change?

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

You Need To Take Into Account Not Just Physical Evolution But Social, Economic Etc Etc

What the hell are you talking about?
Im talking about medical and physiological im not talking about the inflation on your house prices

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

What U Mean Medical Society??? Are U Sayin Environment Doesnt Induce Change?

Man you should rewrite Darwin's theory of evolution as a one man stage show it would be the best comedy in town

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

Man you should rewrite Darwin's theory of evolution as a one man stage show it would be the best comedy in town

UR JUST A DUMBASS THAT DOESNT KNOW WHEN HE IS BEATEN

NOW DEAL WITH HER HA HA HA

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

What U Mean Medical Society??? Are U Sayin Environment Doesnt Induce Change?

maybe somebody recognized by these
http://www.wma.net/e/

guile45

[QUOTE=Rob_
l;55866655]Im sorry I thought that was your personal opinion I didn't know it was scientific fact :rolleyes::rolleyes:

One accredited medical society who back your claims one thats all I ask![/QUOTE]

EAT SH*T AND DIE

http://www.wsu.edu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/phychar/culture-humans-1one.html

Xavi6

guile45 wrote: »

UR JUST A DUMBASS THAT DOESNT KNOW WHEN HE IS BEATEN

NOW DEAL WITH HIM HA HA HA

Fixed that for you

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

EAT SH*T AND DIE

http://www.wsu.edu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/phychar/culture-humans-1one.html

:pac::D:D:D:D:D:D
im sorry what does that prove i really don't understand the point of it.
:D:D:D:D:D
its funny because maybe a ban stick will be waved at you now

Rob_l

hey guile I checked out that link maybe you should check out my link from your link
http://www.wsu.edu/gened/learn-modules/top_longfor/phychar/culture-humans-2two.html

in that first picture which skull is most like yours?

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

:pac::D:D:D:D:D:D
im sorry what does that prove i really don't understand the point of it.
:D:D:D:D:D
its funny because maybe a ban stick will be waved at you now

READ IT IT SHOW MY POINT THAT CULTURE AND SOCIETAL CHANGE CAN EFFECT AND CHANGE THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A SOCIETY

MAYBE LOOK AT GENDER ISSUES IF IT IS NOT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR U
MAN ITS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS, NOW GO FIND A NEW THREAD

Rob_l

Xavi6 wrote: »

Fixed that for you

I think you got that spot on

guile45

guile45 wrote: »

READ IT IT SHOW MY POINT THAT CULTURE AND SOCIETAL CHANGE CAN EFFECT AND CHANGE THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A SOCIETY

MAYBE LOOK AT GENDER ISSUES IF IT IS NOT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR U
MAN ITS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS, NOW GO FIND A NEW THREAD

SAYS THE MAN WHO DOESNT BELIEVE HUMANS HAVE EVOLVED IN ANY WAY SINCE 1948 HA HA HA

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

READ IT IT SHOW MY POINT THAT CULTURE AND SOCIETAL CHANGE CAN EFFECT AND CHANGE THE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF A SOCIETY

MAYBE LOOK AT GENDER ISSUES IF IT IS NOT CLEAR ENOUGH FOR U
MAN ITS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS, NOW GO FIND A NEW THREAD

why dont you go and get me a piece of text that proves anything you have said about evolution since 1948 from that linky?
eh

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

SAYS THE MAN WHO DOESNT BELIEVE HUMANS HAVE EVOLVED IN ANY WAY SINCE 1948 HA HA HA

guiles linky wrote:

In many species, the two sexes are signficantly different in form. In some primate species, gorillas, for example, males are much larger and bulkier than females--in some cases, roughly twice the size of females.

This is the case also in the earliest Hominid species. Sexual difference or dimorphism is expressed in terms of a large size differential between males and females, much as it is in gorillas. On the right are thigh bones (femurs) of adult A. afarensis (3.5 million years old); the larger bones are male and the smaller female. At left, we see contrasted the skulls of male and female A. robustus (top) and Homo habilis (bottom), the first human species, which lived approximately 2 million years ago.

In living mammal species, size differentials of this scale are usually associated with male competition for "harems" of females--for example, in gorillas or sea lions. Indirect evidence of this kind is nearly all that survives in terms of clues about the social behavior of extinct Hominids. Interestingly, this huge size differential between males and females disappears in the human line roughly a million years ago, in Homo erectus. Does this change in anatomy reflect a significant change in behavior? Again, anatomy often provides clues about social behavior

see them bold bits guiley old boy

tribulus

You know things are serious when the caps lock comes on.

I reckon guile has read a few too many Flex magazines.

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

why dont you go and get me a piece of text that proves anything you have said about evolution since 1948 from that linky?
eh

WHY DONT U READ THE TEXT AND STOP LOOKIN FOR A QUICK FIX

Rob_l

Anyway im off home guile I hope the mods can deal with you personal attacks later eh

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

Anyway im off home guile I hope the mods can deal with you personal attacks later eh

YOU'RE ONE TO TALK

Rob_l

guile45 wrote: »

YOU'RE ONE TO TALK

Indeed I am guile indeed talking is one of the evolutionary steps i took since 1948

Wibbs

For a start guile45, calm down. You're presumably not a child so stop acting like one. You're reinforcing the idea that muscle types are reactionary idiots. If your arguments don't carry weight or you don't like the answers well ignore them, get better answers or stop posting simple as.

Your reference to evolution is so wrong it's laughable. Yes evolution in minute amounts happens between generations. There is nothing in the comparisons between old bodybuilders and new ones that explains the huge increase in body muscle. Yes the training has gotten better, the understanding of diet has increased, even so many of the early guys like Magick etc were very highly developed. They were not the size of the modern guys. No where close.. You clearly have no understanding of the changes that have occured in diet in the last 40 years that have increased height etc. These are not evolutionary changes but environmental. EG People of Japanes ancestry are taller in america than in japan, because of different diet, not evolution.

Anabolic steroid abuse is rife in professional bodybuilding, both male and female. While there are clean categories, the very fact they exist shows the use elsewhere.

This does not deny the work required to get to that size. Roids or not you have to put in the work, but roids make it easier to build bulk with the same input. If it didn't they wouldn't use them. The fact that you can't even understand the words anabolic and steroids is worrying. Can you even give me a definition

guile45

Rob_l wrote: »

Anyway im off home guile I hope the mods can deal with you personal attacks later eh

NO WONDER U WERE BULLIED AT SKOOL

tribulus

Wibbs wrote: »

For a start guile45, calm down. You're presumably not a child so stop acting like one.

I'd be amazed if he's over 18.

guile45 wrote:

I'M ACTUALLY 21 YOU TOSSER HAHAHHAHA

I stand corrected.

guile45

Wibbs wrote: »

For a start guile45, calm down. You're presumably not a child so stop acting like one. You're reinforcing the idea that muscle types are reactionary idiots. If your arguments don't carry weight or you don't like the answers well ignore them, get better answers or stop posting simple as.

Your reference to evolution is so wrong it's laughable. Yes evolution in minute amounts happens between generations. There is nothing in the comparisons between old bodybuilders and new ones that explains the huge increase in body muscle. Yes the training has gotten better, the understanding
of diet has increased, even so many of the early guys like Magick etc were very highly developed. They were not the size of the modern guys. No where close.. You clearly have no understanding of the changes that have occured in diet in the last 40 years that have increased height etc. These are not evolutionary changes but environmental. EG People of Japanes ancestry are taller in america than in japan, because of different diet, not evolution.

Anabolic steroid abuse is rife in professional bodybuilding, both male and female. While there are clean categories, the very fact they exist shows the use elsewhere.

This does not deny the work required to get to that size. Roids or not you have to put in the work, but roids make it easier to build bulk with the same input.

READ YOU'RE BOLD STATEMENT AND PLEASE REPHRASE UR ASSESSMENT OF MY INTELLIGENC, WHAT MAKES U SO HIGH AND MIGHTY? MUST I ACCEPT UR THEORIES AS CORRECT COS UR A MOD???
I HAVE A BA IN HUMANITIES AND AN MSC , I HAVE PRODUCED WORKS ON PSYCHOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, FEMINISM AND CULTURE OF THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY.... I HAVE A BROAD UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD OF BODYBUILDING, AND IF UR POINT IS..WHICH I HOPE IT IS NOT, IS THAT WHAT DIFFERS THESE GUYS FROM THE GUYS IN THE 1950s IS PILLS I AM AFRAID U ARE WRONG MATE...IF I WAS ABLE TO EARN MONEY FOR BODYBUILDING AND PUT IN AS MUCH TIME AND USE AS MUCH OF TODAYS TECHNOLOGY AS PRO BODYBUILDERS CAN, I WOULDNT HAVE MY 1950s PHYSIQUE, I WUD BE CLOSE TO WHAT THOSE GUYS HAVE....IF U LOOK AT THE EARLY BODYBUILDERS MANY DIDNT DEVDLOP ABS...ARE ABS A BYPRODUCT OF STERIODS??? NO THEY ARENT, PEOPLE LEARNED HOW TO TRAIN THAT SECTION OF THE BODY AND GET THAT PART OF THE BODY AS RIPPED AS THE REST, I SUPPOSE U COULD CALL THAT EVOLUTION..

tribulus

You were an arts student?

It's all making sense now...

guile45

Main Entry:
evo·lu·tion Listen to the pronunciation of evolution
Pronunciation:
\ˌe-və-ˈlü-shən, ˌē-və-\
Function:
noun
Etymology:
Latin evolution-, evolutio unrolling, from evolvere
Date:
1622

1: one of a set of prescribed movements2 a: a process of change in a certain direction : unfolding b: the action or an instance of forming and giving something off : emission c (1): a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state : growth (2): a process of gradual and relatively peaceful social, political, and economic advance d: something evolved3: the process of working out or developing

guile45

tribulus wrote: »

You were an arts student?

It's all making sense now...

mature

Wibbs

guile45 wrote: »

READ YOU'RE BOLD STATEMENT AND PLEASE REPHRASE UR ASSESSMENT OF MY INTELLIGENC, WHAT MAKES U SO HIGH AND MIGHTY? MUST I ACCEPT UR THEORIES AS CORRECT COS UR A MOD???
I HAVE A BA IN HUMANITIES AND AN MSC , I HAVE PRODUCED WORKS ON PSYCHOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, FEMINISM AND CULTURE OF THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY.... I HAVE A BROAD UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD OF BODYBUILDING, AND IF UR POINT IS..WHICH I HOPE IT IS NOT, IS THAT WHAT DIFFERS THESE GUYS FROM THE GUYS IN THE 1950s IS PILLS I AM AFRAID U ARE WRONG MATE...IF I WAS ABLE TO EARN MONEY FOR BODYBUILDING AND PUT IN AS MUCH TIME AND USE AS MUCH OF TODAYS TECHNOLOGY AS PRO BODYBUILDERS CAN, I WOULDNT HAVE MY 1950s PHYSIQUE, I WUD BE CLOSE TO WHAT THOSE GUYS HAVE....IF U LOOK AT THE EARLY BODYBUILDERS MANY DIDNT DEVDLOP ABS...ARE ABS A BYPRODUCT OF STERIODS??? NO THEY ARENT, PEOPLE LEARNED HOW TO TRAIN THAT SECTION OF THE BODY AND GET THAT PART OF THE BODY AS RIPPED AS THE REST, I SUPPOSE U COULD CALL THAT EVOLUTION..

If you have a cogent argument why do you have to resort to childish name calling and shouting? If you're an adult with all those qualifications why do feel the need to be so defensive? Makes no sense. There's a Chinese saying those who feel the need to raise their voice in an argument have already lost it.

guile45

Wibbs wrote: »

If you have a cogent argument why do you have to resort to childish name calling and shouting? If you're an adult with all those qualifications why do feel the need to be so defensive? Makes no sense. There's a Chinese saying those who feel the need to raise their voice in an argument have already lost it.

when i have to deal with his level of idiocy it had to happen

Wibbs

You picking out my text in bold still does you no favours. Diet is not evolution. Nt in the way you seem to understand it. If I have two twins(and I'm Dr mengele) and I starve one and overfeed another, the former will be weak and small, the latter will be bigger fatter and stronger. They have the same DNA, one has not evolved differently to the other. Do you get it now?

Please ease up on the caps lock.

Wibbs

guile45 wrote: »

when i have to deal with his level of idiocy it had to happen

In your opinion. You have hardly backed up your arguments with either good data or links. Those you have linked to do not back your claims. When you have been asked for such backup you resort to shouting and childish name calling. Surely one with such qualifications and knowledge should not need to start screaming like a 3 year old child? Stop projecting your own insecurities. It's unseemly in an adult and would not be tolerated in someone above the age of reason.

Karoma

guile45 banned. meh.

To the others (Not to single anyone out... Example: rob_l: retaliation / provocation may earn you a ban too. Report the post and move on.)

Wibbs

Indeed if you have produced works in psychology et al your behaviour and the reasons for same should be not difficult to see for you. Your over reactive stance when things don't go your way is basic projection of your insecurities. Physician heal thyself.

Wibbs

Karoma wrote: »

guile45 banned. meh.

Pity I was beginning to enjoy that. More issues than readers digest back catalogue. I suspect he was not the author of those Psychology "works", merely the subject.

Wibbs

Here's an example of a very early bodybuilder who without steroids clearly didn't develop abs....:D http://www.sandowmuseum.com/page134.html

Ignore the fig leaf

Red Hand

Wibbs wrote: »

Here's an example of a very early bodybuilder who without steroids clearly didn't develop abs....:D http://www.sandowmuseum.com/page134.html

Ignore the fig leaf

I say! A spiffing specimen!:p

MooseJam

Wibbs wrote: »

Here's an example of a very early bodybuilder who without steroids clearly didn't develop abs....:D http://www.sandowmuseum.com/page134.html

Ignore the fig leaf

whats abs ?

Smellyirishman

guile45 wrote: »

READ YOU'RE BOLD STATEMENT AND PLEASE REPHRASE UR ASSESSMENT OF MY INTELLIGENC, WHAT MAKES U SO HIGH AND MIGHTY? MUST I ACCEPT UR THEORIES AS CORRECT COS UR A MOD???
I HAVE A BA IN HUMANITIES AND AN MSC , I HAVE PRODUCED WORKS ON PSYCHOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, FEMINISM AND CULTURE OF THE 20TH AND 21ST CENTURY.... I HAVE A BROAD UNDERSTANDING OF THE WORLD OF BODYBUILDING, AND IF UR POINT IS..WHICH I HOPE IT IS NOT, IS THAT WHAT DIFFERS THESE GUYS FROM THE GUYS IN THE 1950s IS PILLS I AM AFRAID U ARE WRONG MATE...IF I WAS ABLE TO EARN MONEY FOR BODYBUILDING AND PUT IN AS MUCH TIME AND USE AS MUCH OF TODAYS TECHNOLOGY AS PRO BODYBUILDERS CAN, I WOULDNT HAVE MY 1950s PHYSIQUE, I WUD BE CLOSE TO WHAT THOSE GUYS HAVE....IF U LOOK AT THE EARLY BODYBUILDERS MANY DIDNT DEVDLOP ABS...ARE ABS A BYPRODUCT OF STERIODS??? NO THEY ARENT, PEOPLE LEARNED HOW TO TRAIN THAT SECTION OF THE BODY AND GET THAT PART OF THE BODY AS RIPPED AS THE REST, I SUPPOSE U COULD CALL THAT EVOLUTION..

Code Red, Code Red.

'roid rage.

ninebeanrows

Nooooo muscles on gurls are not nice,

Sure theyd show me up, and that just aint allowed!

Red Hand

Feminism and body-building=bad idea.