What's your favoured physique on men?

pragmatic1

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Here's a good example of what I'd consider attractive body wise (face in this is meh.)

http://evolvify.com/files/2011/02/claybeforeafterdatesbigger.jpg

First pic is what a lot of guys look like, not fat but not in shape.

Second is my ideal, just toned but not all horrible and ripped-y

Third the guy has gone too far and now looks weird. The thing is a lot of guys who are into gyms etc think this is the ideal, ie, sub 10% body fat. I know I and several of my girlfriends find this really unattractive.

12% body fat is where it's at :cool:

You think pic one is out of shape. Bloody hell.

hondasam

OutlawPete wrote: »

I look something along the lines of this when just out of bed.

Pete

OutlawPete wrote: »

/eats ice cream and cries

children like ice cream

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Awww, don't worry Pete, you have a lovely personality..

have you seen the pic ?

Oranage2

surely it all comes down the the size of his wallet?

snooleen

Nice hands, nice arms (but not too muscular. In fact, I don't mind no muscle at all as long as they're kind of toned looking), pale, dark hair, preferrably curly and tall. Tall very good None of these are requirements though, just preference Actually maybe nice hands is a requirement...

Klingon Hamlet

"Er, what's that bulge?"
"Umm, it's my wallet."
Pause.
"I didn't know they make wallets that small..."

silverspoon

liah wrote: »

Too bad I'm not in Ireland :pac:

Honestly, any guy I've met seems to think they need to be super muscled to get girls, yet most of the girls I've talked to don't like the whole six pack thing. I mean, sure, some do.. but not as many as you'd think.

I find it's guys who're more attracted to the six pack than girls Was horrified when my ex started talking about going to the gym 'cuz he wanted one. Eugh. Natural muscle or none, but gym muscle = complete turn-off for me.

This is very true, overly muscular is unattractive. My definition of overly-muscular as far of those pictures are concerned would actually fall into the second picture. That third picture looks like the poor guy has become obsessed. That or fallen into a vat of radioactive waste. Definitely in the first picture the guy looks best, he's not fat and he has a nice chest that doesn't look like it would cut my cheek if I put my head on it. In fact it's the exact kind of body type that most guys I've been involved with have had, and in reality am most attracted to.

El_Dangeroso

pragmatic1 wrote: »

You think pic one is out of shape. Bloody hell.

Not out of shape, but definitely not 'in' it either

Just a bit soft, little bit of an estrogen belly going on too, even if it hasn't extended to full blown visceral-fat gut.

Men and women are supposed to look different. Women are supposed to be the soft ones. Hence why we lose our menstrual cycle if we go too low on body fat.

I wonder from the responses on this thread if there isn't some kind of role reversal going on where women now prefer slightly softer men due to the changing role of men in society.

stovelid

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Just a bit soft, little bit of an estrogen belly going on too, even if it hasn't extended to full blown visceral-fat gut.

You make it sound like a gory flesh eating disease.

pragmatic1

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Not out of shape, but definitely not 'in' it either

Just a bit soft, little bit of an estrogen belly going on too, even if it hasn't extended to full blown visceral-fat gut.

Men and women are supposed to look different. Women are supposed to be the soft ones. Hence why we lose our menstrual cycle if we go too low on body fat.

I wonder from the responses on this thread if there isn't some kind of role reversal going on where women now prefer slightly softer men due to the changing role of men in society.

I'd say hes healthy looking. If he did have high levels of estrogen the fat would be deposited more in his hips and chest. I agree men and women should look different and it doesnt look good when the roles reverse too much, but two and especially three havent been the default since hunter-gatherer days.

silverspoon

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Not out of shape, but definitely not 'in' it either

Just a bit soft, little bit of an estrogen belly going on too, even if it hasn't extended to full blown visceral-fat gut.

Men and women are supposed to look different. Women are supposed to be the soft ones. Hence why we lose our menstrual cycle if we go too low on body fat.

I wonder from the responses on this thread if there isn't some kind of role reversal going on where women now prefer slightly softer men due to the changing role of men in society.

That man in the first picture does not look effeminate. Or soft. God, you'd swear he had boobs or something. He looks great. I think he looks miles better in the first picture than when he's 'all man' in the third. He looks manly yet like he would give a nice cuddle in the first picture. I wouldn't want a machine for a boyfriend, and it's nothing to do with the role of men in society.

I take your point that men don't need to be the 'hunter-gatherer' any more in society so there's been a shift in terms of how physically strong a man needs to be. But I don't think we're at the stage were men are becoming more 'feminine'-looking just because they don't need to go out on the prowl for a nice deer for supper. Men haven't need to 'hunt and gather' in the western world for a very long time so I don't know that it's a recent phenomenon or anything. And what the hell is an 'oestrogen belly'?

Dwellingdweller

pragmatic1 wrote: »

I'd say hes healthy looking. If he did have high levels of estrogen the fat would be deposited more in his hips and chest. I agree men and women should look different and it doesnt look good when the roles reverse too much, but two and especially three havent been the default since hunter-gatherer days.

since when was being a hunter-gatherer a bad thing?
*rushes off to finish latest cave painting*

pragmatic1

Dwellingdweller wrote: »

since when was being a hunter-gatherer a bad thing?
*rushes off to finish latest cave painting*

Never said it was a bad thing. But back in those times the look was achieved by not knowing where the next meal was coming from.

Dudess

If a person's really into fitness I can understand them being drawn to those who have fit, athletic builds, but not living up to that is not a sign of a person who's in crap shape.

Up-n-atom!

I'd have to say I prefer picture 1 or 2 of that guy. Picture 3 looks a bit much, but if he was an athlete or had to be super fit for his job (say he was a fitness coach or something) I'd understand it. Actually, a shape somewhere between 1 and 2 would be pretty much perfect imo. I'd agree that #1 would be a fairly normal shape here, I wouldn't have any complaints with it!

Dwellingdweller

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Never said it was a bad thing. But back in those times the look was achieved by not knowing where the next meal was coming from.

I'd disagree. I'd say it was achieved more by being on the brink of starvation near-constantly and having to have the raw strength to wrestle large animals to the ground and then kill them, rather then simply not knowing where the next meal was coming from. :cool: All that would have given them is a serious case of the worries.

sunflower27

Up-n-atom! wrote: »

I'd have to say I prefer picture 1 or 2 of that guy. Picture 3 looks a bit much, but if he was an athlete or had to be super fit for his job (say he was a fitness coach or something) I'd understand it. Actually, a shape somewhere between 1 and 2 would be pretty much perfect imo. I'd agree that #1 would be a fairly normal shape here, I wouldn't have any complaints with it!

I agree, between 1 and 2 for me as well. Number 3... just Urgh.:p

El_Dangeroso

silverspoon wrote: »

That man in the first picture does not look effeminate. Or soft. God, you'd swear he had boobs or something. He looks great. I think he looks miles better in the first picture than when he's 'all man' in the third. He looks manly yet like he would give a nice cuddle in the first picture. I wouldn't want a machine for a boyfriend, and it's nothing to do with the role of men in society.

I take your point that men don't need to be the 'hunter-gatherer' any more in society so there's been a shift in terms of how physically strong a man needs to be. But I don't think we're at the stage were men are becoming more 'feminine'-looking just because they don't need to go out on the prowl for a nice deer for supper. Men haven't need to 'hunt and gather' in the western world for a very long time so I don't know that it's a recent phenomenon or anything. And what the hell is an 'oestrogen belly'?

He has no discernible muscle tone. I don't mean to upset anyone, loads of guys look like him, well loads of white western men with desk jobs look like him (and so much worse). But it's a simple fact that a huge defining factor between the physique of a woman and a man is the amount of lean muscle each carries. Hence why women who are overtly muscular are often viewed as having mannish characteristics.

How would you know that the changing role of men in society doesn't determine your sexual selection preferences? We are rarely aware of the cultural and biological influences on our decisions. All preferences are culturally or biologically determined. I know it's a nice thought that we're all unique little snowflakes with self-determination, but a neuroscientist would tend to disagree with you.

pragmatic1

Dwellingdweller wrote: »

I'd disagree. I'd say it was achieved more by being on the brink of starvation near-constantly and having to have the raw strength to wrestle large animals to the ground and then kill them, rather then simply not knowing where the next meal was coming from. :cool: All that would have given them is a serious case of the worries.

Nah humans rarely relied on brute strength to hunt. A four foot chimp would rip the face off a heavyweight MMA fighter, chew it and spit it back.

WindSock

I think gay men seem to prefer the macho gym sculpted bodies than women.

EverEvolving

I prefer broad shoulders with nice arms and not too skinny but not too fat. My ex relationships have had those features as does my current relationship. They make better cuddlers! I do appreciate looking at a toned body but it's not something I would consider a pre-requisite for initial attraction.

Dwellingdweller

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Nah humans rarely relied on brute strength to hunt. A four foot chimp would rip the face off a heavyweight MMA fighter, chew it and spit it back.

Oh. Good to know.

OutlawPete

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

Awww, don't worry Pete, you have a lovely personality..

:mad:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=63135178#post63135178

silverspoon

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

He has no discernible muscle tone. I don't mean to upset anyone, loads of guys look like him, well loads of white western men with desk jobs look like him (and so much worse). But it's a simple fact that a huge defining factor between the physique of a woman and a man is the amount of lean muscle each carries. Hence why women who are overtly muscular are often viewed as having mannish characteristics.

How would you know that the changing role of men in society doesn't determine your sexual selection preferences? We are rarely aware of the cultural and biological influences on our decisions. All preferences are culturally or biologically determined. I know it's a nice thought that we're all unique little snowflakes with self-determination, but a neuroscientist would tend to disagree with you.

Yes, I do understand that women are supposed to be softer than men and have a higher body fat percentage. What I'm disputing is your suggestion that because the guy in the first picture isn't beefed up, that he's not as manly. He's not particularly toned but I wouldn't call him soft. A man can be fit without being particularly muscly no? I just think the guy in the third picture is crazily beefed up and that it's not something achievable without a seriously intense weight-based workout regime. I don't regard it as natural as it wouldn't happen unless he did exactly that. I don't reject the idea that our attractions are biologically and culturally based; I reject the idea that that beefed-up man symbolises the 'manly' man women are apparently rejecting in favour of softer men. I would regard picture number two as representing that masculine man. I just think the guy in the third picture looks like he has an obsession with bodybuilding and doesn't really represent a 'masculine' man because I don't think that would happen in the ordinary course of life.

El_Dangeroso

El_Dangeroso wrote: »

I wonder from the responses on this thread if there isn't some kind of role reversal going on where women now prefer slightly softer men due to the changing role of men in society.

Maybe they just don't know any better.
Society doesn't encourage us to be as leery, as our male counterparts.
If you asked me to spell out my ideal type today. I'd basically be throwing a description of himself at you, because that is the physique I'm busy associating my lustiness with.


I prefer number two btw.

the groutch

silverspoon wrote: »

This is very true, overly muscular is unattractive. My definition of overly-muscular as far of those pictures are concerned would actually fall into the second picture. That third picture looks like the poor guy has become obsessed. That or fallen into a vat of radioactive waste. Definitely in the first picture the guy looks best, he's not fat and he has a nice chest that doesn't look like it would cut my cheek if I put my head on it. In fact it's the exact kind of body type that most guys I've been involved with have had, and in reality am most attracted to.

hey, how you doin?

El_Dangeroso

OutlawPete wrote: »

:mad:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?p=63135178#post63135178

Tongue in cheek? No? No? Ok..

silverspoon wrote: »

Yes, I do understand that women are supposed to be softer than men and have a higher body fat percentage. What I'm disputing is your suggestion that because the guy in the first picture isn't beefed up, that he's not as manly. He's not particularly toned but I wouldn't call him soft. A man can be fit without being particularly muscly no? I just think the guy in the third picture is crazily beefed up and that it's not something achievable without a seriously intense weight-based workout regime. I don't regard it as natural as it wouldn't happen unless he did exactly that. I don't reject the idea that our attractions are biologically and culturally based; I reject the idea that that beefed-up man symbolises the 'manly' man women are apparently rejecting in favour of softer men. I would regard picture number two as representing that masculine man. I just think the guy in the third picture looks like he has an obsession with bodybuilding and doesn't really represent a 'masculine' man because I don't think that would happen in the ordinary course of life.

I agree man number three isn't ideal for most women, plus this level of low body fat and muscularity doesn't always translate into health and longevity. There's a reason that pic three really makes most women go 'No thanks' and that's because it's not optimal for fertility.

If your going off purely evolutionary reasons, the physique of number two gives is associated with higher fertility (better hormone profile). Same way a good waist to hip ratio on a woman indicates fertility and the likelyhood of bearing healthy children.

Will there be people who'll disagree with me, and that's fine, but they occupy the edges of the bell curve. When extensive studies are done on this kind of thing, physique number two comes out as more attractive than physique number one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_attractiveness

This is merely superficial people. I'm not saying it's the sole or even most important factor that determines choice of a mate, but all things being equal, most women prefer a toned man with a decent amount of lean muscle.

pragmatic1

Dwellingdweller wrote: »

Oh. Good to know.

Ya learn something new everyday.

Dwellingdweller

pragmatic1 wrote: »

Ya learn something new everyday.

Speakin of which..
http://www.learnsomethingeveryday.co.uk/
OT I know but ya might get a laugh or two outta it. :P

MrPain

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

bodice ripper

I like both obscenely skinny nerds and chunky hairy metal heads

El_Dangeroso

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

Well the second guy clearly waxes his pubes.

bodice ripper

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

I wouldn't find either of those chaps remotely attractive

hondasam

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

The are both ok. imagine the time it takes to maintain that body. They would be health freaks as well.

Teyla Emmagan

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

Both awful. And somehow ridiculous looking.

Anyway, no woman wants to go out with a man who spends more time on his own body then on hers

silverspoon

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

It's nice and all, I appreciate someone taking care of their bodies and being fit. And they're at the pinnacle of fitness and in a good way (I suppose) as opposed to the poor guy who went crazy on the bodybuilding. But it's not what I'd go for really. It just doesn't do it for me. I know women are supposed to find that really sexy but it's just not that sexy to me. It's too pec-in-my-face. I feel like their chests are actually looking at me.

I just like someone to be healthy, and yeah a bit toned is certainly nice. But big muscles and a six-pack, cut-like-a-diamond torso, while I know it's sexy as hell for lots of women, is just too much for me. I just don't find it attractive.

Refugee from RealLife

According to this thread I am perfectly formed. Happy days and even happier nights to come.

liah

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

Definite no thanks!

I think it might have something to do with vanity not being a particularly desirable trait in a man, and if you put that much time and effort into your body it could be construed that it's due to vanity or obsession (either with health or with body image, imho obsession about anything, even health, isn't healthy). Not that these are the only reasons for working out to that level, but you don't need to look like that just to be healthy. To me, it just looks completely unnatural and makes me wonder about the guy's ego. No offense to anyone reading who may look like that.

I mean, I have a lot of respect for the effort and dedication that goes into achieving a body like that. I just really wouldn't want a partner to be spending that amount of time on their body at the expense of everything else or being so obsessed with his self-image that he thinks he needs to look like that.

Natural muscle all the way, from hobbies or jobs like swimming or building or something. Absolutely nothing sexier than a guy with a bit of natural muscle from doing something productive or something he loves. But none of this build/cut/suck down protein shakes just to get the perfect bod stuff. It's.. girly!

Waste0fSpace

MrPain wrote: »

I personally dont think that guy has the best muscle shape genetics which may affect your view on him.
These both pics are of guys at similar bodyfat levels:
http://www.iconmen.com/images/the_icon_men/models/enlarge/1000007.jpg
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_opkI5kI1V_M/TRs27POxoJI/AAAAAAAAADc/UnU-Tk_CTvc/s1600/Shredded+zyzz.jpg
I, as a straight guy, struggle to see how a female could not find that attractive.

No thanks, I'll have that guy from pic#1

Cianos

liah wrote: »

Definite no thanks!

I think it might have something to do with vanity not being a particularly desirable trait in a man, and if you put that much time and effort into your body it could be construed that it's due to vanity or obsession (either with health or with body image, imho obsession about anything, even health, isn't healthy). Not that these are the only reasons for working out to that level, but you don't need to look like that just to be healthy. To me, it just looks completely unnatural and makes me wonder about the guy's ego. No offense to anyone reading who may look like that.

I mean, I have a lot of respect for the effort and dedication that goes into achieving a body like that. I just really wouldn't want a partner to be spending that amount of time on their body at the expense of everything else or being so obsessed with his self-image that he thinks he needs to look like that.

Natural muscle all the way, from hobbies or jobs like swimming or building or something. Absolutely nothing sexier than a guy with a bit of natural muscle from doing something productive or something he loves. But none of this build/cut/suck down protein shakes just to get the perfect bod stuff. It's.. girly!

As a guy it's nice to hear this

Rabies

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

W00t, I'm quitting the gym.

I'll take your place there.

I've become extra squishy in past 6 months
But girls like it, weird. Even girls I'd never expect.

Women, you're weird creatures!

Sephiroth_dude

Rabies wrote: »

I'll take your place there.

I've become extra squishy in past 6 months
But girls like it, weird. Even girls I'd never expect.

Women, you're weird creatures!

Indeed......I've learned alot from this thread,thanks wimmins :pac:

DaveDaRave

Just started to eat healthy and build a lot of muscle then i read that even the Zyzz isn't attractive to women, fúck, guess ill just go gay.

estadio

As a [straight] male ,
i think the most important thing to women is the physique of our wallet.

gargleblaster

liah wrote: »

Definite no thanks!

I think it might have something to do with vanity not being a particularly desirable trait in a man, and if you put that much time and effort into your body it could be construed that it's due to vanity or obsession (either with health or with body image, imho obsession about anything, even health, isn't healthy). Not that these are the only reasons for working out to that level, but you don't need to look like that just to be healthy. To me, it just looks completely unnatural and makes me wonder about the guy's ego. No offense to anyone reading who may look like that.

I mean, I have a lot of respect for the effort and dedication that goes into achieving a body like that. I just really wouldn't want a partner to be spending that amount of time on their body at the expense of everything else or being so obsessed with his self-image that he thinks he needs to look like that.

Natural muscle all the way, from hobbies or jobs like swimming or building or something. Absolutely nothing sexier than a guy with a bit of natural muscle from doing something productive or something he loves. But none of this build/cut/suck down protein shakes just to get the perfect bod stuff. It's.. girly!

That's unfair actually. Some men might have a harder time maintaining a very sexy muscular and cut physique, but some men get that just from hobbies like swimming or just regular working out.

And God bless them for it!

TeddyTedson

DaveDaRave wrote: »

Just started to eat healthy and build a lot of muscle then i read that even the Zyzz isn't attractive to women, fúck, guess ill just go gay.

What the hell is that?

TeddyTedson

I think this is bull that girls like "Poppin Fresh" guys.
It's all about 6 packs and steroids.

Magic Eight Ball

liah wrote: »

Definite no thanks!

I think it might have something to do with vanity not being a particularly desirable trait in a man, and if you put that much time and effort into your body it could be construed that it's due to vanity or obsession (either with health or with body image, imho obsession about anything, even health, isn't healthy). Not that these are the only reasons for working out to that level, but you don't need to look like that just to be healthy. To me, it just looks completely unnatural and makes me wonder about the guy's ego. No offense to anyone reading who may look like that.

I mean, I have a lot of respect for the effort and dedication that goes into achieving a body like that. I just really wouldn't want a partner to be spending that amount of time on their body at the expense of everything else or being so obsessed with his self-image that he thinks he needs to look like that.

Natural muscle all the way, from hobbies or jobs like swimming or building or something. Absolutely nothing sexier than a guy with a bit of natural muscle from doing something productive or something he loves. But none of this build/cut/suck down protein shakes just to get the perfect bod stuff. It's.. girly!

I Love You!

In all seriousness this post is quite refreshing. I was starting to give up on the female of the species, especially with my recent gf experiences.

It's nice to see not all women are as shallow as a paddling pool.

gargleblaster

Magic Eight Ball wrote: »

I Love You!

In all seriousness this post is quite refreshing. I was starting to give up on the female of the species, especially with my recent gf experiences.

It's nice to see not all women are as shallow as a paddling pool.

:pac:

BraziliaNZ

Regardless of what a few women have said here, women seem to hold looks as equally important as men do, from my experience. So don't get too excited all you ugly out of shape men!

FlutterinBantam

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

Regardless of what a few women have said here, women seem to hold looks as equally important as men do, from my experience. So don't get too excited all you ugly out of shape men!

Sounds like the reply of a fairly sour and bitter dough girl to me.

Doubt if she'd excite too much.:rolleyes: