What if Men Had to Follow Female Beauty Rules?

[MrNate]

MrNate, I'm glad you looked up some things earlier, but I still don't think you understand the female weight loss process. Most women have a definite floor. Now, I don't know if most men have a definite ceiling for muscles. But for basic weight maintenance, men definitely have it easier (just staying relatively trim).

 

Well i think a fat loss process is better than a weight loss process, and I know it's not that much more different than men trying to lose weight. Every human being has floors and ceilings pertaining to anything, we weren't created without physical limits. But I will acknowledge that there can be some differences due to the estrogen hormone. Again however, I don't think men have a significant advantage, and that the female weight loss process is some new, revolutionary scientific process that's never been brought to light. This is frankly something I firmly believe and my opinion is fairly solid on this.

 

I'm sure we all know of very few women and men who actually put in work and give 100% in attaining their goals, and achieving the body their truly capable of. It's much more a case of 'work a little, and expect results of someone who works a lot'. The truly hard workers find a way to their goals no matter what, and bring out their genetic potential. I think this is why people with exceptional physiques are hard to find, and they're often accompanied with great discipline.

[MrNate]

I think he's hot not scary looking.

 

Regarding the article, I think both genders receive an even amount of pressure. Women are pushed to be thin, youthful and look like air brushed models without looking like they're trying to hard.

 

For men I think the pressure is slightly different. Men definitely get the pressure about appearance (tall, dark & handsome) but it goes past that. Men are also expected to be tough, masculine providers while not completely lacking a tender loving side.

 

I think these rules and expectations can be tough on both genders.

 

This is the best thing I think can be taken from this discussion. I think everything balances out evenly, and neither gender has a 'harder' life. We have it easier in certain places, and harder in others.

[Enchanted Girl]

Well i think a fat loss process is better than a weight loss process, and I know it's not that much more different than men trying to lose weight. Every human being has floors and ceilings pertaining to anything, we weren't created without physical limits. But I will acknowledge that there can be some differences due to the estrogen hormone. Again however, I don't think men have a significant advantage, and that the female weight loss process is some new, revolutionary scientific process that's never been brought to light. This is frankly something I firmly believe and my opinion is fairly solid on this.

 

I'm sure we all know of very few women and men who actually put in work and give 100% in attaining their goals, and achieving the body their truly capable of. It's much more a case of 'work a little, and expect results of someone who works a lot'. The truly hard workers find a way to their goals no matter what, and bring out their genetic potential. I think this is why people with exceptional physiques are hard to find, and they're often accompanied with great discipline.

 

I think you joined the debate at the wrong time, honestly, and got a misrepresentation of what was going on there.

 

The person I was debating with insisted that men had a harder time getting in shape and I was just listing ways that dieting was hard for women really. He said it wasn't as hard for us because we don't have to lift those heavy weights and stuff.

[zengirl]

I'm not talking about the limits of what's possible (though there are limits). I'm talking about the process, and the difficulty of it.

 

There are people with IQs below 100 who can become rocket scientists if they want, but that doesn't mean it isn't much easier with someone of an IQ of 144 to do so, and saying it's "All about how hard you work" is just silly. Especially when considering deeply ingrained evolutionary biology.

 

Well i think a fat loss process is better than a weight loss process, and I know it's not that much more different than men trying to lose weight.

 

It is WAY different from men trying to lose weight. Anyone with a background in physiology will tell you this. Male bodies and female bodies are not the same, and that includes weight loss.

 

But I will acknowledge that there can be some differences due to the estrogen hormone.

 

Well, it is not purely the estrogen hormone, though that contributes.

 

Again however, I don't think men have a significant advantage, and that the female weight loss process is some new, revolutionary scientific process that's never been brought to light. This is frankly something I firmly believe and my opinion is fairly solid on this.

 

You can firmly believe all you like. Some people firmly believe there were no dinosaurs even though we've found these giant bones and all this geological and fossil evidence. Some people firmly believe that they're having legitimate conversations with the people in their heads.

 

There is actual scientific data that disputes your "opinion" by people who are educated in the subjects. (I'm not talking about Jenny Craig or anything; I'm talking about the biology of how people's bodies work.) It's not a "revolutionary, new scientific process that's never been brought to light." It's basic human biology, genetics, physiology, and science. New applications may be made, and further scientific discoveries and studies can be conducted, of course (We don't know everything about our own bodies, biologically) but it's not like it's some kind of fad.

 

I'm sure we all know of very few women and men who actually put in work and give 100% in attaining their goals, and achieving the body their truly capable of. It's much more a case of 'work a little, and expect results of someone who works a lot'.

 

As I pointed out with my early analogy about rocket science, the people who get better results with anything on Earth aren't always (or even usually) the people who "work the hardest" at it. I'm not saying that means people shouldn't work hard for whatever they want, but it's silly to say that one person worked harder than another by judging their results.

 

Personally, I don't know what an "exceptional physique" even is. To me, exercise is important to stay healthy, but I don't spend much time on exercise I don't like (I will throw in a few 30 minute sets of cardio if I haven't been able to do something genuinely fun and active). I feel better when I eat good, wholesome foods. I kind of take the European mindset with food -- eat a little of everything, focus more on what's good in the food you eat than what you should limit, and love the food you eat. I'm thin, I'm clearly a bit toned (though not strong), I'm not judged by my weight, so I suppose it would be better for me just to let folks think, "Well, staying in shape is all about working hard." But I know that, truthfully, it's about many things.

 

I also just like science and don't much like it when folks ignore science in favor of their own skewed perceptions.

[MrNate]

I think you joined the debate at the wrong time, honestly, and got a misrepresentation of what was going on there.

 

The person I was debating with insisted that men had a harder time getting in shape and I was just listing ways that dieting was hard for women really. He said it wasn't as hard for us because we don't have to lift those heavy weights and stuff.

 

 

I see, though effective dieting is something most people don't know how to do, but we've already discussed that. It all just boils down to working hard to achieve your goals, and it's definitely possible for anyone.

[zengirl]

Wanted to add. . .

 

For the record, I don't know if it's harder for men to build ripped muscles or woman to get stick thin, honestly, but I do think that take two "average" people, one male and one female, and the male can jump-start basic weight loss (healthy, trimming, toning weight loss) much easier. Most studies show this. Women have to get around more body obstacles. That's what I mean with weight loss.

 

I also wanted to add that, yes, everyone can be a "healthy weight" for them. That's totally achievable. Of course, a healthy weight for me is around a size 2, and it'd be damn near impossible for me ever to be above a size 6. Even as my metabolism slows down, it's the same as my mother -- she eats all day long, barely exercises, and she's a size 6. She looks like she's in WAY better shape than she is. A healthy weight for some women might be a size 12. Really. Body types differ. (This is true with men, too, I'm sure.)

[monkeymaid]

so is this thread about science and aesthetics or social contexts of beauty roles being reversed as far as gender ??

[MrNate]

I'm not talking about the limits of what's possible (though there are limits). I'm talking about the process, and the difficulty of it.

 

There are people with IQs below 100 who can become rocket scientists if they want, but that doesn't mean it isn't much easier with someone of an IQ of 144 to do so, and saying it's "All about how hard you work" is just silly. Especially when considering deeply ingrained evolutionary biology.

 

 

 

It is WAY different from men trying to lose weight. Anyone with a background in physiology will tell you this. Male bodies and female bodies are not the same, and that includes weight loss.

 

 

 

Well, it is not purely the estrogen hormone, though that contributes.

 

 

You can firmly believe all you like. Some people firmly believe there were no dinosaurs even though we've found these giant bones and all this geological and fossil evidence. Some people firmly believe that they're having legitimate conversations with the people in their heads.

 

There is actual scientific data that disputes your "opinion" by people who are educated in the subjects. (I'm not talking about Jenny Craig or anything; I'm talking about the biology of how people's bodies work.) It's not a "revolutionary, new scientific process that's never been brought to light." It's basic human biology, genetics, physiology, and science. New applications may be made, and further scientific discoveries and studies can be conducted, of course (We don't know everything about our own bodies, biologically) but it's not like it's some kind of fad.

 

 

 

As I pointed out with my early analogy about rocket science, the people who get better results with anything on Earth aren't always (or even usually) the people who "work the hardest" at it. I'm not saying that means people shouldn't work hard for whatever they want, but it's silly to say that one person worked harder than another by judging their results.

 

Personally, I don't know what an "exceptional physique" even is. To me, exercise is important to stay healthy, but I don't spend much time on exercise I don't like (I will throw in a few 30 minute sets of cardio if I haven't been able to do something genuinely fun and active). I feel better when I eat good, wholesome foods. I kind of take the European mindset with food -- eat a little of everything, focus more on what's good in the food you eat than what you should limit, and love the food you eat. I'm thin, I'm clearly a bit toned (though not strong), I'm not judged by my weight, so I suppose it would be better for me just to let folks think, "Well, staying in shape is all about working hard." But I know that, truthfully, it's about many things.

 

I also just like science and don't much like it when folks ignore science in favor of their own skewed perceptions.

 

Hey Ms. Zen, aside from some personal attacks on me, I never said women and men's bodies were the same. If you want to get in shape, you have to do work, again I stand by that opinion. And work includes several things, but clearly we have different opinions on what 'hard work' is, and we will have to agree to disagree. I don't recall ignoring science either, but hey, whatever works. I would've loved to continue this discussion, but when someone starts spewing low embedded insults, I lose interest rather quickly, and is a sign it's time to leave ship. I will always believe in hard work when attaining a goal. Regardless, I'm done here, and wished you could have kept the discussion to the issue with out the subtle attacks, and that's something I firmly believe.

 

Have a good one.

[zengirl]

Hey Ms. Zen, aside from some personal attacks on me, I never said women and men's bodies were the same. If you want to get in shape, you have to do work, again I stand by that opinion. And work includes several things, but clearly we have different opinions on what 'hard work' is, and we will have to agree to disagree. I don't recall ignoring science either, but hey, whatever works. I would've loved to continue this discussion, but when someone starts spewing low embedded insults, I lose interest rather quickly, and is a sign it's time to leave ship. I will always believe in hard work when attaining a goal. Regardless, I'm done here, and wished you could have kept the discussion to the issue with out the subtle attacks, and that's something I firmly believe.

 

Have a good one.

 

You ignored science by saying that male and female weight loss were the same. I quoted you at one point.

 

I wasn't attacking you; I was attacking your ideas because you refused to research the science behind the claims you made, Re: How weight loss physically works.

 

ETA: Okay, I guess I was attacking you a bit, as you are your ideas and your words, but I don't consider it a "personal attack." That's like saying I was attacking a politician through "personal attacks" by examining their voting record. I think pointing out the fallacy of someone's word -- their record -- on a thread is anything but personal.

[MrNate]

so is this thread about science and aesthetics or social contexts of beauty roles being reversed as far as gender ??

 

I don't know. I thought it was about the fundamentals of getting in shape and the different methods one may have to imply to achieve it. (such as cardio, light calorie cuting, weights, motivation, etc.)

 

But apparently, despite my great discussions with hokie and enchanted, on what works on women and men, I was waddling around in ignorance over the subject. I'm sad it deviated. We probably could've left with some great ideas for everyone to consider as far as enhancing physical attractiveness.

[MrNate]

You ignored science by saying that male and female weight loss were the same. I quoted you at one point.

 

I wasn't attacking you; I was attacking your ideas because you refused to research the science behind the claims you made, Re: How weight loss physically works.

 

ETA: Okay, I guess I was attacking you a bit, as you are your ideas and your words, but I don't consider it a "personal attack." That's like saying I was attacking a politician through "personal attacks" by examining their voting record. I think pointing out the fallacy of someone's word -- their record -- on a thread is anything but personal.

 

An indirect attack is just as bad as a direct one. I don't care if you attacked my ideas, but when you started implying (very subtly, which are things I notice) that I'm stupid, and slapping insults (such as your unnecessary dinosaur comment) then that's when I lost interest big time. Your comment a bit further up is all I think that was necessary for you to say to get your point across. We don't need to result to insulting the intelligence of someone we don't know.

[zengirl]

An indirect attack is just as bad as a direct one. I don't care if you attacked my ideas, but when you started implying (very subtly, which are things I notice) that I'm stupid, and slapping insults (such as your unnecessary dinosaur comment) then that's when I lost interest big time. Your comment a bit further up is all I think that was necessary for you to say to get your point across. We don't need to result to insulting the intelligence of someone we don't know.

 

For the record, I'm not implying you're stupid. I don't think you're stupid. stating -- not implying -- that you've chosen to focus on your personal opinions and beliefs rather than look into how female weight loss works differently from male weight loss. (Using the words "firmly believe" definitely reminded me of those who deny dinosaurs existed. Why research anything when you firmly believe?)

 

You're the one who made a personal message to me. I was deconstructing your comments.

[monkeymaid]

ok, well then as a personal trainer, i will give my 2 cents.

 

scientifically speaking, men and women burn fat at whatever their bodies metabolic setpoint is. it can be manipulated with weight training, additional muscle mass, elevated heart rate, or exercise in general.

 

in my experience both as a fat man and a very fit man, some girls liked me as a teddy bear and some love me as a more socially savvy svelte sexy beast. i can say that i get more hot bodies as a fit guy than when i was a big guy, but i found more genuine girls when i was fat who liked me for me.

 

i would say women are sexy. period. i think that soft is sexy, but so is an athlete with abs and veins. curves a re my personal favorite, but i know really hot slender girls too.

 

as far as looking a certain way, i suppose that if we all stopped worrying about the people around us and the opposite sex, and focused on the way we feel about ourselves and how we feel in our skin, then we could put in the work to manipulate our bodies to what we wanted and then the opposite sex will find us for what we are and want to be rather than what the social status quo is.

 

im not sure if this coincids with this thread, but its sort of what o got from the gist of things.

[MrNate]

ok, well then as a personal trainer, i will give my 2 cents.

 

scientifically speaking, men and women burn fat at whatever their bodies metabolic setpoint is. it can be manipulated with weight training, additional muscle mass, elevated heart rate, or exercise in general.

 

in my experience both as a fat man and a very fit man, some girls liked me as a teddy bear and some love me as a more socially savvy svelte sexy beast. i can say that i get more hot bodies as a fit guy than when i was a big guy, but i found more genuine girls when i was fat who liked me for me.

 

i would say women are sexy. period. i think that soft is sexy, but so is an athlete with abs and veins. curves a re my personal favorite, but i know really hot slender girls too.

 

as far as looking a certain way, i suppose that if we all stopped worrying about the people around us and the opposite sex, and focused on the way we feel about ourselves and how we feel in our skin, then we could put in the work to manipulate our bodies to what we wanted and then the opposite sex will find us for what we are and want to be rather than what the social status quo is.

 

im not sure if this coincids with this thread, but its sort of what o got from the gist of things.

 

I agree with all of this. And as I stated earlier, genetic differences play their part, but a small one in the grand scheme. Anyone can achieve the body they want. If obese people can become very lean, then for most of the population, regardless of gene disposition, can achieve the results we want if we put in the work. If you try to get in shape to fit society's ideal, (which is impossible) and instead of getting the best shape for yourself, it won't last.

 

Great post.

[MrNate]

For the record, I'm not implying you're stupid. I don't think you're stupid. stating -- not implying -- that you've chosen to focus on your personal opinions and beliefs rather than look into how female weight loss works differently from male weight loss. (Using the words "firmly believe" definitely reminded me of those who deny dinosaurs existed. Why research anything when you firmly believe?)

 

You're the one who made a personal message to me. I was deconstructing your comments.

 

Just because I firmly believe something doesn't mean i'm ignorant to constant new findings, etc. That would imply that I'm not open to new ideas, which I am. When I see significant evidence to support something different to my ideas, I consider it. I also didn't ignore the female weight loss process, I even acknowledged it may be different due to estrogen and some other factors. But I stood by the fact that we have to do work and change things in our lifestyle to get the job done in the end. But again, in further discussions, it is entirely possible to talk to me without dealing low blows and incorrect implications. I look forward to that.

[monkeymaid]

and in case you were wondering i am 5'8" and used to be 265 lbs. i had a 44 inch waist, and couldnt fit in the average high school dsk.

 

now i am 5'8" 190lbs very well muscled i have a 33 inch waist and look like a fitness model.

 

so you understand the extremes i am talking about

 

 

...genetics actually does play a rather large factor as some people do not have the work ethic to apply fitness science to their life and achieve some drastic changes, but then again if we all had this ability, then places like LS and complaining in general wouldnt exist.

 

i complain about not knowing how to make money but its really just me not wanting to put in the very real work required, so am i really any different from someone who refuses to put in the work to loose weight or build muscle or train for a marathon or whatever other physical goal you can think of?

 

 

i think the only major difference between me and most other people is that i refuse to define myself by my mistakes and short comings. i chose to attempt improvement when they are presented to me.

 

ok enough rant. ...and in my opinion this applies to men and women alike.

[MrNate]

and in case you were wondering i am 5'8" and used to be 265 lbs. i had a 44 inch waist, and couldnt fit in the average high school dsk.

 

now i am 5'8" 190lbs very well muscled i have a 33 inch waist and look like a fitness model.

so you understand the extremes i am talking about

 

 

...genetics actually does play a rather large factor as some people do not have the work ethic to apply fitness science to their life and achieve some drastic changes, but then again if we all had this ability, then places like LS and complaining in general wouldnt exist.

 

i complain about not knowing how to make money but its really just me not wanting to put in the very real work required, so am i really any different from someone who refuses to put in the work to loose weight or build muscle or train for a marathon or whatever other physical goal you can think of?

 

 

i think the only major difference between me and most other people is that i refuse to define myself by my mistakes and short comings. i chose to attempt improvement when they are presented to me.

 

ok enough rant. ...and in my opinion this applies to men and women alike.

 

See? That's why I stand by hard work and discipline, there are just too many results to indicate otherwise. You got to a point where you were unhappy with yourself, and decided to make a change to bring out the best in your physique. If you made such a huge change, I think it's also entirely possible for many, many others out there.

 

And I probably downplayed genes a bit, which definitely play their part as a piece to the puzzle. I agree with everything you wrote.

[zengirl]

Just because I firmly believe something doesn't mean i'm ignorant to constant new findings, etc. That would imply that I'm not open to new ideas, which I am. When I see significant evidence to support something different to my ideas, I consider it. I also didn't ignore the female weight loss process, I even acknowledged it may be different due to estrogen and some other factors. But I stood by the fact that we have to do work and change things in our lifestyle to get the job done in the end. But again, in further discussions, it is entirely possible to talk to me without dealing low blows and incorrect implications. I look forward to that.

 

You joined the thread, saying that it was the same process. If you believe it's a different process --- for men and women --- then that's an entirely different thing. I don't believe I dealt you a low blow. I was just responding to the words I quoted, from you. In later posts (after denying it), yes, you acknowledged it may be different but then went on to minimize those differences again. That minimizing is what I objected to and deconstructed.

 

By constantly talking about "work" when people are speaking to differences, between the genders (both sociological expectations and biological truths) seemed the strawman in your assertions, to me, since it began from a conversation of who had it easier with beauty -- men or women -- not from a discussion of general weight loss tips. The point wasn't whether or not it was possible to get in shape, but the work required to do so. A man first asserted men had it much harder to do so, and that was where this line of discussion started (before you entered the discussion at all, though I believe you entered shortly thereafter).

 

At any rate, you're the one who brought up your own intelligence. If you're determined to feel it was insulted, I don't mind you thinking that. But for me it was just a basic deconstruction of what was said.

[MrNate]

You joined the thread, saying that it was the same process. If you believe it's a different process --- for men and women --- then that's an entirely different thing. I don't believe I dealt you a low blow. I was just responding to the words I quoted, from you. In later posts (after denying it), yes, you acknowledged it may be different but then went on to minimize those differences again. That minimizing is what I objected to and deconstructed.

 

By constantly talking about "work" when people are speaking to differences, between the genders (both sociological expectations and biological truths) seemed the strawman in your assertions, to me, since it began from a conversation of who had it easier with beauty -- men or women -- not from a discussion of general weight loss tips. The point wasn't whether or not it was possible to get in shape, but the work required to do so. A man first asserted men had it much harder to do so, and that was where this line of discussion started (before you entered the discussion at all, though I believe you entered shortly thereafter).

 

At any rate, you're the one who brought up your own intelligence. If you're determined to feel it was insulted, I don't mind you thinking that. But for me it was just a basic deconstruction of what was said.

 

Even if it was basic, it was your own personal opinion, of which contained false aspects about me and my ideas. Though it was your own personal deconstruction, it didn't need to be associated with excessively silly ideas such as believing dinosaurs didn't exist. But, even aside from you acknowledging you attacked me, this just a simple deconstruction of things you've said now and previously.

 

I'll see you around in different threads.

[zengirl]

Even if it was basic, it was your own personal opinion, of which contained false aspects about me and my ideas. Though it was your own personal deconstruction, it didn't need to be associated with excessively silly ideas such as believing dinosaurs didn't exist. But, even aside from you acknowledging you attacked me, this just a simple deconstruction of things you've said now and previously.

 

I'll see you around in different threads.

 

The deconstruction didn't contain anything false. You can say my conclusions were erroneous, but that has nothing to do with whether or not I changed your assertions; I didn't.

 

I had no aspects of YOU at all beyond your stated ideas. That's what I find so amusing about you taking things as "personal attacks." There was nothing personal about it---I just discussed your own words. I made analogies and metaphors that were clearly such. If the metaphors made you feel silly, then that's your doing.

 

I didn't attack you in the sense that I would take the word. But I realize that some people think anyone disagreeing with and deconstructing their ideas is an attack. Most people cling pretty closely to their own ideas, as goes the saying, "I think therefore I am."

[MrNate]

The deconstruction didn't contain anything false. You can say my conclusions were erroneous, but that has nothing to do with whether or not I changed your assertions; I didn't.

 

I had no aspects of YOU at all beyond your stated ideas. That's what I find so amusing about you taking things as "personal attacks." There was nothing personal about it---I just discussed your own words. I made analogies and metaphors that were clearly such. If the metaphors made you feel silly, then that's your doing.

 

I didn't attack you in the sense that I would take the word. But I realize that some people think anyone disagreeing with and deconstructing their ideas is an attack. Most people cling pretty closely to their own ideas, as goes the saying, "I think therefore I am."

 

I have a different opinion, and didn't like the idea of associating my ideas with such silly metaphors. And i don't get personal over anyone attacking my ideas, but when they start associating them with silly assertions (such as 'firmly believing' being equated with people who don't believe dinosaurs existed), it shows what that person is basically trying to imply about my ideas which come from me. Whether directly or indirectly. It comes down to wording, which needs to be considered carefully to make sure the point comes across respectfully. Science teaches a lot of things, but it has it's place and limitations thankfully.

 

And as far as "I think, therefore I am", that's one of the most powerful quotes around and I believe in it big time. Your goals start in your mind. Science teaches a lot of things, but it has it's place and limitations thankfully. But that's for another time.

[zengirl]

I have a different opinion, and didn't like the idea of associating my ideas with such silly metaphors. And i don't get personal over anyone attacking my ideas, but when they start associating them with silly assertions (such as 'firmly believing' being equated with people who don't believe dinosaurs existed), it shows what that person is basically trying to imply about my ideas which come from me. Whether directly or indirectly. It comes down to wording, which needs to be considered carefully to make sure the point comes across respectfully. Science teaches a lot of things, but it has it's place and limitations thankfully.

 

And as far as "I think, therefore I am", that's one of the most powerful quotes around and I believe in it big time. Your goals start in your mind. Science teaches a lot of things, but it has it's place and limitations thankfully. But that's for another time.

 

I go more along the lines of: My thoughts are a reflection of me, but they are not all I am. And I am not so fully invested in all of my thoughts. Thoughts change over time. I don't wrap my own identity so much into every little thing I say, like some people tend to do. That's part of zen.

 

But, yes, I think some of your ideas are wrong-headed and willfully ignorant, particularly in regard to how women lose weight versus how men lose weight. If I implied that, I'm not at all sorry, because it is precisely what I meant. I don't see that as an "attack" personally. If I put my ideas out into the world, I expect they'll be criticized (in this case criticized meaning looked at critically, for better or ill -- with praise or denouncements). That's what people do with ideas. It's human nature. But I am more than my ideas, so I've got no insecurities about them.

[MrNate]

I go more along the lines of: My thoughts are a reflection of me, but they are not all I am. And I am not so fully invested in all of my thoughts. Thoughts change over time. I don't wrap my own identity so much into every little thing I say, like some people tend to do. That's part of zen.

 

But, yes, I think some of your ideas are wrong-headed and willfully ignorant, particularly in regard to how women lose weight versus how men lose weight. If I implied that, I'm not at all sorry, because it is precisely what I meant. I don't see that as an "attack" personally. If I put my ideas out into the world, I expect they'll be criticized (in this case criticized meaning looked at critically, for better or ill -- with praise or denouncements). That's what people do with ideas. It's human nature. But I am more than my ideas, so I've got no insecurities about them.

 

I will agree with your section on ideas. I think this conversation was simply approached from two different angles, and as such two different points are trying to be emphasized, which I think has caused a bunch of confusion. Trying to drive two different points home, if you will. So this is where I think I took criticism was taken the wrong way. I have no problem conceding to that.

 

I don't really care what you think about my ideas (which change as sound evidence arises), because I know that in the end, while I acknowledge it may be harder for women, I simply leave it at that. I don't think this line of thinking is ignorant in the slightest, as both genders follow similar (not exact) recipes to achieve fat loss. I could care less how much more intense it may be for women, because men can relate as far as building muscle, which is something that a male has to put in quite a deal of work to achieve. While these goals are different, neither is easy, and they take time and dedication to achieve. This is Mr Nate's reality.

 

I think we're on somewhat of an accord now, and I feel better about letting this thread die in peace.

Edited July 24, 2010 by MrNate

[Amour]

I can't fing believe it you guys are missing a lot of things about attraction and NOONE, I mean, NOONE here ever mentioned anything else but "being lean, muscular..whatever".

 

IT'S A BALANCE BETWEEN LOOKS, EFFORT AND PERSONAL QUALITIES.

 

Below is the truth about sexual attraction for men.

 

In order to be IDEALLY 100% physically attractive you need:

 

1) An attractive face. For the universal beauty junkies: thin, evenly proportional face with a square jaw (MASCULINITY) *OR* proportional "cute" face (APEAL TO MOTHERLY INSTINCTS);

*PLUS*

2) A lean proportional body. THE KEY IS PROPORTIONAL. Too skinny or too muscular will not cut it. Flat stomack is a must, abs are a good plus but are not necessary.

 

In order to have IDEAL attractive personality:

 

1) You have to be confident, relaxed around women, have a good sense of humor, be romantic, powerful, etc...with small fluctuations depending on what your particular type of woman likes.

 

In order to exert 100% effort at seduction you need:

 

1) Great seduction skills, i.e. you need to be experienced and need to know how to seduce women with words, actions, etc.

 

2) 100% effort also means you make yourself 100% available and you actively pursue relationships with women almost on a daily basis.

 

So, let's do some combos:

 

1) [Great looks, low personality, low effort] will STILL get you women (the normal ones will not want to stay in a LTR due to low personality). If you are high on the looks scale, modern women will approach you and do the work in seducing you (a lot of times not the most desirable women due to low effort).

 

The solution: Improve personality and maybe effort to get the women you desire.

 

2) [Low looks, great personality, low effort] will NOT get you women. You are generally unattractive and do not attempt at seducing women, you will not be "getting lucky". Your great personality will not be manifested.

 

The solution: Improve looks through diet and exercise *AND* highly increase effort to get the women you desire.

 

3) [Low looks, low personality, great effort] will sometimes get you AVERAGE women (in bed but not for LTR unless she's a psycho or a weirdo) due to lack of looks and personality.

 

The solution: Improve looks through diet and exercise *AND* improve personality (go see a shrink and get rid of insecurities) to get the women you desire.

 

*WHAT I'M GIVING YOU GUYS IS GOLD ON A SILVER PLATTER!***

 

It took me MANY YEARS to figure this stuff out.

 

At times I thought that what mattered was only looks and that's it.

 

At times I thought that looks didn't matter to women (thanks to misleading cues from women, the media, some self-help mumbo-jumbo, etc). This one was very hard to crack...You know why? Because with great skill and effort I was regularly getting laid and sometimes by pretty even hot women. Why then I argued should I improve looks. I can be happily lazy with the gut (plus I'm short on top of this, which of course I can't do nothing about) and still land hotties with my great seduction skills and effort???? But you know what? The lifestyle made me get almost broke spending a lot of money at bars and going out almost every night. PLUS the girls I was getting were OK to hot looking but their lifestyle and/or personalities were horrible. I didn't want to date any of them. I tried a few times but I ended up with crazies and/or the bar whore type. Additionally, some of the women I was having sex with I had "finessed" into having sex with me via nice words, etc while they were buzzed (beer goggles) and no wonder why I only saw them once when we had sex and they never picked up the phone later. Some of the women thought I was rich or famous since I had such big balls but was no looker and I ended up with gold diggers.

 

I got really good at what I was doing and in the past few years without looks and with some personality (OK I do have a good sense of humor) and a lot of effort I managed to sleep with 50+ women. Never dated any of them (if you exclude some lame attempts).

 

Now that I look back I see how unimaginable hard it was to get intimate with women and that I spent most of my time chasing them...

 

I went out with some of my very good looking friends and my perspective about looks not being important started to change dramatically. Those guys being hot were getting girls with almost no effort. Women were actually pursuing them. I couldn't believe my eyes! I became depressed for a few days and realized my deepest mistake...LOOKS DO MATTER AND THEY MATTER A LOT!

 

That's what I'm working on right now: LOOKS and TO A LESSER EXTENT PERSONALITY. No, I'll never become a model looking guy or the stud on the block but if I could improve my body and go a little up on the looks scale combined with personality and effort I should be able to seduce the woman that I desire in my life.

 

That's it guys....it's a journey and it is HARD WORK for guys like me but it is NOT IMPOSSIBLE! That is my hope.

 

SO, THE GUYS HERE ON THIS FORUM THAT WHINE ABOUT HOW HARD IT IS FOR US GUYS NEED TO GET OVER IT AND SHUT THE F* UP! YOU EITHER WANT THE GIRL OF YOUR DREAMS OR YOU'RE DON'T (TRANSLATE YOU ARE TOO LAZY TO CHANGE)! AND YES, ACCEPT IT THAT THIS WORLD IS ENORMOUSLY UNFAIR AND IF YOU ARE SHORT OR UGLY OR BOTH (LIKE ME) IT IS GOING TO BE HAAARD FING WORK! NO WAY AROUND IT BUT TO DO THE BEST YOU CAN WITH YOUR LOOKS, PERSONALITY AND EFFORT.

 

NOTE: YOU CAN ALSO TRY TO GET WOMEN BY BECOMING RICH FOR THE PURPOSE AND YOU WILL GET HOT GOLD DIGGING BIMBOS WHO WILL SPEND YOUR MONEY AND CHEAT BEHIND YOUR BACK AND WAIT FOR YOU TO DIE SO THEY CAN GET YOUR MONEY!

 

If all fails with my in the end of the day I can still enjoy my life with or without the woman of my dreams....BUT I won't give up without a fight!