Being Buff: Male Power Fantasy? [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

Scowling Dragon

2013-07-23, 07:55 PM

If this is too Real World then I'm sorry and you can take this down. This was intended as a asking of the forum folk.

This is a thing I have been hearing on the internet the past while, that in media the buff 6-8 pack male body type is "The male Power Fantasy".

That characters like Kratos or Connan (Or those Werewolf guys from Twilight) are what men would like to be (Or something).

At least for me this has NEVER been the case.

Power fantasy implies that I have POWER. My "Power" fantasy was being successful at what I wanted in life, and having the power to also be able to do what I want (Like travel around the world and donate to kickstarters/ Charity projects that I like).

Being buff was never related to them.

I would be disgusted and terrified to BE Connan or Kratos. They are horrible murderous monsters (Well Connan is mainly JUST a murderer) that have no access to what I would like to do in my life and no amount of chicks would change that.

If however somebody said "I could make you buff right now consequence free no strings attached right now".

I would say no. Being buff requires lots of continuous exercise and time. Time i'm not willing to spend.

All it would be was a temporary boost and I would just be back to normal later.

If they said that It wouldn't even require exercise I guess I would say yes, but in the same vein of if they offered the immunity to the common cold. Picking up heavier stuff would be more useful and I would never feel bad about how I look.

In general being buff (In the world I plan to enter) wouldn't provide me much power at all. I would much more prefer a steadier drawing arm.

However I like EXERCISING. And that has nothing to do with how I look.

When I exercise, I feel better because of brain chemicals, and I feel like I accomplished something and feel good about myself.

It has nothing to do with how I look.

As a kid (And sometimes as an adult :smallbiggrin:) I enjoyed fantasizing about being a superhero. Again that had nothing to with looks or being buff. It was about the power of having an potential positive impact on the world.

So to put simple: I have a Power Fantasy, and it is not being buff. Mainly the idea of buff makes me feel bad about myself.

So I want to ask guys out there: Is being buff a power fantasy for you?

BRC

2013-07-23, 08:09 PM

It's not so much the muscles themselves as what they imply: Strength.

Strength is Power in it's most literal sense: The ability to do things one would not be otherwise able to do. Even if we don't fantasize about being Konan the barbarian, the notion of physical strength is closely tied to all sorts of ideas of power.

Just think about how the words "Strong" and "Weak" are used. Somebody can make a "Strong" argument. You can have a "Strong" resume. In politics, somebody likely to win is called a "Strong" Candidate. A film that does well is said to have a "Strong" showing at the box office. Literary critics praise a writers "Strong, powerful language". On a performance review, your boss may list your "Strengths" and your "Weaknesses". A well-written character is described as being a "Strong Character". An intense taste is a "Strong Flavor". Our language, and therefore our minds (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linguistic_relativity), constantly associates strength with quality or power.

Even in modern society, physical strength is still a form of power that everybody can instantly relate to. From the big kid who pushes you around on the playground, to professional athlete who pull down massive salaries. Despite thousands of years of civilization under our collective belts, a sizable part of our brains still associates Power with the ability to pick up the biggest thing and hit something with it the hardest.

It's not a direct power fantasy. I doubt many people would find use for Conan's physical strength in their everyday lives. But it's the idea that comes with it. "This man is strong, he is capable of extraordinary physical feats. He is capable of extraordinary things".

Strength is Power, at least on a psychological level, and that is where the Power Fantasy resides.
Plus, you know, in a fantasy you wouldn't need to work for it. It's a Fantasy. The "Buff Male" Power fantasy probably doesn't include intense daily workouts. Fantasies are, by their very nature, unrealistic.

The Fantasy isn't to be Buff, it is to be Strong, and one of the easiest ways to visually communicate that somebody is strong is to depict them as being very buff. Buff is shorthand for Strong. If we associated purple hair with physical strength, then you would be seeing tons of purple-hair characters in everything.

Kitten Champion

2013-07-23, 08:36 PM

Dienekes

2013-07-23, 11:57 PM

To go with my own experience. I want to be stronger, not buffer. They actually are different things when doing a workout. My own reason for this is a bit embarrassing really. But I was one of the strongest guys in my high school and college years and after that basically stopped doing any exercise at all, quickly losing strength. Personally I want to recapture the time when I could lift anyone who displeased me over my head and throw them a considerable distance. I was a bit of a fighter in my youth and I guess I miss that part a little bit. Not enough to actually go out and get into a bit of a scrape on purpose, but I like to know that if it came up I won't embarrass myself. Though if I was asked if I wanted to be buffer, I guess I would say yes for weird reasons. I've basically already built back up to my former strength, but I'm so overweight none of it actually shows. Suddenly being buff really only means I'll loose a lot of excess body fat, which would be something my heart would thank me for.

My brother on the other hand does want to get buffer. In the can see all his muscles without flexing kind of way, not a become a giant mound of immobile meat kind of way. Because he thinks it helps him get chicks. Judging by his social experiences in the past year or so, it seems to be working.

Jerthanis

2013-07-24, 01:38 AM

So to put simple: I have a Power Fantasy, and it is not being buff. Mainly the idea of buff makes me feel bad about myself.

I'm curious as to why the idea makes you feel bad about yourself. Most of your post goes in depth into why you wouldn't care for having muscles, but then at the end you just drop this and it reminds me of my own interaction with buffness in media.

Personally, I read a ton of superhero comics and watched a ton of superhero cartoons throughout my youth, and it gave me a pretty awful self-image that sometimes resurfaces with me today. These heroes would tear off their clothes and leap into action, wearing skin-tight leotards that showed off their perfect physiques. They defined what my mental picture of what a man was supposed to look like, and I felt like less than a man whenever I saw that I didn't look like that.

As it stands now, I'm in good shape and try to stay in good shape, and try not to become as obsessed with getting in better shape as I was at one point, but deep down, these images had a powerful influence on me and I just won't feel good about myself if I can't take off my shirt imagine I could look like Spider-Man.

So I want to ask guys out there: Is being buff a power fantasy for you?

It's definitely not a power fantasy for me, it's just subconsciously what I define what I'm "supposed" to look like as.

Giggling Ghast

2013-07-24, 02:03 AM

Yeah, the fact that I didn't look like (and could never look like) Conan the Barbarian tended to bum me out a lot when I was younger. As I also lacked charisma and piles of money, I was convinced that no woman could ever like me. It took me a while to accept that not all females like the super-buff physique, though I still tend to sigh wistfully when I look in the mirror.

SiuiS

2013-07-24, 02:21 AM

I would also like to plug Nerd Fitness (http://www.nerdfitness.com). You've got nothing to lose but some time. Screw Power Fantasy, being even slightly healthier is often its own reward~

If this is too Real World then I'm sorry and you can take this down. This was intended as a asking of the forum folk.

This is a thing I have been hearing on the internet the past while, that in media the buff 6-8 pack male body type is "The male Power Fantasy".

That characters like Kratos or Connan (Or those Werewolf guys from Twilight) are what men would like to be (Or something).

BRC has it right. It's an emanation. Someone who is proud, sure and and direct has good posture and looks you in the eye. No one ever says "I want to stand tall and look others in the eye" and means only the posture and gaze, they mean what it represents. Being buff is a physical sign of strength without having to exert that strength. You can look powerful without having to demonstrate that power. This is basically the same thing as when people in a building respect you; it's an outward sign to those not familiar with you that you have power and they should be aware of it.

Conan is also a bad example of what not to want. Conan isn't really buff, he's lean. Conan moved like a panther, struck like a snake, and had the endurance and stubbornness of an angry boar; his musculature was secondary at best. Conan was also very smart. Not only was he capable of picking up new languages and customs with alacrity (to the point of teaching himself a dead language by ruined stone markers, lampshades as being beyond even most linguists!), but he decided what he truly wanted and moved toget it, morality, danger and difficulty be damned.

You are like Conan, you just don't care for the things he cared for.

Anarion

2013-07-24, 02:54 AM

Conan is also a bad example of what not to want. Conan isn't really buff, he's lean. Conan moved like a panther, struck like a snake, and had the endurance and stubbornness of an angry boar; his musculature was secondary at best. Conan was also very smart. Not only was he capable of picking up new languages and customs with alacrity (to the point of teaching himself a dead language by ruined stone markers, lampshades as being beyond even most linguists!), but he decided what he truly wanted and moved toget it, morality, danger and difficulty be damned.

You are like Conan, you just don't care for the things he cared for.

To pick up on this, the power fantasy is just that: a POWER fantasy. Strong men like Kratos or even Superman are one expression of it because their physical strength is an expression of power that everyone on the entire planet natively understands.

But there are several other power fantasies of various sorts. Spiderman, for example, is a different sort of fantasy: he doesn't look strong, but he's smart and witty and quick, which makes him simultaneously charming and more relatable to the average comic book reader.

Sherlock Holmes takes that one even further, as he almost never (in the books) takes advantage of physical prowess at all, but has such an incredible mind that he was one of the first characters to receive a fandom.

D&D kind of takes this whole idea to its very basic concepts. The smart wizard, the strong fighter, the cunning rogue, the devout cleric etc. are all essentially archetypes for different people's power fantasies.

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 02:55 AM

I've actually been thinking sort of tangentially to this for awhile.

Body builder shredded only seems to signal two things:
you can pick up and put down heavy things
you have the body type for a certain weight class of martial artist

The toughest people on the planet look like this (http://www.tennenaturephotography.com/albums/papua/Yellow_Tribe_Dancers.jpg) or this (http://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/c2.jpeg?w=600&h=720).

Here (http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/156/701/bobsapp_display_image.jpg?1266120655) are a couple world class super heavyweight fighters.

Note the thickness? They're built to absorb blows and deliver extremely powerful strikes.

This (http://www.ibuysteroids.com/images/arnold_schwarzenegger_2.jpg) guy has just been riding the bicycle and repetitively picking up heavy things.

The extremely low body fat is a product of cutting, meaning he won't be particularly energetic. Even if he wasn't in a cut, the exceedingly large muscle size isn't particularly suited to anything other than very specific lifts.

Big muscle looks, as far as strength goes, correlates somewhat with fighting capability. But the most dangerous fighters in the world are just big, not particularly cut.

And the world's best warriors aren't even that big- in the immortal words of Eazy-E: "with a gat it don't matter if he bigger or smaller."

Anyway, I know this isn't perfectly on topic, but I've been thinking bout this for like 10 years and was wondering what you guys think.

paddyfool

2013-07-24, 03:49 AM

Body builder shredded only seems to signal two things:
you can pick up and put down heavy things
you have the body type for a certain weight class of martial artist

The toughest people on the planet look like this (http://www.tennenaturephotography.com/albums/papua/Yellow_Tribe_Dancers.jpg) or this (http://theselvedgeyard.files.wordpress.com/2009/02/c2.jpeg?w=600&h=720).

Here (http://cdn.bleacherreport.net/images_root/slides/photos/000/156/701/bobsapp_display_image.jpg?1266120655) are a couple world class super heavyweight fighters.

Note the thickness? They're built to absorb blows and deliver extremely powerful strikes.

This (http://www.ibuysteroids.com/images/arnold_schwarzenegger_2.jpg) guy has just been riding the bicycle and repetitively picking up heavy things.

Strongly agree with all of this. One thing that I think is a little sad about the superhero genre is how its heroes seem to get all their physiques in the bodybuilder mode, rather than in actual athletic modes of one kind of another. (Which come in many forms, incidentally). (http://www.volunteers4sport.eu/en/news/showNews/1444/news/showCategory/adverts/1/unactive)

And OK, so you can argue they're all built for very specific tasks. Well then, what about Decathletes (and Heptathletes, because this isn't just a male issue by any means)? They have muscle definition, fair enough, but they've no use for the masses of muscle bulk you see on so many Supers. The superhero and bodybuilder industries feed off each other, and then they feed us lies about what a good physique actually is.

(Then, of course, you have the whole other issue about how training up for any discipline at an Olympic level isn't going to be even close to healthy).

Cikomyr

2013-07-24, 03:52 AM

It's all about power. But power comes in different shapes. In some respect, a fully-built bodybuilder kind of looks ridiculous, and therefore isn't something I aspire as.

But I wouldn't mind having a body as tight as, let's say, Artemis Entreri. I'd be happy looking like Hawkeye, even compared to Thor (yes, Movie versions).

But that's the point: it's about looking. It's part of the aura your project, which is a form of power as well. But for some reason, I do not believe the Superbuilt Hero is THAT respected anymore compared to, as you say, the James Bond and other more well-rounded physical bodies.

Eldan

2013-07-24, 04:02 AM

I wouldn't want to be buff. I don't even find it aesthetically pleasing. I'd quite like to be fit, though. I mean, I do exercise several times a week and I can't remember the last time I haven't been on a diet. I'm still not fit.

Coidzor

2013-07-24, 04:14 AM

So I want to ask guys out there: Is being buff a power fantasy for you?

I think you're rather missing the point by asking the question like that. :smallconfused:

SiuiS

2013-07-24, 04:30 AM

This (http://www.ibuysteroids.com/images/arnold_schwarzenegger_2.jpg) guy has just been riding the bicycle and repetitively picking up heavy things.

I think you're using the wrong picture here. Sure, that's steroid use and muscle for the sake of aesthetics athe expense of usefulness, but damned if that isn't a worthy power fantasy! The man won body building contests by guile, social maneuvering and intelligence, and then leveraged it into a successful media and political career. Smart, successful, capable not only of meeting a goal to be good looking but also leverage that into success in other, almost unrelated fields?

Tony Stark, anyone? Or Captain America? Or hell, Rarity? Or any wizard ever? (See Anarion's response).

As for your question on what we think... It's a complex issue. I go for effectiveness. Sometimes, what I want to be effective at is being good looking so that's where I focus (anarion can attest to my failure there; one day I will figure out how pretty hair works that is naturally curly T~T). But the adage Fake It 'til you Make It works! So pick a successful person. Emulate them. If that means be loud, smile hard and body build, it will still work, because whether you're workin with the base equations or the heuristics of surface details you're aiming in about the right direction. Knowing the equation makes it more efficient but who cares?

And yeah, no body fat sucks. I did a workout for the first time in a while a few weeks ago and two days later I was literally dragging myself to a concession stand; almost passed out from hypoglycemia. Wasn't even intensive workout, either, but it engaged a long burn >_<
Real athletes who don't supplement their training tend towards marbleized muscle, with fat striating the meat and with a thick, almost chubby core. With understandable Flanderization of "real" and "athlete" for the sake of expediency.

I think you're rather missing the point by asking the question like that. :smallconfused:

How so?

Kato

2013-07-24, 04:37 AM

Well, most things have been said, I think, but just a short recap from my point of view.

The thing is, Kratos or Conan look strong. And... "strong" is a positive attribute. We want to be strong because if we are strong we are safe(r than if we are weak).
Some people find the idea to look like that pleasing from an asthetic stand point. But I guess those are overall a minority. (I for myself if I had to pick an ideal image what I want to look like it would be along the lines of Solid Snake or any other "fit but not bodybuilding" type. But while I'm not sure if I could ever turn into that I don't have the time or motivation to try :smalltongue:)

Yeah, you can want to be powerful by looking like that but... I think most people would rather be powerful by other means. Either by being physically strong in a different way or just being powerful in a way that's not based on a bunch of muscles. (If it comes to that... I don't really care about being powerful that much? I guess that's kind of weird in itself)

Eldan

2013-07-24, 05:10 AM

Well, if I could decide on my body, I wouldn't be opposed to some lean muscle. But mostly, I'd like to be about a head taller.

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 05:19 AM

I think you're using the wrong picture here. Sure, that's steroid use and muscle for the sake of aesthetics athe expense of usefulness, but damned if that isn't a worthy power fantasy! The man won body building contests by guile, social maneuvering and intelligence, and then leveraged it into a successful media and political career. Smart, successful, capable not only of meeting a goal to be good looking but also leverage that into success in other, almost unrelated fields?

I don't think so. His success is enviable, for sure, and his muscles a product of social power and a suite of positive attributes, like dedication, leisure time, intelligence, an astounding degree of body symmetry, drive- but the muscles aren't a signal of any further power behind the muscles themselves.

Muscles can be a signal, but again, they really either signal two things:
1. you're aspiring to be arnold
2. you can cop a hit like anderson silva

In the first, the muscles don't mean much more than fake tits, bleached hair, fake tan, make-up.

The second, you do crunches for thick abdominal walls because people are punching you there.

In virtually any other sport, your physique will be way different that the sort of "blessed by brodin" look exemplified in his son of swole, Zyzz.

Here's Kali (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xvjeM_-k74&list=UUg_tz2iw7_-gf2xIL-DdM2g) getting crushed by a guy that's smaller than him. Why? Because between little cardio and the L-ana, Kali just focuses on looking good (and damn he does).

I know some world class athletes in rather obscure, but extreme sports. You wouldn't be able to tell that they could navigate through 200 miles of trackless wilderness in two days with nothing but 20lbs of gear and manpower. They just look like regular guys. Some world class fighters don't even look fit- they're just big. Not muscle big, just big guy big. World class rock climbers are long, skinny, full on ottermode.

Basically, the only sports where you even approach bodybuilder physique are bodybuilding and martial arts. And even for the martial arts, it tends to be certain weight classes, though that may have more to do with trying to maximize power-weight ratios due to weight divisions.

Having a Liebfield body type, as a "power fantasy"... I dunno. Big muscles are mostly signaling, I think. Like, social signaling. So in that case, I can see it as a "power fantasy", the same way being rich would be part of a power fantasy.

Eldan

2013-07-24, 05:41 AM

Here's Kali (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xvjeM_-k74&list=UUg_tz2iw7_-gf2xIL-DdM2g) getting crushed by a guy that's smaller than him. Why? Because between little cardio and the L-ana, Kali just focuses on looking good (and damn he does).
.

See, I never understood why people thin kthat looks good. That kind of giant muscle with bulging veins? To me, it looks somewhere between weird, grotesque and even slightly disgusting. The other guy looks way better.

Spiryt

2013-07-24, 06:19 AM

See, I never understood why people thin kthat looks good. That kind of giant muscle with bulging veins? To me, it looks somewhere between weird, grotesque and even slightly disgusting. The other guy looks way better.

It's not even about looking 'good', it's about competing in body-building - huge muscle, extremely low fat, all visible, defined, separated, exerted, visible. It's whole culture.

And recently it went towards maximal mass over all. Aside completely exaggerated secondary masculine characteristics.

And to some people it looks good, so fair game I guess.

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 06:20 AM

See, I never understood why people thin kthat looks good. That kind of giant muscle with bulging veins? To me, it looks somewhere between weird, grotesque and even slightly disgusting. The other guy looks way better.

The same way you can acknowledge Tchaikovsky's mastery as a Romantic composer while finding Romanticism an aesthetically vacuous movement.

Brother Oni

2013-07-24, 06:22 AM

I'm going to agree with the general sentiment here.

Looking buff is just a product of a low body fat percentage and has limited correlation with actually being strong.

As Spuddles and Paddyfool have demonstrated, physical strength comes in many shapes and forms depending on the intended purpose.

Adding my own examples:
Being able to lift the heaviest weight possible: Zydrunas Savickas (http://www.theworldsstrongestman.com/athlete/zydrunas-savickas/)
Strong and fast: Jonah Lomu (http://resources2.news.com.au/images/2009/09/15/1225773/685790-jonah-lomu.jpg).

Eldan

2013-07-24, 06:27 AM

Oh, pictures, now? Fine. Let's have some traditional sports like stone throwing:

http://seel-schwingerverband.ch/Unspunnen/images/phocagallery/Steinstossen/thumbs/phoca_thumb_l_Demo%20Steinstossen.jpg

Or wrestling:

http://www.srfcdn.ch/radio/modules/data/pictures/drs-3/aktuell/schwingen/schwingerkoenig/65279.hauptbild_def.jpg

That's the national champion from a few years ago. Really doesn't look 20 years old, either.

Frozen_Feet

2013-07-24, 06:55 AM

To me, being buff is not very important. I'm rather happy with how I look, actually.

I still exercise a lot because I want to be strong, though. Physical competence is an important personal goal to me. And it's hardly useless, since I'm a construction worker. Moving heavy things is part of the job.

If we're talking about my ideal power fantasy, it's more "lean&mean". Bruce Lee, rather than Arnold.

Feytalist

2013-07-24, 06:58 AM

Eh, I never worried about strength or physique. It helps that I'm a smallish guy anyway, not just in height but in build. I was never going to be all that buff anyway. As long as I can lift myself and do normal everyday stuff, I'm okay.

Also I've never had body fat, even without any specific routine. Just lucked out with my metabolism, I guess.

Short of it is: no, I have never fantasized about being built in any sort of fashion. Not on my personal radar.

Tengu_temp

2013-07-24, 07:23 AM

Also I've never had body fat, even without any specific routine. Just lucked out with my metabolism, I guess.

How old are you? Chances are, this will change with age. Trust me.

Tiki Snakes

2013-07-24, 07:28 AM

Hmm. Well, given where I personally have encountered the term, I got the impression it was supposed to be parsed differently.
As in, it's not a power fantasy common to males. It's a fantasy of Male Power?

At least, that's what I got from context.

Feytalist

2013-07-24, 07:28 AM

How old are you? Chances are, this will change with age. Trust me.

Heh. Late 20s.

I'll worry about it when I get there.

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-24, 07:30 AM

I'm glad you guys all agree with me, i don' have to powertype my keyboard in two writing out a strongly worded post now!

One thing though - please, whatever you do, do not associate bodybuilding with strength. Strength is irrelevant to bodybuilding, as is the opposite. Other things that are not strength - abs, bodyfat %, fighting ability, posing trunk colour, facebook profile pic of your arm in the bathroom mirror, anything you read in a magazine that sells supplements.

Lifting the heaviest things, throwing something the furthest, and hitting the hardest are all things that should be associated with strength, because that is what they are all about, broskis.

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 07:41 AM

One thing though - please, whatever you do, do not associate bodybuilding with strength. Strength is irrelevant to bodybuilding, as is the opposite.

lol, sure whatever you say

Other things that are not strength - abs, bodyfat %, fighting ability, posing trunk colour, facebook profile pic of your arm in the bathroom mirror, anything you read in a magazine that sells supplements.

Lifting the heaviest things, throwing something the furthest, and hitting the hardest are all things that should be associated with strength, because that is what they are all about, broskis.

Fighting ability is ultimately the only strength that matters. Everything else is masturbation. Lifting heavy things, playing handegg- those are signals that demonstrate your fitness and physical prowess- ladies I'm healthy; gents, if I tear it up in a game of ruggers, I'll tear you up at the pub, so stand down mate.

Spiryt

2013-07-24, 07:44 AM

One thing though - please, whatever you do, do not associate bodybuilding with strength. Strength is irrelevant to bodybuilding, as is the opposite.

This is actually entirely too strongly (hur hur) worded, and in fact on 'every day' level it's just plain wrong.

Gaining strength in everything one does, is pretty much literally body building, building stronger muscles, more nerve connection etc.

More muscles mass is more strength, bigger joints, and larger ligaments can take bigger forces, etc.

Surely, this linked Muscle Kali dude has to sacrifice a lot of strength, cardio, agility, or whatever, body capabilities are limited, and there whole body is tuned to sustain huge muscle hypertrophy, very low fat, high vascularisation etc.

But that's extreme example, of someone literally putting as much lean muscle mass as his body can handle.

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 07:51 AM

This is actually entirely too strongly (hur hur) worded, and in fact on 'every day' level it's just plain wrong.

Gaining strength in everything one does, is pretty much literally body building, building stronger muscles, more nerve connection etc.

More muscles mass is more strength, bigger joints, and larger ligaments can take bigger forces, etc.

Surely, this linked Muscle Kali dude has to sacrifice a lot of strength, cardio, agility, or whatever, body capabilities are limited, and there whole body is tuned to sustain huge muscle hypertrophy, very low fat, high vascularisation etc.

But that's extreme example, of someone literally putting as much lean muscle mass as his body can handle.

I'm fairly certain Kali can outlift anyone here in this thread, anyway. It's not like he's not strong.

Emmerask

2013-07-24, 08:02 AM

Also I've never had body fat, even without any specific routine. Just lucked out with my metabolism, I guess.

Short of it is: no, I have never fantasized about being built in any sort of fashion. Not on my personal radar.

Was the same for me when I was in the 20s.
I could eat whatever "garbage" I liked, and however much I liked without having to train or any such nonsense...
Now (being 31) however I have to watch how much I eat and what I eat (within reason) and have to do some sports...

It REALLY SUCKS :smallsigh::smallannoyed::smallmad::smalleek:

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 08:13 AM

It REALLY SUCKS :smallsigh::smallannoyed::smallmad::smalleek:

You should change your approach (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWUcHKAj_tc).

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-24, 08:28 AM

Guys, i am referring to the sport of body building, the qualitative evaluation of a person's physique, as opposed to the quantitative comparison of the mass lifted by a number of competitiors at another sporting event, such as weightlifting, powerlifting etc (and although bodybuilders are pretty strong, the sport itself has no particular use of strength, only any means necessary of making certain muscles larger - otherwise bodybuilders would dominate the strength sports, which they do not. They use strength as a tool not a goal.)
And when i refer to strength i mean the measurement of producing force against external resistance, not how good you fight (whic his comprised of many different factors).

Specifity of language is quite important when discussing such cloudy topics, for example lifting weights and building your body do not necessarily mean the sports of weightlifting and bodybuilding, but people use the latter to mean both, and it confuses the situation.
Much more of this and i'll have to order another keyboard!

Spuddles

2013-07-24, 08:34 AM

paddyfool

2013-07-24, 08:59 AM

Brother Oni

2013-07-24, 09:05 AM

And when i refer to strength i mean the measurement of producing force against external resistance, not how good you fight (whic his comprised of many different factors).

Not to mention the even finer definition between maximal sustained production of force (power lifting) and maximal production of force (hitting things as hard as you can).

Much more of this and i'll have to order another keyboard!

Perhaps you could copy/paste or link to your post in the Real Weapons and Armour thread on this subject?

Alternately, start saving your posts somewhere and just copy and paste every time the subject comes up to reduce your keyboard bill. :smallbiggrin:

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-24, 09:09 AM

Personally, i prefer power; so weightlifters, throwers and punchy-kicky folks are the populace of my personal olympus/valhalla/disturbing dream

But if you are only using one metric to determine the 'worthiness' of humans, then this is where you end up, eh!

EDIT: Oni. me no like copy paste, like sound of own voice (sight of own words?)

SiuiS

2013-07-24, 09:11 AM

I don't think so. His success is enviable, for sure, and his muscles a product of social power and a suite of positive attributes, like dedication, leisure time, intelligence, an astounding degree of body symmetry, drive- but the muscles aren't a signal of any further power behind the muscles themselves.

You're diving into specifics too hard. Forest. Trees. Platitudes.

When I clicked that link I didn't see a body builder. I saw a very professional very successful man who has what most who desire power want – Heath, wealth, game, friends and clout. That is a power fantasy. Be like Arnold is not a bad thing to put on your charts.

This thread is about whether something is a power fantasy. I said Arnold was a bad example because aside from body building, all his other traits make him much more admirable than any other picture you could have chosen.

How old are you? Chances are, this will change with age. Trust me.

Yeah. Some of us, though... I'm approachin thirty and it has taken seven years if dedicated slouching and desk job to get a minor pooch, and mostly I'm just losing muscle (and joint strength >_>)

Hmm. Well, given where I personally have encountered the term, I got the impression it was supposed to be parsed differently.
As in, it's not a power fantasy common to males. It's a fantasy of Male Power?

At least, that's what I got from context.

The two often intercorelate, but no. Power fantasy is fantasy of having power. I believe that a power fantasy of a male as stereotypically depicted does express the forms of having a fantasy of male power though.

I'm glad you guys all agree with me, i don' have to powertype my keyboard in two writing out a strongly worded post now!

Your avatar made this much more entertaining~

lol, sure whatever you say
Fighting ability is ultimately the only strength that matters.

Parsing wrong, based on same word having contextual meanings. No one is arguing anything near whether fighting ability matters.

This is actually entirely too strongly (hur hur) worded, and in fact on 'every day' level it's just plain wrong.

Gaining strength in everything one does, is pretty much literally body building, building stronger muscles, more nerve connection etc.

That's great, except Body Building is not body building, it is a specific sport with specific ideas for maximal success within that sport, which includes severe dehydration to show musculature better, lifting in such a way to gain definition an size regardless of strength, gain size disproportionate to anything useful and remove as much fat as possible to avoid concluding the musculature. So, no, in a sport that defines success as sufficient mass to screw over the power/weight ratio, you DO get weaker as you get better most of the time – often enough for it to be a truism.

It's like football. It's not really football, but it's called foot Ball anyway evaluate that's the official capital letter title that has meaning aside from what the words themselves would denote. Just like professional Body Building.

Brother Oni

2013-07-24, 09:14 AM

...personal olympus/valhalla/disturbing dream

Is the difference between the three dependent on which hat they're wearing at the time? :smalltongue:

The idea of a realm populated by powerful folk all wearing chef hats would probably be a disturbing dream for me as well...

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-24, 09:31 AM

The idea of a realm populated by powerful folk all wearing chef hats would probably be a disturbing dream for me as well...

I think we both know that disastrous pigs foot chopping video has too many views for you to pretend this is true :wink:

Soras Teva Gee

2013-07-24, 10:03 AM

I think it can be argued that physical prowess and strength is THE male power fantasy. This applies whether you have some wispy bishie anime sparkle boy or body builder of liefeldian stature, provided they show they can kick your ass.

What you disagree? Call me when action oriented heroes stop being popular or resolve things without busting people up or throw/taking punches. It is of course not the only male fantasy, but this is a matter of the aggregate and general mass not something disproved by some exceptions around the edges.

And excepting maybe Kissinger's ultimate aphrodisiac its probably hard to definitively label anything else a "power" fantasy since the words are so linked.

How that physical prowess is visualized is more a matter of fashion and what do you mean by "buff" in particular. I can see Lance Armstrong, Michelangelo's David, and the Governator all described as "buff" for differing values of it. Few I think would be the males that turn down some nice muscle tone if they can get it, just what style do you get. Lean, heavy or in between fitness in general is always in fashion since the Pharaohs had themselves prettied up in scuplture.

If your talking about just the Governator style buff that's what kinda an 80s/90s thing. I guess maybe its made something of a comeback in recent years probably, but that's merely a perception of mine looking back on it. I'll casually trace that to Daniel Craig and that skimpy swimwear in Casino Royal.

Actually some of that might not be entirely male driven. While back I gladly happened across something examining what women actually find physically attractive. According to at least one Australian study (http://www.economist.com/news/science-and-technology/21576061-womens-expectations-opposite-sex-are-least-unrealistic)1 women responded positively to that tall triangular male shape. Diminishing rate of return and only examining simulate physical factors (don't loose hope yet everyone) but definitely there. And personally you can't tell me that there are shirtless men all over those rather explicit romance book covers for solely male benefit, or in movies like Twilight that are catering to the same idea.

1Warning!: Article also talks about genitalia in technical terms, if thats NSFW for you be aware.

Scowling Dragon

2013-07-24, 10:10 AM

So.....Yes you would like to be buff?

paddyfool

2013-07-24, 11:28 AM

What you disagree? Call me when action oriented heroes stop being popular or resolve things without busting people up or throw/taking punches. It is of course not the only male fantasy, but this is a matter of the aggregate and general mass not something disproved by some exceptions around the edges.

Of course, there's also the subversion of this, through the canny warrior who resolves things by tricking or generally outsmarting his opponent, going at least as far back as Odysseus, right through to Bruce Lee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_Ycw0d_Uow), James Bond (especially in his Roger Moore incarnation) and Indiana Jones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs). Although said canny warriors are almost always portrayed as highly capable fighters when they have to be, they're also shown as being smart enough not to fight if they can think their way around the fight (sometimes, anyway).

BRC

2013-07-24, 11:37 AM

Goosefeather

2013-07-24, 11:45 AM

And they are generally all portrayed as being very physically fit. They may succeed because of their minds, but their DEPICTION is as athletic, healthy men. Because we associate physicial strength with quality and power. Indiana Jones could read those glyphs just as well if he was a slightly overweight man going prematurely bald, but he's not. He's Indiana Jones, square-jawed and well-muscled (even if he's not Ahnold big).

Well, to be fair, they are the protagonists of action/adventure films. Indiana Jones doesn't just read glyphs, he explores dangerous temples and does a lot of running, climbing, fighting, and general physical activity. Because that's more interesting to watch than him musing over books for an hour and a half. It'd be unrealistic for him to carry out those activities if he were unfit, and it'd be dull to watch if he didn't carry them out.
The same goes for Bond, Bruce Lee, and Odysseus (he is a warrior, after all).

Mando Knight

2013-07-24, 11:48 AM

So.....Yes you would like to be buff?

It depends on what level of muscular mass and definition you consider to be "buff."

jseah

2013-07-24, 11:58 AM

I don't know about you people, but my 'fantasy' of an ideal sort of person I would like to see myself as is more like a gender-swapped version of the silent girl in the library...

A Nobel would be nice if I was allowed to dream, yes. =D

navar100

2013-07-24, 12:28 PM

It's not as if muscles are the only thing. Johnny Depp, Leonardo DiCaprio, and Tom Cruise have managed well enough to become movie stars, and not just with women, without being muscular. That is where charisma comes in. As I mentioned in my review of "Oblivion", despite Tom Cruise's real life drama on screen he has presence and made the film work. This is "The Fonzi" fantasy, to be Cool, as opposed to "The Conan".

Fonzi and Conan are not mutually exclusive, but when it comes to movies they usually are. The Hero is one or the other, not both. Giving Conan funny one-liners doesn't make him Fonzi. It's to compensate straight men for watching a shirtless male. A shirtless Fonzi doesn't make him Conan. It's to compensate women for watching an action/violent movie.

The Fonzi actor has the advantage in that he can star in different genres. He can be in comedies, dramas, chick-movies, horror. When he goes back to action movies, he still has presence and verisimilitude. Hugh Jackman can be Wolverine, then play a gay man on Broadway, and still go back to being Wolverine. Jean Claude Van Damme, a Conan, could not. Notice every comedy movie attempt by Arnold Schwarzennegar flopped, "Twins" being the exception because 1) he still played the Conan and 2) Danny Devito.

However, there's nothing wrong with being the Conan. It is not something to be ashamed of for men who like such movies.

Spiryt

2013-07-24, 12:38 PM

Not to mention the even finer definition between maximal sustained production of force (power lifting) and maximal production of force (hitting things as hard as you can).

You are describing exertion of force with different dynamics... Usually somehow static power lifting (deadlift for example), and for more dynamic thing, shot putting, clean and jerk etc. would be better example.

Hitting stuff with fists etc. very hard is rather different movement all together than pushing resisting stuff, so I wouldn't compare those.

Basically swinging part of your body, and supporting it with the rest, by hip rotation, shifting weight from one feet to the other etc.

OverdrivePrime

2013-07-24, 12:45 PM

I enjoy being big and strong. For health reasons, I'd like to be more lean, maybe drop 10-15 pounds of fat. For ego reasons I'd like to gain another 10-15 pounds of muscle. I definitely feel a primal call to make myself stronger and become a better fighter.

For me the (often, but not exclusively male) power fantasy is not just strength and physical might (though that's certainly nice to have), but the ability to do something with it. All the strength in the world isn't worth much if my technique is sloppy or my reactions are too slow to keep someone else from imposing their physical power on me. And that's really what the power fantasy is about - being able to exert your will on the world without other people being able to stop you.

The power can be used for good or for evil, but the choice is all yours.

You might remember the boss fight scene in The Protector (http://youtu.be/ir5U3hNs9s4?t=1m28s) where tiny little Tony Jaa (5'-6", 135 lbs) is up against big, hulking Nathan Jones (6'-11", 360 lbs). One solid hit to the midsection from Nathan Jones would probably break 30% of Tony Jaa's ribs in real life.

But the fantasy is that not only is Tony tough enough enough to withstand ludicrous amounts of punishment and fast enough to keep from getting pounded into paste, he's also skilled and resourceful enough to be able to eventually defeat a much larger, much scarier opponent.

And I think that's the primal essence of the male power fantasy - "See that bear over there? Wouldn't it be cool if I could beat it up?"

Haruki-kun

2013-07-24, 01:16 PM

So to put simple: I have a Power Fantasy, and it is not being buff. Mainly the idea of buff makes me feel bad about myself.

So I want to ask guys out there: Is being buff a power fantasy for you?

For me, it is. It's something that my girlfriend and some of my friends have tried to get me to explain and I just can't. One of my guesses would be media influence and being really insecure as a child. But the thought of being buff has always been important for me. It wasn't until I turned 19 that I started lifting weights for the purpose of achieving precisely this: And I have never looked back. I feel a lot better and confident about myself, even though I do not have a "fit guy" appearance so much as a "built" appearance.

But you do notice changes in your life: You feel better and healthier, people mess with you less, they start treating you with more respect, they get out of your way often (heh :smalltongue:). It also gets your hormones moving for a general "feel good". It's a matter of doing the things that make you feel happier and more confident in yourself.

Incidentally:

One thing though - please, whatever you do, do not associate bodybuilding with strength.

Correct.

Strength is irrelevant to bodybuilding, as is the opposite.

Incorrect. Bodybuilders are not as strong as say, powerlifters, because as stated they focus almost entirely in appearance, and muscle size does not correlate to muscle strength. But they ARE relevant. Even bodybuilders are at least intermediate strength trainers.

Gaining strength in everything one does, is pretty much literally body building, building stronger muscles, more nerve connection etc.

More muscles mass is more strength, bigger joints, and larger ligaments can take bigger forces, etc.

There are two types of muscle hypertrophy: Myofibrillar and Sarcoplasmic. Sarcoplasmic is an enlargement of the existing muscle fibers, while myofibrillar is building more muscle fibers. They're not INDEPENDENT from each other in any way (that's delving deeper into details and is a story for another topic), but they're not equivalent. And it is possible to train more focused on sarcoplasmic (bodybuilders, fitness models) or or on myofibrillar (olympic lifters, powerlifters).

More Info. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_hypertrophy#Myofibrillar_vs._sarcoplasmic_h ypertrophy)

PS: I apologize if at any point I came on as conceited or full of myself, but considering most of the replies I've read on this thread are "no, I don't want to be buff", I thought I may as well answer since mine was "yes, I do".

Soras Teva Gee

2013-07-24, 02:19 PM

So.....Yes you would like to be buff?

Yes.

Of course, there's also the subversion of this, through the canny warrior who resolves things by tricking or generally outsmarting his opponent, going at least as far back as Odysseus, right through to Bruce Lee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_Ycw0d_Uow), James Bond (especially in his Roger Moore incarnation) and Indiana Jones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs). Although said canny warriors are almost always portrayed as highly capable fighters when they have to be, they're also shown as being smart enough not to fight if they can think their way around the fight (sometimes, anyway).

I presume you know that Indy's classic scene there only happened by accident right. Harrison Ford is barely able to stand there and wasn't up for the planned big fight scene.

More to the point though to be a subversion means you are a minority case that deviates from the typical expectation. Ergo the general expectation is of physical prowess. Thus the much important point that must be considered here for a question like is physical prowess the power fantasy of men.

Note you can like/dislike this all you want. This is simply about factually ascertaining general trends and defaults not an assertation of Divine Truth brooking no exceptions. So what you really need to make the point is a more statistical perspective displaying a majority or at least fairly even division.

And Odysseus? Sure he's the Batman of Greek Myth, but he did shoot an arrow through a dozen axe heads when he got home then slew all his wife's suitors, along with that clever bit with the horse. And among the Trojan War participants you have Odysseus next to any number of Murder Chariots like Achilles, Ajax, and so forth. While Greek myth has its share of smart heroes most of them have a couple of feats of prowess in their to establish how badass they are too.

Well, to be fair, they are the protagonists of action/adventure films. Indiana Jones doesn't just read glyphs, he explores dangerous temples and does a lot of running, climbing, fighting, and general physical activity. Because that's more interesting to watch than him musing over books for an hour and a half. It'd be unrealistic for him to carry out those activities if he were unfit, and it'd be dull to watch if he didn't carry them out.
The same goes for Bond, Bruce Lee, and Odysseus (he is a warrior, after all).

Merely internal logic like that is dictated by the decision on what sort of hero you wish.

Your hero isn't strong because he had to wrestle bears growing up, he wrestled bears growing up because you wished him to be strong and needed a feat of prowess to prove it.

You might remember the boss fight scene in The Protector (http://youtu.be/ir5U3hNs9s4?t=1m28s) where tiny little Tony Jaa (5'-6", 135 lbs) is up against big, hulking Nathan Jones (6'-11", 360 lbs). One solid hit to the midsection from Nathan Jones would probably break 30% of Tony Jaa's ribs in real life.

Also in movies way too often, the biggest guy in the room mysteriously seems to have never trained in martial arts for a day. Instead of every bit as much as the littlest guy in the room.

What exactly are you supposed to do when someone is twice your size and just as good? Movies (quite understandably) flee such questions like the plague.

OverdrivePrime

2013-07-24, 03:22 PM

Also in movies way too often, the biggest guy in the room mysteriously seems to have never trained in martial arts for a day. Instead of every bit as much as the littlest guy in the room.
Ugh. That trope drives me nuts. Hey goons of the world - go take krav maga so we can get better fight scenes.

You'll note that even though Tony Jaa is 'the little guy', he is still about as ripped as his frame allows. He is obviously incredibly strong for his size, he's just at a tremendous disadvantage against the giant (who, in truth, holds his own until Tony starts shredding him with elephant bone shards).

What exactly are you supposed to do when someone is twice your size and just as good? Movies (quite understandably) flee such questions like the plague.
Usually you trick them into making a positioning mistake and then kick them into a conveniently placed jet intake (http://youtu.be/NPRlHwwVIug).

Brother Oni

2013-07-24, 03:31 PM

What exactly are you supposed to do when someone is twice your size and just as good?

You get your arse kicked then get saved by a last minute reprieve. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8NTtowJW67o)

Ugh. That trope drives me nuts. Hey goons of the world - go take krav maga so we can get better fight scenes.

I'd be happier with no shakey cam so we can actually see what they're doing without getting motion sick.

Water_Bear

2013-07-24, 04:23 PM

Personally, I would absolutely choose to be buffer if it was available via magic*. Not like "steroid-junkie" huge but at least swimmer muscles or werewolf abs.

Physical strength is less useful than mental acuity or money, but will absolutely improve your life. A cut body is less helpful with women than wit confidence and money, but is still a huge help. And being intimidatingly large is endlessly useful dealing with other men; as a person who tops 6ft and has broad shoulders I can vouch for part of that already.

*I'm already working on it IRL, so that's less hypothetical.

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-24, 04:59 PM

I'd like to be more lean, maybe drop 10-15 pounds of fat... I'd like to gain another 10-15 pounds of muscle.

Isn't that just life's eternal dillema!

There are two types of muscle hypertrophy: Myofibrillar and Sarcoplasmic

You must have heard the line by now, anyone who talks about myofibrillar vs. sarcoplasmic doesn't have enough of either, no?

McStabbington

2013-07-24, 05:22 PM

I don't think being buff is a power fantasy so much as its a status fantasy. The funny thing about fashion and beauty is that it uncannily tracks with the things upper-class people of that age use to differentiate themselves from the lower classes. Women of Late Medieval and Rennaissance paintings are, at least by modern standards of beauty, very much on the plump side of healthy, and the reason is because it suggests abundance of food at a time when most people barely get enough to survive on. The same reason applied to the lily-white skin prized by Victorian England: at a time when most people are working outside, porcelain skin can only be achieved by never going out of doors.

And now, tanned skin and fit, taut physiques are prized because they connote enough free time to go outside and run around in an age when most work is indoors. It's the modern way of signalling that you have enough money to have lots and lots of leisure time.

As for would I like a buff physique, I have one, albeit mine comes from a place that only accidentally triggers the right status cues. I keep myself taut for the same reason I always keep my head up when I walk home and I make sure to know my neighbors: because I've lived my life in rough neighborhood after rough neighborhood, and there is nothing so effective at convincing would-be muggers to pick a different target than broad shoulders and a flat stomach. As a result, I can pass for being much higher class than I am right up until I describe what I use my strength for, because if you're really high class, you don't actually need those muscles for anything but ornament. Carrying furniture when you're 30? No rich person does that.

Johel

2013-07-24, 05:34 PM

It's not a direct power fantasy. I doubt many people would find use for Conan's physical strength in their everyday lives. But it's the idea that comes with it. "This man is strong, he is capable of extraordinary physical feats. He is capable of extraordinary things".

This.

To have the capacity to reach easily above and beyond what common folk can hope to achieve.
To owe this capacity to yourself alone rather than to the talent, skills, knowledge and, essentially, good will of other.
And to be as close to impossible to stop by any other people if you choose to carry on.
This is the "power fantasy" at its core.

There is the notion of success, as OP mentionned.
But beyond that, it's the raw talent and potential that we desire or at least wouldn't mind to have.
To inspire that right mix of admiration for what we do on a daily basis and fear from what we could do if we were crossed.

paddyfool

2013-07-24, 05:38 PM

Yes.
More to the point though to be a subversion means you are a minority case that deviates from the typical expectation. Ergo the general expectation is of physical prowess. Thus the much important point that must be considered here for a question like is physical prowess the power fantasy of men.

I don't think I completely understand what you're saying, but what I meant as being subverted was the old trope of heroes who solve problems by applying their muscles and/or fighting skills, rather than their brains.

Usually you trick them into making a positioning mistake and then kick them into a conveniently placed jet intake (http://youtu.be/NPRlHwwVIug).

Or an airplane propeller, depending on the era (thinking of the fight with the strongman from Raiders of the Lost Ark... can't seem to find a link to the full fight video, though).

Brother Oni

2013-07-24, 06:22 PM

Or an airplane propeller, depending on the era (thinking of the fight with the strongman from Raiders of the Lost Ark... can't seem to find a link to the full fight video, though).

Here you go, not amazing quality though. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wtWJNMbJc30)

paddyfool

2013-07-24, 06:38 PM

Thank you, but that doesn't get to the end of the fight, which was kind of the point of my comment...

gooddragon1

2013-07-24, 06:51 PM

Always imagined a non muscular build with a lot of strength. :/

Brother Oni

2013-07-24, 06:56 PM

Thank you, but that doesn't get to the end of the fight, which was kind of the point of my comment...

Oh, if that's all you wanted... :smalltongue: (http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lOKfQK7fs0c&t=196)

Haruki-kun

2013-07-24, 07:04 PM

You must have heard the line by now, anyone who talks about myofibrillar vs. sarcoplasmic doesn't have enough of either, no?

Nope, never heard it. Elaborate?

What's with the blue? :smallconfused:

McStabbington

2013-07-24, 07:27 PM

IIRC, lines enclosed in blue are sarcastic.

Coidzor

2013-07-25, 12:28 AM

How so?

What I took away even from his reasoning in the OP was that being buff in and of itself was not the fantasy.

So.....Yes you would like to be buff?

Why wouldn't someone like to have their body's perfect body fat percentage and a body that was able to do what they wanted it to do? I mean, what is buff?

Your stated reasoning seemed to entirely hinge upon the idea that it was too much trouble to maintain, even though you'd be under no obligation to maintain it other than not wanting your body to atrophy.

Nope, never heard it. Elaborate?

What's with the blue? :smallconfused:

Blue is sarcasm, sure, it's just that the rest is all greek to me. Probably anatomical and a fair chance that it's related to types of muscle fibers though from context and at a guess.

????? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_hypertrophy#Myofibrillar_vs._sarcoplasmic_h ypertrophy)

SiuiS

2013-07-25, 01:39 AM

Of course, there's also the subversion of this, through the canny warrior who resolves things by tricking or generally outsmarting his opponent, going at least as far back as Odysseus, right through to Bruce Lee (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o_Ycw0d_Uow), James Bond (especially in his Roger Moore incarnation) and Indiana Jones (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YyBtMxZgQs). Although said canny warriors are almost always portrayed as highly capable fighters when they have to be, they're also shown as being smart enough not to fight if they can think their way around the fight (sometimes, anyway).

... Are you using Bruce Lee as an example of a non-buff guy?

Krieg the Psycho, can you do your Bruce Lee impression for me?
"My pecs, have pecs!"
Thank you, Krieg.

http://www.theplace2.ru/archive/bruce_lee/img/23018006.jpg
http://www.mikementzer.com/images/lee3.jpg

I mean seriously, the guy had lats like a frikkin' cobra hood!

http://www.the-biomatrix.net/leelats.jpg

Oops, totally somehow over-wrote my clipboard. Gimme a minute, I'll fix that.
Anyway; Bruce Lee had a phenomenal physique. He isolated and trained muscles the burgeoning body builder culture hadnt been able to work on yet. The only thing going for Bruce not being 'buff' is that he hit around 160# once, decided te extra mass slowed him down too much, and cut back. But if you e'er want to find a, functionally, body builder who was also strong and competent, Bruce would be him.

I don't know about you people, but my 'fantasy' of an ideal sort of person I would like to see myself as is more like a gender-swapped version of the silent girl in the library...

A Nobel would be nice if I was allowed to dream, yes. =D

Okay. Now, what's your Power fantasy?

I must confess, mine has always been a gish setup. Gandalfian wizard; wise, intelligent, clever, mysterious, able to cut a foo' if necessary. The greatest intelligence is shown by knowing when to use the simple solution. Like an axe to the back.

Also in movies way too often, the biggest guy in the room mysteriously seems to have never trained in martial arts for a day. Instead of every bit as much as the littlest guy in the room.

What exactly are you supposed to do when someone is twice your size and just as good? Movies (quite understandably) flee such questions like the plague.

Some truth to it; bigger guys rely on size. You can see it in boxing and similar sports; the medium weights are more (seemingly) technically proficient than the heavies, who tend more toward power shots in hopes of even clipping the target. This is really just polish, and it may be a necessity of the target also being bigger (and this requiring more or different force? I'm not sure if there's a point where size causes returns to diminish so greatly that precision and skill count for nothing...) but when one sees big guys consistently, even in trained matches, throw awkward haymaker after awkward haymaker, and the guy just ten pounds lighter is doin things that scream proficiency an effectiveness, it's hard to shake that concept.

Of course, that may also be media saturation. Coupled with a wide hook being wired into primate brains, and who knows how accurate it truly is?

Personally, I would absolutely choose to be buffer if it was available via magic*. Not like "steroid-junkie" huge but at least swimmer muscles or werewolf abs.

Oh man, I would love werewolf abs D=

What I took away even from his reasoning in the OP was that being buff in and of itself was not the fantasy.

Oh! Then yeah, I agree.

Blue is sarcasm, sure, it's just that the rest is all greek to me. Probably anatomical and a fair chance that it's related to types of muscle fibers though from context and at a guess.

????? (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muscle_hypertrophy#Myofibrillar_vs._sarcoplasmic_h ypertrophy)

"If you're debating between looking big and being strong, you're neither! Drop and give me INFINITY!"

Anarion

2013-07-25, 01:54 AM

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-25, 03:54 AM

Nope, never heard it. Elaborate?

What's with the blue? :smallconfused:

The blue is becasue people don't always get when you're joking, it kinda underlines it os to speak.

As far as the phrase goes, i forget who said it, maybe Jim Wendler or Dave Tate or someone like that, but it refers to i think internet 'strength coaches' who debate the merits of different rep structures and detailed programming, er, details but who can't squat say ~500lbs or so. It is something of a backlash/joke against sports science and coaches who claim to be experts at training but haven't actually achieved any amount of it themselves.

jseah

2013-07-25, 06:34 AM

Okay. Now, what's your Power fantasy?Young me: I discover the Theory of Everything

Teenage me: I invent any immortality treatment (mind-upload tech counts) and apply it to myself + everyone I want to

Recent me: As above, or I create the world's first true General AI, taking over the world with it optional

Really, I more fit the "evil genius" stereotype you find in SF movies than the hero who opposes them. Minus the evil part obviously.

Brother Oni

2013-07-25, 06:42 AM

It's weird to me that this thread has such a focus on being "buff."

That's the question posed by the OP - is looking physically muscular, a male power fantasy?

We've since pointed out that he's missing the point - it's not looking physically muscular, it's being physically powerful that's the fantasy: looking buff is just a side effect.

We subsequently digressed into the different forms of being physically powerful, then we got distracted.

SiuiS

2013-07-25, 07:13 AM

It's weird to me that this thread has such a focus on being "buff." The power fantasy has to do with, y'know, power. And the characters that are examples of it have something visual about them that indicates power. That can be a buff physique, a lean physique, a toned physique, whatever adjective you want. People understand that guys in all sorts of sports and athletics are strong and powerful just by looking at them, the specific body type isn't really the important point.

The question has been addressed; no, being buff is not a power fantasy in and of itself, it is however ancillary to a power fantasy in most instances.

Now I'm just addressing points of interest and pointing out where examples seem flawed.

Haruki-kun

2013-07-25, 09:10 AM

The blue is becasue people don't always get when you're joking, it kinda underlines it os to speak.

As far as the phrase goes, i forget who said it, maybe Jim Wendler or Dave Tate or someone like that, but it refers to i think internet 'strength coaches' who debate the merits of different rep structures and detailed programming, er, details but who can't squat say ~500lbs or so. It is something of a backlash/joke against sports science and coaches who claim to be experts at training but haven't actually achieved any amount of it themselves.

Oh. Well, no, I'm by no means an expert, but the info does hold some merit.

Spuddles

2013-07-25, 10:16 AM

This. Bodybuilders and powerlifters are two very different groups of people, with very different training methods, goals, and physiques. About the most you could say they have in common is "both use weights" and "both tend to take nutritional supplements".

And yet, if I would bet on the bodybuilder over the cross fitter every time it came to a proper lift.

You're diving into specifics too hard. Forest. Trees. Platitudes.

When I clicked that link I didn't see a body builder. I saw a very professional very successful man who has what most who desire power want – Heath, wealth, game, friends and clout. That is a power fantasy. Be like Arnold is not a bad thing to put on your charts.

This thread is about whether something is a power fantasy. I said Arnold was a bad example because aside from body building, all his other traits make him much more admirable than any other picture you could have chosen.

I chose Arnold because he is the face of the modern body building movement. That he built a career out of having huge muscles exemplifies what I'm talking about.

That's great, except Body Building is not body building, it is a specific sport with specific ideas for maximal success within that sport, which includes severe dehydration to show musculature better, lifting in such a way to gain definition an size regardless of strength, gain size disproportionate to anything useful and remove as much fat as possible to avoid concluding the musculature. So, no, in a sport that defines success as sufficient mass to screw over the power/weight ratio, you DO get weaker as you get better most of the time – often enough for it to be a truism.

What? You get weaker? Only during a cut, and that will typically be before a show. Dehydrated for a few days, hungry for a week or two.

Otherwise, no, you're only getting "weaker" in a power to weight ratio. That's like saying because an ant can lift 50x its weight, and you can lift, at most, double or triple yours, an ant is stronger than you.

The Fonzi actor has the advantage in that he can star in different genres. He can be in comedies, dramas, chick-movies, horror. When he goes back to action movies, he still has presence and verisimilitude. Hugh Jackman can be Wolverine, then play a gay man on Broadway, and still go back to being Wolverine. Jean Claude Van Damme, a Conan, could not. Notice every comedy movie attempt by Arnold Schwarzennegar flopped, "Twins" being the exception because 1) he still played the Conan and 2) Danny Devito.

However, there's nothing wrong with being the Conan. It is not something to be ashamed of for men who like such movies.

Are you kidding? Arnold was one of the biggest movie stars of the 90s. His comedies were smash hits. I don't know what you consider a flop, but most of his films grossed at least twice what it cost to produce. The only flop was Last Action Hero, which for some reason critics didn't get and was marketed wrong. It ended a few careers. But it was a damn good film. Here are what I consider Arnold's comedy movies:

Kindergarten Cop
cost $15m
gross $200m

Junior
cost $60m
gross $108m

True Lies
cost $115m
gross $378m

Jingle All the Way
cost $75m
gross $130m

Last Action Hero
cost $85m
gross $137m

I don't think being buff is a power fantasy so much as its a status fantasy.

Samesies.

It's weird to me that this thread has such a focus on being "buff." The power fantasy has to do with, y'know, power. And the characters that are examples of it have something visual about them that indicates power. That can be a buff physique, a lean physique, a toned physique, whatever adjective you want. People understand that guys in all sorts of sports and athletics are strong and powerful just by looking at them, the specific body type isn't really the important point.

Yeah, it seems like the power part of power fantasy is being literally interpreted as Power = Work/Time

BRC

2013-07-25, 11:33 AM

Yeah, it seems like the power part of power fantasy is being literally interpreted as Power = Work/Time
The Muscles are a visual indication of Power.

A Bodybuilder is not the strongest person out there, nor neccessarily the best looking (if you see male models/actors, they are generally in great shape, but not bodybuilder-ripped). If you look at an athlete, they don't look like bodybuilders either, though (depending on the sport) they can be much more "Powerful".

Which brings us to Kratos/Conan/Rambo.
They are portrayed with bodybuilder physiques, not because a bodybuilder is the strongest person out there, but because that physique is the one we most likely associate with strength, and therefore with power. If you want to sell a fantasy of physical strength and power, the bodybuilder physique is the best way to do that, it's visual shorthand for "This person is very strong"

Now, there ARE other power fantasies out there. Lets look at Tony Stark in the Iron Man Movies. The Tony Stark power fantasy comes, not from physical strength, but from intelligence, wealth, and status. Yes the Iron Man armor gives him superstrength, but the Armor is a symbol of his intelligence and wealth.

Tony Stark could be just as effective if he was a scrawny weakling, or mildly overweight (Provided the armor was built to compensate). With very few exceptions, he would still be just as "powerful" (Defined as his ability to achieve his goals and make things happen).
And yet, when RDJ played Tony Stark, he was physically fit. Not quite bodybuilder levels, but definetly above average. More than a character who mainly uses his brains and his wealth needs to be.

Tony Stark's fantasy is wealth and power. BUT, because we associate physical fitness with power, the Tony Stark Fantasy wouldn't work if he had a more common physique. He would be just as smart and wealthy, but Fantasy is about subconcious.

if you're going to fantasize about being a genius billionaire playboy philanthropist, you might as well fantasize about being a genius billionaire playboy philanthropist who is in great shape.

Kratos, Rambo, and Conan's physiques also translate to Status. In their situations, physical strength is far more important, and therefore correlates to Status.

In Tony Stark's case, his physique reinforces the impression created by his wealth and intelligence. For Kratos, Rambo, and Conan, their physique indicates their status as the baddest dudes on the battlefield.

JustSomeGuy

2013-07-25, 02:19 PM

Oh. Well, no, I'm by no means an expert, but the info does hold some merit.

That's err, why it's a joke...

EDIT: I would like to take this time to refute a common misconception, and this week i shall mostly be using an analogy.

What car has the fastest top speed? Which has the greatest acceleration (0-60)? Which cars are fastest, over an F! circuit, a specific rally stage, a nascar race, a tractor pull, a 1/4 mile drag? No doubt, because there were numerous different numerical criteria setting the conditions, you have identified many different cars which are 'fastest'. Each holds a valid claim to being the fastest car, because each undeniably was fastest within a set of rules.

*WARNING i am about to embarass myself and make many cool kids cringe reading what i am about to type in the most 'dad' way possible - if you have any sense of cool, consider leaving now*

Now, lets consider a 'show car', and by this i mean the max power/street cruise/car park rally sort - folks modifying their car to show off, whether it be to look the flashiest (paint, bodykit, wheels, suspension etc), have the coolest stereo/speakers stuff. No doubt these cars may be faster than they were when they rolled out the factory gates, but they have no business claiming to be the fastest. They are entirely judged based on subjective qualities, non of which are how fast they go (i know there is a portion of the car scene that is indeed about making their car faster and street racing and such, but this isn't really relevant to the analogy so i'll not include it).

This is the crux of the issue: Bodybuilders (the shaved, tanned, starved posing pouch variant) are not strength athletes. They do not compete to lift the most, there are no prizes for the strongest in show (that i know of, but i don't follow the sport), they do not train for maximal strength. Of course they are stronger than most other folks who don't train, and they are stronger than they would be if they didn't lift, but they are not as strong as they could be nor are they strong enough to win many strength contests (of course some do, but then they are no longer bodybuilders, but 'dual/multi classed' if you will, because they will have trained for it). However, because they do not contest to see who is objectively strongest, they can make no claims towards being 'the strongest' at anything, and as a result, THE DEFAULT GO-TO EXAMPLE OF STRONG MEN/WOMEN.

Mando Knight

2013-07-25, 10:26 PM

However, because they do not contest to see who is objectively strongest, they can make no claims towards being 'the strongest' at anything, and as a result, THE DEFAULT GO-TO EXAMPLE OF STRONG MEN/WOMEN.
However, the idea that bulked-up people are stronger than other builds is a fairly basic extrapolation from the difference between people who are not very strong at all and those who are fairly strong: the latter generally have more muscle definition and mass than the former. Since bodybuilders are visibly built up even more so, the simple extrapolation implies that they look stronger than other people, even those with more optimized musculature.

To use your car analogy, the bodybuilder is the muscle car that has a hole cut in the hood to fit in a very large and loud engine... a sleeker, fine-tuned vehicle may be a lot faster, but the oversized engine makes the muscle car look like the more powerful vehicle.

To the casual observer, showy symbols of power equate to the power itself.

BRC

2013-07-25, 11:19 PM

However, the idea that bulked-up people are stronger than other builds is a fairly basic extrapolation from the difference between people who are not very strong at all and those who are fairly strong: the latter generally have more muscle definition and mass than the former. Since bodybuilders are visibly built up even more so, the simple extrapolation implies that they look stronger than other people, even those with more optimized musculature.

To use your car analogy, the bodybuilder is the muscle car that has a hole cut in the hood to fit in a very large and loud engine... a sleeker, fine-tuned vehicle may be a lot faster, but the oversized engine makes the muscle car look like the more powerful vehicle.

To the casual observer, showy symbols of power equate to the power itself.

Yeah. This isn't about reality, it's about PERCEPTION. Plenty of people on this thread have already made the point that bodybuilders are not the strongest people out there.

Somebody isn't going to look at Conan or Rambo and say "Yeah, to have that level of muscle tone they would be sacrificing a considerable amount of actual strength.", they'll say "WOAH, LOOK HOW STRONG THAT GUY IS! I WANT TO BE THAT GUY!" The fact that their builds don't necessarily correlate to actual maximum strength (that would probably be the build of an olympic athlete of some flavor or another depending on the nature of the strength. An Endurance Runner and a Weightlifter are both in prime physical condition, but for very different tasks) is irrelevant. They LOOK stronger, and in a visual medium like film, games, or comics, the APPEARANCE of Strength is what's important to send the message "This character is strong" to the audience.

Anarion

2013-07-25, 11:52 PM

To the casual observer, showy symbols of power equate to the power itself.

I'd change that to human instinct and subconscious, rather than just the casual observer. It's not a misunderstanding by the ignorant, but rather a very basic tenet that's programmed into us. Until the very recent past, more muscle correlated to more power because something like body-building in a way that made you look strong but not actually be really strong wasn't something that happened.

MLai

2013-07-26, 05:42 AM

Chalk me up as Yes, I would like to be buff as my male power fantasy. It's not entirely fantasy though, as I've been working on it twice a week for the past 3 years now, and I've made significant visible gains from a scrawny nerdy beanpole to a tall cut guy with big arms.

My body type is just scrawny by default (metabolism too high), or else I should be more massive with my amount of regular training. Other guys tell me that's BS; that I'll be bigger if I eat more while working out. I try! I always eat double portions now! I'm also told to do less reps but more weight, and I'm doing that now.

I agree that being cut and being big just makes a person feel good, regardless whether it helps you get girls or if you're a pacifist. IMO any man who says he doesn't want to look fit, athletic, and powerful is just sour grapes. And no more of the strawman of "I don't want to look like a gross lobster-red bodybuilder." Most thin-average men think of this link below when they think "I wanna be buff". They do not visualize a bodybuilder on the competition podium.
http://www.zulumuscle.com/2012/02/10-of-most-ripped-tv-and-movie-super.html

As for "I value brains more; I want to invent XYZ, win Nobel, etc." Nothing says superiority more than doing all of the above while also being buff.

jseah

2013-07-26, 08:42 AM

As for "I value brains more; I want to invent XYZ, win Nobel, etc." Nothing says superiority more than doing all of the above while also being buff.Well, it's more like I value my time more than being buff lol.
If I have the time to train to be buff while winning a Nobel, why not two Nobels instead?

If a genie came up to me and said "would you like to be buff?", I would ask if it could just do "fit & healthy" (after all, who likes heart disease?) or maybe let me trade for higher Int scores.

It's... due to a stereotype I tend to unconsciously hold that being buff is correlated with lower intelligence. I know! I know, this is not true, and that there is no real reason for that correlation but when I see a buff guy, I don't exactly expect feats of mental gymnastics from him. It's something I try to work against, but well, ingrained stereotypes and all.

And if I worked harder at being smarter and getting better scores... maybe I'd be doing a PhD now instead of getting an industry job. =(

Spuddles

2013-07-26, 10:32 AM

Well, it's more like I value my time more than being buff lol.
If I have the time to train to be buff while winning a Nobel, why not two Nobels instead?

If a genie came up to me and said "would you like to be buff?", I would ask if it could just do "fit & healthy" (after all, who likes heart disease?) or maybe let me trade for higher Int scores.

It's... due to a stereotype I tend to unconsciously hold that being buff is correlated with lower intelligence. I know! I know, this is not true, and that there is no real reason for that correlation but when I see a buff guy, I don't exactly expect feats of mental gymnastics from him. It's something I try to work against, but well, ingrained stereotypes and all.

And if I worked harder at being smarter and getting better scores... maybe I'd be doing a PhD now instead of getting an industry job. =(

Regular physical activity increases mental performance.

jseah

2013-07-26, 10:48 AM

Regular physical activity increases mental performance.
I'm not disputing anything. I'm just coming up with an explanation for my mild aversion to looking buff.

Soras Teva Gee

2013-07-26, 10:53 AM

I'm not disputing anything. I'm just coming up with an explanation for my mild aversion to looking buff.

Its simple really.... wear glasses.

That should counter any perception of being dumb muscle. :smallwink:

jseah

2013-07-26, 11:46 AM

Its simple really.... wear glasses.

That should counter any perception of being dumb muscle. :smallwink:
Lol, I am in fact wearing some of the thickest glasses I've seen. It's kinda rare that I meet someone with thicker glasses than I wear.

Short-sightedness @ 10 diopters. >.>

It's not a good thing. =(

navar100

2013-07-26, 06:27 PM

Its simple really.... wear glasses.

That should counter any perception of being dumb muscle. :smallwink:

But if he wears glasses, no one would recognize him!

http://s19.postimg.org/bhcgus5ab/clarkkent.jpg (http://postimage.org/)
image upload with preview (http://postimage.org/)

Spuddles

2013-07-26, 06:35 PM

I'm not disputing anything. I'm just coming up with an explanation for my mild aversion to looking buff.

You should open yourself up to Brodin and let Swole into your life, bro.

Mando Knight

2013-07-26, 08:15 PM

I'd change that to human instinct and subconscious, rather than just the casual observer. It's not a misunderstanding by the ignorant, but rather a very basic tenet that's programmed into us. Until the very recent past, more muscle correlated to more power because something like body-building in a way that made you look strong but not actually be really strong wasn't something that happened.

That's kinda why I said the casual observer: people can condition themselves to look past their subconscious impulses, but the "uninitiated" in whatever such field won't have that particular conditioning, and thus rely more on their instinct, even when it's wrong.

So, yes, the instinct/subconscious is probably a more correct answer, but the casual observer bit is a little more concise and relays much of the same information.

SiuiS

2013-07-26, 08:54 PM

I chose Arnold because he is the face of the modern body building movement. That he built a career out of having huge muscles exemplifies what I'm talking about.

That's fair.

What? You get weaker? Only during a cut, and that will typically be before a show. Dehydrated for a few days, hungry for a week or two.

Otherwise, no, you're only getting "weaker" in a power to weight ratio. That's like saying because an ant can lift 50x its weight, and you can lift, at most, double or triple yours, an ant is stronger than you.

Body builders have lower outputs than other muscle folk who are smaller. Objectively, being a body builder can actually make you much weaker both due to your muscle inhibiting itself in sheer power and in reduced range of motion.

In this instance, the bodybuilder is the ant; it's impressive UNTIL you factor in square/cube law.

I'd change that to human instinct and subconscious, rather than just the casual observer. It's not a misunderstanding by the ignorant, but rather a very basic tenet that's programmed into us. Until the very recent past, more muscle correlated to more power because something like body-building in a way that made you look strong but not actually be really strong wasn't something that happened.

Disagree over two issues.
One, my standard and casually thrown out "humans don't have instincts in the way most people mean them", but whatevs. That's like, barely ancillary.

Second, actual lived by their physique folks didn't look ANYTHING like muscle folks do now. I know you only said 'more muscle' but folks who live like that 'back in the day' would not look muscular to you – they would look fat. Or ridonkulously skinny if they were of the taller breeds.

jseah

2013-07-26, 11:04 PM

But if he wears glasses, no one would recognize him!
But if I don't wear glasses, I can't recognize anyone!

=P Sorry, the reversal was just too good to pass up.

Soras Teva Gee

2013-07-28, 06:49 PM

But if he wears glasses, no one would recognize him!

But if I don't wear glasses, I can't recognize anyone!

=P Sorry, the reversal was just too good to pass up.

I'm glad this went about like I expected.

Kiero

2013-07-28, 07:08 PM

How old are you? Chances are, this will change with age. Trust me.

My dad is going to be 60 this year. He's never been overweight, he still has a lot of lean muscle on him. So frankly, nonsense. People who don't look after themselves will certainly deteriorate and put fat on, especially if they drink beer and eat rubbish.

Given I've never been overweight either, and at 33 look no different to when I was 18 physically, I can only assume I lucked out with some of those genes. Course I also don't drink, don't eat rubbish and exercise regularly.

As to the thread, I like to be strong, fast and enduring. That martial arts, gym and other stuff also makes me look good is a bonus. I also find I'm often stronger than people who are bigger than me. Because you don't need bulk to be strong.

Always makes me laugh when people look up to bodybuilder types, yet many of those dudes would struggle to run a mile. You know, do something pretty basic for which the human body was designed. Besides, I see no point in something gained by steroids or supplements, when as soon as you stop those things, the gains vanish.

Soras Teva Gee

2013-07-28, 08:05 PM

My dad is going to be 60 this year. He's never been overweight, he still has a lot of lean muscle on him. So frankly, nonsense. People who don't look after themselves will certainly deteriorate and put fat on, especially if they drink beer and eat rubbish.

Given I've never been overweight either, and at 33 look no different to when I was 18 physically, I can only assume I lucked out with some of those genes. Course I also don't drink, don't eat rubbish and exercise regularly.

If you've gone that long and your hairline hasn't started receding then yes you can probably count yourself lucky. :smallwink:

I didn't believe that until I checked people my age, or about five years younger now, to see that I myself have apparently lucked out there. Not people going bald outright mind you, but creeping up the forehead a few inches over the course of you mid-late 20s.

Also general understanding at least is that it gets harder to maintain such things as time goes by. Not really and excuse but there. And when you don't take good care of yourself to raise the chances of developing something that will make it harder to do so. A negative feedback loop perhaps all the more terrible for how subtle it is and that it isn't really an excuse.

Kiero

2013-07-29, 03:21 AM

If you've gone that long and your hairline hasn't started receding then yes you can probably count yourself lucky. :smallwink:

I didn't believe that until I checked people my age, or about five years younger now, to see that I myself have apparently lucked out there. Not people going bald outright mind you, but creeping up the forehead a few inches over the course of you mid-late 20s.

Also general understanding at least is that it gets harder to maintain such things as time goes by. Not really and excuse but there. And when you don't take good care of yourself to raise the chances of developing something that will make it harder to do so. A negative feedback loop perhaps all the more terrible for how subtle it is and that it isn't really an excuse.

I wasn't quite that lucky, but everything below the eyebrows is unchanged. Not so much receding hairline as random patch that's thinned.

Themrys

2013-07-29, 12:09 PM