Fag Muscles

[Jory]

No. The census only gives a picture of how much everyone earns and gives a number of how many people live outside of subsistance living.

Those that live ouside subsistance living are the ones that have the necessary disposal incomes to spend on things, like gym membership.

If you ever get the chance, I totally recommend checking out the census results because it's extremely shocking or just eye opening.

Ten to one the ones having gym membership are the upper middle classes

The working class can't aford it and the Elite class usually have their own personal gyms and trainers

 

[Ares]

^ The way I interpreted it is a muscular guy that looks masculine, but turns out to sound or act feminine. The first people that popped into my head were Mike Tyson and that Olympic gymnast dude from a few years ago, Paul Hamm I think. They both have high voices that you wouldn't expect coming out of their built body. But to the best of my knowledge neither is gay, so I think the OP is using "fag" as an equivalent to feminine/non-athletic rather than a required sexual orientation. He probably could have thought of a more appropriate title by using a couple more neurons, but I don't like to judge.

 

[falconfan]

I'm sorry are we going to sit here and pretend like athletics as a whole aren't ritualized behavior in which men attempt to prove their "manliness" and prowess? That the "jock" status isn't portrayed by our society as a marker of strength, popularity, and most importantly and consistently and ability to obtain the most attractive mates? So "natural" muscle is simply acting as a middle man for the same thing we're going to pretend people are pathetic for going to a gym to do?

More to the point though if you associate bodybuilding with homosexuality then you have just as many issues with understanding sexuality as the "fag" musclemen you detest. In fact what it appears to me is that you are assuming that gay men, by virtue of them being "fags," MUST by a natural order have a less muscular and more "feminine" body type what seeing as gay men are practically women and all! So if a gay man dare build muscle it MUST be because they are insecure with their masculinity and trying to supplement with this obvious lack with muscle mass in a futile attempt that just appears ungodly unnatural. It couldn't be the same simple vanity that leads everyone on this Earth to in someway alter their appearance or anything silly like that....

Ridiculousness! The whole lot of this is ridiculousness! Are we really still at a point where the gay community thinks that using "fag" is OK?!? Really? When you're trying to coin a term that denotes that something as bad you choose a term that is intrinsically linked to homosexuality so you can further an association between homosexuality and negativity. Grow the fuck up.

It's one thing not to be attracted to overly muscular men. I'd say very few people are. But when you see that muscle and automatically make a mental leap to the assumption that the man who it's on MUST be insecure with his masculinity because he's gay and has muscle... that's pathetic. It's a closed mindset. A closed and old mindset.

 

[Telstra]

Another example of gay muscle as living theater. Nothing detrimental, but another distinctly gay spin on something that is otherwise mundane. You might call it fag muscle, in a humorous sense.

mmmm they are hot !!!

 

[Fishstix]

Stop using the word Fag even if you are one, stop discriminating against gay people saying they need to fit a stereotype and it's impossible for them to enjoy sports or a good work out to reduce stress because they're gay and stop doing drugs. If they think it looks good then let them do what they want to do with their body. None of them find you attractive either so they don't need to change themselves to fit your standards. If a guy doesn't want to shave either, he doesn't need to do it for you because you think it looks gross.

On top of all that, you don't know why or how the person got the muscles. There are many other reasons other than looks. The OP's post just sounded really shallow and close minded.

If you hate muscles then just say that, you don't have to single out gay people, use an offensive slur, and reinforce stereotypes.

 

[godson112]

I like muscles in a fantasy situation kind of way.
Like, for one night (or several ) I'd like some big muscly guy to just...rough me up a bit.

But realistically, if I;m honest, I couldn't ever 'be' with one because I'd feel inadequate. I'm not ugly, but I like to be the better looking person in the relationship

 

[Fishstix]

And who the fuck made up "Muscle Mary's"? Does everything gay related have to involve something girly related? The term is pretty much homophobic.

 

[Fishstix]

No. The census only gives a picture of how much everyone earns and gives a number of how many people live outside of subsistance living.

Those that live ouside subsistance living are the ones that have the necessary disposal incomes to spend on things, like gym membership.

If you ever get the chance, I totally recommend checking out the census results because it's extremely shocking or just eye opening.

I could see the time thing but not the money thing. If 33% of the population is obese and about 66% overweight then they could definately cut the food budget. A gym membership is about $30 a month and a lot of these people don't need to be eating as much as they do. Going to the gym keeps the body healthy so that they don't end up with body problems in the future that will cost more than the gym memberships they would've signed up for.

 

[davy]

I could see the time thing but not the money thing. If 33% of the population is obese and about 66% overweight then they could definately cut the food budget. A gym membership is about $30 a month and a lot of these people don't need to be eating as much as they do. Going to the gym keeps the body healthy so that they don't end up with body problems in the future that will cost more than the gym memberships they would've signed up for.

you would think so; but do you want to know something REALLY fascinating: it's the exact opposite.

five years ago, the journal of the american medical association made a direct link to obesity and poverty. meaning that: the poorer you are, the greater the likelihood that you'll be overweight.

you have to wonder if that 66% that are overweight are also the same 66% that are living at subsistence level income.

also: menshealth magazine, last year, said that the average cost of gym membership is $75 per month and that doesn't include the sign up costs. (the sign up costs are usually three to four times the monthly membership).

 

[Fishstix]

you would think so; but do you want to know something REALLY fascinating: it's the exact opposite.

five years ago, the journal of the american medical association made a direct link to obesity and poverty. meaning that: the poorer you are, the greater the likelihood that you'll be overweight.

you have to wonder if that 66% that are overweight are also the same 66% that are living at subsistence level income.

also: menshealth magazine, last year, said that the average cost of gym membership is $75 per month and that doesn't include the sign up costs. (the sign up costs are usually three to four times the monthly membership).

What a rip off. People are actually paying around 100 a month then? None of the gyms in my area are that expensive. Most places over here are around $30-$40 and I've looked at many gyms before signing up. There's no way the average is $75 a month, they must've only looked at rich locations.

 

[smoothebottom]

I'm sorry are we going to sit here and pretend like athletics as a whole aren't ritualized behavior in which men attempt to prove their "manliness" and prowess? That the "jock" status isn't portrayed by our society as a marker of strength, popularity, and most importantly and consistently and ability to obtain the most attractive mates? So "natural" muscle is simply acting as a middle man for the same thing we're going to pretend people are pathetic for going to a gym to do?

More to the point though if you associate bodybuilding with homosexuality then you have just as many issues with understanding sexuality as the "fag" musclemen you detest. In fact what it appears to me is that you are assuming that gay men, by virtue of them being "fags," MUST by a natural order have a less muscular and more "feminine" body type what seeing as gay men are practically women and all! So if a gay man dare build muscle it MUST be because they are insecure with their masculinity and trying to supplement with this obvious lack with muscle mass in a futile attempt that just appears ungodly unnatural. It couldn't be the same simple vanity that leads everyone on this Earth to in someway alter their appearance or anything silly like that....

Ridiculousness! The whole lot of this is ridiculousness! Are we really still at a point where the gay community thinks that using "fag" is OK?!? Really? When you're trying to coin a term that denotes that something as bad you choose a term that is intrinsically linked to homosexuality so you can further an association between homosexuality and negativity. Grow the fuck up.

It's one thing not to be attracted to overly muscular men. I'd say very few people are. But when you see that muscle and automatically make a mental leap to the assumption that the man who it's on MUST be insecure with his masculinity because he's gay and has muscle... that's pathetic. It's a closed mindset. A closed and old mindset.

You just totally turned me on with this alone.

 

[BabiGayPimp]

I'm sorry are we going to sit here and pretend like athletics as a whole aren't ritualized behavior in which men attempt to prove their "manliness" and prowess? That the "jock" status isn't portrayed by our society as a marker of strength, popularity, and most importantly and consistently and ability to obtain the most attractive mates? So "natural" muscle is simply acting as a middle man for the same thing we're going to pretend people are pathetic for going to a gym to do?

More to the point though if you associate bodybuilding with homosexuality then you have just as many issues with understanding sexuality as the "fag" musclemen you detest. In fact what it appears to me is that you are assuming that gay men, by virtue of them being "fags," MUST by a natural order have a less muscular and more "feminine" body type what seeing as gay men are practically women and all! So if a gay man dare build muscle it MUST be because they are insecure with their masculinity and trying to supplement with this obvious lack with muscle mass in a futile attempt that just appears ungodly unnatural. It couldn't be the same simple vanity that leads everyone on this Earth to in someway alter their appearance or anything silly like that....

Ridiculousness! The whole lot of this is ridiculousness! Are we really still at a point where the gay community thinks that using "fag" is OK?!? Really? When you're trying to coin a term that denotes that something as bad you choose a term that is intrinsically linked to homosexuality so you can further an association between homosexuality and negativity. Grow the fuck up.

It's one thing not to be attracted to overly muscular men. I'd say very few people are. But when you see that muscle and automatically make a mental leap to the assumption that the man who it's on MUST be insecure with his masculinity because he's gay and has muscle... that's pathetic. It's a closed mindset. A closed and old mindset.

Sorry honey, but they gay community has taken the muscle thing to theatrical extremes rarely witnessed elsewhere--and had special costumes custom made! There's a certain muscleman posture that you, typically see in gay-oriented drinking establishments... It's too late to deny it, or project onto the larger society, we done seent it! Heh! heh! And we can't help but laugh at ourselves. I had sex with a gay bodybuilder who moaned, orgasmically, "muscle, muscle, muscle." If that's not comic relief, I don't know what is. Tee-hee!

 

[jaycee style]

Here in America, anyway, the entire concert of "natural muscles" is rather oxymoronic, isn't it? Straight OR gay? Any muscular guy you see almost certainly didn't get that way hauling iron ore, or doing heavy farm work. He got that way by going to the gym (and, possibly, via chemical enhancements).
Lex

this is real shit.

see, my biological father was tall and skinny as shit and biological mother was short and lightly fat.

so my sister and I are (NATURALLY) these pudgy goofing looking things. so i have high fiber in the morning, heavy protien, starch and vegatable for lunch and light protien and a small cup of water for dinner and whey protien juice with lunch of breakfast.

and i exercise 2 hours out of 6 days with one day off of which i treat myself to some junkfood.

today its gonna be angel cake with lemon icing.

but..... i digress.

im such a pothead i'm procrastinating on rolling this joint.

 

[kayman23]

Well, I do understand what the OP may have been implying. He is discussing how body dysmorphic behavior has affected so many gay/bi males to the point in which you have to achieve a certain "look" to be accepted or considered desirable. I say he has a point because it seems to be all about looks, but that American society in general these days. It's one thing to just be physically active to maintain or improve your health and its another to be in the gym working out just so you can be the center-of-attention or as another way to caust your ego/self-esteem. The latter behavior does point to self-esteem/self image issues.

Another sad testament about how much we have evolved in some areas, but remain unevolved or have regressed in other key areas.