Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Fashion to be skinny?

  1. Jan 24, 2006 #1
    How come that for each year that passes it becomes more and more fashion for males to be skinny and somewhat feminine?

    I couldnt stop laughing when I heard girls refer to Tobey Maguire as buff/muscular after he got bit by the spider in spiderman. :rofl:

    What happaned to the good old days when guys wanted to look like the old greek gods, Arnold, Stallone, Steve Reeves or Lou Ferrigno(ok, this might be pushing it cause he is one uggly bloke), not like Tobey Maguire or (god forbid:surprised ) Aston Kutcher:confused:

    What can be the casue for strong(physicaly) males not beeing desirable anymore?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jan 24, 2006 #2

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    I like skinny, whimpy guys, with glasses. I always have. :redface:
     
  4. Jan 24, 2006 #3

    JasonRox

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Who wanted to look like Arnold?

    It's never been like that at all. Not that I know of anyways.

    Note: They were hardly ever desired. These guys went to far with it.

    You got this all wrong.

    Who said girls have to like muscular men anyways?

    Note: If you thought you were going to get girls by working out, I say that's the funniest thing ever.
     
  5. Jan 24, 2006 #4
    Because when it's too hard to look like that, it's best to just settle for what takes less work. Kinda like, If you ever read 'america the book' you might remember the picture with the really fat chick and the caption that read "in 50 years, you will want to 'tap' this." we will just keep lowering our standards until fat is hot.
     
  6. Jan 24, 2006 #5

    JasonRox

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    That's false.

    Fat will never be hot. It will just be hot relative to others.

    In our minds, man will always want a thin female over a fat female.
     
  7. Jan 24, 2006 #6
    hahah fat will be hot, what an interesting perspective. but in the same vein, in female minds the would have wanted a strong male to protect them instinctively, but now they want skinny indie guys
     
  8. Jan 24, 2006 #7

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I am zeus.
     
  9. Jan 24, 2006 #8
    Skinny is not hot, fat is not hot, period.
     
  10. Jan 24, 2006 #9

    JasonRox

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member

    Yes, girls want big, but not TOO big.

    You can't make that mistake. There is a limit on this.

    Sure, the guys are small compared to what is HUGE, but it's big compared to normal.

    I workout and have been built, but I've never been built too large. I've noticed that girls think I have a hot body when I reach about 14.5 inch arms give or take, with my body in proportion of course. It seems that I attract a lot more at this size than any other.

    You have to remember, some girls are attracted to the riches too.
     
  11. Jan 24, 2006 #10
    im zeus' son :yuck:
     
  12. Jan 24, 2006 #11

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Unless you're Michael Praed. I have been in love with him since he played Robin Hood in the BBC series. His hips and legs are skinnier than mine.

    Now this guy is HOT!!!

    ncrobij1sg.jpg
     
  13. Jan 24, 2006 #12
    My waist is only 32," but thats not "hot."


    Evo, a waist is a terrible thing to mind.
     
  14. Jan 24, 2006 #13

    G01

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper
    Gold Member


    I think its what I call the proportionality factor.

    Someone is a attractive when there in proportion......ok let me explain.

    Im attracted (physically) more to women who are proportional.
    Disproportionality turns me off. I rather go for a girl with .......how do you say....... "lesser curvature" if her body fits her frame, than a girl who can't stand straight up because of all the silicone. Too me, its too out of proportion.

    Maybe its the same for these women atracted to smaller guys. Big guys with gigantic muscles are, just......too big.

    As usual, I hope I'm making some kinda sense here.
     
  15. Jan 24, 2006 #14
     
  16. Jan 24, 2006 #15
    ALOT of women liked men who were "buff". They needn't necessarily be Arnold's size just muscular and toned. If you don't believe me go back and look at who were the sex symbols about ten years ago and why. Most (note: not all) were relatively muscular. I think that the thin/compact yet muscular look started to come into fashion with Edward Norton.

    Now though with the new trends in pop music the really thin sometimes feminine look popular with indie and emo are becoming more mainstream.



    By the way Azael Greek gods generally weren't depicted the way you are describing them. The "beautiful" gods were always depicted as being rather feminine. The gods that were depicted as "manly men" generally were not considered "good looking" per se. Consider that the forger Vulcan/Hephaestus who would most obviously be powerful and muscle bound was depicted as being deformed and ugly.
     
  17. Jan 24, 2006 #16

    Pengwuino

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think JasonRox is lonely :redface:
     
  18. Jan 24, 2006 #17
    wimpy? so you don't want him to stand up to you ever? :eek:
     
  19. Jan 24, 2006 #18

    Evo

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    physically, not mentally
     
  20. Jan 25, 2006 #19
    The skinny, feminine thing has been going on forever. Each generation has at least one very popular skinny, feminine guy. David Bowie, Young Frank Sinatra, are a couple that come to mind. This isn't new.

    When I was in college most women I asked about it said that Michelangelo's David represented the most muscles they thought looked good on a guy. Beyond that they felt men started to look grotesque.

    Pumping Iron, the documentary that made Arnold Schwartzenegger famous, was aired there, and people's reaction to it was pretty much that it was a film about an obnoxious freak, a kind of study in excess.
     
  21. Jan 25, 2006 #20

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Yeah, seriously - no one except little kids ever wanted to be comic book freaks like Arnold or Lou. I've actually never met a person anywhere - even online - who wanted a "Mr Universe" type body. Toby McQuire in Spiderman had a normal, healthy, muscular physique - almost like a wrestler (I was a wrestler). 20 years ago, the standard for good-looking guys in their 20s was "Top Gun" - for teenage guys, it was still Tom Cruise, a few years earlier, in "Risky Business", but remember, even Ashton Kutcher has put on weight since his start as a high-schooler in a sitcom. And go back further and compare Dustin Hoffman in "The Graduate" to Tom Cruise in "Risky Business" - it is uncanny how much they look alike. So I don't think all that much has changed.

    Edward Norton isn't really considered to be in the same class as Tom Cruise and Ashton Kutcher, so I don't think using him as a benchmark applies.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2006
  22. Jan 25, 2006 #21
    Well I personaly know plenty of people that would kill to look like Arnold. I know plenty of people growing up to admire the physiques of the 70's and 80's.

    uhh who said I was working out to get girls:confused: I workout because I care about what I se in the mirror everyday and beeing strong is a rush. If that happens to be totaly opposit to societies ideals I wouldnt care one bit.
     
  23. Jan 25, 2006 #22
    Except among black artists for some reason. Its still fashion to be muscular among black rappers. This might be a semi stupid thing to say. But another thing me and most bodybuilders I know have noticed. A black woman never complains that a guy is to muscular. While white females does it all the time. That is something I have never figured out.

    Arnold size is obviously a bit over the top. But like you say modells have always been muscular. Like the cover models on fitness mags.

    Didnt know that. Thanks for clearing that up. But the manly men gods where probably what young kids back then aspired to become. Not the feminine beauty modells??:confused:
     
  24. Jan 25, 2006 #23
    Well you have meet the first now :biggrin:

    Yes healthy and normal is the word. Muscular well I just aint seeing that. Hes level of muscularity can easily be reached with just a few months in the gym. What Im saying is that people seem to think his level of muscularity is "buff". But thats not how anyone I know think of "buff". Buff how I think of it atleast is something that takes years with proper diet and sacrifice to achieve. A body not comonly seen.
    A level most people wont reach because they dont have dedication or intereste to reach it. Ll cool j thats about the level for starting to be buff.
    I would rather call his physique fit. Like a wrestler like you say or a light weight mma fighter. Just a toned beach body.

    I had the same reaction when people where raving on how big brad pit was in fight club.


    sad that the general population look at that movie with that mindset. To me its the ultimate show of dedication. Arnold is to physiques what Einstein is to physics.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2006
  25. Jan 25, 2006 #24

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    But that's what you started this thread about - saying that that used to be a popular goal. It really wasn't.
    Arnold was dedicated, sure, but he was also on sterroids, as are most Mr. Universe types. Few people achieve that physique - fewer still without drugs. And I question whether such a physique - even without the drugs - is actually healthy. Specifically, Mr. Universe types typically don't have a very high level of cariovascular fitness because it burns energy that otherwise could be used for making muscles. I knew a handful of Navy SEALS (my standard for the top physical condition that is healthy) and they have far less muscle mass than a Mr. Universe type.

    It's also important to remember we're talking about something that most people to for health reasons, while Mr. Universe types (and even navy seals) do it because it's their job. Toby McQuire probably did it in 3-6 months, but I'm sure he spent 20 hours a week in the gym.

    Again, with the thread title being about what's fashionable, I have never perceived it to be fashionable to be any more built than Tobey McQuire in Spiderman. The one thing that I think has changed is that the Mr. Universe/bodybuilder look has gone from being acceptable to being not acceptable because of its connection with sterroids and the realization that it can be damaging to the body even without sterroids. But I don't think it ever was "fashionable".
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2006
  26. Jan 25, 2006 #25
    Well I still think I have a valid point in saying what is considered muscular in this time and age is alot less than what was considered muscular previously. Look at models today and 20 years ago.

    Look at todays celebrities that are considered hot. They are alot less masculine than what they used to be. Unless I have a totaly twisted picture of the 60's-80's. That is quite possible since I was born 84.

    Well there is plenty of evidence pointing towards steroids beeing very safe to use. I could expand on this if anyone is interested. There is a wealth of solid info on the various bodybuilding boards on the net.
    With that said steroids is far from beeing a bodybuilding specific problem. Its just that it isnt so visualy obvious in martial arts or olympic sports. I dont think any elite atlethe in explosive sports can be competitive without steroids and its seldom I hear of sprinters dropping dead because of doping issues.

    I agree fully though that a EXTREMELY muscular body is not healthy. It must put a very heavy strain on the heart to keep blood flowing through obscene ammounts of muscle mass. But I think the avarage bodybuilder is WAY WAY WAY more healthy than the avarage joe. Mostly because bodybuilders pay alot of attention what they eat . A guy around 6 feet tall that weights around 220 ibs with 8% bodyfat following a healthy diet and working out often is probably a very healthy dude even though he has a abundance of muscle.

    Its a old myth that cardiovascular training is a obstacle in gaining muscle. A myth modern powerlifting(or well to be precise old soviet/eastern block strenght science that is starting to get popular in the west) has totaly destroyed. Its just that bodybuilding is a sport that is still in the 70's scientificly so some people still think its true. Cardio is very much benificial to muscle gains.
    Just about all bodybuilders do ALOT of cardio, either to stay in shape or get into shape. Myself 6 months of the year I walk 10 kilometers each day, do high intensity intervall training for 15 minutes on the stairmaster after hitting the weights 3-4 times a week, throw in some skiprope once or twice a week ect.
    I could only think that people with the most extreme metabolisms or the very stupid would avoid cardio because it burns kcal. When eating 5-7 times a day its extremely easy to compensate for any negative Calorie balance caused by cardio.

    Just think of markus schenkenberg, fabio and other previously famous celebreties. They where FAR more muscular than Tobey.

    I should not have mentioned arnold and ferrigno since they where never mainstreem. But I notice more buff physiques in older movies. Today hollywood even tell people like Vin Disel and The rock that they have to slim down if they want to get into movies and hell Vin was just big not huge when he got into acting.
     
    Last edited: Jan 25, 2006
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook