Why Males Prefer Skinny Look: Fashion or Society?

[Azael]

How come that for each year that passes it becomes more and more fashion for males to be skinny and somewhat feminine?

I couldn't stop laughing when I heard girls refer to Tobey Maguire as buff/muscular after he got bit by the spider in spiderman.

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 ) Aston Kutcher

What can be the casue for strong(physicaly) males not beeing desirable anymore?

 

[Evo]

I like skinny, whimpy guys, with glasses. I always have.

 

[JasonRox]

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.

 

[1123581321]

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.

 

[JasonRox]

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.

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.

 

[FUNKER]

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

 

[Pengwuino]

I am zeus.

 

[Cyrus]

Skinny is not hot, fat is not hot, period.

 

[JasonRox]

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

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.

 

[FUNKER]

I am zeus.

im zeus' son

 

[Evo]

Skinny is not hot,

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!

 

[Cyrus]

My waist is only 32," but that's not "hot."


Evo, a waist is a terrible thing to mind.

 

[G01]

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.

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.

 

[scorpa]

How come that for each year that passes it becomes more and more fashion for males to be skinny and somewhat feminine?

Everyonce in a while i will be walking down the street and see a guy that is wearing more makeup than most girls do, and that looks like he spends more time on his hair to. Ewwwww...how disturbing.

Oh and Tobey Maguire...another ewwwwww.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

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.

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.

 

[Pengwuino]

I think JasonRox is lonely

 

[The_Professional]

I like skinny, whimpy guys, with glasses. I always have.

wimpy? so you don't want him to stand up to you ever?

 

[Evo]

wimpy? so you don't want him to stand up to you ever?

physically, not mentally

 

[zoobyshoe]

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.

 

[russ_watters]

Who wanted to look like Arnold?

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.

 

[Azael]

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.

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 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 wouldn't care one bit.

 

[Azael]

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.

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.

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.

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??

 

[Azael]

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).

Well you have meet the first now

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 I am saying is that people seem to think his level of muscularity is "buff". But that's 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 won't reach because they don't have dedication or intereste to reach it. Ll cool j that's 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.

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.

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.

 

[russ_watters]

sad that the general population look at that movie with that mindset. To me its the ultimate show of dedication.

But that's what you started this thread about - saying that that used to be a popular goal. It really wasn't.

Arnold is to physiques what Einstein is to physics.

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".

 

[Azael]

But that's what you started this thread about - saying that that used to be a popular goal. It really wasn't.

Well I still think I have a valid point in saying what is considered muscular in this time and age is a lot 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 a lot 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.

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.

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 isn't so visualy obvious in martial arts or olympic sports. I don't 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 a lot 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.

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".

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.

 

[Azael]

in the 80's we had carl weathers, stallone, arnold, lou, van damme, dolph lundgrens. Just to mention the ones with respectable physiques on the top of my mind. Also imense amounts of muscular b actors.

Today we have the rock and vin disel and they are far from the stars some of those earlier mentioned was.

If fashion hasnt changed than atleast the level of acceptable muscularity in hollywood movies has.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Just look at guys like My Chemical Romance and Hoobastank then look back about ten years ago and take a look at Red Hot Chili Peppers and Sugaray. Go back another ten years and check out the guys in the majority of the hair bands.
There were notably thinner and more feminine sex symbols back then and today there are some notably larger and more masculine but it seems pretty obvious to me that there has been a shift as Azael indicates.
I used Edward Norton as a bench mark because he started gaining his popularity in the nineties and his scrawniness has always been highlighted as part of his sex apeal. Even in American History X where he was pretty well toned and cut he was still relatively scrawney next to say Tom Cruise in Top Gun who was considered relatively small then.

 

[Cyrus]

Are you kidding, tom cruise had guns in top gun! So did val kilmer. They were all cut. The ice man (chews gum then stops and bites teeth real loud) ...that movie is the best!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Are you kidding, tom cruise had guns in top gun! So did val kilmer. They were all cut. The ice man (chews gum then stops and bites teeth real loud) ...that movie is the best!

Next to Val Kilmer he was small. Next to Dolph Lungren and most any of the famous guys that Azael mentioned he was definitely small. By todays standards he was pretty big and buff.

 

[ShawnD]

I think its what I call the proportionality factor.

Very true. One cute girl I know is actually overweight by quite a bit, but she still has nice proportionality between the hips and waist. She also has a nice round butt (yes it's fat).

 

[Azael]

Next to Val Kilmer he was small. Next to Dolph Lungren and most any of the famous guys that Azael mentioned he was definitely small. By todays standards he was pretty big and buff.

Amen

 

[loseyourname]

Next to Val Kilmer he was small. Next to Dolph Lungren and most any of the famous guys that Azael mentioned he was definitely small. By todays standards he was pretty big and buff.

Dolph Lundgren is more than a foot taller than Tom Cruise. Makes him look like a smurf.

 

[Gale]

i think today's society general trends towards leaving all gender specific fashions anyway. Women have been becoming more and more boyish. super models lack "womanly" looks entirely. men also have been becoming more feminine, to the point where i know a lot of guys who even where women's pants.

though, like you said, the "hip hop" scene isn't really that way, the men are buff and the women are curvy...

but on a side note, i don't like any man that pays too much attention to his looks, it shows he must be lacking in other areas and i consider physical looks to be not so important. i like a guy to be healthy and that's about all i'd ask. if he happens to have some muscle (like the army guys I've dated,) that's A-OK! if not, then that's fine too. but if a guy is going to the gym everyday and checking himself out more often than i am, that's way too much. same with the metro guys who do their hair up a lot and shave everything and also spend ages looking at themselves. guys who care that much about looks are way too vain, masculine or otherwise, and I'm not cool with that.

 

[Azael]

A thread about how the ideal look of each gender has blended togheter would probably have been more interesting. Todays ideals are seriously disturbed imo. I have never figured out what is pretty about female super modells for instance. Just skin and bones. No ass, no breast, no legs. No nothing.

Im not a big fan of hip hop music(I don't dislike it either). But I got to say that I enjoy to se music videos where men look like men and females have curves where they should have them. Sir mixalot was a smart man

Hail to hiphop. The last bastion of masculinity in a feminised world :)

I can se the vanity remark though. But there is a distinct difference betwen vanity and dedication.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Dolph Lundgren is more than a foot taller than Tom Cruise. Makes him look like a smurf.

Yeah I realized how absurd the comparison was after I posted.

 

[rocketboy]

I agree, huge like arnold isn't very sexy. But neither is skin and bones. I mean, let's think of two guys at the beach. What are women going to be more attracted to, the guy who has no chest, no abs, stick legs and arms, and no "tone" or muscular figure...or are they going to be attracted to the guy with defined muscles...a moderately built chest, toned arms, good abs?

I think there is an in-between where muscles meet attractiveness. Too skinny (in my opinion) is definitely not attractive (for girls and guys) and too built and it's also not attractive.

The members who said the word proportion are right in my view. Attractive muscles are muscles that aren't too big for your body, but at the same time complete lack of any "build" certainly is not sexy.

 

[Evo]

I'm more attracted to the 92 lb weakling.

The only time I let myself go for looks was my second husband. He was Ivy League (pre-med at Yale, Graduated from Dartmouth, some post graduate at Harvard) so I figured what the heck, he's not grossly over built.

I have decided to go back to skinny scientists.

Here's my ex.

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1264/dman6wy.jpg

 

[ShawnD]

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1264/dman6wy.jpg

I have muscle tone sort of like that, but he has a nicer tan. Bastard

 

[russ_watters]

Well there is plenty of evidence pointing towards steroids beeing very safe to use. I could expand on this if anyone is interested.

Whoa - don't let any of our biologists see you saying that. To believe that despite the overwhealming evidence is...scary. Please be careful.

 

[zoobyshoe]

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.

This wasn't the general population, but a population of fairly bright college students. I think the general population was somewhat more open minded about his physique. What killed the issue for anyone on the fence about it was the amazing conceit and self-agrandizement he demonstrated in that film. He doesn't talk that way about himself anymore, but it was years before he toned it down.

 

[Cyrus]

I'm more attracted to the 92 lb weakling.

The only time I let myself go for looks was my second husband. He was Ivy League (pre-med at Yale, Graduated from Dartmouth, some post graduate at Harvard) so I figured what the heck, he's not grossly over built.

I have decided to go back to skinny scientists.

Here's my ex.

http://img96.imageshack.us/img96/1264/dman6wy.jpg

Mmmmmmmm, who wears short shorts? Good ole 1980. Even magnum PIs shorts were longer. Thats underewear with trim.

 

[Evo]

Mmmmmmmm, who wears short shorts? Good ole 1980. Even magnum PIs shorts were longer. Thats underewear with trim.

That's when bathing suits didn't look like tents.

 

[Cyrus]

Im going to see Evo on VH1, I love 85'.

 

[Evo]

Im going to see Evo on VH1, I love 85'.

Love 80's music, but the 90's were better (for me).

 

[Azael]

Whoa - don't let any of our biologists see you saying that. To believe that despite the overwhealming evidence is...scary. Please be careful.

well I would tell them to look at Dr Bhasin studies at first and then do some polls among steroids users to really find out what the side effects are. Not only look at the rare guy that has abused(note abused, not used) steroids.
I am daily in contact with thousands of steroid users on the internet and I know atleast 20 irl that has been using for years and years and they always return with perfect bloodwork after doc visits. On the 4-5 years I have spent on online bodybuilding/fitness/steroid communitys I don't think I have once heard of one serious side effect in someone that knows what they are doing.

I don't think the avarage joe has any ide of how many steroid users there really are and how the majority never show any dangerous side effects.

I would also tell them to read this book, http://www.legalmusclebooks.com/ written by a lawyer that has specialised in defending steroid users in court. It cuts right through the myts and rumors spread around.

The schedualing of steroids was the biggest legal misstake any nation has ever made. To even compare steroids to rec drugs is a insult. No surprise that the majority of the medical comunity was against the schedualing.

Not trying to sound arrogant since I am honestly far from that. But I would welcom a debate with any biologist here. I would probably have to pull in some help from the docs/biologists on the steroid forums though since I don't have any credentials to back up my words.

 

[Azael]

This wasn't the general population, but a population of fairly bright college students. I think the general population was somewhat more open minded about his physique. What killed the issue for anyone on the fence about it was the amazing conceit and self-agrandizement he demonstrated in that film. He doesn't talk that way about himself anymore, but it was years before he toned it down.

Yeah he is truly a ******* in that movie no doubt. But it wasnt a true documentary. It was staged in many way to make arnold look superior and to make ferrigno look like a semi retard.
Arnold would probably have killed hos own mother to get ontop of the game and I bet he is still like that. Got to admire the drive, even if the methods are dubious.

When talking about pumping iron. If you remeber the third competitior in arnolds height class. Serge nubret. He has what I could call a perfect balance betwen muscularity and symmetri. His legs are a bit skinny. But if ignoring that his body is pure perfection. He still looks like that and is well into his 60's.

Im not suprised that college students dislike it more than the general population. Academics and strenght sports doesn't seem to go hand in hand for some weird reason.

 

[russ_watters]

...polls among steroids users to really find out what the side effects are.

I don't suppose those guys are having their sperm counts checked on a regular basis, or taking calipers to their testicles, are they? In any case, how do you think side effects are determined? Anecdotal evidence from satisfied customers is not a scientific way to gage it - in fact, you are asking precisely the wrong people. The people you want to ask are the ones who stopped taking steroids. Also, the worst side effects are the long-term ones that haven't manifested yet due to the age of the users. It'll be interesting to see what Arnold dies from.

Dr Bhasin...

...Did a study of the effect of steroids on muscle mass. Everyone already knows steroids increase muscle mass. That doesn't have anything to do with what the potential problems are with steroid use.

Beyond all that, doesn't steroid use detract from the "dedication" point you mentioned earlier? Steroids reduce the dedication required, and to me, that lessens the accomplishment.

Regarding classification, I'm not certain, but I don't think steroids are considered recreational drugs, just controlled substances. Steroids have a wide variety of legitimate medical uses.

 

[Astronuc]

One bad side effect of steroids is that the increased concentration in the body/blood stream suppresses the normal production in the body and those endocrine tissues may be adversely affected. One potential side effect is testicular atrophy.

 

[Monique]

The Russians used to secretly drug their top athletes, which I once saw a documentary on. There was a woman who had been on steroids since a young girl, her physique had been totally distroyed so she decided to continue her life as a guy, really sad.

 

[Azael]

I don't suppose those guys are having their sperm counts checked on a regular basis, or taking calipers to their testicles, are they? In any case, how do you think side effects are determined? Anecdotal evidence from satisfied customers is not a scientific way to gage it - in fact, you are asking precisely the wrong people.

Well offcourse they take sperm counts and offcourse they are very very low while they are on steroids as well as LH. But that is something all steroid users accept. Since the sperm count shoots up through the roof post cycle with proper suplementation(clomid, hcg, arimidex ect). It takes a few months to get all the levels back to normal after a cycle of steroids. But only a few have to go on HRT when they get older. But that is a acceptable risk most steroid users take. Its not in anyway a deadly consquense. I can tell you straight away that I have never heard of one single person going sterile because of steroids and neither have anyone else that I know. You might not like personal experiences as any kind of evidence, neither do I realy. But if the risk was big certainly I would have heard of atleast one.

Why I don't think asking steroid uses are wrong is because there is almost NO studies done on aas in the dosage ranges that is interesting.
The 2 that I can remember straight out is one where they did a dubble blind test with 500mg/testosterone week to se if those levels of testosterone increases agression. It didnt. I can't remember the name of the study or the one in charge of it but I can probably look it up.
Another one is
"Bhasin S THE EFFECTS OF SUPRAPHYSIOLOGIC DOSES OF TESTOSTERONE
ON MUSCLE SIZE AND STRENGTH IN NORMAL MEN The New England
Journal of Medicine VOLUME 335 JULY 4, 1996 NUMBER 1"

One steriod where more studies has been done is Oxymetholone, dosages comonly used to thread anemia and wasting disorders is as high if not even higher than what steroid users use. To no surprise it shows liver toxicity. But other than the liver toxicity and the rare case where water retention causes to high bloodpressure I am not aware of any other long term side effects. You could possibly explain that away to its incredibly weak binding to the androgen receptors though.


Why I think its crucial to ask steroid users about side is because a lot of steroid users do regular health checkups. Cholesterol, bloodpressure, liver and kidney values ect. So monitoring what values they have is a very effective way of seeing what impacts steroids have on health. If you have enough people doing it it becomes pretty convincing evidence. Acctualy a doctor in göteborg(Thord rosen) in sweden is doing a study now. Steroid users can go to him for free and get health checkups and he will use the results of all those checkups. It will be very interesting when he publishes the results.

The worst side effect of steroids imo is that most steroids, especialy the heavy androgenic, raise LDL, lower HDL and raise homocysteine. But those 3 things can easily be balanced out with proper diet and supplementation.

If steroids are used responsibly in a knowlegable way they are safe. If the regular joe goes to the local dealer, buys a bunch of anadrol or dianabol and starts cramming down 20 tabs a day indefenetly offcourse he will suffer consequenses.

The people you want to ask are the ones who stopped taking steroids. Also, the worst side effects are the long-term ones that haven't manifested yet due to the age of the users. It'll be interesting to see what Arnold dies from. ...Did a study of the effect of steroids on muscle mass. Everyone already knows steroids increase muscle mass. That doesn't have anything to do with what the potential problems are with steroid use.

Well I guess we can say that almost all elite athletes are doing a experiment right now. If steroids are so lethal in the long run we are going to se not only powerlifters and bodybuilders dropping dead. We will se a lot of elite sprinters, martial artists, rugby, football players, shot putters ect drop dead. offcourse football and wrestlers(the wwe stuff not real wreastling) is at even higher risk because of the insane pain killer abuse.
Arnold is over 55 now if I don't remember wrong and he started using steroids as a 16 year old. I think long term side effects should have shown themself in his case by now...

Beyond all that, doesn't steroid use detract from the "dedication" point you mentioned earlier? Steroids reduce the dedication required, and to me, that lessens the accomplishment.

No not realy. You got to realize that in bodybuilding and powerlifting there is no possible way to be a contender without steroids. You just can not grow that big or get that strong without steroids and possibly other anabolic substances like GH, insulin or igf-1.
Even at the absolutely lowest amature level everyone is using steroids. Using steroids in those sports(and sprinting, weightlifting and other explosive sports for that matter) is a neccesity if you compete. In professional bodybuilding it isn't even against the rules to use steroids.

It does in no way reduce the dedication required. It just makes the hard work pay off more. I can promise you that competitive bodybuilding is one of the mentaly most straining sports imaginable. The dieting most of all and the endless hours of cardio. It is a 24 hour a day comitment for those that compete. Even more so than most sports at elite level. its not possible to be more dedicated. Its hard to explain how utterly exhausting mentaly and physicaly a hard cutting diet is.

Regarding classification, I'm not certain, but I don't think steroids are considered recreational drugs, just controlled substances. Steroids have a wide variety of legitimate medical uses.

Steroids are schedual 3. So in the eyes of the law they are the same as ketamin and some hallucinogens.

Anyway sorry for this very long post. But this is a subject I am very interested in.