+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 27

Thread: Oh the faggotry... (part 2)

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Denver CO
    Posts
    6,430

    Default

    There is something wrong with training for aesthetics over performance. If you want to judged on the way you look, thats your issue. Men are judged by what they can do. Speaking of that, my thick legs and trunk have much more explosive hip extension than some stick legged wanna be male model.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    1,910

    Default

    This guy's advice isn't so much shitty per se as it is incomplete, and therefore potentially useless to its intended audience. One of the most valuable things Rip preaches, and one of the things that so much fitness instruction ignores, is that different training approaches are needed for trainees at different stages of adaptation/advancement. Incline DB presses, dips, and pull ups are all good exercises, but for whom, and how are they to be implemented? Anybody can name some basic exercises that will hit a bunch of bodyparts, but that's not a program. And the program that's appropriate for me is not necessarily going to be appropriate for someone with wildly different stats/experience level.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    1,910

    Default

    Also I looked at his site again and now I remember the guy who wrote this stuff -- he quoted Practical Programming in one of his posts:

    http://fitnessblackbook.com/muscle_t...term-examined/

    Er, I guess this is supposed to be a different guy than the dude who wrote the article in the OP. But his site promotes the other guy's site. His "about" page is hilarious though:

    http://www.kinobody.com/about/
    Last edited by LudwigVan; 02-17-2011 at 02:08 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Ottawa, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    462

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LudwigVan View Post
    This guy's advice isn't so much shitty per se as it is incomplete, and therefore potentially useless to its intended audience. One of the most valuable things Rip preaches, and one of the things that so much fitness instruction ignores, is that different training approaches are needed for trainees at different stages of adaptation/advancement. Incline DB presses, dips, and pull ups are all good exercises, but for whom, and how are they to be implemented? Anybody can name some basic exercises that will hit a bunch of bodyparts, but that's not a program. And the program that's appropriate for me is not necessarily going to be appropriate for someone with wildly different stats/experience level.
    Don't forget that, according to people like Mr.Popular, squats, deadlifts, presses and bench presses are 'arbitrary' and 'dangerous' for a novice. The 'arbitrary' comment requires no further elucidation, as anymore time spent dispelling it is time well wasted and could be spent doing more productive things like masturbating. But I was at the gym the other day dealing with some bodybuilder who happened to use the squat rack. I apologized for taking up so much time, but nevertheless told him that my preference for this gym is based on the fact that nobody uses the rack. He said that, based on his experience, people are intimidated by the rack because of its perceived danger.

    I'm all for safety, but what has the human race come to when it refuses to read, reflect, practice and progress using weight it is capable of lifting?

    In all honesty, if you want to train for aesthetics so that you can satisfy your body composition issues or to reflect the way in which society wants you to look, then fine. At one point in time there was more to being a man than having a faux-hawk and an emasciated physique. God forbid you're actually judged by your actions, accomplishments and work ethic.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Whitby, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,742

    Default

    190 at 5'10" is husky?

    Buncha pussies up in here.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    5,125

    Default

    It's not the fact that some people train for aesthetics that bothers me, it's that they claim to have the one true objective standard for a perfect physique, and they based it on hollywood actors.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    4,073

    Default

    Considering the amount of time he spends obsessing over the "perfect male body" I find that unlikely.
    +10

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    4,073

    Default

    BTW, On the Starting Strength forum I believe it is considered foolish to advise training for aesthetics over strength or performance. Furthermore, women DO NOT find guys with large upper bodies and small lower bodies anywhere near as pleasing as men who are developed in a full and balanced way. They look at your legs, Draft. And they laugh. They see training results like that for what they are, pure vanity. If you like women who like vain men then you're probably going to end up bamboozled and controlled by some shallow, materialistic waste of time. Turn your brain on.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Whitby, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    4,742

    Default

    I like this guy ^


    In a completely nonsexual way.

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Colorado Springs
    Posts
    4,073

    Default

    I like you too, bro. Without wee-wees involved.

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts