Somatotypes and RWBBers
nobody is saddled with genetics so poor that he cannot reach 1/2/3/4 but a 400 lb squat already reveals a great disparity between those who attain it relatively easily and those who require significant specialization and advanced training to come close. this difference is profound: a gifted high schooler training for the football team might achieve this before he's old enough to drink without even thinking about it, while someone in the bottom quintile may have to pursue the goal with the dedication of a professional for several years. in spite of this it is all too common for the gifted to assume the disparity is merely a matter of effort.

it's unreasonable for mr. latter spend his limited time cultivating the big 3 lifts, rather than with other pursuits where he may actually excel, yet there still exists a fixation on the bench press and bicep circumference that seems to meet every other metric with derision. this is tantamount to evaluating a manlet by his success in basketball. bodybuilding has always been but one option out of many, and the alternatives are by no means lesser. someone who can squat 4 plates is unlikely to swim across the english channel, or to climb el capitan, and these feats are just as impressive if not moreso than a 400 lb squat.

i want to clarify that i'm not referring to "natural weakness" which may or may not exist, but rather to an innate suitability to particular athletic pursuits, of which a major element is body type.

My mentioning a 400lb squat wasn’t intended to extol it as a sole virtue/achievement but merely as one of many. Like you said there are others, and i’d argue that climbing Capitan is more right tailed than. 400lb squat, probably on the level of a 600lb one.

Obviously different types are suited to different pursuits, and I don’t expect everyone to be bodybuilders/strength athletes, but it is obvious when observing someone if they have attained something worthwhile, imo. The only time it becomes muddled is when resentments and/or factionalism come into play (“yah may be able to bench a lot but what’s your mile time?” or “who cares?”)

There’s a great value to futilely pursuing something despite one not being suited to it or the thing itself being fundamentally unattainable. In reality, body types are more pertinent for aesthetics in that that form the foundations of specific types of looks than they are indicative of overall athletic performance, with few exceptions. Body type is huge in swimming, for instance, because of the viscosity of the medium. But for most things? Like i said, Mentzer said it best. One MUST try, try and try and try. Futile, damned pursuit is the default and beautiful state of all things, and achievement only arises out of it.


I should also add that i have seen your discussion of my qt of vyl’s post, and that i tend to agree with you. Frankly no effort was put into that post, and it should be observed given other tweets of mine, like the observation that all women, when asked who their ideal man is, will always point at some twink like leonardo dicaprio or chalamet. Why? Who selects these twinks to occupy cultural iconism (because we both know that’s actually why women like them; they’re on the tee vee). The answer is gays like bryan singer, they’re the ones who are *really motivated* to select for a certain type of actor. Women then thoughtlessly follow suit in these preferences because they simply don’t have original preferences. What i really am reacting against is a culture that has no interest in valuing me or people like me, and indeed goes out of its way to denigrate us.

I will also admit a certain amount of resentment over it. I have not, am not, and never will be beautiful. Another guy in that same thread pointed out that beauty is flowering and not building, and that the “no pain no gain” mentality doesn’t evoke genuine/original or even epigenetic beauty. I don’t refute any of that and i resent god for making me the way i am. @“Earth Rabbit”, as well as yourself, in this very thread, pointed out the value in rebelling against ones original state when it is found wanting.
Obsessing with statistics, numbers regarding this is something I always found to be sort of cringy, irritating. Nobody has to be a hunk who squats 400 pounds, but there has to be some sort of athletic standard, not only for reasons of health, but also aesthetics - by looking like Big Chungus or some scrawnoid, you only invite trouble upon yourself and make things insufferable for no reason whatsoever.

Try to fulfill your physical potential, at least - go as far as you can, if only for completeness sake. Callisthenic competence, imo, is the bare minimum. Mastery over the body is non-negotiable.
i have a great fondness of tragedy and i admire the pursuit of something despite its futility. i'll also say that whatever preferences girls may have impressed upon them by hollywood homos, do not change the fact that among men a muscular, masculine type will always win status and admiration over one with boyish looks. indeed even those who find great success with women envy the strength and size of a larger man. on the other hand it's not quite right to say that girls' preferences are entirely cultural, there is still a function of age (younger girls prefer youthful looking guys) and i believe there is also a tendency to prefer one's equivalent body type in the opposite sex, although this means that 'twinks' are preferred by only a subset of women. ultimately beauty is judged very differently by men than by women (and gays) and i now see your perspective for being bitter over this with greater clarity.

Quick Reply
Type your reply to this message here.

Human Verification
Please tick the checkbox that you see below. This process is used to prevent automated spam bots.

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)