PDA

View Full Version : strength and muscles..


Reality Check
December 9th 03, 02:56 PM
Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
weight? I'd just like to tone up and be able to do pull-ups with no
assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
body fat)

Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after exercise?
How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I heard
that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat high-protein/high-carb
foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs re-fill
the glycogen stores...???

I hope I made sense.... thanks in advance!

Helgi Briem
December 9th 03, 03:21 PM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> wrote:

>Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
>weight? I'd just like to tone up

Eeek.

> and be able to do pull-ups with no
>assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
>body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
>moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
>by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
>body fat)

You can certainly build strength ( a lot of it) without increasing
your muscular mass. To gain mass, you need to eat a lot more
than you burn. In fact, as a woman, you would be hard
pressed to gain muscle mass at all.

For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
Very many women can't do even 1.

Have a look at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html,
the definitive guide to weight training for women (and men,
it's all the same).

BTW, we don't use the t*** word here. Have a look at
Gym Lie Number 2:
http://www.stumptuous.com/gymlies.html

>Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
>day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after exercise?
>How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I heard
>that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat high-protein/high-carb
>foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs re-fill
>the glycogen stores...???

Muscles are built during rest. They require protein.
Eat some after exercise. Don't obsess about it.

Robert Dorf
December 9th 03, 03:22 PM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> wrote:

>Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
>weight? I'd just like to tone up and be able to do pull-ups with no
>assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
>body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
>moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
>by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
>body fat)
>
>Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
>day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after exercise?
>How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I heard
>that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat high-protein/high-carb
>foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs re-fill
>the glycogen stores...???
>
>I hope I made sense.... thanks in advance!
>
These sites are good places to start:

www.stumptuous.com/weights.html

http://www.trygve.com/mfw_faq.html

You can get stronger in a given movement, up to a point, without
adding any muscle at all.

Your body can build muscle all day and all night, more sometimes, less
others, and then sometimes it breaks it down. Getting around 0.8
grams of protein per day per pound of bodyweight is a good idea,
getting plenty of sleep is a good idea, getting carbs and protein
right after training is usually a good idea, getting some carbs and
protein into your system before training may be a better idea.

Keith Hobman
December 9th 03, 03:26 PM
In article >, Helgi Briem
> wrote:

> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> > wrote:
>
> >Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
> >weight? I'd just like to tone up
>
> Eeek.
>
> > and be able to do pull-ups with no
> >assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
> >body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
> >moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
> >by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
> >body fat)
>
> You can certainly build strength ( a lot of it) without increasing
> your muscular mass. To gain mass, you need to eat a lot more
> than you burn. In fact, as a woman, you would be hard
> pressed to gain muscle mass at all.
>
> For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
> Very many women can't do even 1.
>
> Have a look at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html,
> the definitive guide to weight training for women (and men,
> it's all the same).
>
> BTW, we don't use the t*** word here. Have a look at
> Gym Lie Number 2:
> http://www.stumptuous.com/gymlies.html
>
> >Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
> >day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after exercise?
> >How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I heard
> >that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat high-protein/high-carb
> >foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs re-fill
> >the glycogen stores...???
>
> Muscles are built during rest. They require protein.
> Eat some after exercise. Don't obsess about it.

Actually she can expect to gain some muscle mass, but strength gains come
from neural inputs as well.

But its very possible for beginners to gain strength without gaining
overall mass.

--
Keith Hobman

--- email address above is a non-monitored spam sink.

Steve Freides
December 9th 03, 03:51 PM
"Keith Hobman" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, Helgi Briem
> > wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> > > wrote:
> >
> > >Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
> > >weight? I'd just like to tone up
> >
> > Eeek.
> >
> > > and be able to do pull-ups with no
> > >assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain
overall
> > >body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
> > >moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper
push-ups!)
> > >by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15
lbs of
> > >body fat)
> >
> > You can certainly build strength ( a lot of it) without increasing
> > your muscular mass. To gain mass, you need to eat a lot more
> > than you burn. In fact, as a woman, you would be hard
> > pressed to gain muscle mass at all.
> >
> > For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
> > Very many women can't do even 1.
> >
> > Have a look at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html,
> > the definitive guide to weight training for women (and men,
> > it's all the same).
> >
> > BTW, we don't use the t*** word here. Have a look at
> > Gym Lie Number 2:
> > http://www.stumptuous.com/gymlies.html
> >
> > >Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
> > >day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after
exercise?
> > >How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I
heard
> > >that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat
high-protein/high-carb
> > >foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs
re-fill
> > >the glycogen stores...???
> >
> > Muscles are built during rest. They require protein.
> > Eat some after exercise. Don't obsess about it.
>
> Actually she can expect to gain some muscle mass, but strength gains come
> from neural inputs as well.
>
> But its very possible for beginners to gain strength without gaining
> overall mass.

My experience has taught me that, at least for men, even if you don't train
to add muscle mass, if your body needs more of it in certain areas, your
body will do its best to add it. I train solely for strength almost to the
exclusion of hypertrophy - short, heavy sets, long rests, low volume - but I
still grow muscles in a few places as needed, e.g., when I started
deadlifting again recently, I saw a small but noticeable increase in the
size of my lats and traps - gotta have those to deadlift so my body just
built them for me.

The same thing has happened to my wife but on a much smaller scale. The net
result for us both has been what we wanted - we both lost weight overall and
we're both stronger. You can't complain about that when it comes to rock
climbing.

-S-
http://www.kbnj.com


> --
> Keith Hobman
>
> --- email address above is a non-monitored spam sink.

Elzinator
December 10th 03, 02:10 AM
Helgi Briem > wrote in message >...
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> > wrote:
>
> >Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
> >weight? I'd just like to tone up
>
> Eeek.

Seconded.

> > and be able to do pull-ups with no
> >assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
> >body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
> >moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
> >by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
> >body fat)
>
> You can certainly build strength ( a lot of it) without increasing
> your muscular mass. To gain mass, you need to eat a lot more
> than you burn. \
******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain muscle mass at all.

WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a long time.

> For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
> Very many women can't do even 1.

I think she needs to concentrate on Pull-ups. She's a rock climber.

> >Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
> >day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after exercise?
> >How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I heard
> >that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat high-protein/high-carb
> >foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs re-fill
> >the glycogen stores...???
>
> Muscles are built during rest.

If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.

>They require protein.
> Eat some after exercise. Don't obsess about it.

Eat enough, too.

Helgi Briem
December 10th 03, 09:01 AM
On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:

>******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
>muscle mass at all.
>
>WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
>No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a long time.

You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?

I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
great deal of mass without drugs.

>> For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
>> Very many women can't do even 1.
>
>I think she needs to concentrate on Pull-ups. She's a rock climber.

Yup. I was just commenting that 5 push-ups were not bad.

>> Muscles are built during rest.
>
>If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.

I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
Is that better?

Keith Hobman
December 10th 03, 02:09 PM
In article >, Helgi Briem
> wrote:

> On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:
>
> >******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
> >muscle mass at all.
> >
> >WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
> >No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a
long time.
>
> You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?
>
> I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
> it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
> sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
> any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
> great deal of mass without drugs.

Still wrong. Women can put on a whole pile of muscle without resorting to
drugs.

Its hard for anyone to get really, really strong, explosive or muscular.
Which is good.
>
> >> For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
> >> Very many women can't do even 1.
> >
> >I think she needs to concentrate on Pull-ups. She's a rock climber.
>
> Yup. I was just commenting that 5 push-ups were not bad.
>
> >> Muscles are built during rest.
> >
> >If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.
>
> I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
> Is that better?

Still wrong, but at least closer.

But I think Helgi's initial point was - don't worry about looking like a
professional bodybuilder. You can get stronger without adding a lot of
mass. And that is true. You can get much stronger without adding mass.

--
Keith Hobman

--- email address above is a non-monitored spam sink.

Elzinator
December 11th 03, 02:08 AM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:01:19 +0000, Helgi Briem
> wrote:

>On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:
>
>>******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
>>muscle mass at all.
>>
>>WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
>>No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a long time.
>
>You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?
>
>I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
>it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
>sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
>any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
>great deal of mass without drugs.

Still incorrect. While recognizing that muscle mass gains in women are
relative (especially to males), women are quite capable of gaining
muscle mass and strength without chemical enhancement.


>>> Muscles are built during rest.
>>
>>If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.
>
>I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
>Is that better?

Not really. Without the progressive loading of resistance training, an
adaptation, i.e. hypertrophy and/or strength gains, will not occur.
It's a process that cannot really be clearly delineated from the
stimulus of exercise and of recovery. The two are hand in hand, so to
speak. And even 48-72 hours post-training, adaptation may begin to
disappear (detraining).


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Elzinator
December 11th 03, 02:14 AM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:09:11 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
wrote:

>In article >, Helgi Briem
> wrote:
>
>> On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:
>>
>> >******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
>> >muscle mass at all.
>> >
>> >WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
>> >No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a
>long time.
>>
>> You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?
>>
>> I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
>> it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
>> sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
>> any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
>> great deal of mass without drugs.
>
>Still wrong. Women can put on a whole pile of muscle without resorting to
>drugs.
>
>Its hard for anyone to get really, really strong, explosive or muscular.

Elzi's Law No. 2:: Everything is relative.

At a point, the gains become incrementally smaller and then diminish
(threshold of diminishing returns). We have genetic limitations,
albeit they vary between individuals and even over our lifetime.

>> >> Muscles are built during rest.
>> >
>> >If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.
>>
>> I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
>> Is that better?
>
>Still wrong, but at least closer.
>
>But I think Helgi's initial point was - don't worry about looking like a
>professional bodybuilder. You can get stronger without adding a lot of
>mass. And that is true. You can get much stronger without adding mass.

Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
mouth shut and walk away.


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Reality Check
December 11th 03, 02:56 AM
"Helgi Briem" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> > wrote:
>
> >Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
> >weight? I'd just like to tone up
>
> Eeek.
>

Oh dear... didn't know it' was blasphemy to use the word "tone" around here.
What I meant by it is to simply lose fat and gain more strength. I'm
definitely not one of those women who do 25 reps of light weights each set.
I do about 5 sets of 10-12 starting out fairly light to warm up and go up as
heavy as I could (without losing form) as I'm not worried at all about
bulking up.



>
> You can certainly build strength ( a lot of it) without increasing
> your muscular mass. To gain mass, you need to eat a lot more
> than you burn. In fact, as a woman, you would be hard
> pressed to gain muscle mass at all.
>
> For a female beginner, 5 proper push-ups isn't all that bad.
> Very many women can't do even 1.
>
> Have a look at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html,
> the definitive guide to weight training for women (and men,
> it's all the same).
>
> BTW, we don't use the t*** word here. Have a look at
> Gym Lie Number 2:
> http://www.stumptuous.com/gymlies.html


Thanks for the URL. This is a pretty cool website. I'm still reading
through it... I think I read somewhere in it that fat cells "shrink" but
don't really leave the body or something like that? I'm not sure of the
exact wording... I have to go back and check.

I also went and had a look at the HST website... wow, it's got loads of info
on how the body processes protein/fats/carbs. Good stuff. Thanks! Got
lots of reading to do :-)

-Reality-



>
> >Also, how does the body build muscle? Does it do it all throughout the
> >day/night or only when you feed your body with protein right after
exercise?
> >How does it breakdown the food that we eat to feed the muscles? I heard
> >that after heavy weight-training, it's best to eat high-protein/high-carb
> >foods so that the protein goes straight to the muscles and the carbs
re-fill
> >the glycogen stores...???
>
> Muscles are built during rest. They require protein.
> Eat some after exercise. Don't obsess about it.

hardworkin
December 11th 03, 04:35 AM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> wrote:

>Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
>weight? I'd just like to tone up and be able to do pull-ups with no
>assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
>body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
>moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
>by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
>body fat)
>

If your goal is primarily related to climbing performance, then grip
strength and calf strength are probably your primary targets, with
abdominal strength also important. Strength to weight ratio is huge,
so lose those pounds. Don't worry about bulking up, you will be
stronger long before you'll be heavier. Try do do lots of bouldering
and indoor climbing to strengthen the specific muscles you'll need.

As for physical training for climbing, flexibility is also important.
You may already have plenty, but in case you don't, work on those high
steps and ankles.


- HW

Elzinator
December 11th 03, 05:39 AM
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:56:05 +1100, "Reality Check"
> wrote:

>
>"Helgi Briem" > wrote in message
>> Have a look at http://www.stumptuous.com/weights.html,
>> the definitive guide to weight training for women (and men,
>> it's all the same).
>
>Thanks for the URL. This is a pretty cool website. I'm still reading
>through it... I think I read somewhere in it that fat cells "shrink" but
>don't really leave the body or something like that?

That's right. They don't magically disappear when the fat droplets
leave the cells. So they sit there like little sponges waiting for
excess calories to be driven back inside where they can 'inflate' the
fat cells again.



It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Elzinator
December 11th 03, 05:41 AM
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 04:35:35 GMT, hardworkin
> wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 01:56:46 +1100, "Reality Check"
> wrote:
>
>>Does strengthening the muslces necessarily mean you're gaining muscle
>>weight? I'd just like to tone up and be able to do pull-ups with no
>>assistance... I've started rockclimbing and I really need to gain overall
>>body strength especially my upper body as it is very weak at the
>>moment...(as in..right now, I can't really do more than 5 proper push-ups!)
>>by the way, I'm female, 5'2" and 133 lbs (goal is to lose about 10-15 lbs of
>>body fat)
>>
>
>If your goal is primarily related to climbing performance, then grip
>strength and calf strength are probably your primary targets, with
>abdominal strength also important. Strength to weight ratio is huge,
>so lose those pounds. Don't worry about bulking up, you will be
>stronger long before you'll be heavier. Try do do lots of bouldering
>and indoor climbing to strengthen the specific muscles you'll need.
>
>As for physical training for climbing, flexibility is also important.
>You may already have plenty, but in case you don't, work on those high
>steps and ankles.


good advice. Another topic is joint stability, especially the shoulder
girdles and wrist/ankles.



It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

John HUDSON
December 11th 03, 10:40 AM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:08:24 -0500, Elzinator > wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:01:19 +0000, Helgi Briem
> wrote:
>
>>On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:
>>
>>>******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
>>>muscle mass at all.
>>>
>>>WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
>>>No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a long time.
>>
>>You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?
>>
>>I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
>>it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
>>sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
>>any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
>>great deal of mass without drugs.
>
>Still incorrect. While recognizing that muscle mass gains in women are
>relative (especially to males), women are quite capable of gaining
>muscle mass and strength without chemical enhancement.

However, some of them do use Nandrolone Elzi, don't they? ;o)
http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/nandrolone/nandj.htm

>
>
>>>> Muscles are built during rest.
>>>
>>>If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.
>>
>>I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
>>Is that better?
>
>Not really. Without the progressive loading of resistance training, an
>adaptation, i.e. hypertrophy and/or strength gains, will not occur.
>It's a process that cannot really be clearly delineated from the
>stimulus of exercise and of recovery. The two are hand in hand, so to
>speak. And even 48-72 hours post-training, adaptation may begin to
>disappear (detraining).

This is "nit-picking" Elzi; you know exactly what the other poster
meant even it was not written in 'jargon'! The 'benefit' to the
relevant muscles exercised, continues well into the recovery period,
long after the specific exercise has ceased.

>
>
>It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

John HUDSON
December 11th 03, 10:44 AM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:14:55 -0500, Elzinator > wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 08:09:11 -0600, (Keith Hobman)
>wrote:
>
>>In article >, Helgi Briem
> wrote:
>>
>>> On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:
>>>
>>> >******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
>>> >muscle mass at all.
>>> >
>>> >WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
>>> >No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a
>>long time.
>>>
>>> You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?
>>>
>>> I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
>>> it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
>>> sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
>>> any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
>>> great deal of mass without drugs.
>>
>>Still wrong. Women can put on a whole pile of muscle without resorting to
>>drugs.
>>
>>Its hard for anyone to get really, really strong, explosive or muscular.
>
>Elzi's Law No. 2:: Everything is relative.
>
>At a point, the gains become incrementally smaller and then diminish
>(threshold of diminishing returns). We have genetic limitations,
>albeit they vary between individuals and even over our lifetime.
>
>>> >> Muscles are built during rest.
>>> >
>>> >If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.
>>>
>>> I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
>>> Is that better?
>>
>>Still wrong, but at least closer.
>>
>>But I think Helgi's initial point was - don't worry about looking like a
>>professional bodybuilder. You can get stronger without adding a lot of
>>mass. And that is true. You can get much stronger without adding mass.
>
>Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>mouth shut and walk away.

How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?

>
>
>It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Mistress Krista
December 11th 03, 11:43 AM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
>
> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
> mouth shut and walk away.


Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and Fiction
Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work because
it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that but
not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?

Sigh.

Krista, adding another name to the list of corporate offices to shoot up

--
--------------------
www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
www.trans-health.com

Helgi Briem
December 11th 03, 01:23 PM
On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:14:55 -0500, Elzinator > wrote:

>Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>for years in other women.

That was precisely the fear I was trying to anticipate and allay.

Reality Check
December 11th 03, 01:30 PM
"hardworkin" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> If your goal is primarily related to climbing performance, then grip
> strength and calf strength are probably your primary targets, with
> abdominal strength also important. Strength to weight ratio is huge,
> so lose those pounds. Don't worry about bulking up, you will be
> stronger long before you'll be heavier. Try do do lots of bouldering
> and indoor climbing to strengthen the specific muscles you'll need.
>
> As for physical training for climbing, flexibility is also important.
> You may already have plenty, but in case you don't, work on those high
> steps and ankles.
>
>
> - HW

Hey HW

Thanks for this advice. My strength to weight ratio is much less than 1, I
can safely say. I've only been doing indoor rockclimbing for a month and
I'd love to be able to do harder climbs but my lack of strength fail me.
I'm staying away from the bouldering cave for now as I'm almost certain I
wouldn't be able to do even the easiest climb. I really like it so I'm
pretty sure I'll be doing a lot more of it and hopefully go climb real rocks
one day!

I'm having some probs losing pounds and I'm blaming my metabolism for it.

Steve
December 11th 03, 03:46 PM
"Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote
> Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and Fiction

LOL. I have to pass that on to a bodybuilder friend of mine.

I saw one of those for the first time in years the other day while in
the doctors office. Its about 80% advertisements.

Steve

Rutabaga22
December 11th 03, 10:38 PM
>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?

The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will look like
Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife harboring this
delusion.) Most women - and most men, for that matter - have absolutely no
idea how difficult it is to "get big."

I've been lifting heavy for 14 years and nobody has ever said I'm too big.

Also, they can stop lifting if they decide they're getting too big. just my 2
cents -

SJ
December 11th 03, 10:54 PM
Rutabaga22 wrote:

>>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
>>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
>
> The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will look like
> Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife harboring this
> delusion.)

It's extremely unrealistic, especially when you consider that many women
also have psychological issues about getting fat, and probably won't eat
enough to gain even the amount of muscle they potentially could.

> Most women - and most men, for that matter - have absolutely no
> idea how difficult it is to "get big."

If I touch any weights that aren't covered in pretty colored vinyl, I'll
get hyooge, right?

> I've been lifting heavy for 14 years and nobody has ever said I'm too big.

Well, I've been lifting for 17 years, and at least one person has said
I'm too muscular. But the only one I can think of offhand is my stupid
sister, who was incredibly envious of how I looked when she saw me a
couple of weeks ago at Thanksgiving. Apparently in the summer, when I
wear shorts and a tank top and she can see my arms and legs, I'm too
muscular. But in long pants and a sweater I'm thin and she's jealous.

> Also, they can stop lifting if they decide they're getting too big.

But then the muscle just turns into fat, right?

> just my 2
> cents -

John HUDSON
December 11th 03, 11:24 PM
On 11 Dec 2003 22:38:20 GMT, (Rutabaga22) wrote:

>>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
>
>The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will look like
>Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife harboring this
>delusion.) Most women - and most men, for that matter - have absolutely no
>idea how difficult it is to "get big."

I'm not suggesting for one moment that "getting big" is likely if
women use weights for training. I simply queried the extravagant
suggestion that women who don't want to risk the possibility of
acquiring masculine muscle definition, are "psychologically"
disturbed!

This is quite clearly utter nonsense and in fact the reverse is more
near the truth. Women who want to mutate their bodies to look like
well-muscled men, and who address people as "dude", are suffering with
some degree of inadequacy which requires them to aspire to be
something they are not. This is symptomatic of classic psychological
disturbance!

>
>I've been lifting heavy for 14 years and nobody has ever said I'm too big.
>
>Also, they can stop lifting if they decide they're getting too big. just my 2
>cents -

Sarah Jane
December 12th 03, 12:13 AM
In > John HUDSON wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2003 22:38:20 GMT, (Rutabaga22) wrote:
>
>>>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
>>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
>>
>>The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will
>>look like Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife
>>harboring this delusion.) Most women - and most men, for that matter -
>>have absolutely no idea how difficult it is to "get big."
>
> I'm not suggesting for one moment that "getting big" is likely if
> women use weights for training.

So you agree that it's an irrational fear.

> I simply queried the extravagant
> suggestion that women who don't want to risk the possibility of
> acquiring masculine muscle definition, are "psychologically"
> disturbed!

No one said they were *disturbed*; it was merely referred to as a
"psychological issue". And it is. It's an irrational fear, and it's a
fear that prevents many women from doing something that would probably
be quite beneficial for them. That's called a "phobia", and it is indeed
a psychological issue.


> This is quite clearly utter nonsense and in fact the reverse is more
> near the truth. Women who want to mutate their bodies to look like
> well-muscled men,

Now you've got a false dichotomy. There are some women who are so afraid
of getting hyooge and masculine that they won't lift real weights. That
could be considered a psychological issue. Then there are women who use
massive amounts of steroids to make themselves look like men. That could
also be considered a psychological issue. However, there are women who
lift heavy without fear of becoming freakish and masculine, because we
know it won't happen without drugs. We know that lifting heavy will make
us strong, healthy, and attractive, without sacrificing our femininity.
Do you think that's a psychological issue?

> and who address people as "dude",

That's a psychological disturbance? Get real, dude.

> are suffering with
> some degree of inadequacy which requires them to aspire to be
> something they are not. This is symptomatic of classic psychological
> disturbance!

And which classic psychological disturbance is it that compels women to
pick up heavy things and call people "dude"? Please tell me what the DSM-
IV diagnosis for that would be.

Elzinator
December 12th 03, 03:10 AM
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
*rem0vethis*> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>> mouth shut and walk away.
>
>
>Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and Fiction
>Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work because
>it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that but
>not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?

I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).

Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body area
is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.

So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in those
muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.

HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:

1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many muscle
groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories, and
mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the leg
press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.

2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the biggest
muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall diet
and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will start
to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The body
fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys dig.

That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Elzinator
December 12th 03, 03:12 AM
On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 13:23:34 +0000, Helgi Briem
> wrote:

>On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:14:55 -0500, Elzinator > wrote:
>
>>Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>for years in other women.
>
>That was precisely the fear I was trying to anticipate and allay.

But it is prevalent. Which is why I was prompted to write the article
that appeared on mesomorphosis and in FitnessRX several years ago on
women and Iron. I attempted to dispell that myth.


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Lee Michaels
December 12th 03, 03:35 AM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
> >> mouth shut and walk away.
> >
> >
> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and
Fiction
> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work because
> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that
but
> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
>
> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
>
> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body area
> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
>
> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in those
> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
>
> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
> women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:
>
> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many muscle
> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories, and
> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the leg
> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
>
> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the biggest
> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall diet
> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will start
> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The body
> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys dig.
>
> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
>
>
OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said similar things
for years.

How many of them really believe it?

Elzinator
December 12th 03, 04:17 AM
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:35:19 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
>> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
>> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >>
>> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>> >> mouth shut and walk away.
>> >
>> >
>> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and
>Fiction
>> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work because
>> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that
>but
>> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
>>
>> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
>>
>> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
>> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body area
>> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
>> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
>>
>> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in those
>> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
>> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
>> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
>>
>> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
>> women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:
>>
>> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many muscle
>> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
>> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories, and
>> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
>> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the leg
>> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
>>
>> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
>> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the biggest
>> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall diet
>> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will start
>> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The body
>> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys dig.
>>
>> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
>>
>>
>OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said similar things
>for years.
>
>How many of them really believe it?

Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
to believe. And I won't patronize them.
I gave up.





It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

John HUDSON
December 12th 03, 09:10 AM
On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:13:19 GMT, Sarah Jane >
wrote:

>In > John HUDSON wrote:
>> On 11 Dec 2003 22:38:20 GMT, (Rutabaga22) wrote:
>>
>>>>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
>>>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
>>>
>>>The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will
>>>look like Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife
>>>harboring this delusion.) Most women - and most men, for that matter -
>>>have absolutely no idea how difficult it is to "get big."
>>
>> I'm not suggesting for one moment that "getting big" is likely if
>> women use weights for training.
>
>So you agree that it's an irrational fear.

It's not "irrational fear" it is merely a common misconception due to
ignorance.

>
>> I simply queried the extravagant
>> suggestion that women who don't want to risk the possibility of
>> acquiring masculine muscle definition, are "psychologically"
>> disturbed!
>
>No one said they were *disturbed*; it was merely referred to as a
>"psychological issue". And it is. It's an irrational fear, and it's a
>fear that prevents many women from doing something that would probably
>be quite beneficial for them. That's called a "phobia", and it is indeed
>a psychological issue.

Of course "irrational fear" indicates a phobic disorder. Your
all-embracing application of a "psychological issue" to the women
who are uninformed about the benefits of training with weights is
utterly inappropriate.

>
>
>> This is quite clearly utter nonsense and in fact the reverse is more
>> near the truth. Women who want to mutate their bodies to look like
>> well-muscled men,
>
>Now you've got a false dichotomy. There are some women who are so afraid
>of getting hyooge and masculine that they won't lift real weights. That
>could be considered a psychological issue.

See my previous comments.

> Then there are women who use
>massive amounts of steroids to make themselves look like men. That could
>also be considered a psychological issue.

These are very definitely "disturbed" 'women'!!

> However, there are women who
>lift heavy without fear of becoming freakish and masculine, because we
>know it won't happen without drugs. We know that lifting heavy will make
>us strong, healthy, and attractive, without sacrificing our femininity.

Which I applaud and encourage to all the 'ladies' of my acquaintance!
;o)

>Do you think that's a psychological issue?

No!

>
>> and who address people as "dude",
>
>That's a psychological disturbance? Get real, dude.

I'm not completely au fait with "dude" but I assume it to be the
American equivalent of the English word "mate", which is a colloquial
bonding expression between working-class males. It's adaptation by
aggressive females grates on my sensitivities, and de-feminises the
women that are given to its use!!

>
>> are suffering with
>> some degree of inadequacy which requires them to aspire to be
>> something they are not. This is symptomatic of classic psychological
>> disturbance!
>
>And which classic psychological disturbance is it that compels women to
>pick up heavy things and call people "dude"?

Narcissistic Personality Disorder with latent Inferiority complex. For
simple explanation see:
http://www.peaceandhealing.com/personality/narcissistic_symptoms.asp
http://www.charismaonline.com/church/cccbookarticle.htm


>Please tell me what the DSM-
>IV diagnosis for that would be.

http://www.suicide-parasuicide.rumos.com/en/resources/dsmIV/prsnd/npd.htm

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 12th 03, 09:18 PM
"John HUDSON" > wrote in message
...
> On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 21:08:24 -0500, Elzinator > wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 10 Dec 2003 09:01:19 +0000, Helgi Briem
> > wrote:
> >
> >>On 9 Dec 2003 18:10:36 -0800, (Elzinator) wrote:
> >>
> >>>******In fact, as a woman, you would be hard pressed to gain
> >>>muscle mass at all.
> >>>
> >>>WHAT?????????????????????????????????????????????? ?????
> >>>No more credits to you. That was the worse statement I've heard in a
long time.
> >>
> >>You disagree that it's hard for women to build muscle mass?
> >>
> >>I'm not saying that it can't be done, just that it's hard and
> >>it doesn't happen by accident when you're not looking
> >>sort of thing. You have to seriously work on it. And in
> >>any case, even working on it, women won't put on a
> >>great deal of mass without drugs.
> >
> >Still incorrect. While recognizing that muscle mass gains in women are
> >relative (especially to males), women are quite capable of gaining
> >muscle mass and strength without chemical enhancement.
>
> However, some of them do use Nandrolone Elzi, don't they? ;o)
> http://www.chm.bris.ac.uk/motm/nandrolone/nandj.htm
>

Oh please John, even Lysis got bored with that eventually.

> >
> >
> >>>> Muscles are built during rest.
> >>>
> >>>If that were true, we would all gain muscle mass sitting on our asses.
> >>
> >>I should perhaps have said, "during rest, after exercise".
> >>Is that better?
> >
> >Not really. Without the progressive loading of resistance training, an
> >adaptation, i.e. hypertrophy and/or strength gains, will not occur.
> >It's a process that cannot really be clearly delineated from the
> >stimulus of exercise and of recovery. The two are hand in hand, so to
> >speak. And even 48-72 hours post-training, adaptation may begin to
> >disappear (detraining).
>
> This is "nit-picking" Elzi; you know exactly what the other poster
> meant even it was not written in 'jargon'! The 'benefit' to the
> relevant muscles exercised, continues well into the recovery period,
> long after the specific exercise has ceased.
>
> >
> >
> >It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.
>

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 12th 03, 09:22 PM
"Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
message
. cable.rogers.com...
>
> "Elzinator" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
> > look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
> > enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
> > for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
> > mouth shut and walk away.
>
>
> Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and
Fiction
> Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work because
> it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that but
> not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
>
> Sigh.
>
> Krista, adding another name to the list of corporate offices to shoot up
>
Can I tag along? I'm a really good shot and I'll say lots of nice things
about you between bursts ...

</sucking up>

> --
> --------------------
> www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
> www.trans-health.com
>
>
>

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 12th 03, 09:24 PM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:35:19 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
> >> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >>
> >> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
> >> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
> >> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
> >> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep
my
> >> >> mouth shut and walk away.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and
> >Fiction
> >> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work
because
> >> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that
> >but
> >> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
> >>
> >> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
> >>
> >> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
> >> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body area
> >> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
> >> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
> >>
> >> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in those
> >> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
> >> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
> >> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
> >>
> >> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
> >> women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:
> >>
> >> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many muscle
> >> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
> >> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories, and
> >> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
> >> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the leg
> >> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
> >>
> >> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
> >> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the biggest
> >> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall diet
> >> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will start
> >> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The body
> >> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys dig.
> >>
> >> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
> >>
> >>
> >OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said similar
things
> >for years.
> >
> >How many of them really believe it?
>
> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
> I gave up.

I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close to
playing nice?

</good natured cheek>
>
>
>
>
>
> It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 12th 03, 09:30 PM
"SJ" > wrote in message
...
> Rutabaga22 wrote:
>
> >>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
> >>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
> >
> > The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will
look like
> > Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife harboring this
> > delusion.)
>
> It's extremely unrealistic, especially when you consider that many women
> also have psychological issues about getting fat, and probably won't eat
> enough to gain even the amount of muscle they potentially could.
>
> > Most women - and most men, for that matter - have absolutely no
> > idea how difficult it is to "get big."
>
> If I touch any weights that aren't covered in pretty colored vinyl, I'll
> get hyooge, right?

If you get some "liquid insulation" (an electrical product for coating the
ends of cut bussbars) you can cover those 45's in whatever colour pvc takes
your fancy. Then you'll be able to bend the bar without getting hyooge!
:-))

>
> > I've been lifting heavy for 14 years and nobody has ever said I'm too
big.
>
> Well, I've been lifting for 17 years, and at least one person has said
> I'm too muscular. But the only one I can think of offhand is my stupid
> sister, who was incredibly envious of how I looked when she saw me a
> couple of weeks ago at Thanksgiving. Apparently in the summer, when I
> wear shorts and a tank top and she can see my arms and legs, I'm too
> muscular. But in long pants and a sweater I'm thin and she's jealous.
>
> > Also, they can stop lifting if they decide they're getting too big.
>
> But then the muscle just turns into fat, right?
>
> > just my 2
> > cents -
>

Elzinator
December 13th 03, 06:13 AM
On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:24:51 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
<mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:35:19 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
>> >> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>> >> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>> >> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>> >> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep
>my
>> >> >> mouth shut and walk away.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle and
>> >Fiction
>> >> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work
>because
>> >> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like that
>> >but
>> >> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
>> >>
>> >> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
>> >>
>> >> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
>> >> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body area
>> >> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
>> >> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
>> >>
>> >> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in those
>> >> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
>> >> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
>> >> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
>> >>
>> >> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
>> >> women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:
>> >>
>> >> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many muscle
>> >> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
>> >> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories, and
>> >> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
>> >> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the leg
>> >> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
>> >>
>> >> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
>> >> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the biggest
>> >> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall diet
>> >> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will start
>> >> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The body
>> >> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys dig.
>> >>
>> >> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
>> >>
>> >>
>> >OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said similar
>things
>> >for years.
>> >
>> >How many of them really believe it?
>>
>> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
>> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
>> I gave up.
>
>I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close to
>playing nice?

It depends on how altruistic I feel,

></good natured cheek>

Did you forget to wipe the other one?


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

SJ
December 13th 03, 04:07 PM
John HUDSON > wrote in message >...
> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:13:19 GMT, Sarah Jane >
> wrote:
>
> >In > John HUDSON wrote:
> >> On 11 Dec 2003 22:38:20 GMT, (Rutabaga22) wrote:
> >>
> >>>>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
> >>>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
> >>>
> >>>The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will
> >>>look like Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife
> >>>harboring this delusion.) Most women - and most men, for that matter -
> >>>have absolutely no idea how difficult it is to "get big."
> >>
> >> I'm not suggesting for one moment that "getting big" is likely if
> >> women use weights for training.
> >
> >So you agree that it's an irrational fear.
>
> It's not "irrational fear" it is merely a common misconception due to
> ignorance.

It's a fear of something that just ain't gonna happen. That's an
irrational fear.

>
> >
> >> I simply queried the extravagant
> >> suggestion that women who don't want to risk the possibility of
> >> acquiring masculine muscle definition, are "psychologically"
> >> disturbed!
> >
> >No one said they were *disturbed*; it was merely referred to as a
> >"psychological issue". And it is. It's an irrational fear, and it's a
> >fear that prevents many women from doing something that would probably
> >be quite beneficial for them. That's called a "phobia", and it is indeed
> >a psychological issue.
>
> Of course "irrational fear" indicates a phobic disorder. Your
> all-embracing application of a "psychological issue" to the women
> who are uninformed about the benefits of training with weights is
> utterly inappropriate.


But it's not just being uninformed. As Elzi has pointed out, it
doesn't matter if you explain it them. They still believe what they
believe. That's irrational.

> >> This is quite clearly utter nonsense and in fact the reverse is more
> >> near the truth. Women who want to mutate their bodies to look like
> >> well-muscled men,
> >
> >Now you've got a false dichotomy. There are some women who are so afraid
> >of getting hyooge and masculine that they won't lift real weights. That
> >could be considered a psychological issue.
>
> See my previous comments.

I have seen them. And they're still wrong.

> > Then there are women who use
> >massive amounts of steroids to make themselves look like men. That could
> >also be considered a psychological issue.
>
> These are very definitely "disturbed" 'women'!!

Probably.

>
> > However, there are women who
> >lift heavy without fear of becoming freakish and masculine, because we
> >know it won't happen without drugs. We know that lifting heavy will make
> >us strong, healthy, and attractive, without sacrificing our femininity.
>
> Which I applaud and encourage to all the 'ladies' of my acquaintance!
> ;o)

And how many of them actually do it?

> >Do you think that's a psychological issue?
>
> No!

Huh. That's odd. We actually agree on something.

> >
> >> and who address people as "dude",
> >
> >That's a psychological disturbance? Get real, dude.
>
> I'm not completely au fait with "dude" but I assume it to be the
> American equivalent of the English word "mate", which is a colloquial
> bonding expression between working-class males. It's adaptation by
> aggressive females grates on my sensitivities, and de-feminises the
> women that are given to its use!!

If it grates on your delicate sensitivities, maybe you're the one with
the disturbance, mate.

> >> are suffering with
> >> some degree of inadequacy which requires them to aspire to be
> >> something they are not. This is symptomatic of classic psychological
> >> disturbance!
> >
> >And which classic psychological disturbance is it that compels women to
> >pick up heavy things and call people "dude"?
>
> Narcissistic Personality Disorder with latent Inferiority complex. For
> simple explanation see:
> http://www.peaceandhealing.com/personality/narcissistic_symptoms.asp
> http://www.charismaonline.com/church/cccbookarticle.htm

You're kidding, right?

> >Please tell me what the DSM-
> >IV diagnosis for that would be.
>
> http://www.suicide-parasuicide.rumos.com/en/resources/dsmIV/prsnd/npd.htm

I suppose item 4 on that list could apply to most bodybuilders, male
or female. But I still don't think lifting heavy things and calling
people "dude" are necessarily symptoms of any disturbance.

Dally
December 13th 03, 04:32 PM
John HUDSON wrote:


> I'm not completely au fait with "dude" but I assume it to be the
> American equivalent of the English word "mate", which is a colloquial
> bonding expression between working-class males. It's adaptation by
> aggressive females grates on my sensitivities, and de-feminises the
> women that are given to its use!!

I think you're right in making it the equivalent of the chummy "mate".
I think you're wrong to say that making someone a social equal
"de-feminises" that person. The thing is that people are people and the
pursuit of improving our bodies is common to both men and women. They
can - and are - friends with each other even if one of them happens to
be a girly-girl who wants nice shoulder muscles for her strapless
evening gowns. (That nicely describes Sarah Jane, right?) :-)

No doubt you're suffering from the British classist world-view that
can't imagine the comradery that other people have across racial and
gender spectrums. I wonder how that mental illness is classified?

>>And which classic psychological disturbance is it that compels women to
>>pick up heavy things and call people "dude"?
>
> Narcissistic Personality Disorder with latent Inferiority complex.

So you're saying that women aren't social equals and the ones who think
they are equal are suffering from delusions and sorrow over their
inferiority? Please, illuminate poor little me more, I wish I could
think as good as you!

Dally

John HUDSON
December 13th 03, 11:07 PM
On 13 Dec 2003 08:07:25 -0800, (SJ) wrote:

>John HUDSON > wrote in message >...
>> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:13:19 GMT, Sarah Jane >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >In > John HUDSON wrote:
>> >> On 11 Dec 2003 22:38:20 GMT, (Rutabaga22) wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>>How is it a "psychological issue" just because the majority of
>> >>>'feminine' women don't want to look like "King-Kong"?
>> >>>
>> >>>The issue is in thinking that there is any realistic chance you will
>> >>>look like Mr. Kong in the near future. (I've even caught my wife
>> >>>harboring this delusion.) Most women - and most men, for that matter -
>> >>>have absolutely no idea how difficult it is to "get big."
>> >>
>> >> I'm not suggesting for one moment that "getting big" is likely if
>> >> women use weights for training.
>> >
>> >So you agree that it's an irrational fear.
>>
>> It's not "irrational fear" it is merely a common misconception due to
>> ignorance.
>
>It's a fear of something that just ain't gonna happen. That's an
>irrational fear.

It is not "fear", it is a personal choice. The vast majority of people
don't work-out at all, so to single out that small minority of women
that do and choose not to heave heavy weights, as having psychiatric
problems is ludicrous!

>
>>
>> >
>> >> I simply queried the extravagant
>> >> suggestion that women who don't want to risk the possibility of
>> >> acquiring masculine muscle definition, are "psychologically"
>> >> disturbed!
>> >
>> >No one said they were *disturbed*; it was merely referred to as a
>> >"psychological issue". And it is. It's an irrational fear, and it's a
>> >fear that prevents many women from doing something that would probably
>> >be quite beneficial for them. That's called a "phobia", and it is indeed
>> >a psychological issue.
>>
>> Of course "irrational fear" indicates a phobic disorder. Your
>> all-embracing application of a "psychological issue" to the women
>> who are uninformed about the benefits of training with weights is
>> utterly inappropriate.
>
>
>But it's not just being uninformed. As Elzi has pointed out, it
>doesn't matter if you explain it them. They still believe what they
>believe. That's irrational.

No. That simply means they don't trust the person trying to educate
them. It also means they probably just want to go to the gym to
'potter'; they simply just don't want to do 'serious' weight training.

>
>> >> This is quite clearly utter nonsense and in fact the reverse is more
>> >> near the truth. Women who want to mutate their bodies to look like
>> >> well-muscled men,
>> >
>> >Now you've got a false dichotomy. There are some women who are so afraid
>> >of getting hyooge and masculine that they won't lift real weights. That
>> >could be considered a psychological issue.
>>
>> See my previous comments.
>
>I have seen them. And they're still wrong.

In your opinion!! Which, given our track record, comes as no surprise!

>
>> > Then there are women who use
>> >massive amounts of steroids to make themselves look like men. That could
>> >also be considered a psychological issue.
>>
>> These are very definitely "disturbed" 'women'!!
>
>Probably.

Sounds a little reluctant?

>
>>
>> > However, there are women who
>> >lift heavy without fear of becoming freakish and masculine, because we
>> >know it won't happen without drugs. We know that lifting heavy will make
>> >us strong, healthy, and attractive, without sacrificing our femininity.
>>
>> Which I applaud and encourage to all the 'ladies' of my acquaintance!
>> ;o)
>
>And how many of them actually do it?

Not many, but I do have a few successes.

>
>> >Do you think that's a psychological issue?
>>
>> No!
>
>Huh. That's odd. We actually agree on something.

I think you may have misinterpreted my answer!

>
>> >
>> >> and who address people as "dude",
>> >
>> >That's a psychological disturbance? Get real, dude.
>>
>> I'm not completely au fait with "dude" but I assume it to be the
>> American equivalent of the English word "mate", which is a colloquial
>> bonding expression between working-class males. It's adaptation by
>> aggressive females grates on my sensitivities, and de-feminises the
>> women that are given to its use!!
>
>If it grates on your delicate sensitivities, maybe you're the one with
>the disturbance, mate.

It's probably a higher degree of sophistication rather than a
"disturbance", as it is also the view of all my friends and associates
dearie!

>
>> >> are suffering with
>> >> some degree of inadequacy which requires them to aspire to be
>> >> something they are not. This is symptomatic of classic psychological
>> >> disturbance!
>> >
>> >And which classic psychological disturbance is it that compels women to
>> >pick up heavy things and call people "dude"?
>>
>> Narcissistic Personality Disorder with latent Inferiority complex. For
>> simple explanation see:
>> http://www.peaceandhealing.com/personality/narcissistic_symptoms.asp
>> http://www.charismaonline.com/church/cccbookarticle.htm
>
>You're kidding, right?

Not in the slightest!

>
>> >Please tell me what the DSM-
>> >IV diagnosis for that would be.
>>
>> http://www.suicide-parasuicide.rumos.com/en/resources/dsmIV/prsnd/npd.htm
>
>I suppose item 4 on that list could apply to most bodybuilders, male
>or female. But I still don't think lifting heavy things and calling
>people "dude" are necessarily symptoms of any disturbance.

Neither do I across the board. However, it certainly applies to those
that take the concept too far, including zealots that proclaim
perfectly normal people who won't take their advice, as having
"irrational fears"!!

SJ
December 14th 03, 12:54 AM
Dally > wrote in message >...
> The thing is that people are people and the
> pursuit of improving our bodies is common to both men and women. They
> can - and are - friends with each other even if one of them happens to
> be a girly-girl who wants nice shoulder muscles for her strapless
> evening gowns. (That nicely describes Sarah Jane, right?) :-)

Heh. I went shopping with a friend today. I picked up a halter-style
dress, and she said "ooh, that'll make your shoulders look FABULOUS" -
it did, but I couldn't zip it all the way. I tried sucking in, but you
can't suck in your lats. I ended up buying a different dress, but
similar style. Halter style front, and backless - I think the only way
I could get a dress to fit was to avoid the lat issue completely. So
yeah, that's me. A girly girl who wants her shoulders to look
fabulous in her evening gowns.

Proton Soup
December 14th 03, 02:11 AM
On 13 Dec 2003 16:54:23 -0800, (SJ) wrote:

>Dally > wrote in message >...
>> The thing is that people are people and the
>> pursuit of improving our bodies is common to both men and women. They
>> can - and are - friends with each other even if one of them happens to
>> be a girly-girl who wants nice shoulder muscles for her strapless
>> evening gowns. (That nicely describes Sarah Jane, right?) :-)
>
>Heh. I went shopping with a friend today. I picked up a halter-style
>dress, and she said "ooh, that'll make your shoulders look FABULOUS" -
>it did, but I couldn't zip it all the way. I tried sucking in, but you
>can't suck in your lats. I ended up buying a different dress, but
>similar style. Halter style front, and backless - I think the only way
>I could get a dress to fit was to avoid the lat issue completely. So
>yeah, that's me. A girly girl who wants her shoulders to look
>fabulous in her evening gowns.

With all the girly girls getting into weightlifting, I guess it's just
a matter of time before we see a Powerpuff Girls bench blouse.

Proton Soup

Lucas Buck
December 14th 03, 08:13 AM
On 13 Dec 2003 16:54:23 -0800, (SJ) wrote:

>Dally > wrote in message >...
>> The thing is that people are people and the
>> pursuit of improving our bodies is common to both men and women. They
>> can - and are - friends with each other even if one of them happens to
>> be a girly-girl who wants nice shoulder muscles for her strapless
>> evening gowns. (That nicely describes Sarah Jane, right?) :-)
>
>Heh. I went shopping with a friend today. I picked up a halter-style
>dress, and she said "ooh, that'll make your shoulders look FABULOUS" -
>it did, but I couldn't zip it all the way. I tried sucking in, but you
>can't suck in your lats. I ended up buying a different dress, but
>similar style. Halter style front, and backless - I think the only way
>I could get a dress to fit was to avoid the lat issue completely. So
>yeah, that's me. A girly girl who wants her shoulders to look
>fabulous in her evening gowns.

JPEGS PLEASE

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 14th 03, 11:28 PM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:24:51 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:35:19 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
> >> >> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make
them
> >> >> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous
chemical
> >> >> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to
battle
> >> >> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just
keep
> >my
> >> >> >> mouth shut and walk away.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle
and
> >> >Fiction
> >> >> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work
> >because
> >> >> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like
that
> >> >but
> >> >> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
> >> >>
> >> >> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
> >> >>
> >> >> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
> >> >> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body
area
> >> >> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
> >> >> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
> >> >>
> >> >> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in
those
> >> >> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
> >> >> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
> >> >> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
> >> >>
> >> >> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
> >> >> women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:
> >> >>
> >> >> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many
muscle
> >> >> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
> >> >> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories,
and
> >> >> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
> >> >> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the
leg
> >> >> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
> >> >>
> >> >> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
> >> >> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the
biggest
> >> >> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall
diet
> >> >> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will
start
> >> >> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The
body
> >> >> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys
dig.
> >> >>
> >> >> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said similar
> >things
> >> >for years.
> >> >
> >> >How many of them really believe it?
> >>
> >> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
> >> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
> >> I gave up.
> >
> >I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close to
> >playing nice?
>
> It depends on how altruistic I feel,
>
> ></good natured cheek>
>
> Did you forget to wipe the other one?
>
My bad natured cheek? I try to leave that one alone.

I think you would be fun to go drinking with Elzi.

>
> It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

August Pamplona
December 15th 03, 01:26 AM
"Lucas Buck" > wrote in message
...
> On 13 Dec 2003 16:54:23 -0800, (SJ) wrote:
>
> >Dally > wrote in message
>...
> >> The thing is that people are people and the
> >> pursuit of improving our bodies is common to both men and women.
They
> >> can - and are - friends with each other even if one of them happens
to
> >> be a girly-girl who wants nice shoulder muscles for her strapless
> >> evening gowns. (That nicely describes Sarah Jane, right?) :-)
> >
> >Heh. I went shopping with a friend today. I picked up a halter-style
> >dress, and she said "ooh, that'll make your shoulders look
FABULOUS" -
> >it did, but I couldn't zip it all the way. I tried sucking in, but
you
> >can't suck in your lats. I ended up buying a different dress, but
> >similar style. Halter style front, and backless - I think the only
way
> >I could get a dress to fit was to avoid the lat issue completely. So
> >yeah, that's me. A girly girl who wants her shoulders to look
> >fabulous in her evening gowns.
>
> JPEGS PLEASE

Seconded.

August Pamplona
--
The waterfall in Java is not wet.
- omegazero2003 on m.f.w.

a.a. # 1811 apatriot #20 Eater of smut
To email replace 'necatoramericanusancylostomaduodenale' with
'cosmicaug'

Elzinator
December 16th 03, 03:15 AM
On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:28:21 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
<mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
>> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:24:51 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
>> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
>>
>> >
>> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:35:19 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
>> >> > wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >
>> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
>> >> >> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make
>them
>> >> >> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous
>chemical
>> >> >> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to
>battle
>> >> >> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just
>keep
>> >my
>> >> >> >> mouth shut and walk away.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle
>and
>> >> >Fiction
>> >> >> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work
>> >because
>> >> >> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some **** like
>that
>> >> >but
>> >> >> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and Fitness?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the abc
>> >> >> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body
>area
>> >> >> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of the
>> >> >> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in
>those
>> >> >> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain size
>> >> >> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those muscles
>> >> >> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean that
>> >> >> women should not train their lower body. It only means two things:
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many
>muscle
>> >> >> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
>> >> >> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more calories,
>and
>> >> >> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means get
>> >> >> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on the
>leg
>> >> >> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
>> >> >> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the
>biggest
>> >> >> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall
>diet
>> >> >> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will
>start
>> >> >> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The
>body
>> >> >> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys
>dig.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said similar
>> >things
>> >> >for years.
>> >> >
>> >> >How many of them really believe it?
>> >>
>> >> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
>> >> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
>> >> I gave up.
>> >
>> >I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close to
>> >playing nice?
>>
>> It depends on how altruistic I feel,
>>
>> ></good natured cheek>
>>
>> Did you forget to wipe the other one?
>>
>My bad natured cheek? I try to leave that one alone.

Are they hairy? ;)

>I think you would be fun to go drinking with Elzi.

Um, I try not to drink. I either fall asleep or get very very
'punchy.' (not the physical kind)

It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Dally
December 16th 03, 05:48 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
> mouth shut and walk away.

Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
sexier shoulders or more defined calves."

Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
have teeth that white naturally.

Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out

Proton Soup
December 16th 03, 08:10 PM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:

>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>> mouth shut and walk away.
>
>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>
>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>have teeth that white naturally.
>
>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out

http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html

---
Proton Soup

"If I drink water I will have to go to the bathroom and
how can I use the bathroom when my people are in bondage?"
-Saddam Hussein

Chupacabra
December 16th 03, 11:58 PM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup >
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>
>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>
>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>
>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>
>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html


.....

Wow. That's incredibly hot.
>
>---
>Proton Soup
>
>"If I drink water I will have to go to the bathroom and
> how can I use the bathroom when my people are in bondage?"
>-Saddam Hussein

Dally
December 17th 03, 12:30 AM
Proton Soup wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:

>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy.
>
> http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html

Thank you. (Rather proved my point.)

Dally, who bookmarked it for inspiration

Elzinator
December 17th 03, 02:15 AM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:

>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>> mouth shut and walk away.
>
>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>
>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>but most people don't.)

No, I didn't know. That would make a great poster, don't you think? I
bet we would see women scrambling to pick up weights. :)


>It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>muscles give you that toned look.

I have tried to tell women that men dig women with some muscle rather
than sticks for limbs. They usually don't believe me. After several
years of observation and some discussion with women and men, I have
come to believe that generally women value another woman's perception
of their appearance rather than a man's perception. Many don't have a
clue what men like in a woman's physique (other than big mammary
glands).

Actually, it's not too dissimilar than the competition of females
against females in other species. Women compete against themselves for
male interests, but they lose their perspective of what men prefer in
a female (again, disclaimer regarding breasts).

We really are odd birds as a species, aren't we?
(hyenas are the ultimate, though)


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Elzinator
December 17th 03, 02:17 AM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup >
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>
>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>
>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>
>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>
>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html

Dude, that poster rocks. It should be in every gym.



It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Proton Soup
December 17th 03, 02:38 AM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:15:10 -0500, Elzinator >
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>
>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>
>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>but most people don't.)
>
>No, I didn't know. That would make a great poster, don't you think? I
>bet we would see women scrambling to pick up weights. :)
>
>
>>It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>muscles give you that toned look.
>
>I have tried to tell women that men dig women with some muscle rather
>than sticks for limbs. They usually don't believe me. After several
>years of observation and some discussion with women and men, I have
>come to believe that generally women value another woman's perception
>of their appearance rather than a man's perception. Many don't have a
>clue what men like in a woman's physique (other than big mammary
>glands).

A man's perception depends on the man. And also on some societal
conditioning. I'm not sure if it's still the case, but I remember
hearing once that in Argentina breast reduction surgery is the norm.

Actually, I've never cared much for big hooters. Perky is nice. But
then, I've also never adapted well to the rest of male pop culture.
Most sports, especially team events like football, I could care less
about. Ocassionally, I might watch something like drag racing, strong
man competitions, or sumo.

>Actually, it's not too dissimilar than the competition of females
>against females in other species. Women compete against themselves for
>male interests, but they lose their perspective of what men prefer in
>a female (again, disclaimer regarding breasts).
>
>We really are odd birds as a species, aren't we?
>(hyenas are the ultimate, though)

Well, some of us are odd birds, even within our own species.

>It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

---
Proton Soup

"If I drink water I will have to go to the bathroom and
how can I use the bathroom when my people are in bondage?"
-Saddam Hussein

Lee Michaels
December 17th 03, 04:39 AM
"Elzinator" wrote
>
> >It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
> >people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
> >muscles give you that toned look.
>
> I have tried to tell women that men dig women with some muscle rather
> than sticks for limbs. They usually don't believe me. After several
> years of observation and some discussion with women and men, I have
> come to believe that generally women value another woman's perception
> of their appearance rather than a man's perception. Many don't have a
> clue what men like in a woman's physique (other than big mammary
> glands).
>
> Actually, it's not too dissimilar than the competition of females
> against females in other species. Women compete against themselves for
> male interests, but they lose their perspective of what men prefer in
> a female (again, disclaimer regarding breasts).
>
> We really are odd birds as a species, aren't we?
> (hyenas are the ultimate, though)
>
>

As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic or
brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many women.
(Why is that Krista?)

I primarialy focused on these points when dealing with problem (female)
backs over the years. (Interestingly, guys did not present these problems
when addressing a rehab effort to take care of their injuries or physical
shortcomings.) The cutesy, nonsensical answers I got back followed a certain
them.

1) Big holes in the muscle on the back.

"Al the girls have them. Why should I worry?"

2) The inability to lift or do almost anything with the back.

"Why should I care. That what guys are for anyway."

3) The fact that this problem will only get worse and worse if they don't do
something about it NOW!

"But I just wanna have fun now. Besides, it will probably just go away."

4) Simple appearance, grace and phsiological function.

"I ain't a horse so don't compare me to an animal. I just wanna look like a
runway model."

Elzinator
December 17th 03, 05:34 AM
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 04:39:27 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" wrote
>>
>> >It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>> >people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>> >muscles give you that toned look.
>>
>> I have tried to tell women that men dig women with some muscle rather
>> than sticks for limbs. They usually don't believe me. After several
>> years of observation and some discussion with women and men, I have
>> come to believe that generally women value another woman's perception
>> of their appearance rather than a man's perception. Many don't have a
>> clue what men like in a woman's physique (other than big mammary
>> glands).
>>
>> Actually, it's not too dissimilar than the competition of females
>> against females in other species. Women compete against themselves for
>> male interests, but they lose their perspective of what men prefer in
>> a female (again, disclaimer regarding breasts).
>>
>> We really are odd birds as a species, aren't we?
>> (hyenas are the ultimate, though)
>>
>>
>
>As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
>the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic or
>brainpower is involved.

I did not even imply that logic was involved.

>In fact using logic seems to infuriate many women.
>(Why is that Krista?)

That parallels an ongoing email discussion I've been having with
someone.

There is a gender difference in some cognitive function, but there is
also a large element of social and cultural construct.

>I primarialy focused on these points when dealing with problem (female)
>backs over the years. (Interestingly, guys did not present these problems
>when addressing a rehab effort to take care of their injuries or physical
>shortcomings.)

Men typically have different issues, a big one: EGO.

>The cutesy, nonsensical answers I got back followed a certain
>them.
>
>1) Big holes in the muscle on the back.
>
>"Al the girls have them. Why should I worry?"
>
>2) The inability to lift or do almost anything with the back.
>
>"Why should I care. That what guys are for anyway."
>
>3) The fact that this problem will only get worse and worse if they don't do
>something about it NOW!
>
>"But I just wanna have fun now. Besides, it will probably just go away."
>
>4) Simple appearance, grace and phsiological function.
>
>"I ain't a horse so don't compare me to an animal. I just wanna look like a
>runway model."

I have no patience for this. That's one reason why I quit personal
training. (other than I'm a labrat at heart)


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

John HUDSON
December 17th 03, 08:11 AM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:17:49 -0500, Elzinator >
wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>>
>>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>>
>>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>>
>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>>
>>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html
>
>Dude, that poster rocks. It should be in every gym.

Unfortunately Marilyn was a well-known devotee of the "clanking
dumbbells at the top brigade", and would therefore be a very poor
example for weight-training disciples!

On the other hand, Martina Navratilova does not bang 'hers' together,
and therefore might be a much better role model!!

>
>
>
>It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Mistress Krista
December 17th 03, 11:45 AM
"Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s04...
>
> As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
> the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic
or
> brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
women.
> (Why is that Krista?)
>


I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.

Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also have
downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and pitchforks
if we install one."

Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*


Krista

--
--------------------
www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
www.trans-health.com

Mistress Krista
December 17th 03, 12:02 PM
"Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
news:[email protected]_s04...
>
> As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
> the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic
or
> brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
women.
> (Why is that Krista?)
>


In a serious vein, both men and women are prone to developing explanatory
paradigms which may be inaccurate. Everyone has little narratives and
theories which purport to explain the world in large or small ways.
Sometimes these little theories are more or less in tune with reality,
sometimes they are not. Sometimes they make perfect sense to their owners;
or, they may be self-contradictory but the person would prefer not to
acknowledge that. We can all think of ways that we have defended ourselves
when presented with information or ideas that we would rather not entertain.

When I was fat, I constructed an elaborate theory involving genetic destiny,
all my clothing simultaneously shrinking in the dryer, and women's clothing
sizes being a conspiracy. It's obviously bull**** but at the time, because I
was rewarded in some way with this idea (i.e. did not have to deal with
weight gain), I bought into it. I still believe the last part about women's
clothing, though. :) Saddam Hussein's daughter has already shared her
theory that her father must have been tranquilized by the US in order not to
put up a fight. Etc.

Psychoanalysts would say that the self defends itself from trauma in this
way. Sociologists would probably talk about how people buy into ideologies
as a result of social risks or rewards. Regardless of how one might explain
it, in our culture, middle class girls and women, particularly the younger
ones, are still rewarded socially for being weaklings. And a variety of
agents participate in this, along with the women themselves. There is lots
of positive pressure in the form of social approval, and negative pressure
in the form of various stigma about strong/assertive/big/muscular women.
Some of the girls in my undergraduate classes are happy when they can buy
clothing from GapKids. WTF? There also appears to be a connection between
affluence and this stupid body image. Women who know they have to work, and
work hard, for a living can't afford to buy into this bull****. Women who
have the luxury of believing that their primary function is to be ornamental
can.

One could identify various fictions in which men participate as well. It's
inescapable when one is immersed in a broth of certain cultural messages, or
when one creates particular ways to explain the world, as we all do. We all
believe stupid ****. It just varies from person to person.

Ultimately of course, people have to take responsibility for the choices
they make. A lot of women who starved themselves to be thin are going to
have a very ****ty wake-up call when it comes to the BMD scan in middle age.


Krista

--
--------------------
www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
www.trans-health.com

Chupacabra
December 17th 03, 02:02 PM
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 11:45:38 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
*rem0vethis*> wrote:

>
>"Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
>news:[email protected]_s04...
>>
>> As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
>> the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic
>or
>> brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
>women.
>> (Why is that Krista?)
>>
>
>
>I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
>
>Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also have
>downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and pitchforks
>if we install one."
>
>Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
>
>
>Krista

Ah, but you *do* need a subwoofer to get proper bass response (or a
set of expensive speakers with good bass response from their built-in
woofers).

Lyle McDonald
December 17th 03, 03:49 PM
Mistress Krista wrote:
>
> "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]_s04...
> >
> > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
> > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic
> or
> > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
> women.
> > (Why is that Krista?)
> >
>
> In a serious vein, both men and women are prone to developing explanatory
> paradigms which may be inaccurate. Everyone has little narratives and
> theories which purport to explain the world in large or small ways.
> Sometimes these little theories are more or less in tune with reality,
> sometimes they are not. Sometimes they make perfect sense to their owners;
> or, they may be self-contradictory but the person would prefer not to
> acknowledge that. We can all think of ways that we have defended ourselves
> when presented with information or ideas that we would rather not entertain.
>
> When I was fat, I constructed an elaborate theory involving genetic destiny,
> all my clothing simultaneously shrinking in the dryer, and women's clothing
> sizes being a conspiracy. It's obviously bull**** but at the time, because I
> was rewarded in some way with this idea (i.e. did not have to deal with
> weight gain), I bought into it. I still believe the last part about women's
> clothing, though. :) Saddam Hussein's daughter has already shared her
> theory that her father must have been tranquilized by the US in order not to
> put up a fight. Etc.
>
> Psychoanalysts would say that the self defends itself from trauma in this
> way. Sociologists would probably talk about how people buy into ideologies
> as a result of social risks or rewards. Regardless of how one might explain
> it, in our culture, middle class girls and women, particularly the younger
> ones, are still rewarded socially for being weaklings. And a variety of
> agents participate in this, along with the women themselves. There is lots
> of positive pressure in the form of social approval, and negative pressure
> in the form of various stigma about strong/assertive/big/muscular women.
> Some of the girls in my undergraduate classes are happy when they can buy
> clothing from GapKids. WTF? There also appears to be a connection between
> affluence and this stupid body image. Women who know they have to work, and
> work hard, for a living can't afford to buy into this bull****. Women who
> have the luxury of believing that their primary function is to be ornamental
> can.
>
> One could identify various fictions in which men participate as well. It's
> inescapable when one is immersed in a broth of certain cultural messages, or
> when one creates particular ways to explain the world, as we all do. We all
> believe stupid ****. It just varies from person to person.
>
> Ultimately of course, people have to take responsibility for the choices
> they make. A lot of women who starved themselves to be thin are going to
> have a very ****ty wake-up call when it comes to the BMD scan in middle age.

The simplest way I ever heard this put

What the thinker thinks, the prover proves.

Once you have made up your mind in a belief, you will go out of your way
to prove it to yourself through selective data editing and illogic.

So once the conspiracy theorist has decided that there is a vast
conspiracy around him, any data to the contrary will be defined as part
of the coverup.

Religious twits define anything that would appear to 'disprove' their
bleief system as a 'test of satan'.

And people who are in an argument with me will define anyone who defends
what I'm saying as 'one of Lyle's cloying sycophants'.

etc.

Lyle

Elzinator
December 18th 03, 12:38 AM
"Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in message ogers.com>...
> "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]_s04...
> >
> > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
> > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic
> or
> > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
> women.
> > (Why is that Krista?)
> >
>
>
> I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
>
> Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also have
> downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and pitchforks
> if we install one."
>
> Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*

I used to think that was a function of the Y chromosome, but I like
techie stuff, too (I would respond similiarly :) Maybe it's associated
with androgen levels.

BTW, send me an email. I have something I want to ask you about re:
gender phenotypes and brain function. I don't have your email on my
laptop (my PC is still packed).

Mistress Krista
December 18th 03, 01:01 AM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
om...
> "Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
message
ogers.com>...
> > "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]_s04...
> > >
> > > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous
members of
> > > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little
logic
> > or
> > > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
> > women.
> > > (Why is that Krista?)
> > >
> >
> >
> > I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
> >
> > Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also
have
> > downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and
pitchforks
> > if we install one."
> >
> > Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
>
> I used to think that was a function of the Y chromosome, but I like
> techie stuff, too (I would respond similiarly :) Maybe it's associated
> with androgen levels.


Ah, but then you have the confounding factor of technical equipment *type*.
I don't care about stereo equipment. However, were we to discuss the merits
of acquiring a most excellent souped up computer, I would be very receptive.
:)


Krista

--
--------------------
www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
www.trans-health.com

OmegaZero2003
December 18th 03, 02:46 AM
"Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
message able.rogers.com...
>
> "Elzinator" > wrote in message
> om...
> > "Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
> message
> ogers.com>...
> > > "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]_s04...
> > > >
> > > > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous
> members of
> > > > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little
> logic
> > > or
> > > > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
> > > women.
> > > > (Why is that Krista?)
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
> > >
> > > Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also
> have
> > > downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and
> pitchforks
> > > if we install one."
> > >
> > > Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
> >
> > I used to think that was a function of the Y chromosome, but I like
> > techie stuff, too (I would respond similiarly :) Maybe it's associated
> > with androgen levels.
>
>
> Ah, but then you have the confounding factor of technical equipment
*type*.
> I don't care about stereo equipment. However, were we to discuss the
merits
> of acquiring a most excellent souped up computer, I would be very
receptive.
> :)

Othr than it being out of date in a year, it makes for awsome game-playing,
video capture and editing, human-parallel-tasking and compute-intensive
problem solving using favorite packages like Mathematica and Brainmaker.

AFA subwoofers go - it is all about moving sufficient air with low
distortion. Legacy makes the best.

>
>
> Krista
>
> --
> --------------------
> www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
> www.trans-health.com
>
>
>

Elzinator
December 18th 03, 03:00 AM
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 01:01:03 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
*rem0vethis*> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" > wrote in message
om...
>> "Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
>message
ogers.com>...
>> > "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
>> > news:[email protected]_s04...
>> > >
>> > > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous
>members of
>> > > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little
>logic
>> > or
>> > > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
>> > women.
>> > > (Why is that Krista?)
>> > >
>> >
>> >
>> > I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
>> >
>> > Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also
>have
>> > downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and
>pitchforks
>> > if we install one."
>> >
>> > Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
>>
>> I used to think that was a function of the Y chromosome, but I like
>> techie stuff, too (I would respond similiarly :) Maybe it's associated
>> with androgen levels.
>
>
>Ah, but then you have the confounding factor of technical equipment *type*.
>I don't care about stereo equipment. However, were we to discuss the merits
>of acquiring a most excellent souped up computer, I would be very receptive.

I agree, tech type (not touch type) is a factor. However, I get
excited about both stereo and computer equipment.

I don't however, want the woofer in the bottom of the couch......


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Elzinator
December 18th 03, 03:40 AM
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 02:46:56 GMT, "OmegaZero2003"
> wrote:

>
>"Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
>message able.rogers.com...
>>
>> "Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> om...
>> > "Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
>> message
>> ogers.com>...
>> > > "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
>> > > news:[email protected]_s04...
>> > > >
>> > > > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous
>> members of
>> > > > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little
>> logic
>> > > or
>> > > > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
>> > > women.
>> > > > (Why is that Krista?)
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
>> > >
>> > > Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also
>> have
>> > > downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and
>> pitchforks
>> > > if we install one."
>> > >
>> > > Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
>> >
>> > I used to think that was a function of the Y chromosome, but I like
>> > techie stuff, too (I would respond similiarly :) Maybe it's associated
>> > with androgen levels.
>>
>>
>> Ah, but then you have the confounding factor of technical equipment
>*type*.
>> I don't care about stereo equipment. However, were we to discuss the
>merits
>> of acquiring a most excellent souped up computer, I would be very
>receptive.
>> :)
>
>Othr than it being out of date in a year, it makes for awsome game-playing,
>video capture and editing, human-parallel-tasking and compute-intensive
>problem solving using favorite packages like Mathematica and Brainmaker.

Got any suggestions for a decent pocket PC? Although the dept is
paying for it, I still want to be frugal.


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Lucas Buck
December 18th 03, 05:53 AM
On Wed, 17 Dec 2003 08:11:50 +0000, John HUDSON > wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 21:17:49 -0500, Elzinator >
>wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup >
>>wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>>>
>>>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>>>
>>>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>>>
>>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>>>
>>>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html
>>
>>Dude, that poster rocks. It should be in every gym.
>
>Unfortunately Marilyn was a well-known devotee of the "clanking
>dumbbells at the top brigade", and would therefore be a very poor
>example for weight-training disciples!
>
>On the other hand, Martina Navratilova does not bang 'hers' together,

But she would have loved to have banged Marilyn.

Lucas Buck
December 18th 03, 05:53 AM
On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup > wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>
>>Elzinator wrote:
>>
>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>
>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>
>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>
>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>
>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html


Darn, I was hoping that this would be a picture of her snatch.

Proton Soup
December 18th 03, 06:08 AM
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 05:53:13 GMT, Lucas Buck
> wrote:

>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup > wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>>> mouth shut and walk away.
>>>
>>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>>
>>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>>
>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>>
>>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html
>
>
>Darn, I was hoping that this would be a picture of her snatch.
>

What a jerk.

---
Proton Soup

"If I drink water I will have to go to the bathroom and
how can I use the bathroom when my people are in bondage?"
-Saddam Hussein

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 18th 03, 10:44 AM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:28:21 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> ...
> >> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:24:51 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
> >> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> >> On Fri, 12 Dec 2003 03:35:19 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
> >> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> On Thu, 11 Dec 2003 11:43:02 GMT, "Mistress Krista"
> >> >> >> *rem0vethis*> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> >> >> ...
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make
> >them
> >> >> >> >> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous
> >chemical
> >> >> >> >> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to
> >battle
> >> >> >> >> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just
> >keep
> >> >my
> >> >> >> >> mouth shut and walk away.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >Got a letter from a reader the other day, telling me that Muscle
> >and
> >> >> >Fiction
> >> >> >> >Hers is telling women to stay away from weighted lower body work
> >> >because
> >> >> >> >it'll bulk them up. I'd expect that from Shape or some ****
like
> >that
> >> >> >but
> >> >> >> >not M&F Hers. I mean, isn't the magazine called MUSCLE and
Fitness?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I think I know the origin of their comments (maybe).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Women spend enormous time working mostly two muscle groups: the
abc
> >> >> >> and the thighs/butt. You and I know that trimming size of a body
> >area
> >> >> >> is primarily a function of reducing bodyfat. And which area of
the
> >> >> >> body is the hardest to lose bodyfat (and size)? The lower body.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> So, women who train in a manner that will induce hypertrophy in
> >those
> >> >> >> muscle groups (thighs and butt) may actually see that area gain
size
> >> >> >> before it gets smaller. That is because hype trophy of those
muscles
> >> >> >> may happen quicker than they lose bodyfat from that area.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> HOWEVER (and I can't emphasize that enough), that does not mean
that
> >> >> >> women should not train their lower body. It only means two
things:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 1. they should use compound exercises that incorporate as many
> >muscle
> >> >> >> groups of the body as possible in addition to lower body muscle
> >> >> >> groups. They get an overall training effect, expend more
calories,
> >and
> >> >> >> mobilize more bodyfat (due to energy requirements). That means
get
> >> >> >> your asses off the ButtBlaster and the Yes-No machines, get on
the
> >leg
> >> >> >> press, or even better, learn to squat and deadlift.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> 2. They just have to be patient. Increasing muscle mass puts more
> >> >> >> energetic demand on the body's fuel sources, and where are the
> >biggest
> >> >> >> muscles in the body? The lower body. Eventually, if their overall
> >diet
> >> >> >> and exercise program is tuned in, the fat on the lower body will
> >start
> >> >> >> to drop off and those regions will eventually become smaller. The
> >body
> >> >> >> fat will drop away to reveal lovely shapely strong legs that guys
> >dig.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> That is what I tell women (and guys who have girlfriends).
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >OK Elzi, what you say makes perfect sense to me. I have said
similar
> >> >things
> >> >> >for years.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >How many of them really believe it?
> >> >>
> >> >> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
> >> >> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
> >> >> I gave up.
> >> >
> >> >I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close to
> >> >playing nice?
> >>
> >> It depends on how altruistic I feel,
> >>
> >> ></good natured cheek>
> >>
> >> Did you forget to wipe the other one?
> >>
> >My bad natured cheek? I try to leave that one alone.
>
> Are they hairy? ;)

<sigh> could be but that's all behind me.

>
> >I think you would be fun to go drinking with Elzi.
>
> Um, I try not to drink. I either fall asleep or get very very
> 'punchy.' (not the physical kind)

Well I didn't mean to drink THAT much.

>
> It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 18th 03, 10:55 AM
"Mistress Krista" *rem0vethis*> wrote in
message ble.rogers.com...
>
> "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]_s04...
> >
> > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members
of
> > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little
logic
> or
> > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
> women.
> > (Why is that Krista?)
> >
>
>
> I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
>
> Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also
have
> downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and
pitchforks
> if we install one."
>
> Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
>
Sorry, you lost me. What's the problem here?
;-)
>
> Krista
>
> --
> --------------------
> www.stumptuous.com/weights.html
> www.trans-health.com
>
>
>

gps
December 18th 03, 02:35 PM
Mistress Krista wrote:
>
> "Lee Michaels" > wrote in message
> news:[email protected]_s04...
> >
> > As someone who has had this discussion off and on with numerous members of
> > the female gender for almost 30 years, I can assure you that little logic
> or
> > brainpower is involved. In fact using logic seems to infuriate many
> women.
> > (Why is that Krista?)
> >
>
> I have observed that logic does not work so well on men either.
>
> Me: "We don't need a subwoofer. The sound is perfectly good. We also have
> downstairs neighbours who will come to our door with torches and pitchforks
> if we install one."
>
> Husband: "I want one anyway." *pout*
>
> Krista

So are you planning on having a second child? :)
ps

OmegaZero2003
December 18th 03, 06:25 PM
"Proton Soup" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 05:53:13 GMT, Lucas Buck
> > wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup > wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
> >>
> >>>Elzinator wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
> >>>> look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
> >>>> enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
> >>>> for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep
my
> >>>> mouth shut and walk away.
> >>>
> >>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
> >>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change
their
> >>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
> >>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
> >>>
> >>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
> >>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
> >>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy.
Bigger
> >>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
> >>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
> >>>have teeth that white naturally.
> >>>
> >>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
> >>
> >>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html
> >
> >
> >Darn, I was hoping that this would be a picture of her snatch.
> >
>
> What a jerk.

Keep it clean now!

>
> ---
> Proton Soup
>
> "If I drink water I will have to go to the bathroom and
> how can I use the bathroom when my people are in bondage?"
> -Saddam Hussein

Elzinator
December 19th 03, 04:54 AM
On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:44:53 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
<mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:

>
>"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:28:21 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
>> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
>> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
>> >> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:24:51 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell" wrote:
>> >> >> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they want
>> >> >> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
>> >> >> I gave up.
>> >> >
>> >> >I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close to
>> >> >playing nice?
>> >>
>> >> It depends on how altruistic I feel,
>> >>
>> >> ></good natured cheek>
>> >>
>> >> Did you forget to wipe the other one?
>> >>
>> >My bad natured cheek? I try to leave that one alone.
>>
>> Are they hairy? ;)
>
><sigh> could be but that's all behind me.

Most butts are.

>> >I think you would be fun to go drinking with Elzi.
>>
>> Um, I try not to drink. I either fall asleep or get very very
>> 'punchy.' (not the physical kind)
>
>Well I didn't mean to drink THAT much.

Hey, it doesn't take much.
I'm a cheap date.


It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

Michael and Debbie Russell
December 19th 03, 08:46 AM
"Elzinator" > wrote in message
...
> On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:44:53 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> On Mon, 15 Dec 2003 10:28:21 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
> >> <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
> >> >"Elzinator" > wrote in message
> >> >> On Sat, 13 Dec 2003 08:24:51 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
wrote:
> >> >> >> Few. That's what is so frustrating. They only believe what they
want
> >> >> >> to believe. And I won't patronize them.
> >> >> >> I gave up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >I thought you enjoyed patronizing dumb people, or is that too close
to
> >> >> >playing nice?
> >> >>
> >> >> It depends on how altruistic I feel,
> >> >>
> >> >> ></good natured cheek>
> >> >>
> >> >> Did you forget to wipe the other one?
> >> >>
> >> >My bad natured cheek? I try to leave that one alone.
> >>
> >> Are they hairy? ;)
> >
> ><sigh> could be but that's all behind me.
>
> Most butts are.
>
> >> >I think you would be fun to go drinking with Elzi.
> >>
> >> Um, I try not to drink. I either fall asleep or get very very
> >> 'punchy.' (not the physical kind)
> >
> >Well I didn't mean to drink THAT much.
>
> Hey, it doesn't take much.
> I'm a cheap date.
>
Smarter than me AND a cheap date?
I think I'm in lust
>
> It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.

SJ
December 19th 03, 05:56 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup >
> wrote:
>
>
>>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>>>look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>>>enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>>>for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>>>mouth shut and walk away.
>>>
>>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>>
>>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>>
>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>>
>>http://oneartrow.com/Pages/Marilyn_Weights.html
>
>
> Dude, that poster rocks. It should be in every gym.

I think it looks great on my bedroom wall. I finally picked it up from
the frame shop yesterday. Took em over a month to get it done, but it
looks FABULOUS.

Nina
December 19th 03, 06:34 PM
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 11:56:30 -0600, SJ > wrote:

>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 14:10:44 -0600, Proton Soup >
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>On Tue, 16 Dec 2003 12:48:29 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>Elzinator wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Unfortunately, most women think that weight training will make them
>>>>>look like men or like female pro-bb's who do use exogenous chemical
>>>>>enhancement. It's a psychological issue which I have tried to battle
>>>>>for years in other women. Sometimes I get tired of it and just keep my
>>>>>mouth shut and walk away.
>>>>
>>>>Once or twice when I hear a newbie tell the tour-guide trainer "I don't
>>>>want to bulk-up," I say, "That's what everyone says. They change their
>>>>tune in about two months when they start really wishing they COULD get
>>>>sexier shoulders or more defined calves."
>>>>
>>>>Do you know that Marilyn Monroe did weight-lifting? (You probably did,
>>>>but most people don't.) It's obvious once you know it, but a lot of
>>>>people have to have it spelled out for you: muscle tone is sexy. Bigger
>>>>muscles give you that toned look. It's a moment of dawning awareness,
>>>>sort of like when you realize that all those movie stars don't REALLY
>>>>have teeth that white naturally.
>>>>
>>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out

I don't know who used the movie star comparison (and I'm too lazy to
figure it out), but it's sort of a speciious comparison. As someone
who works with actors on a regular basis, a lot of them JUST LOOK LIKE
THAT. Sure, the watch what they eat (sometimes) and work out
(sometimes) but a lot of them have one the DNA olympics, and the rest
of the stuff is just fine tuning. But then they get stalked by
paparazzi at their birthday parties, while I can head down the street
for a margarita in relative anonymity. But that's why I'm a writer.
:)

Cheers,
Nina
Yes, I still exist.

delicious! evil! calorie free!
http://www.theslack.com

Dally
December 19th 03, 09:13 PM
Nina wrote:

>>>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>
>
> I don't know who used the movie star comparison (and I'm too lazy to
> figure it out),

And you might have missed my name-change. Wendy = Dally.

> But then they get stalked by
> paparazzi at their birthday parties, while I can head down the street
> for a margarita in relative anonymity. But that's why I'm a writer.
> :)

It's not because some muse makes you do it? I'm so disillusioned!


> Cheers,
> Nina
> Yes, I still exist.

Glad to hear.

Dally

Nina
December 19th 03, 09:50 PM
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:13:24 -0500, Dally > wrote:

>Nina wrote:
>
>>>>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>>
>>
>> I don't know who used the movie star comparison (and I'm too lazy to
>> figure it out),
>
>And you might have missed my name-change. Wendy = Dally.

I must have. I was, erm, off planet at the time.

>
>> But then they get stalked by
>> paparazzi at their birthday parties, while I can head down the street
>> for a margarita in relative anonymity. But that's why I'm a writer.
>> :)
>
>It's not because some muse makes you do it? I'm so disillusioned!

It's really my Desire to Control the Universe that makes me do it.
And the paycheck. But those could both be considered muses, right?

Cheers,
Nina
delicious! evil! calorie free!
http://www.theslack.com

Lee Michaels
December 19th 03, 10:05 PM
"Nina" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:13:24 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>
> >Nina wrote:
> >
> >>>>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
> >>
> >>
> >> I don't know who used the movie star comparison (and I'm too lazy to
> >> figure it out),
> >
> >And you might have missed my name-change. Wendy = Dally.
>
> I must have. I was, erm, off planet at the time.
>
> >
> >> But then they get stalked by
> >> paparazzi at their birthday parties, while I can head down the street
> >> for a margarita in relative anonymity. But that's why I'm a writer.
> >> :)
> >
> >It's not because some muse makes you do it? I'm so disillusioned!
>
> It's really my Desire to Control the Universe that makes me do it.
> And the paycheck. But those could both be considered muses, right?
>

OK Nina, let's see if I get this right.

The reason why you aren't a movie star is cuz you wouldn't be able to
control the universe? Cus that is a kinda behinds the scenes kinda job?

Nina
December 19th 03, 10:45 PM
On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 22:05:30 GMT, "Lee Michaels"
> wrote:

>
>"Nina" > wrote in message
...
>> On Fri, 19 Dec 2003 16:13:24 -0500, Dally > wrote:
>>
>> >Nina wrote:
>> >
>> >>>>>>Dally, who bleaches her teeth since she figured it out
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> I don't know who used the movie star comparison (and I'm too lazy to
>> >> figure it out),
>> >
>> >And you might have missed my name-change. Wendy = Dally.
>>
>> I must have. I was, erm, off planet at the time.
>>
>> >
>> >> But then they get stalked by
>> >> paparazzi at their birthday parties, while I can head down the street
>> >> for a margarita in relative anonymity. But that's why I'm a writer.
>> >> :)
>> >
>> >It's not because some muse makes you do it? I'm so disillusioned!
>>
>> It's really my Desire to Control the Universe that makes me do it.
>> And the paycheck. But those could both be considered muses, right?
>>
>
>OK Nina, let's see if I get this right.
>
>The reason why you aren't a movie star is cuz you wouldn't be able to
>control the universe? Cus that is a kinda behinds the scenes kinda job?

No, the reason I'm not a movie star is that I didn't win the DNA
Olympics. But I placed at regionals.

Cheers,
Nina
delicious! evil! calorie free!
http://www.theslack.com

Elzinator
December 20th 03, 12:53 AM
"Michael and Debbie Russell" <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote in message >...
> "Elzinator" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Thu, 18 Dec 2003 21:44:53 +1100, "Michael and Debbie Russell"
> > <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote:
> > >> >I think you would be fun to go drinking with Elzi.
> > >>
> > >> Um, I try not to drink. I either fall asleep or get very very
> > >> 'punchy.' (not the physical kind)
> > >
> > >Well I didn't mean to drink THAT much.
> >
> > Hey, it doesn't take much.
> > I'm a cheap date.
> >
> Smarter than me AND a cheap date?
> I think I'm in lust

Is that supposed to be romantic?

Adam Fahy
December 20th 03, 05:15 PM
Elzinator wrote:

> "Michael and Debbie Russell" <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote in message >...

>>Smarter than me AND a cheap date?
>>I think I'm in lust
>
> Is that supposed to be romantic?

I am experiencing a series of measurable chemical cascades and physical
responses.


-Adam

Elzinator
December 20th 03, 05:23 PM
On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 17:15:46 GMT, Adam Fahy >
wrote:

>Elzinator wrote:
>
>> "Michael and Debbie Russell" <mickndeb at westserv dot net dot au> wrote in message >...
>
>>>Smarter than me AND a cheap date?
>>>I think I'm in lust
>>
>> Is that supposed to be romantic?
>

Frontal cortex:
>I am experiencing a series of measurable chemical cascades and physical
>responses.
>
>
>-Adam

Limbic system:

Ooooo baby!!!!!



It's not enough to just live. You've got to have something to live for.