[AlexG]

Just an update on the comments for this video – one brave guy (possibly a member here on Amaz0ns) dared to speak up and say that he found Cindy attractive.  So guess what one of the Homo neanderthalis commenters wrote?  Yep, that's right, the only cliched remark that hadn't appeared when I first wrote about this:

"If you find this attractive, you must be gay."

*Headdesk, headdesk*

>:( >:( ::) ::) :'( :'(

(I just can't help but apply a touch of sardonic humor here . . . )

Please, you're insulting Neanderthals  😉  Their females were on the rather robust and very strong side, thus that makes them Pro-Amazon.   ;D

Obviously these commenting creatures of whom you speak, as retrograde reactionaries, have their origins from far further back in the evolutionary process . . .  8)

“I like a good story well told. That is the reason I am sometimes forced to tell them myself.”
~ Mark Twain / Samuel Clemens (1907)

[cpbell0033944]

Alex – you won't believe this, but, having seen a headline in my New Scientist magazine telling us that Neanderthals were a lot closer to us than we think, I originally tried to type in Homo heidelburgensis an earlier species of hominid, but, not being sure whether I'd spelt it correctly, not knowing whether I was the only person here who was nerdy enough to know what Homo heidelburgensis was, and not being able to summon the interest to look it up, I decided to switch to Homo neanderthalis ;D
In all seriousness, what's your take on the "You must be gay" stuff?  Is it as simple as just being that most people think "Muscle = male, weak and frail = female"?

[AlexG]

In all seriousness, what's your take on the "You must be gay" stuff?  Is it as simple as just being that most people think "Muscle = male, weak and frail = female"?

Putting on my Doc Samson psychologist hat . . .

My personal impression has long been that it’s a symptom of sexual insecurity originating from any number of complex reasons.  It could be that they have a difficult time socially interacting with women in general, especially those in positions of power – and adding into the mixture an outward display of physical prowess (strength and/or physique development) only accentuates the inner conflict that they have when dealing with women in the real world. 

It could be that they (believe it or not) are also just as attracted to them as you are, but because of how they were raised and in the current environment that they now live, have conflicted emotions (socially and sexually) about such women.  On one hand they might desire them, on the other they’re afraid of what their family, friends and associates might think if they learned of their interest in the female bodybuilding / fitness sub-culture.

As for their use of a homosexual retort, it’s a means of shielding the insecurity that they have – i.e. to terminate the discussion so that others will be too intimated to express their own (and presumably positive) opinions on the subject of femuscular women.

Finally, in a group setting no one, and men in particular, wants to be laughed at by their friends and/or peers.  Publicly, they might put-down such an outré interest by others, perceiving it as a personal security threat, but in a more private one-on-one discussion, its not uncommon for someone to open up to their attraction to femuscle – to what degree of development that they prefer can vary, of course.

“I like a good story well told. That is the reason I am sometimes forced to tell them myself.”
~ Mark Twain / Samuel Clemens (1907)

[cpbell0033944]

Hmmm. interesting thesis Alex.  I certainly don't yet feel quite ready yet to open-up to my family about this (I still live at home because of disability and other reasons), but, when I'm ready, I almost certainly will.  My background isn't incredibly liberal, but my parents are great and I wouldn't feel that they would ostracise me or anything like that.  I suppose the advantage that I have is that my dad and I share a wacky sense of humour and we both have unusual hobbies and interests, so I think that my recently-discovered femuscular attraction would be thought of in much the same light.
As far as group pressure is concerned, I definitely agree.  Remembering the mentality of many of my friends in our English High School (ages 12-16), had I discovered this at that time, there's NO way I'd have revealed it.  I was the butt of enough jokes as it was.  Had it come to light more recently, while I was at University, I probably would, as the circle of friends I had there were eclectic and open-minded.
Anyway, Merry Christmas.

[Fett]

I think it's dangerous to psychoanalyse people over the internet and then generalise on them.

Saying that they really are attracted to the muscluar woman but can't admit it for whatever reason, due to say, insecurities or fear of embarrassment, is as damaging as the "you must be gay" approach.

I think the answer is far more simple – when it comes to sex, there are two reactions; attraction and revulsion. Each person finds somethings sexually attractive, and others, sexually revolting. It depends not just on the person's own tastes, but what is portrayed in front of him. I had a crush on a girl I knew, finding her very attractive, but I have yet to see a single photograph of her that was even remotely appealing (I'm talking about proper modelling-like photos, not jokey photos of her on the toilet) – she was sexy, in person.

My point is, it's not just the object of the sexual desire that can be attractive or revolting, but the situation the object is in. It's quite possible a lot of people who find muscular women revolting would be attracted to them in person, and those of us who find muscular woman attractive in youtube vids, rather revolting in person.

But some men are turned off by muscles, just like others are turned off by members of the same sex, bondage, or what-have-you. I wouldn't presume to imagine everyone is a closet fbb-lover. I just don't think it's true.

The problem isn't that these people don't find fbbs sexually attractive – it's that they're rude to those who do.

[cpbell0033944]

A late (here in UK at least) on Xmas Day addendum to the "homosexual" jibes and the mentality of Metacafe members – a video of GinaDavis posted by one "Muscle lover" prompted several rude replies about Gina ("It's a man" etc… ::) >:(), including the following:

Homosexual tendencies
Muscle lover must be gay, or else why would he dig chicks that look so manly? I think the name says it all: We know what kind of muscle he loves — the love muscle!

Huh? ???

[Fett]

The 'love muscle' would be the 'penis'.

Anyhow, I'm surprised that they jump right to 'gay'. Surely being bisexual is a more conservative, and thus, more appropriate guess?

[fasola]

Well, I've rerad most of the post at this partivular topic here, and some of the "agressive " ones at metacafe, and camo to this conclussion:

I believe, like Fett, that it's not right to analyse somebody through the net. But sadly, nowdays, the liking or disliking of something goes beyond just personal taste. I think that the peolple that flame us Fbb fans, were raised in a more concervative closeminded enviroment. They were thought that men are stronger and should do the work and sustain the house, and women should stay at home raise the kinds and so on. So, when they see a woman who has decided to "enter" they arena, they see her as manly, masculine etc. and so all the men that are atracted to them are atracted to manly, masculine figures, and so, they tend to believe that everybody who likes them is gay.

Also, the same thing aplies to bisexuality, they can accept the existance of homosexuality (they mostly reject it, but the know it exist) but something that is so "twisted" that can decide, is almost unthinkable.

Many men have acted like this throughout history. How the europeans conquerors saw the natives as primitive and completelñy laking culture, and not thinking of the posibility of a different culture. There are many minds that aren't ready for something different from what they were told. Insted of analysing the posibility of coexistance, the demonize it and they attack it no matter what somebody else might think.

just my two cents,

Fasola

PS: I won't start a discussion on the fact that the penis is not thecnicaly a muscle. (This is for the quote that cpbell posted and not for fett's response)

[cpbell0033944]

Thanks Fett – I was aware of the euphemistic meaning of the phrase "love muscle", even though, as Fasola said, it's very definitely NOT All muscle (although part of it is).  Mind you, there's no bone in it, either, unlike some mammal species which have the os penis.  Anyway, I digress; my point is that I agree that distance psychoanalysis is somewhat pointless, but I never suggested it was.  I agree with Fasola's view, though: it seems to be mainly a cultural thing rather than some base behaviour hard-wired into the genome – if anything, there's an evolutionary advantage to women being strong.  I also agree with you, Fett, that despite someone's personal view, they should not be rude as some of the commenters on Metacafe are.  I'm afraid, though, that closed minds do tend to lash-out against anything they can't understand, and this is its manifestation.  I also see your attraction/revulsion thing, although I would suggest that there is also a middle category; "indifference", perhaps?  I just dream of a day when female muscle is as acceptable as male – if muscular guys are seen as attractive to women, why shouldn't muscular women be attractive to guys?

[cactusjoe]

(…)if muscular guys are seen as attractive to women, why shouldn't muscular women be attractive to guys?

No better conclusion that this sentence

🙂

[Author]

Posts