Bodybuilding Aims - Realistic / Natural / Unnatural?

[Richard]

I have been thinking about what people aim for in bodybuilding, and a lot of the time people aim to get as big as they can, whilst remaining pretty much in proportion, and with low fat %. However, a lot of the really big bodybuilders have what I consider to be an unnatural body. It is hard to say what a 'natural' body would be, but I think that there is a kind of limit, or a line, where a body seems like it has been altered beyond what is functional for a human.

 

When you look at horses and other large muscular animals, they have very low fat, and big muscles, but they're all pretty much the same within their own specific species / breed - and that's what I'd consider to be natural (for wild animals). But with humans, we're no longer wild, and so we have some very over-weight people, but also we get people who are deliberately trying to design their own look, so you get some really thin people, and some really muscular people and so on. If humans were wild, what would we look like? I imagine it would depend on the climate and our surroundings, but either way I doubt that anybody would end up like the massive bodybuilders that we see.

 

Why is it that people aim for that size? I like to look at pictures of very muscular people, it is interesting to see. However, for myself I want to aim for what I consider to be the optimum in terms of health as well as a personal preference for how I'd want to look.

 

More importantly, I don't think it's a good thing to really promote as the ultimate goal. What seems to happen is that people look at these giant dudes, most of whom have presumably used steroids, and they think that anyone smaller than that isn't a proper bodybuilder, or is somehow lacking. As a spectacle, I think the very big people are entertaining, but as role-models, is it really wise to want to be that big, and to give so much credit to it? People who have reached a more natural optimum level of muscularity and fitness should be recognised more I think. A lot of people on this forum are really fit and in good shape, and I think that's a more important thing than being huge.

 

Anyone know what I'm trying to say? I am not sure if it came out right! I am not saying that people shouldn't aim to be huge if that's what they want. I think that what I mean is that, in the same way that the trend in super-models makes people think that they're not sexy unless they're stick-thin, there are also people who seem to think that huge is the only goal for bodybuilders, and anyone who's not there can't be a real bodybuilder, if you see what I mean?

[Gaia]

I see the big massive bodybuilders of today and applaud them. The playing field of that caliper is like walking on a tightrope between life and death. They have an image to get too, and more importantly maintain, and it is NOT healthy at all. We have seen some that have fallen off the rope to their own death. In my own life's ambitions that is not for me, but I still know from experience all the work that goes into it (even with the steroids and diuretics) and if that is their goal, so be it. It is their life and not mine.

 

I do not think myself a bodybuilder reject though because I am not like them. I do not compare myself to them. They are not my peers. I am my own peer. I do not compare myself to supermodels either (which may be unhealthy too). I am who I am, and I just lift weights and am healthy. The only thing that may influence me is clothes. For my thighs to fit into jeans I wear a size 16, but my waist is a size 8. I think I am going to have to start making my own clothes from now on! (Yeah, like I have the time!). Or wear baggy sweats all the time.

 

What is your definition of promoting the big massive bodybuilders?

[Richard]

Yeah I am not entirely sure. I don't know how it has come about, but I think that it is a common thing in people's heads that bodybuilding = absolutely huge dudes. I think that concept isn't very common here at all though! I mean that in general society, it's considered that if you're a bodybuilder, then that's your aim. As I said, I don't have a problem with people who have it as their aim, that is cool, but I think that somehow people have the wrong idea about bodybuilding on a more general level.

 

People ask me about vegan bodybuilders, and when I show them photos of people from this site, they say "Well they're not very big" and then show me pictures of XYZ massive bodybuilder. That is a dumb mentality, as if to say that bodybuilders of a moderate size are somehow inadequate - rather than the people who are absolutely huge are unnatural and uncommon.

[markc7]

Correct me if I'm wrong. But in a bodybuilding competition, all else being equal, the larger of two competitors will win, right? So in terms of competing it's always better to be bigger (unless it comes at the cost of some other physical attribute). As long as that's the way competitions work, then there's going to be that pressure "from the top" that will trickle down to all levels of the sub-culture. It seems like this is equivalent to saying that triathletes spend too much on their bikes (many of them do spend alot), but as long as the races are being won by the person who goes the fastest that's not going to change.

[Richard]

Bodybuilding doesn't just mean professional bodybuilding competitions. Bodybuidling means lifting weights, trying to alter your body through exercise, that's all.

 

I think the way I see it is like body types on a scale:

 

Unhealthy (starving / obese) -> Surviving (not in great shape) -> Fit / Healthy -> Muscular and fit and healthy -> Really muscular and fit and healthy -> really really muscular

 

Somewhere along there, in my opinion, a line is crossed where it's beyond what the human body is really about, and what is practical. So it is odd that that end of the scale is sort after and praised to the extent that it is. Again, I think it's fine to aim for that, but I think there are more practical and healthy things to aim for, and it's a shame that they aren't given more recognition perhaps. I don't think that being super-sized is the optimum for our species if you see what I mean, it's not what I'd call perfection, it's more like a distortion, going beyond.

[markc7]

Bodybuilding doesn't just mean professional bodybuilding competitions. Bodybuidling means lifting weights, trying to alter your body through exercise, that's all.

 

Right! Like I said there is a mentality that trickles down from the top to anyone who considers themselves a bodybuilder. Even without ever have watched or attended or participated in a bodybuidling competition, it is possible to pick up the preferences and mentality of the people at the top. To stick with the triathlon metaphor beginners sometimes buy, or at least discuss, what the best equipment is, even if they are not yet at the level where they would see a significant performance increase.

 

My point is that, regardless of whether or not someone has any interest in participating in competitions, they can still be influenced by the nature of the sport at the pro level.

[Richard]

Bodybuilding doesn't just mean professional bodybuilding competitions. Bodybuidling means lifting weights, trying to alter your body through exercise, that's all.

 

Right! Like I said there is a mentality that trickles down from the top to anyone who considers themselves a bodybuilder. Even without ever have watched or attended or participated in a bodybuidling competition, it is possible to pick up the preferences and mentality of the people at the top. To stick with the triathlon metaphor beginners sometimes buy, or at least discuss, what the best equipment is, even if they are not yet at the level where they would see a significant performance increase.

 

My point is that, regardless of whether or not someone has any interest in participating in competitions, they can still be influenced by the nature of the sport at the pro level.

 

I think you're kind of missing what I'm trying to say. The aim of professional bodybuilding itself seems peculiar to me. I would have thought that the aim would be to have an optimum body. The size that people get to I would not describe as optimum for humans, and as I've suggested, I doubt many wild humans would have looked like that. Instead, the aim of some bodybuilders seems to be to compete with the other really really massive bodybuilders, to see who can be biggest; nothing to do with what is actually optimum, and I don't think people think about what would be optimum for a human. The physiques of really massive bodybuilders is seen as desirable, just like supermodels' physiques, but I think that both are very extreme - and it is peculiar that people compare themselves to those extremes, rather than a more natural / optimum human body

[Zack]

If humans were wild we'd be lean/slim but with muscle.

[Richard]

If humans were wild we'd be lean/slim but with muscle.

 

Yeah, that's pretty much what I imagine.

[Guest]

I agree. Even the simple desire to be muscular isn't natural. I think we're probably supposed to be lean and thin but fatten up before whatever season is about where food is scarce. Even the size natural bodybuilders get isn't natural...but either is being able to run 26miles or ride a bike as much as I do.

[markc7]

Bodybuilding doesn't just mean professional bodybuilding competitions. Bodybuidling means lifting weights, trying to alter your body through exercise, that's all.

 

Right! Like I said there is a mentality that trickles down from the top to anyone who considers themselves a bodybuilder. Even without ever have watched or attended or participated in a bodybuidling competition, it is possible to pick up the preferences and mentality of the people at the top. To stick with the triathlon metaphor beginners sometimes buy, or at least discuss, what the best equipment is, even if they are not yet at the level where they would see a significant performance increase.

 

My point is that, regardless of whether or not someone has any interest in participating in competitions, they can still be influenced by the nature of the sport at the pro level.

 

I think you're kind of missing what I'm trying to say. The aim of professional bodybuilding itself seems peculiar to me. I would have thought that the aim would be to have an optimum body. The size that people get to I would not describe as optimum for humans, and as I've suggested, I doubt many wild humans would have looked like that. Instead, the aim of some bodybuilders seems to be to compete with the other really really massive bodybuilders, to see who can be biggest; nothing to do with what is actually optimum, and I don't think people think about what would be optimum for a human. The physiques of really massive bodybuilders is seen as desirable, just like supermodels' physiques, but I think that both are very extreme - and it is peculiar that people compare themselves to those extremes, rather than a more natural / optimum human body

 

We're in complete agreement. I get what you're saying and I'm not arguing with your opinion that the really super huge bodybuilders are unnatural or not optimal. I think it would be awesome to have a BB culture that focused less on pure size.

 

If you look at the people who do compare themselves to the super massive bodybuilders, I suspect that you would find very few who are not involved in the BB subculture in some way. If you asked a regular person on the street, they would choose a typical body from Men's Health over one from Muscle and Fitness. It certainly is strange, though, that some of the people who would compare themselves to bodies in M&F are those who bodybuild without any desire or intent to compete, especially when as you say this is not optimal in a physical sense.

[Richard]

If you look at the people who do compare themselves to the super massive bodybuilders, I suspect that you would find very few who are not involved in the BB subculture in some way. If you asked a regular person on the street, they would choose a typical body from Men's Health over one from Muscle and Fitness.

 

Yeah that is probably the case

[seitan_man]

I would *not* want to look like one of those super huge guys that grace the covers of BB magazines, as I don't find that attractive it all and sincerely doubt it is natural or healthy.

[Odidnetne]

A friend in a conversation said recently that humans evolved mainly to be long distance runners, which, if this is true, we're probably supposed to be fairly lean.

[VeganEssentials]

There seems to be a decent following for more "natural" style bodybuilding (typically, guys that are weighing in at 220 or below, not 280+), but the money is where the biggest guys are, so that's what you see the most of. It's a big freakshow - the guy who can come in the largest, most balanced and most cut, typically due to LOTS of performance-enhancing drugs, and look the least "unnatural" (no GH gut, no oversized facial features from GH use, no mis-shapen Synthol arms, etc.) is the one that walks away with the prize. Though, by far most of people who bodybuild who don't see that as being their goal, and they just train to gain a bit naturally and see where it takes them. We have to remember, probably 1% of all people who get into bodybuilding will ever even look remotely close to these people (I'm most likely being quite generous with that 1% figure, and I'm referring to "remotely close" in a sense of being even 2/3 of the size that the pro bodybuilders are), and those are the ones that have decided for their own reasons that it's what they really want for themselves. The other 99% either never want to look like that, or, they find out what it really takes to look that way and decide that either they don't have the ability, genetics, drug money, etc. to follow that path and settle for what they can do naturally.

 

I started out wanting to look like Nasser el Sonbaty, my favorite bodybuilder in the mid 90s, but once I knew more about what it entailed to get like he did, I knew that it wasn't my destiny. Do I think it's wrong to look like that? Not if it is what you really want to pursue, so long as you know the risks and needs to achieve it. I do think that it's not the greatest that all the big muscle mags hide what it really takes to be a pro BB and look like that, but I suppose if people knew you had to basically eat, sleep and breathe bodybuilding, spend up to $60k/year on drugs (for some of the guys who do massive quantities), most likely work a full-time job in addition and expect that you'll never be able to make a living off it it, the allure would be long gone

 

I HOPE to see more natural bodybuilding come into being accepted as being a great way to go and that people don't feel that the "bigger is better" scenario is the only way to go. But, until the people who control the sport decide to promote it, they'll keep giving us the freakshow and that's what you'll see in Flex, MuscleMag and the rest of the publications.

[Guest]

The thing is...even natural bodybuilders that aren't taking anything are aiming for unnatural size. They don't want to be as good looking as they can with the muscle they have...if that was the case they'd just be models. They still want to get as large as they can cleanly...which is still unhealthy.

[VeganEssentials]

The thing is...even natural bodybuilders that aren't taking anything are aiming for unnatural size. They don't want to be as good looking as they can with the muscle they have...if that was the case they'd just be models. They still want to get as large as they can cleanly...which is still unhealthy.

 

But, the differece here is, how many will acheive larger-than-healthy size vs. how many will just settle in at slightly-larger-than-normal size? I'm not talking about competitve bodybuilders only, but a cross-section of those who bodybuild and don't go the drug route. I'm a member at 3 different gyms (and have held memberships at 5 other gyms over the past 10 years), and I can safely say, that perhaps 1 out of every 75 men I see training is large enough to make me think "Damn, he's a big boy!" I'm larger than 98% of the guys I see training, but I'm nowhere near being unhealthily large, so while many guys may have the idea that they want to be massive, really, how many actually acheive it? I think that the average gym rat who is carring 10-30 lbs. of extra muscle on his/her frame over their "natural" size is doing less harm to their bodies than a person carrying that amount of extra fat, which is infinitely more common out there. I've heard more often than not that once people start to see their gains peter off after a couple of years in the gym, reality sets in and they're pleased to be able to add just a few lbs. of mass per year and are no longer expecting to be standing on stage or the next Mr. O. I'm sure there are some who are delusional about what to expect, but I have pretty good faith in people to believe that most will come to realize where they will eventually end up unless they dedicate themselves completely to the goal of getting larger.

 

And, come on, how much crazier and damaging is it to be a bigger guy than someone who runs ultramarathons, competes in MMA and takes frequent shots to the head, or, rides their bike 50km in the middle of winter

[Guest]

Honestly I think nearly everyone can really achieve larger than healthy size. Animals that are smaller within a species tend to live longer plain and simple. Getting larger(say 15lbs more than you would if you never lifted weights) simply taxes all the organs of your body and your heart more than it needs to be taxed. Unfortunately these parts of our body don't really grow much with our muscular growth. Sure most people don't have impressive size but impressive size to one man may be his natural size(I'd say both of us would fall under this category if we never lifted weights...we'd probably still be big...assuming I wasn't trying to shrink). While someone else that looks someone muscular may have too much muscle for his body to handle in the long run. And of course its better to have 20-30lbs of extra muscle than extra fat but its probably much healthier to have extra nothing...HENCE CALLING IT EXTRA.

 

And no I'm not claiming building muscle is less natural than doing extreme endurance event. Its probably even worse for your body to do ultra marathons than lift weight 5 days a week. What I do is definitely not natural and it surely isn't good for me. This much physical stress is the only way you improve but that doesn't mean I'm gaining anything from it in terms of health. I'm just short of 25yrs old...20 or so years away from at least 1 hip replacement...extremely athritic wrists...I suffer from nerve damage in my hands all the way to my finger tips...all from playing sports. I'd be less fit if I didn't but I know for a fact that I'd probably feel better so long as my diet was decent...by the way 50K bike rides are very very short for me and I pretty much only do them to recover

[Zack]

building muscle is natural as far as i'm concerned. To an extent at least. If we were like any other animals, we'd actually have to do physical work everyday to stay alive. I look at weightlifting as compensation for ease of life.

[VeganDude]

When I started working out my goal was just to get a little fitter/more muscular. But after a short time I just really liked working out and I just want to lift more/heavier all the time. So I never thought about getting bigger then most people, thats just how it's evolving.

 

As far as what would be "natural". It depends on what you mean, if you are strict in the meaning of the word everything is "natural".

If you mean "natural" as what is alowed in natural bb competitions, it's different again.

I think most people that don't do sports when talking about "natural" regarding sports think of it as no synthetic products being used to enhance performance. Which is clearly not the case.

 

About what we would look like in the wild, are we in captivation? Or do you guys mean what we looked like xx amount of years ago?

[Richard]

The idea that anything and everything is natural removes any meaning from the word, since then there would be no such thing as unnatural, therefore natural would just mean 'anything'. The way humans live now, with cars, houses, televisions etc, I'd describe that as unnatural. No other animals live like this, we developed to the point where survival isn't so much of a problem. In the wild, you have to compete with others to stay alive, and be able to run from danger etc. Humans don't need to physically fight or struggle to survive, so it isn't necessary for our bodies to be in peak condition, and I think most people are nowhere near. But if you think about how we would have been in the wild, meaning, without the kind of civilization that we have now, we would be doing different physical activities, and also have less access to food in general, and no processed food at all.

[Devils Plaything]

To be honest, I agree with veganpotter's view, that trying to increase your muscles to a certain level can allways be seen as unnatural or unhealthy. Maybe the desire of some people, to get very big is related to the fact, that humans probably evolved from a not very fit (in the darwinian sense), species of apes and that in some people the archaic desire, to be as strong as possible natural competitors (concerning territory, food etc.) is still very present.

 

But I don't really think that the main problem with steroid-abuse (and the abuse of ohter common substances used for sucess in competitve Bodybuilding) is "naturality", since you really can advocate the view, that everything is sort of natural.

I think, that the main problem is the giant gap of health risks between natural- and regular Bodybuling.

And I'm pretty sure, the damage a professional Bodybuilder (or someone trying to get almost as big as one) does to himslef is incomparably bigger than the health risks you accept, when you do natural Bodybuilding.

 

And also, certain problems arise from the fact, that many Bodybuilders aren't honest about their drug-use.

I think a lot of younger people (including me at the age of 17 and 18, or so) out there don't really relaize, that you can never get as big as any professional Bodybuilder without roids and so on.

So these people tend to train wrong, get frustrated, maybe get under a bad influence and might end up using steroids after all - which they never intended in the fisrt place...

 

So if there was more transparency about drug abuse, and more awareness of the risks it arises, maybe the damage could at least be embarked.

 

PS: And I think, that in some way it's also an Issue of personal pride, to stay natural

[VeganDude]

Cool post!

 

PS: And I think, that in some way it's also an Issue of personal pride, to stay natural

Do you consider creatine or other synthetic suplements to be "natural" in that sence?

[Devils Plaything]

Well, as I said, anything can be seen as natural, since we consider it human nature, to modify our surroundings and ourselves...

So as far as naturality goes, concerning Bodybuilding, I stick with the standards of Natural BB associations, especially the german one (gnbf). In their sense, creatine is not "unnatrual" and I also use it once in a while. As well as I supplement with brewers yeast and sometimes even a mineral complex, or zinc pills.

I understand if some people don't think of that as natural anymore, but then you really gotta ask yourself, if it's natural, to eat cooked food, if it's natural to eat food, that was grown in a special way, conserved foods and any sort of processed foods.

I think, that, if by natural you mean "free from human influence", or something similar, there would hardly be anything left to eat.

[Richard]

I'd say that cooked food isn't natural, since you don't see wild animals with an oven but everyone has a different idea of what nature is I guess