The Female Gaze

[GuiltyCowboy]

Getting fit from playing a sport is OK, but getting fit from going to the gym isn't? Even people who spend a tremendous amount of time playing a sport also work out in the gym.

I wasn’t saying whether it was ‘ok’ or not - who am I to say what women can find attractive or not - I was drawing a distinction between the vanity of obsessive gym-going, on the one hand, where the only goal is to have a certain type of body and, on the other hand, having a naturally athletic physique because that’s just one of the consequences of playing sport/dancing etc.

My understanding has always been that women find vanity an unattractive quality in a man. Generally speaking and all that.

Rugby players don’t go to the gym to get chiseled abs for the camera, despite the calendar opportunities, but to be able to play their sport more effectively because it makes them stronger and fitter. It’s not an activity rooted in vanity.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

I wasn’t saying whether it was ‘ok’ or not - who am I to say what women can find attractive or not - I was drawing a distinction between the vanity of obsessive gym-going, on the one hand, where the only goal is to have a certain type of body and, on the other hand, having a naturally athletic physique because that’s just one of the consequences of playing sport/dancing etc.

My understanding has always been that women find vanity an unattractive quality in a man. Generally speaking and all that.

Rugby players don’t go to the gym to get chiseled abs for the camera, despite the calendar opportunities, but to be able to play their sport more effectively because it makes them stronger and fitter. It’s not an activity rooted in vanity.

I think very few actual weight lifters are rooted in vanity. There is the body builder subset who do things like Mr. Universe where they are being judged strictly on appearance but that's a remarkably small group all things considered. Most guys go to the gym to get fit. It's no more vanity than women in a spin class.

 

[TheRedChamber]

Note to Mary Harrington - if you are socially conditioned to be a narcissist (sorry, self-absorbed...) that still means you are a narcissist.

Flipping it around, there's probably an interesting discussion on the ways men are allowed and not allowed to be 'vane' and how many of those are actually a good thing. Certainly, as the (overly-wordy) article points out, women are encouraged to show themselves off far more than men are, but it also seems like the younger generation have decided that going to the gym is a basis requirement for dating/life in a way it never was when I was growing up.

 

[joy_of_cooking]

Girl muscle can be done in different ways, as can men's. My preference leans to this, though less extreme is good too.

View attachment 2563267

Whoa, those are some scary abs on a woman. I'm sure she's much more carefully nourished than I am, but something in me cannot help but see that as a starvation thing.

 

[Levorotatory]

I'm one of the 35% of men who would have rated the before picture more attractive, and not because of the clothing or the pose or the background. I just don't find excessive muscle definition attractive, and I prefer the rounder before face before to the more angular after face. I have the same opinions for women. Pictures of female bodybuilders make me want eye bleach, and the dancer NotWise posted would look much better to me fully dressed.

I think the collection of well-muscled women needs one more example though: the woman who held the heavyweight world weightlifting records before she got caught using PEDs. I find her quite attractive.

 

[jsmiam]

I think the pictures themselves made the survey invalid.

Before: a normal non weird photo

After: a picture of a guy who comes across as a douchebag due to his tight “weenies in a blanket” shorts and sucked in abdomen pose. The improved physical conditioning isn’t the only factor in the photo. Thre things about the picture (and one thing IN the picture) that instantly draw attention to themselves that would make my wife say “eww, nobody wants to see THAT, why did he wear those shorts, and why still sucking in your gut for that pose? It’s the picture, not the change in conditioning alienating some.

And another thing, “before” wasn’t that bad. He wasn’t in terrible shape to begin with, especially compared to our (45% I think? I forget the actual stat) obesity rate overall in the modern western world. He’s by no means starting from rock bottom. When he (forget the sausage show outfit) became more buff it wasn’t a leap from awful to great (physical conditioning, it was a leap from something in the “normal/ typical/ perhaps even slightly better than today’s average” range to much fitter than average.

But mostly, I think, it was the “lemme show you my weenie via these tight shorts” that triggered negative responses in some.

 

[onehitwanda]

10% is a HUGE amount. Even in sports where testosterone and the accompanying muscle mass isn't a big deal there are sizeable differences. The Men's Marathon record is 2:00:35, the women's is 2:09:56. Her pace was 4:57, which means she would have been 2 miles back when the man crossed the line.
Most women's world records in track and field events are equivalent to the boy's 14 and under US records. IE where puberty hits.

Remember, too, that velocity is proportional to the square of the energy being put in. For a man to be putting down times that are 10% faster, he's doing 21% more work to maintain that speed.

Just digging online, elite open-water male swimmers have speeds that are approximately 7% faster than elite female swimmers, when measured over FINA 10km open water swims.

Just to put that in context, a man would be finished, and the woman would still have 700 metres to swim - 14 lengths of a standard 50m pool. And that is in a sport where women have a natural advantage due to narrower shoulders and thus a better streamline than men!

Even people who spend a tremendous amount of time playing a sport also work out in the gym.

The primary difference is that elite sportsmen/women are following an individually-tailored regimen with a specific goal, often built for them by an entire team of researchers. For someone like Adam Peaty, for example, a two month training regimen might require he spend hours in a gym working on reaction speed, so that he can eke out 0.1% on his Breaststroke recovery, or turn his feet half a degree more during his kick cycle. The Dutch national swimming center in Eindhoven have a 50 metre, one-lane pool that has more sensors in it than the NSA, purely so that they can do kinematic analysis of every millisecond of a swimmer's stroke. Loughborough likely has similar equipment, and both have the weight of a national sports organisation behind it.

Most gym rats might have a personal trainer at best. It's kazoo vs Philharmonia

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Remember, too, that velocity is proportional to the square of the energy being put in. For a man to be putting down times that are 10% faster, he's doing 21% more work to maintain that speed.

Just digging online, elite open-water male swimmers have speeds that are approximately 7% faster than elite female swimmers, when measured over FINA 10km open water swims.

Just to put that in context, a man would be finished, and the woman would still have 700 metres to swim - 14 lengths of a standard 50m pool. And that is in a sport where women have a natural advantage due to narrower shoulders and thus a better streamline than men!



The primary difference is that elite sportsmen/women are following an individually-tailored regimen with a specific goal, often built for them by an entire team of researchers. For someone like Adam Peaty, for example, a two month training regimen might require he spend hours in a gym working on reaction speed, so that he can eke out 0.1% on his Breaststroke recovery, or turn his feet half a degree more during his kick cycle. The Dutch national swimming center in Eindhoven have a 50 metre, one-lane pool that has more sensors in it than the NSA, purely so that they can do kinematic analysis of every millisecond of a swimmer's stroke. Loughborough likely has similar equipment, and both have the weight of a national sports organisation behind it.

Most gym rats might have a personal trainer at best. It's kazoo vs Philharmonia

True, but you are comparing the elite of one area with the rank and file of another.
The average rugby player who is part of an intermural squad or a rec league isn't much different than the average guy weight training.

Similarly the elite body builders who are actually competing for Mr Universe and all have tons of professional help.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Note to Mary Harrington - if you are socially conditioned to be a narcissist (sorry, self-absorbed...) that still means you are a narcissist.

Flipping it around, there's probably an interesting discussion on the ways men are allowed and not allowed to be 'vane' and how many of those are actually a good thing. Certainly, as the (overly-wordy) article points out, women are encouraged to show themselves off far more than men are, but it also seems like the younger generation have decided that going to the gym is a basis requirement for dating/life in a way it never was when I was growing up.

Perhaps the gym wasn't the thing, but every generation seems to have a subset of men who are more interested in appearance than the typical male. Mods, metrosexuals, and so forth.
Given a choice between a guy who wants to spend his time at the gym to look better or one who wants to spend his time reading fashion magazines and shopping...I'll take the gym rat.

 

[LickableWallpaper]

Perhaps the gym wasn't the thing, but every generation seems to have a subset of men who are more interested in appearance than the typical male. Mods, metrosexuals, and so forth.
Given a choice between a guy who wants to spend his time at the gym to look better or one who wants to spend his time reading fashion magazines and shopping...I'll take the gym rat.

Ha Im the opposite. I really appreciate men who take time to dress well and have their own style. Gym goers are fine but Id also prefer the before guy to the after. Definition is nice, but not required and a lot of muscles is not a turn on for me. I guess it just proves women are all different. I think a lot of women associate that whole overly need to be aggressive with muscle-y guys. Also imo, softer guys are more fun to cuddle. And I always appreciate a man who is confident in himself that they do what they enjoy vs what they think is most masculine.

It does piss me off when men proclaim I am lying or other women are lying. Why would we lie? Either we have preferences and we are shallow bitches or we dont /have different preferences and we are lying whores. This whole discussion is just mostly men mad that women have preferences at all. I think a lot of people think women need to give everyone a chance who is interested in her. Which is a terrible idea for both parties involved..

Everyone wants to be attracted to their partner. This isnt shallow. Also everyone has their own set of what attracts them. Also ok. I think also some people confuse having a preference vs. Voicing that preference constantly unasked and or putting down people they are not attracted to.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Man and woman, man and man, woman and woman, if there's no spark, there can never be a fire.

Ha Im the opposite. I really appreciate men who take time to dress well and have their own style. Gym goers are fine but Id also prefer the before guy to the after. Definition is nice, but not required and a lot of muscles is not a turn on for me. I guess it just proves women are all different. I think a lot of women associate that whole overly need to be aggressive with muscle-y guys. Also imo, softer guys are more fun to cuddle. And I always appreciate a man who is confident in himself that they do what they enjoy vs what they think is most masculine.

It does piss me off when men proclaim I am lying or other women are lying. Why would we lie? Either we have preferences and we are shallow bitches or we dont /have different preferences and we are lying whores. This whole discussion is just mostly men mad that women have preferences at all. I think a lot of people think women need to give everyone a chance who is interested in her. Which is a terrible idea for both parties involved..

Everyone wants to be attracted to their partner. This isnt shallow. Also everyone has their own set of what attracts them. Also ok. I think also some people confuse having a preference vs. Voicing that preference constantly unasked and or putting down people they are not attracted to.

 

[Jorunn]

Ha Im the opposite. I really appreciate men who take time to dress well and have their own style.

Unless you are already in a relationship, guys who are looking should follow this advice!

I don’t look for beefcake(?) but a fit guy is an indication that he is active and doing the kind of things many women are interested in.

 

[MillieDynamite]

If one has to hold one's belly in to see one's toes, one might be a bit overweight. If one must hold her tits in to see her toes, one is very popular with many of the boys.

Unless you are already in a relationship, guys who are looking should follow this advice!

I don’t look for beefcake(?) but a fit guy is an indication that he is active and doing the kind of things many women are interested in.

 

[StillStunned]

If one has to hold one's belly in to see one's toes, one might be a bit overweight. If one must hold her tits in to see her toes, one is very popular with many of the boys.

When my wife wants to knows what her toes are doing, she tells me to bend down and look at them.

 

[NotWise]

Whoa, those are some scary abs on a woman. I'm sure she's much more carefully nourished than I am, but something in me cannot help but see that as a starvation thing.

She certainly isn't carrying much body fat, but a dancer functions at a high energy level, so actual starvation is unlikely.

I suspect the photo is taken with a very short exposure and the dancer is in motion. Her muscles are flexed, and that's why she shows such definition. The combination of motion and light at a 90-degree angle to the camera lens can show amazing muscle definition in a dancer in motion.

 

[Jorunn]

Not my image of a swan or fairy or princess. I’m still waiting for a Lumberjill or MMA ballet.

 

[MillieDynamite]

Yummy view, what's the other side like?

She certainly isn't carrying much body fat, but a dancer functions at a high energy level, so actual starvation is unlikely.

I suspect the photo is taken with a very short exposure and the dancer is in motion. Her muscles are flexed, and that's why she shows such definition. The combination of motion and light at a 90-degree angle to the camera lens can show amazing muscle definition in a dancer in motion.

View attachment 2563568

 

[NotWise]

Yummy view, what's the other side like?

That shall remain a mystery.

 

[TheRedChamber]

I think the pictures themselves made the survey invalid.

Before: a normal non weird photo

After: a picture of a guy who comes across as a douchebag...

There's definitely an aspect where people look at these photos for the meta-context behind them - e.g. anyone who is posting a dating app photo with them in a gym is definitely trying to send a specific message to anyone looking at it. I guess the question then becomes if before-guy and after-guy are hanging out somewhere neutral but somewhere that lets them show-off their physiques (e.g. the beach) but behaving exactly the same way (because they are in fact the same person) then which one would more women prefer?

It does piss me off when men proclaim I am lying or other women are lying. Why would we lie? Either we have preferences and we are shallow bitches or we dont /have different preferences and we are lying whores. This whole discussion is just mostly men mad that women have preferences at all. I think a lot of people think women need to give everyone a chance who is interested in her. Which is a terrible idea for both parties involved..

Everyone wants to be attracted to their partner. This isnt shallow. Also everyone has their own set of what attracts them. Also ok. I think also some people confuse having a preference vs. Voicing that preference constantly unasked and or putting down people they are not attracted to.

Internet discourse always favours the most vocal and unpleasant replies to any questions, especially with this kind of viral example where the most unhinged replies are always the ones quoted. Men are always trying to crack the code of what women want and this example traps them in a catch-22. The assumption is that if you really put the effort in at the gym then you will be rewarded with at least some level of extra interest. But most of us struggle to actually put in that level of work. Finding a guy who actually has put in the work and to have women still say 'yuck no' breaks some men's brains because we know we look like before-guy and yet clearly none of us are reaping the levels of attention that this survey seems to suggest. Similary, we know we know we could go out and spend thousands of [unit of currency] on a new wardrobe and still not benefit from it.

...and have their own style...

I was drawing a distinction between the vanity of obsessive gym-going, on the one hand, where the only goal is to have a certain type of body and, on the other hand, having a naturally athletic physique because that’s just one of the consequences of playing sport/dancing etc.

The whole dating game can be summed up by the conversation between Han Solo and Chewbacca in Return of the Jedi.

"Keep you distance...[yawl]...But don't make it look like you're keeping your distance..[yawl?]...I don't know...fly casual."

 

[GuiltyCowboy]

The whole dating game can be summed up by the conversation between Han Solo and Chewbacca in Return of the Jedi.

"Keep you distance...[yawl]...But don't make it look like you're keeping your distance..[yawl?]...I don't know...fly casual."

Yes, make the effort to look good but don’t be vain. A lot of men find that instruction to be holding two contradictory thoughts in their head at the same time. Which it isn’t really. But there’s the rub.

My version of cognitive dissonance on this topic goes like this…

Me catching sight of my body after several weeks of decent exercise: “alright sexy, looking good!”

Me catching sight of a buff man on the street: “what a freak, only a loser spends that much time at the gym”.

Anyway, what’s the quotation by F Scott Fitzgerald about having a first rate intelligence again…?

 

[Kelliezgirl]

There's definitely an aspect where people look at these photos for the meta-context behind them - e.g. anyone who is posting a dating app photo with them in a gym is definitely trying to send a specific message to anyone looking at it. I guess the question then becomes if before-guy and after-guy are hanging out somewhere neutral but somewhere that lets them show-off their physiques (e.g. the beach) but behaving exactly the same way (because they are in fact the same person) then which one would more women prefer?



Internet discourse always favours the most vocal and unpleasant replies to any questions, especially with this kind of viral example where the most unhinged replies are always the ones quoted. Men are always trying to crack the code of what women want and this example traps them in a catch-22. The assumption is that if you really put the effort in at the gym then you will be rewarded with at least some level of extra interest. But most of us struggle to actually put in that level of work. Finding a guy who actually has put in the work and to have women still say 'yuck no' breaks some men's brains because we know we look like before-guy and yet clearly none of us are reaping the levels of attention that this survey seems to suggest. Similary, we know we know we could go out and spend thousands of [unit of currency] on a new wardrobe and still not benefit from it.


The whole dating game can be summed up by the conversation between Han Solo and Chewbacca in Return of the Jedi.

"Keep you distance...[yawl]...But don't make it look like you're keeping your distance..[yawl?]...I don't know...fly casual."

This brings up another interesting male/female divide.
It doesn't seem like men are as likely to concern themselves with the context when they are asked to rate something strictly on appearance.

Years ago in a marketing class we discussed a study where they had taken 100 pictures of men and showed them to a large group of women and said "rate them 1-10 strictly on appearance."

Then they appended some additional information.
Instead of being "Bob" the picture was labeled "Bob the Banker" or "Bob the Janitor".
A new group of women were asked to rate them. the instructions were again to rate them on just their appearance.
When a picture was labeled with a high status job, the score went up, low status jobs the score went down a statistically significant amount.

I suspect if you conducted a similar experiment with men the results wouldn't change. Men can rate on appearance and Suzy the secretary or Suzy the Surgeon wouldn't change that.

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Yes, make the effort to look good but don’t be vain. A lot of men find that instruction to be holding two contradictory thoughts in their head at the same time. Which it isn’t really. But there’s the rub.

My version of cognitive dissonance on this topic goes like this…

Me catching sight of my body after several weeks of decent exercise: “alright sexy, looking good!”

Me catching sight of a buff man on the street: “what a freak, only a loser spends that much time at the gym”.

Anyway, what’s the quotation by F Scott Fitzgerald about having a first rate intelligence again…?

Why does spending time in the gym make someone a freak? How many hobbies does that freakishness extend to?
I suspect there are quite a few people on Lit who spend more time writing anonymous smut they post for free than some of those buff guys spend in the gym.
Which is more freakish?

 

[GuiltyCowboy]

If you spend a vast amount of your spare time in a gym

I was drawing a distinction between the vanity of obsessive gym-going, on the one hand, where the only goal is to have a certain type of body

Previously, I was talking about the extraordinary amount of time you need to spend in the gym to achieve the kind of physique in the ‘after’ picture. Which is why I referred to ‘vast amount of time’ and ‘obsessive gym-going’. It suggests the kind of vanity that is unattractive to most people.

I am not talking about simply ‘spending time in the gym’, as you’ve reduced it.

I don’t think there’s anything freakish about working out in a reasonable way to be fit and healthy.

In my last post, however, I was making fun of myself: I will be more attractive if I have chiseled abs, I think to myself, but anyone else who puts in the effort to get those abs is a freak who works out too much...

But anyway, let me ask you a question: if we can accept that achieving the kind of body in the ‘after’ picture requires a very significant amount of time in the gym - way, way more than exercising to maintain a fit and healthy lifestyle - do you find that pursuit is a) vain and unattractive, b) kind of vain but the result is attractive or c) not vain at all?

 

[Kelliezgirl]

Previously, I was talking about the extraordinary amount of time you need to spend in the gym to achieve the kind of physique in the ‘after’ picture. Which is why I referred to ‘vast amount of time’ and ‘obsessive gym-going’. It suggests the kind of vanity that is unattractive to most people.

I am not talking about simply ‘spending time in the gym’, as you’ve reduced it.

I don’t think there’s anything freakish about working out in a reasonable way to be fit and healthy.

In my last post, however, I was making fun of myself: I will be more attractive if I have chiseled abs, I think to myself, but anyone else who puts in the effort to get those abs is a freak who works out too much...

But anyway, let me ask you a question: if we can accept that achieving the kind of body in the ‘after’ picture requires a very significant amount of time in the gym - way, way more than exercising to maintain a fit and healthy lifestyle - do you find that pursuit is a) vain and unattractive, b) kind of vain but the result is attractive or c) not vain at all?

As always, things like this come down to definitions.
What is a "significant" amount of time?
When does wanting to look good cross the line into "vain"?

I've never considered people who work out and want to look good "vain". Even the people who are going for the hyper muscled physique.
They are hobbyists pursuing a goal.
I'm a runner, and people in my world are frequently pursuing a goal, often doing an incredible amount of training to achieve it.
Qualifying for Boston, trying to break a particular barrier for their PR, whatever it is.

Why assume that people are working for a given physique to impress other people?

 

[HordHolm]

But anyway, let me ask you a question: if we can accept that achieving the kind of body in the ‘after’ picture requires a very significant amount of time in the gym - way, way more than exercising to maintain a fit and healthy lifestyle - do you find that pursuit is a) vain and unattractive, b) kind of vain but the result is attractive or c) not vain at all?

I think you need to also include the possibility that for some people activities can take on an obsessive nature. For example, back in the day I used to play football (soccer) and ride a bike a lot. Someone I knew also enjoyed riding his bike. He also had quite the 'social' lifestyle, and seeing him swaying and giggling with a 'healthy' sized G & T was not unusual. Then one day he decided to get fit and quit the booze. Within a year he had got to the point with his bike riding that he was being invited for trials with a professional team (he was rejected due to age). He had shown no particular ambition for a professional career, instead he simply got obsessive (and was unexpectedly good). I think we need to remember that there are some men who easily take an activity from a pastime to an obsession.