Did the Ancient Greeks and Romans know secrets about fitness that were lost in history...

Greeks had focus on beauty, replacing realistic proportions with aesthetics.

Romans however, were much more realistic, so I guess that most Roman models were jacked to begin with.

>idealism
The representations of the human form in greek sculpture is idealized, in that it represents an augmented human form that would seem most aesthetically appealing, it doesn't represent an achievable form of physique. The diminished sexual organs is there to emphasize the Godliness of the figure, rather than having large or average penis sizes which give off a theme of satyriasis or humaness. Neoplatonists did similar.

They didn't sit in chairs all day. No cars, no office jobs, no junk food, but a prosperous enough civilization that food is rarely scarce.

Obviously they are trying to represent people who are better looking than average, but I doubt that this sort of thing would be that uncommon in a society like that.

They knew a fair amount. Milo of Croton was a wrestler and Olympian who, according to myth, built strength by lifting a calf every day as it grew and then slaughtering and eating it when it was too big to carry. This shows that they understood progressive lifting and the value of a meat based diet for strength.
Roman gladiators were also fed on barley this suggests that they had some idea about sports nutrition even if they didn't have a specific word for Protein.

>115g protein
Kek stay dyel you gladiator summerbitch.

The average height back then was like 5 foot 5, that's plenty.

Those statues were exaggerated ideals.

If you know your anatomy you'll see how, extra muscle groups, wildly disproportionate hands/feet/head, 'ideal' measurements (super fucking beautiful but tiny dicks because large dicks were seen as animalistic, like a negro) that rarely if ever exist in nature.

Fun activity: work out how many hours a day you're sitting or laying down.

Romans I could see being jacked. Let's say you're a gladiator....
How intense would your training and workouts be if your life depended on your strength and athleticism?
With enough dedication this body is totally achievable natty

Small penises were desirable in the roman ages, even if they didn't have small dicks they were sculpted that way.

Their genes were made up from jacked people who actually had to work hard to survive.

>high protein diet
>has no choice other than lifting 7 days a week
>descendants weren't fat, pampered and lazy (for the most part)

The all fucked each other....
When your fighting in battle you tend to fight better if the dude stood next to you is the guy your fucking

The idea that small penises were desirable seems like a myth. Obviously the reason that sculptures have small penises is that the sculptor does not want the sculpture to be erotic or pornographic. Even if homosexuality was not looked down upon like it is now, that would be crass, and that's not the feeling that the artist is trying to invoke.

they photoshopped the statues fool

>Obviously the reason that sculptures have small penises is that the sculptor does not want the sculpture to be erotic or pornographic

How is that obvious?

Nudity as eroticism is a weirdly Anglo viewpoint. You're projecting so hard right now user.

Anyone else think that small dicks are more aesthetic? That is, it's better to be a grower than a shower? Don't get me wrong, I still think 7x6 is the best /erect/ length, but non-erect, I think growers look better.

>Nudity as eroticism
I did not imply that nude = erotic. I said that the sculptor of a nude statue would not want that nude statue to be erotic. Work on your reading comprehension.

Please leave this board..

>all the people ITT who think that statue was exxagerated

LMAO YOU FUCKING LOW TEST BETAS

THAT'S WHAT THE AVERAGE GREEK LOOKED LIKE. WHY? BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T FLOODED WITH XENOESTROGENS, PHYTOESTROGENS, AND PLASTIC.

Statues with huge dicks would be seen as erotic even without the stingma against nudity.

>I said that the sculptor of a nude statue would not want that nude statue to be erotic

Because you assume that a large dick is more erotic than a small one in a statue of a naked dude.

Maybe it is a myth, I'm not a classical scholar, but surely you see your own biases are kicking in here?

t. Dicklet

What's wrong with having a small dick?

small dicks: Because ancient greeks didn't give a shit about whether the size of their dick pleased the women and/or men they were fucking and you shouldn't either.

Oh, and female orgasm is a myth. Prove women "orgasm" feels the same as a mans.

Sorry about your 2in dick

this. its not so much about desirability, but rather just because a massive cock at eye level would be distracting from the rest of the sculpture without really adding anything of value

It's pretty obvious. I mean if they made statues with giant hanging penises, people would be staring at the penises. With the way they sculpted them instead, people take in the whole statue, albeit after laughing at the fact that it has a baby dick.

Gladiators were probably perma bulk strong fat

That's ok. At least I've never had a woman turn down a request for anal.

NIGGA THEY LITERALLY WALKED EVERYWHERE. HAVE YOU EVEN BEEN TO ITALY/GREECE? ITS HILL AFTER HILL AFTER HILL.