How big would you get, if you could get that big?

>So you just want to be at the peak of physical performance without compromising either?
Yeah, pretty much. Look at Jon Pall, he was incredibly strong but still had a good level of cardio.

>I find this the most aesthetic because all the proportions are perfect
Considering that increasing the size of the body while retaining proportionality relative to other muscles is possible I'm assuming you're talking about it relative to the actual frame of the person, not just muscle-to-muscle?

Do you find this body type aesthetic, or attractive? Why?

You can stop answering at any time, I won't be offended. I'm just curious.

>Yeah, pretty much
Any particular reason?

B5

>6pl8 squat
>7pl8 deadlift
>1pl8 bench
>no ohp
>what are rear delts
>no tris only bis
>synthol bis
>natty

Reasoning?

WHAT DO THE NUMBERS MEAN, MASON?

Only correct choice.

Breh I dont fucking know..
I just find the chest should be wide like this, but not pop out much more than this, relative to the core.
Other than that the rest of his body just fits.
no homo

>Reasoning?
Because I want to be as muscular as possible without being in total freak territory.
As lean as possible without my hormone balance and other health markers going to shit.

I guess a lot of it depends on how wide your core is, because is aesthetic aswell and probably gets women hornier than what I suggested

Looks like a fuckboi

>I just find the chest should be wide like this, but not pop out much more than this, relative to the core.
So with a wider core you'd be comfortable carrying more muscle, then? Is it mostly just about achieving v-taper?

Anyway, the specifics of exactly how you'd want to look are an aside. I'm mostly interested in why you find that look aesthetic and why you think the aesthetic pursuit is worth it. If you're not lifting to get stronger, what motivates you to lift? Would you continue to lift if you had magic muscles that would never go away even without exercise, maintained eternally at your desired size?

>Because I want to be as muscular as possible
Why? To be strong, to look a certain way, for psychological benefits?

>without being in total freak territory.
Why do you want to avoid this territory? What constitutes freak territory. Is OP a freak? How much bigger/smaller would be necessary?

>how much muscle would you have?
ALL OF IT

...

Honestly it would probably change day to day, outfit to outfit even. Just trying to achieve perfect aesthetic at all times

...

190 lbs 8% bf @ 5'9"

>Why? To be strong, to look a certain way, for psychological benefits?
Because being big is attractive to women and scares away most idiots: I live in a third world shit-hole. Nobody messes with me in my neighborhood because they know I'd take a savage beating to gouge out an eye at least - but a 4-5plt bench can't hurt when everyone is better armed than the police.

>without being in total freak territory.
Total freak territory for me is when even normies who think Arnold is natty start going "oh, he takes roids." Yep, OP pic has the whole HGH-distortion vibe going on. FFMI of maybe 27-28.

What's so important about peak aesthetic? Would you consider it important mostly for internal reasons (self-confidence, sense of worth from strength), or external reasons (respect, sloots)?

Reasoning? Why not bigger? Why not smaller?

Why do you want to be so defined?

>Because being big is attractive to women and scares away most idiots
So it's mostly because you want to get sloots and not get messed with? Would it be fair to say that you want to be big because of the social status it gives you, and that you want to avoid freak territory because you start losing social status there?

Do you feel like you respect other people who are big in the same way that normies do, or is your respect different because you are also big?

How would you feel about carrying a gun?

Honestly I think I'd just like to have a David body (but with a big Dick of course).

I dunno after befriending some bodybuilders I realized they're victims to prejudice. One guy was extremely smart and everyone treated him as if he was just a meathead.

Also you're expected to fight assholes, I don't want to deal with that shit.

Because being at peak physical condition is the main goal of training and fitness. Aesthetics are a bonus

>I dunno after befriending some bodybuilders I realized they're victims to prejudice.
To be fair, most of them are dumb meatheads. If you ever watch interviews with bodybuilders on YouTube you can almost see right through to the back of their cranium when you look in their eyes.

>being at peak physical condition is the main goal of training and fitness
Why do you train, and want to be fit?

Do you just enjoy doing the training, and the peak athleticism and strength is merely a goal to focus the enjoyable activity, or do you hate the training and do it for some other reason?

"Why do you want to be so defined?"

I dunno. No particular reason I guess. I figured if we're talking about hypotheticals, might as well be lean and mean. I don't like being very heavy. I endeavor to be as strong as safely as possible but also to be able to move fast and well. Slightly more of a physical generalist I guess you could say.

>So it's mostly because you want to get sloots and not get messed with?
Not just that, if I actually earned it as opposed to taking roids or this remote scenario then there'd be a tremendous feeling of pride and confidence from being able to put in all the work to get there. If I had the discipline to do that, then I imagine I can do a lot more. Of course natty, a FFMI of 27 is likely out of most peoples reach.

Freak territory is not healthy and not aesthetic, plus it comes with a stigma -yes, I'd like to avoid that.

When I encounter a big guy I like him more if he's a decent guy because I approximately understand him in that respect - sharing a hobby. If he's a dick I think that he only got big because he is a prick who wants to bully others.

In my experience: if you carry a gun around here, sooner or latter you end up using it. I'm not violent at all. The only reason I fight when pushed is because it's a much more peaceful life if you show your teeth once in a while than to constantly avoid conflict and be pushed around 24/7.

Zyzz/Jeff Seid mode

FAWKIN JUICY

Pretty much. But I'd rather have super humanly dense muscles at that size and be able to outperform a fat ass plg.

This probably. I'm not really a fan of either but the physiques are great.

>No particular reason I guess
Do you think it would be fair to say you are being carried on the current of social expectations and popular sentiment?

>I endeavor to be as strong as safely as possible but also to be able to move fast and well.
Is this because it gives you a goal to train towards because you enjoy training, and so it just functions as a way to rationalise training that you already enjoy instead of a goal in-and-of-itself.

Do you think other forms of personal achievement would endow you with the same self-assurance? If, for example, you won a Nobel Prize but were a fat nerd type, would you walk as tall?

>Freak territory is not healthy and not aesthetic
Do you think that serious weight training makes you a healthier person than a more generalised, less stressful training regime would?

looks dyel as fuck

Not even that big to be honest, large enough to be considered pretty strong, injury proof and simple to maintain muscle and still lithe enough to maintain long duration cardiovascular/musclular use.

Any bigger than that and it gets into freak territory. Most normal people would consider him a freak, but I'm too far down the body dysmorphia rabbit hole to see it.

Why I want to be that big is mostly due to compensating for short height and wanting to be better than other people.

fuckin dumbass

Goals.

So you acknowledge that a body like that is still outside social norms, but still want to attain it. Then you say that anything larger than that is too freaky. Do you think that if you actually got that big you would end up wanting to be bigger in a few months or years?

Does being bigger than other people make you feel superior to them?

It sounds like you are very internally motivated. It doesn't matter to you that others see you as a freak because you are able to see yourself as superior to them?

Is there any other activity or state that you think can provide the same feeling of superiority? Why/why not?

I just came here to post goals but this guy is strait psychoanalyzing people.

>I just came here to post goals but this guy is strait psychoanalyzing people.
Yeah, well, that's why I made this thread. Less to psychoanalyse people, but more to understand why people lift weights. I lift for a very different reason and I find it hard to understand the appeal outside of that reason, save for the people who just like improving at things.

>Do you think it would be fair to say you are being carried on the current of social expectations and popular sentiment?

No. 8% was an arbitrary number. It was a hypothetical. Form follows function. Whatever I end up with at the end of the day is fine.

>Is this because it gives you a goal to train towards because you enjoy training, and so it just functions as a way to rationalise training that you already enjoy instead of a goal in-and-of-itself.

No. I enjoy training but I also value the results it yields. I try to apply the minimum effective dose. I only lift twice a week just choosing among a push, pull (vertical and horizontal), squat and hinge and a little rotator cuff work. I try to stretch and walk or jog each day too.

I don't get why you insist on playing psychoanalyst though. The aesthetics shitkids aside, is physical cultivation really something that needs to be justified?

B3 or A3, just want to be aesthetic

>Whatever I end up with at the end of the day is fine.
>I enjoy training but I also value the results it yields.
So you lift to perfect the craft of lifting, then?

What do you think makes it more appealing to you than, say, carpentry?

>I don't get why you insist on playing psychoanalyst though
I am trying to understand why people lift. I'm not trying to make you justify it any more than you want to. If I were trying to make you do that I'd be asking why it's alright for you to consume more food for a narcissistic attempt at gaining social status while people starve, or I'd ask why money is set aside for gyms while people in your community struggle to afford school, etc. etc. etc.

I'm not asking those questions because I don't care whether lifting is morally righteous or Western decadence. I want to know why you do it.

B4

This, but with a more developed core and chest, and no tats. Too bad it's not possible without roiding, because I like my hair.

Any reason in particular?

I just want to be ottermode so i can get grills and not have to maintain too much.

This x1000

Natty limit, with a good layer of fat.

how do i look like that? is it a lot of work?

i want the shoulders, forearms, the abs, the iliac crest, and ab veins

i'm 5'10 130lbs.

>Chabal
overrated meme player, literal shit compared to based Harinordoquy

What other people feel doesn't matter as much to me.

If I actually got to that size there is a good chance I would want to get bigger. I'm not so naive that I believe myself immune to what I see happening to others around that level.

I do feel superior to unhealthy people that complain and do nothing about it. I don't think surpassing another lifter would give me that much satisfaction though. It's mostly about battling my own limits and doing the best with what I've been born with.

In terms of other activities/states I would say overall enjoyment in life, acquiring knowledge, reading, learning languages, painting and a lot of other stuff.

It's all about genetics. At the same definition and lean body mass you could look exactly the same or totally different, depending on your genes.

Finding out is half the fun.

>3 years
>tfw im looking close to this after 3 weeks

enjoy those shitty genetics brah

Well for one, I've never done carpentry.

In a sense, yes - to perfect the craft. I try not to place much value on things external to myself. At the end of the day, I figure that the only things I really own are my mind and body, so I might as well refine them. I believe that doing so is key to a more satisfying life. What interests me is that the specific craft of lifting, however, lends itself to the most general physical adaption of all - strength. Along with mobility and endurance, you have the most general sense of fitness. So for me it lends itself to enjoyment as a craft, but also intrinsic satisfaction.

>Do you think other forms of personal achievement would endow you with the same self-assurance?
Yes, but not in the same way. Looking good is obvious and simple and universal (or nearly so.) I used to think that money and looks aren't nearly as important as intellectual pursuits, but the truth is that that is not the world we live in. Nobody mocks me for liking RPGs or badly translating TS Elliot, if I were scrawny or timid I wouldn't hear the end of it. Being big and rich and all that frees you from societies judgement to a degree. TL;DR For me being big a fundament of confidence and discipline that I build (or at least lean) everything else on.

>Do you think that serious weight training makes you a healthier person than a more generalised, less stressful training regime would?
I also do cardio. But lifting weights and the resulting look is what gives me the motive to eat clean and do all that. I'd probably be healthier with a bit more cardio and a little less lifting, but that is not what I want. My sleeping and eating habits are a lot better since lifting, I also stopped drinking and smoking, psychology and motive go a long way.

Young Jouko Ahola. He looked very badass to me

>It's mostly about battling my own limits and doing the best with what I've been born with
What if you could continue training and get infinitely stronger, but would never gain more size? Would this demotivate you?

Do you think it is fair to say that you enjoy lifting because you can make measurable progress that you can compare to others to quantify exactly how superior you are to them, whereas you cannot do that with, say, poetry? Or would you say the same thing, but you can quantify exactly how much you have improved by? You can enjoy the other activities to an extent, but its harder to get the same satisfaction from self-improvement because self-improvement is less evident?

So would you say that lifting differs from carpentry because a carpenter can only improve his craft and his product (leaving aside that a carpenter improves his skill at carpentry), whereas the lifter can improve his craft and himself?

Or would you say that lifting and carpentry are equally satisfying so long as the person in question views them both as equally intrinsic? If you viewed carpentry as some intrinsic feature of yourself, like fitness, would you derive the same satisfaction and work as hard at it?

So lifting provides a particular kind of confidence, then? Do you think it is accurate to say you require a self-perception of physical superiority to the general population to feel safe and capable, something that nothing else can provide?

I'm not sure I buy the discipline reasoning alone, because there are a billion hobbies that require as much discipline. I think that it's the things I outline in the first paragraph that really motivate you, and the discipline component is like a side benefit?

Is it fair to say that lifting is a requirement for you to be the healthiest person that you specifically can be, even if for the "average" person it's not optimally healthy?

Why not smaller? Or bigger?

The latter question is more interesting to me. I'm confused as to why people get to a certain size and then stop, and their desire to get bigger basically disappears at that size.

Magic button? I would instantly become strongman mode. I don't care about looking pretty, I want to look like a barbarian. I don't want people to look at me and say, "wow, he must work out!" I want people to look at me and say, "holy shit, hide your classical civilizations, some beast from mythology is here to threaten everything we know and love with his world-ending need for protein and mad lust for lifting impossibly heavy objects!"

Your arms are small because you have no delts/pecs/back

If you get lats and delts, you will have arms

200 lbs @ 10% body fat.

But really my only goal is hitting AT LEAST 1/2/2.5/3.5 pl8s for 5x5.

So size is a way to get social status for you?

I would probably just get big enough to fit in my shirts nicely, means slightly fuller chest and fuller upper back. Also maybe more calves. At 6"8' I'm still lanklet mode even with close to 230lbs. Then I'd just continue working out. The strength gains are more important to me, the aesthetic gains are a nice side effect that keeps me going when I'm feeling down.

B4-B5

they would look at you and think "wow, what a fat fuck"

Do you think that your perspective on aesthetics has developed because your height makes it harder for you to be aesthetic, or do you think you had that perspective before lifting and it's why you lift when other lanklet-mode people don't?

If future hypothetical strength gains were possible, but would push you into an appearance like the OP, or some similar huge bodybuilder, would you still pursue those strength gains? If not, what is your "upper limit" per se, and why?

that's literally a regular sized dick if you're not a manlet.

Anyone 6'+ with a dick porportional to david would have 6"

Arnold was a god, that is the biggest i would ever want to get. Arnold's physique was one of the best even today

Not even up for discussion

He's got a nice cock too

Probably Calum von monger at that photoshoot on the beach.

>tfw david mode
feels great

He looks strong and aesthetic, which is what I want. I hate the choice between fuccboi but aesthetic mode, and strong fat but looks big and strong mode.

Not really. I don't think most people would see looking the way I want to look as desirable, so I don't see it as gaining me any positive social status in the way that displays of wealth or physical attractiveness would.

People have always said that I look large or intimidating, but I've never felt that way. I have always felt weak. I want to look and be strong, and I want to be able to feel real pride in accomplishment.

I think. I cannot psychoanalyze myself.

>So would you say that lifting differs from carpentry because a carpenter can only improve his craft and his product (leaving aside that a carpenter improves his skill at carpentry), whereas the lifter can improve his craft and himself?
>Or would you say that lifting and carpentry are equally satisfying so long as the person in question views them both as equally intrinsic? If you viewed carpentry as some intrinsic feature of yourself, like fitness, would you derive the same satisfaction and work as hard at it?

They can both be just as gratifying to different individuals I'm sure. Past that I don't know. I can't find out either because I can't re-calibrate my interests. I guess you could try to answer that by asking how far relativism should go in this case. Is it objectively better to be strong and fit than to not be? Does carpentry or strength training improve your overall capacity to do things to a larger degree?

Calum is probably my ideal physique as well. I'd like to look like him

You'll never even be ottermode, and you'll never impress women. Your insecurity will be plainly obvious and your training will be non-committal and poorly done. It's the same with all of you pathetic pussy-worshiping DYELs, because none of you are in it for yourselves. You're nothing.

You want to look like Callum and Callum wants to look like Arnold and Arnold wanted to look like serge Olivia

>tiny lil dick
>"m-manlet"

My dick is 8 inches and I'm 5'9

>tfw girls tell me its "average"

I don't mean social status as in a linear progression from omega pathetic man looked down on to inspiring charismatic ubermensch.

I meant that looking like that gives you a specific social status; you seem large, intimidating, etcetera.

If this is the case, why not bigger? Would verging into freakish territory detract from the social status, do you think? Or would there be other concerns?

Why do you want to look strong and aesthetic? Also, it seems to me that strength and aestheticism are opposite ends of the spectrum in the way you use them. If a hypothetical you was solely interested in strength, you'd be okay with being bigger, probably. Would a hypothetical you solely interested in aesthetics want to be smaller than that? Would you describe that body as a "compromise" body?

Fair enough, then. Last question: if you lift to perfect the craft of lifting, and you do it to increase your intrinsic value, where is the point where you don't want to be any bigger, and why? Is it just cardiovascular fitness/mobility/athleticism concerns, or are there concerns over being a 'freak' as well?

>Do you think it is accurate to say you require a self-perception of physical superiority to the general population to feel safe and capable, something that nothing else can provide?
I know it sounds dumb, but as I said, I live in a slightly rough part of the world - being scrawny is like having a bulls-eye on your back.

>I'm not sure I buy the discipline reasoning alone
I never said it's only about that. I freely admitted it's also, to a large extent, about image. And there is nothing wrong with that, people drawing conclusions about you by your appearance is natural and logical. Liking to be liked is basic mammalian psychology.

As far as discipline goes: yes, it's a big part of it. Every time I go to the gym at 5am after eating skim milk and oats I prove something to myself. Every time I take an ice-cold shower afterwards I prove something. I need that. It's a much more immediate and shorter feedback-loop than most other pursuits. It's simple and clearly measurable. Plus, for me: no lifting = bad nutrition, bad sleep, cigarettes, alcohol = feeling shitty = getting depressed = withdrawing from the world = failing on all fronts. Playing guitar doesn't give me that, writing doesn't give me that, tinkering with stuff doesn't give me that. That's the way it is for me, if someone thinks that's shallow or insecure I don't really care.

>I know it sounds dumb
It definitely doesn't.

>I freely admitted it's also, to a large extent, about image
Okay, so let's talk about this.

Lifting provides certain benefits to you, which you go over in your post, and it gives you a social position which is also beneficial. Those benefits would probably all still exist even if you took on half again the weight of your ideal body. Presumably you don't want to do that because it's not aesthetic - why do you think that is? Why do you not consider that amount of musculature aesthetic?

Any health concerns over that, too?

>Why do you want to look strong and aesthetic?

I like how it looks. I want the best of both worlds in looking like I bench press busses, but also having muscle definition and veins poking out.

> Also, it seems to me that strength and aestheticism are opposite ends of the spectrum in the way you use them.

Aesthetics to me is low bf and an appreciable amount of muscle mass. As a natty, you can't maintain much muscle mass and muscle fullness at a low BF, hence why people who look aesthetic natty look like fuccbois. If you want to be big and strong looking (fuller muscles and more LBM) then you have to be a higher BF, but that ruins the aesthetic appeal. As a natty they are mutually exclusive from what I have seen.

>If a hypothetical you was solely interested in strength, you'd be okay with being bigger, probably. Would a hypothetical you solely interested in aesthetics want to be smaller than that? Would you describe that body as a "compromise" body?

It's not so much that I would want to be smaller, just that I couldn't look super strong while looking aesthetic and low bf. I don't think I'd want to compromise because I'd end up looking worse than either option IMO. I'll probably go full strong mode in the future, though I'll still be training for mass first, strength second. Like I said, I want to LOOK strong, not necessarily move the most weight ever.

Do you think that these perceptions that you have of how particular body-types look are your own perceptions, or do you think that they reflect the perceptions of general society and not just yourself?

Basically you feel like you have to choose between looking one way or the other, but it's all about choosing between looks and not actual capability? If I could give you a device that would make you look like uber buff strongman with no negative repercussions, but that would only grant you a quarter of uber buff strongman's actual strength, would you use it?

Also, if you do go full strong mode, is there a size that is too big down that path? Seeing as your reasoning seems to be very externally based I assume it's the point where others think it starts to look more freaky than strong?

At my current physique it would be both demotivating and motivating. Getting stronger is a big part of what I enjoy in lifting.

If I was the last person on earth I doubt I would take lifting as seriously. In that way I guess you could say that I am after measureable progress relating to others. If there's no one to compare myself to it would be less interesting. But at the same time I don't need others to know that I am stronger than them to enjoy being stronger.

I would not want to be bigger because at that point you basically look like shit to 99.99%+ of the population, including myself. You can't look (and be) athletic when you're a Mr Olympia ripped mass monster, and everyone is disgusted by the way you look.

Also the diet, drugs, etc to maintain that mass monster status are extremely unhealthy.

>He's a dicklet

>why do you think that is? Why do you not consider that amount of musculature aesthetic?
Proportions; if your chest is projecting forward by more than, say, three (I'm just illustrating) fingers then that just looks cartoonish. If your arm is so wide that it starts looking like a stub then that is not appealing. etc. etc.

>Any health concerns over that, too?
Yes, even if that were possible without roids: maintaining so much mass, even if it's muscle and not fat, is not healthy. Metabolic turnover, cardiovascular load - you're simply rapping your head on the ceiling of what the square-cube law allows for in a human body.

>Fair enough, then. Last question: if you lift to perfect the craft of lifting, and you do it to increase your intrinsic value, where is the point where you don't want to be any bigger, and why? Is it just cardiovascular fitness/mobility/athleticism concerns, or are there concerns over being a 'freak' as well?

I'm not willing to use PEDs, so that's kind of a moot point. The body will only let you accumulate so much muscle mass naturally - not enough to really compromise general fitness either. I originally wrote 190 @ 8% bf because that's around where I estimate peak natural body composition, which is a reflection of peak natural strength and fitness. Although if anything I guess any concerns would be more associated with compromising general fitness rather than others perceptions of me.

>I meant that looking like that gives you a specific social status;

But people already tell me I am large and/or intimidating. And I know it is just a look and not a reality because of my facial genetics, higher weight, and attitude.

>Would verging into freakish territory detract from the social status, do you think?

I guess it's a matter of aesthetics. If you have to look at it through social terms then no, I do not want to look unnatural. I want to look a man of myth and legend, not science fiction.

>op is a tumblr social studies major, trying to write a derisive study about Veeky Forums and toxic masculinity.
mark my words.

So yeah, you're really strongly internally motivated.

What about the inverse - if you could only continue getting stronger by growing to a size most people would consider freaky (but that, hypothetically, has no health repercussions or inconveniences except athletic ones)? Would you do so?

What if it did have health repercussions, was expensive, and inconvenient?

Okay, but does this concern over aesthetics run through all your training at every size, or only kick on once you start verging on freaky?

>Proportions
That all the muscles are out of proportion with the other muscles, or that the entire package is out of proportion with a "regular" human being? If someone maintained perfect proportions between muscles at some obscene size, would it still be ugly?

Health is the big one, obviously. Would it be fair to say that you're only okay with lifting and getting bigger so long as it's a net improvement on your health? (Consider lifting and getting bigger as two separate things).

>But people already tell me I am large and/or intimidating
So it's not about social status, it's about resembling some particular state of human? You want to look like a particular type of person because you want to be associated with them; or simply because you want to imitate them for some reason?