Image vs. Reality?

[quote]jsbrook wrote:
and how what you’re presented with is really not reality and unrealistic standards.[/quote]

I would go as far as saying that unrealistic standards is our reality.

Meh, ive seen some of the “real women” ad campaigns here in aus. LOL, there is nothing normal or attainable about them. Great genetics, legs that go on forever, great skin, no cellulite despite a bit of fat on their bum, everything holds up… great hair, great makeup…

One standard is not necessarily any better then the other. The standards before mass media were just as unattainable for the average woman.

[quote]Beatnik wrote:
Meh, ive seen some of the “real women” ad campaigns here in aus. LOL, there is nothing normal or attainable about them. Great genetics, legs that go on forever, great skin, no cellulite despite a bit of fat on their bum, everything holds up… great hair, great makeup…

One standard is not necessarily any better then the other. The standards before mass media were just as unattainable for the average woman. [/quote]

You make a good point. Beautiful is beautiful. And some people will never be beautiful. Nevertheless, what is often promoted today as ideal is an airbrushed and photo-shopped 15-year old model. And not even the 15-year old looks like her magazine layout in real life. Putting aside extensive hair and makeup, to which non-professional attention can improve every woman greatly, they had to airbrush her to look like that.

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
jsbrook wrote:
what you’re presented with is really not reality and unrealistic standards.

Exactly.

It’s the unrealistic standards that I reject in our system and that permeates sports as well:

It is not enough to have muscle development, let’s take steroids to blow them out of proportion.

It’s not enough to be an athlete and deliver great performances within our bodies natural cycle of recovery, let’s take performance enhancing drugs to reach the top and stay on top as and when my sports federation calendar demands…

Is it just “ugly and fat” women who are victims of this image enhancement?

And doesn’t a man spend hours at the gym to “make up” his body to look and feel more appealing?

And doesn’t a man degrade another man for not working this muscle or not having developed that muscle?

Just some thoughts…

I’ve always thought that steroids are largely just a cosmetic drug for men.

Sure, for some (read: pro athletes), they are a necessary evil, and for others (read: exercise addicts - like me) they facilitate quicker recovery, thus allowing more quality exercise sessions per week.

Even so, for 99% of steroid users (myself included most definitely, lol), there is a huge narcissistic component to their consumption of gear. Positive mood/lifestyle enhancement/TRT issues notwithstanding :wink:

Bushy

[/quote]

Though, I’ve never personally taken the plunge, I would agree. That rings true to me. Though I do think it’s harder for women-much more pressure to look a certain way and fit a certain mold.

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:

I’ve always thought that steroids are largely just a cosmetic drug for men.

Sure, for some (read: pro athletes), they are a necessary evil, and for others (read: exercise addicts - like me) they facilitate quicker recovery, thus allowing more quality exercise sessions per week.

Even so, for 99% of steroid users (myself included most definitely, lol), there is a huge narcissistic component to their consumption of gear. Positive mood/lifestyle enhancement/TRT issues notwithstanding :wink:

Bushy

[/quote]

If they made steroids for women or just a drug that would stop my periods I would take it.
I’d rather spend three hours training with intensity every day then spend three hours plucking hair, shaving, applying make up and doing my hair everyday.

Is it narcissistic to want to experience sustained power - which your type of steroid use suggests or are you using steroids to attain “a look” of power which comes with steroid abuse?

[quote]Alpha F wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:

I’ve always thought that steroids are largely just a cosmetic drug for men.

Sure, for some (read: pro athletes), they are a necessary evil, and for others (read: exercise addicts - like me) they facilitate quicker recovery, thus allowing more quality exercise sessions per week.

Even so, for 99% of steroid users (myself included most definitely, lol), there is a huge narcissistic component to their consumption of gear. Positive mood/lifestyle enhancement/TRT issues notwithstanding :wink:

Bushy

If they made steroids for women or just a drug that would stop my periods I would take it.
I’d rather spend three hours training with intensity every day then spend three hours plucking hair, shaving, applying make up and doing my hair everyday.

Is it narcissistic to want to experience sustained power - which your type of steroid use suggests or are you using steroids to attain “a look” of power which comes with steroid abuse?

[/quote]

I’m not sure that one goal is more noble than the other. It’s easy to make arguments both ways on that. But certainly, careful and judicious use whatever the motivation is careful and judicious use. I don’t think the same use that is not abuse for athletic purposes could be considered abuse for aesthetic purposes.

[quote]Alpha F wrote:
…If they made steroids for women or just a drug that would stop my periods I would take it. …[/quote]

I could stop your period (at least for 9 months.)

[quote]bushidobadboy wrote:
I’ve always thought that steroids are largely just a cosmetic drug for men.
Bushy
[/quote]

Not just for pro athletes either. Perhaps you are too young to remember the East German 1976 Olympic Women’s Swimming team.

Also gaining popularity in women’s college sports.

[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
Alpha F wrote:
…If they made steroids for women or just a drug that would stop my periods I would take it. …

I could stop your period (at least for 9 months.)[/quote]

big belly laughter

: D

I would indeed be enhanced but the side effects would slow me down considerably!!

[quote]Yo Momma wrote:
bushidobadboy wrote:
I’ve always thought that steroids are largely just a cosmetic drug for men.
Bushy

Not just for pro athletes either. Perhaps you are too young to remember the East German 1976 Olympic Women’s Swimming team.

Also gaining popularity in women’s college sports.

[/quote]

I remember. They looked like a different race of mankind.
I’m not sure if it was the 1976 team or a later one which pressed charges against their coach as they were only told they were taking “vitamins” and later on found themselves unable to have children or other health problems steroid related.

The wife of a german Olympic swimmer also told me her husband who was also given “vitamins” finds himself immune to most antibiotics and has a hard time recovering from anything since he stopped swimming and stopped taking the so called “vitamins”.

All to live up to the image of the unrealistic standards of sustained victory/power.

So maybe, to always be able to deliver peak performance is somewhat akin to always be photoshoped and appear as “your best self”.

Still, I would love to be able to train 6 days a week with no drops on my strength at 100% absolute power - awesome!

[quote]Professor X wrote:
A Dove soap campaign [/quote]

Ahhh Dove soap! I was wondering what it had to do with chocolate.

[quote]Jillybop wrote:
Freaky Styley wrote:
I believe the key point of that ad is that Photoshop is a phenomenal piece of software :).

Actually, I was wondering where they were going with it before the Photoshop use. It was like ‘yeah, women wear makeup…and?’

Don’t forget that most women don’t have access to an entire team of professionally trained hair and makeup people or the time to devote to that much ‘prep’.
[/quote]

I’m sick of excuses!

DB

Universally, all animals have gone and go to certain lengths to make themselves more attractive to the opposite sex (or same sex in the case of homosexuals). The only thing that changes from species to species, time to time, region to region, etc, is the accepted form of beauty.

Is enhancing one’s appearance unnatural as many on here are claiming? I would proffer the idea that the act in itself is purely natural even if the means are not.

DB


But have girls ever had such unrealistic standards to try to live up to? Nobody is actually as pretty as the images they are continually bombarded with, not even the models themselves.

http://demo.fb.se/e/girlpower/retouch/retouch/index.html

(This is a clickable link that shows exactly how the tweaked the image)

And another site I had seen before

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/digital.html

[quote]Jillybop wrote:
But have girls ever had such unrealistic standards to try to live up to? Nobody is actually as pretty as the images they are continually bombarded with, not even the models themselves.

http://demo.fb.se/e/girlpower/retouch/retouch/index.html
[/quote]

In all honesty though, who is buying these magazines? Guys don’t really give a shit whether a girl’s hair is frosted with “Autumn Orange” or “Winter Frost”. Guys don’t give a shit about the specific color of lip gloss…unless they are gay. Even when I was a kid I would have found the pic you just posted too “Barbie-ish”.

You could easily make the claim that GUYS have now eclipsed the girls with the way they act as far as looks because how many dudes log in lately with legit eating disorders who now weigh sub-130lbs? Who do we blame that on?

Some personal responsibility has to be accepted because no one MAKES someone believe that trying to look like a stick figure is the epitome of “HAWT”. It isn’t even realistic. You can’t blame the media because guys AND girls lately want to look like poseable figurines with the matching Malibu convertible and eyeshadow. So me responsibility falls on the parents for allowing these BRATZ to be that damn shallow.

For the record…if you want to see something really scary that could potentially start all of this in young girls?:

Blame the rest on the Hilton Sisters.

I found the Bratz for boys link.

I think this explains where metro got started.
http://www.thebratzboyz.com/news.htm

Any father who would buy this for his son needs to be bullwhipped.

[quote]Jillybop wrote:
And another site I had seen before

http://homepage.mac.com/gapodaca/digital/digital.html
[/quote]

That is unreal! I’m so behind in my Photoshop skills.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
I found the Bratz for boys link.

I think this explains where metro got started.
http://www.thebratzboyz.com/news.htm

Any father who would buy this for his son needs to be bullwhipped.[/quote]

WTF? All I wanted was Legos…