Lean athletic physique vs hypertrophic (roided) physique: biological and evolutionary basis of preference

william2605

william2605

Luminary
Joined
Mar 16, 2023
Posts
7,668
Reputation
5,703
IMG 0077
IMG 0079

On this forum, it’s often argued that the ideal physique is lean and athletic (low body fat, efficient proportions), while an extremely hypertrophied body is seen as less “optimal.”





I’m looking for a technical and objective explanation:


why, from a biological and evolutionary standpoint, does the human body seem to be optimized for a lean athletic physique rather than an extremely large one?
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Mainlander and Centurion_Hunter
View attachment 4967305View attachment 4967306
On this forum, it’s often argued that the ideal physique is lean and athletic (low body fat, efficient proportions), while an extremely hypertrophied body is seen as less “optimal.”





I’m looking for a technical and objective explanation:


why, from a biological and evolutionary standpoint, does the human body seem to be optimized for a lean athletic physique rather than an extremely large one?
Because humans are mainly long endurance runners and lived mostly in open terrain so its not advantageous to tire quick
 
  • +1
Reactions: coastal, oskar2302, inceliusndius and 2 others
Because humans are mainly long endurance runners and lived mostly in open terrain so its not advantageous to tire quick
Alright, but if I ask you to rate a physique from 1 to 10 objectively, what would you answer?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Centurion_Hunter
View attachment 4967305View attachment 4967306
On this forum, it’s often argued that the ideal physique is lean and athletic (low body fat, efficient proportions), while an extremely hypertrophied body is seen as less “optimal.”





I’m looking for a technical and objective explanation:


why, from a biological and evolutionary standpoint, does the human body seem to be optimized for a lean athletic physique rather than an extremely large one?
Even more forested peoples like west Africans Europeans and Asians still need a certain degree of a slim physoque because most preys that small human groups hunt is preet small
Humans also have endurance over most ungulates so heres that
 
  • +1
Reactions: william2605
Alright, but if I ask you to rate a physique from 1 to 10 objectively, what would you answer?
The top guys looks better than the roiders
 
  • +1
Reactions: greycelldude and william2605
The top guys looks better than the roiders
For bodybuilders, being like the guy on the left is considered a 6.
But objectively, what does it have that’s superior compared to a huge physique?
 
  • +1
Reactions: Centurion_Hunter
N
View attachment 4967305View attachment 4967306
On this forum, it’s often argued that the ideal physique is lean and athletic (low body fat, efficient proportions), while an extremely hypertrophied body is seen as less “optimal.”





I’m looking for a technical and objective explanation:


why, from a biological and evolutionary standpoint, does the human body seem to be optimized for a lean athletic physique rather than an extremely large one?
Not everything has to make sense from an evolutionary standpoint… it’s just more aesthetically pleasing lmao
 
N

Not everything has to make sense from an evolutionary standpoint… it’s just more aesthetically pleasing lmao
Are you kidding? If something is inherently attractive to the human mind, it’s because it’s rooted in an evolutionary criterion—like the face, for example.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Centurion_Hunter
The ideal male physique is something like Yoel Romero
 
  • +1
Reactions: yyk117
For bodybuilders, being like the guy on the left is considered a 6.
But objectively, what does it have that’s superior compared to a huge physique?
Aerodynamics and endurance
Bodybuilders would just gas out while a leaner physique still allowd you to chase prey
Humans cant simply compete with carnivorans in strenght so the humans advantages(endurance and agility) were selected for
 
You're never getting the physique on the right no matter how many grams you pin.
 
Are you kidding? If something is inherently attractive to the human mind, it’s because it’s rooted in an evolutionary criterion—like the face, for example.
Lmao according to who ? Avoid the naturalistic fallacy
 
Are you kidding? If something is inherently attractive to the human mind, it’s because it’s rooted in an evolutionary criterion—like the face, for example.
Hes right
For example the chin isnt advantageous
But the human physique is certainly selecrwd for both sexually and unsexually
 
  • +1
Reactions: william2605
Yeah hence why it's good for sports but it's not what gets the ladies going
I guess

But for most of human history what got the ladies going wasn’t really how good you looked but how scary, dangerous, how many resources you had etc
 
Aerodynamics and endurance
Bodybuilders would just gas out while a leaner physique still allowd you to chase prey
Humans cant simply compete with carnivorans in strenght so the humans advantages(endurance and agility) were selected for
And aesthetically?
 

Similar threads

william2605
Replies
14
Views
72
whyw
whyw
Tyler1
Replies
1
Views
27
underwearremover
underwearremover
IwillRope2024
Replies
11
Views
56
dragomog
dragomog
zeronai
Replies
15
Views
140
zeronai
zeronai
davidlaidisme67
Replies
6
Views
63
savage21
savage21

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top