Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Self-Image

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

That's really untrue... another myth spawned because people who don't do it right fail to get any results and declare it impossible. It's fully possible for an ectomorph to go from 145 scrawny pounds to over 200 pounds of lean muscle in only a couple years of lifting.

That's not what I meant: an ectomorph is still going to look like an ectomorph. A guy with a 5 7/8" wrist is just not going to look like Sophia's brother. The genetics won't allow for it. If you're an ecto-mesomorph who's just never worked out, then maybe. But the muscles will still never become wider then the length of the muscle bellies themselves. This is a physiological hard limit.

That said, if you know any true ectomorphs - 6 foot tall or more with small frame wrist measurements - that went from 145 to over 200 without a lot of that being fat, then do share what methods they used, etc. I'd be interested to hear it.

I agree with the rest of what you said, about tone being a myth and the "never going to get any noticeable results from anything other than weightlifting."

Pilates and yoga are not all that different from tai chi and they undoubtedly work to tone your muscles.

They don't "tone" muscles; they grow them in the same way that bodybuilding does. It's the exact same physiological reaction, so using a different word for it only serves to turn it into an anti-concept.

What they do is work the small, supporting and balancing muscles by applying the body's weight. Just like a chin up or a dip. Same thing. There is no "tone."

Edited by Inspector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what I meant: an ectomorph is still going to look like an ectomorph. A guy with a 5 7/8" wrist is just not going to look like Sophia's brother. The genetics won't allow for it. If you're an ecto-mesomorph who's just never worked out, then maybe. But the muscles will still never become wider then the length of the muscle bellies themselves. This is a physiological hard limit.

That said, if you know any true ectomorphs - 6 foot tall or more with small frame wrist measurements - that went from 145 to over 200 without a lot of that being fat, then do share what methods they used, etc. I'd be interested to hear it.

I agree with the rest of what you said, about tone being a myth and the "never going to get any noticeable results from anything other than weightlifting."

They don't "tone" muscles; they grow them in the same way that bodybuilding does. It's the exact same physiological reaction, so using a different word for it only serves to turn it into an anti-concept.

What they do is work the small, supporting and balancing muscles by applying the body's weight. Just like a chin up or a dip. Same thing. There is no "tone."

I understand the similarity. I don't think it is an anti concept exactly though. It does describe what tenure is looking for in physical outcome. That is, create a strong tight look without bulk. I do agree with you that he would not have to worry about getting too bulky with lifting based on his description of himself.

The important thing about this for tenure, is whether or not he will do it. I suggest that martial arts or pilates are going to be far more effective then lifting if it causes him to actually do it. Lifting is undoubtedly quicker for creating size, but only if you are willing to show up. I never was, so it didn't help me build much mass.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it is an anti concept exactly though. It does describe what tenure is looking for in physical outcome. That is, create a strong tight look without bulk.

It does describe what happens - but only by implying that a different physiological process goes on. ("Bulk" vs "tone.") That's what makes it an anti-concept. Because there is no such distinction. What people call "tone" is only the growth of the smaller, supporting muscles and (usually) the loss of fat around them so you can see them better. You are "bulking" when you "tone." You're just bulking different muscles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It does describe what happens - but only by implying that a different physiological process goes on. ("Bulk" vs "tone.") That's what makes it an anti-concept. Because there is no such distinction. What people call "tone" is only the growth of the smaller, supporting muscles and (usually) the loss of fat around them so you can see them better. You are "bulking" when you "tone." You're just bulking different muscles.

So isn't that enough to differentiate them? If I wanted to bulk up small balancing muscles and everyone knows that means the same thing as "tone" then it would still be ok to say I want to get toned. If a gal came and said,"I want to bulk up," I would think was was ready to get on some roids. If she said, "I want to get toned," I would (now that you've explained it) think, oh, she wants to build up strong balancing muscles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So isn't that enough to differentiate them?

Not really. Building muscle is building muscle. If you want to only build to a certain point or mostly build certain ancillary muscles without hitting the big ones too much, then say that. But "tone" implies that there is a different kind of growth ("toning") that is achieved with high-rep-low-weight (or no weights) which simply is not true.

Simply put, the conventional way of understanding this (as "bulk vs tone") is flatly wrong.

Deal with it like you would people using terms out of Marx like "economic power." Explain what it means and then warn against using the term at all because it injects confusion into a discussion.

Edited by Inspector
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I disagree with your assessment that nothing but weightlifting will give you muscle tone. I weigh 210lbs with not much fat and I have never lifted weights.

Nothing will ever give you "muscle tone" because that concept as people generally understand it does not exist.

Your muscles will slightly inflate with additional water because of increased glycogen storage from the strain put on them by martial arts, and thereby grow a tiny bit. You will not -EVER- gain any additional muscle from anything other than lifting weights.

Your entire conception of how muscles work is wrong.

That's not what I meant: an ectomorph is still going to look like an ectomorph. A guy with a 5 7/8" wrist is just not going to look like Sophia's brother. The genetics won't allow for it. If you're an ecto-mesomorph who's just never worked out, then maybe. But the muscles will still never become wider then the length of the muscle bellies themselves. This is a physiological hard limit.

Who said there is any need to change your body type? Haven't you ever seen an extremely muscle-bound ectomorph?

That said, if you know any true ectomorphs - 6 foot tall or more with small frame wrist measurements - that went from 145 to over 200 without a lot of that being fat, then do share what methods they used, etc. I'd be interested to hear it.

First of all, you absolutely don't need to be "6 foot tall or more" to be an ectomorph.

www.johnstonefitness.com is one example of an ectomorph, and this guy isn't even that hardcore. If he can do it, anyone can. His kinds of results, and better, are very common all throughout natural bodybuilding forums if you search for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Who said there is any need to change your body type? Haven't you ever seen an extremely muscle-bound ectomorph?

Not too many. But they don't look a thing like a muscle-bound mesomorph; I can tell you that. That's my point - the "muscle bound" that people don't want to be is the kind of person that's on the cover of the supplement - I mean bodybuilding magazines these days. Those are mesomorph steroid users. And if you're not a mesomorph and not a steroid user, then it is impossible to look like that so there is no need to fear such an outcome. That's what I was getting at.

First of all, you absolutely don't need to be "6 foot tall or more" to be an ectomorph.

No, absolutely you don't have to be. My point was to illustrate how skinny some folks can be. A weight doesn't tell the story without a height. 145lbs is one thing - 145lbs at 6 foot is quite another. When I started out, I was less than 145 lbs at six foot.

www.johnstonefitness.com is one example of an ectomorph, and this guy isn't even that hardcore. If he can do it, anyone can. His kinds of results, and better, are very common all throughout natural bodybuilding forums if you search for it.

Impressive. Does he list his height and wrist measurements (or other before-after measurements) anywhere so I can get an idea of the scale?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nothing will ever give you "muscle tone" because that concept as people generally understand it does not exist.

Your muscles will slightly inflate with additional water because of increased glycogen storage from the strain put on them by martial arts, and thereby grow a tiny bit. You will not -EVER- gain any additional muscle from anything other than lifting weights.

Your entire conception of how muscles work is wrong.

Actually, now that I think about it, both our conceptions are wrong. The truth is that the magic muscle fairy put 60lbs of muscle on my frame without my lifting weights. I just woke up one morning and there it was.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually, now that I think about it, both our conceptions are wrong. The truth is that the magic muscle fairy put 60lbs of muscle on my frame without my lifting weights. I just woke up one morning and there it was.

That's called natural growth due to age, water weight, and probably fat as well if it was that much weight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
No...your wrong...It's definitely the muscle fairy.

Well, you're right in a way.

Blessed and Accursed--Some Have It, Some Don't--Posted 8/20/07

Not often - (but enough to be remarkable) - while I am explaining the role of genetics in bodybuilding at a seminar or to a phone consultation client, someone complains, refusing to accept the fact that the extent to which muscles can be developed is strictly, inherently limited. And, while most bodybuilders today are at least aware of the issue of genetics, very few know precisely how crucial a role it plays, or much about specific, phenotypic (i.e. genetic materials' physical) expressions.

As a youth, walking the main streets of my small hometown of Ephrata, Pennsylvania, I would regularly see non-trained women who exhibited ordinary muscular development otherwise, yet had calves on par with those of an advanced bodybuilder. Not much later, while in Air Force boot camp, I encountered two different individuals on separate occasions with muscular physiques. Upon asking each how he trained, both responded in essentially the same fashion, "Everyone thinks (I) am a bodybuilder; but I've never worked out in my life."

Mike Mentzer

Just because you have gained muscle - especially when young - does not mean that you are practicing effective or even remotely useful training techniques. That is, effective for anyone who doesn't share your genetic proclivity to put on muscle or effective when compared to weight lifting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...