Kampframmer
Esq.
+313|5057|Amsterdam
I have the shittiest joints in the history of lifting and the bicep exercise that doesn't hurt for me is preacher curls. The support really helps.
And of course you could always use cables. They are painless for me, but I don't do them because it simply doesn't feel like it's hitting the muscle as well as actual (preacher) curls.

Last edited by Kampframmer (2013-04-17 02:17:55)

Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
Missing workouts at the moment due to adjusting to the new job and having friends visit. Still managed to increase by either weight or rep tonight despite not having worked out since last week. Once I hit a routine and perhaps change to Gold's Gym Sydney, which is a block from my work, I should be doing 3x a week once more.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,813|6321|eXtreme to the maX
Treadmills don't have a downhill setting?
Seems unfair.
Fuck Israel
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
Ho ho ho, so funny.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,813|6321|eXtreme to the maX

Kampframmer wrote:

I have the shittiest joints in the history of lifting and the bicep exercise that doesn't hurt for me is preacher curls. The support really helps.
And of course you could always use cables. They are painless for me, but I don't do them because it simply doesn't feel like it's hitting the muscle as well as actual (preacher) curls.
Lifting fucks up your joints - its one of the reasons I don't do it.
Fuck Israel
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4470

Dilbert_X wrote:

Kampframmer wrote:

I have the shittiest joints in the history of lifting and the bicep exercise that doesn't hurt for me is preacher curls. The support really helps.
And of course you could always use cables. They are painless for me, but I don't do them because it simply doesn't feel like it's hitting the muscle as well as actual (preacher) curls.
Lifting fucks up your joints - its one of the reasons I don't do it.
i posted an awesome quotation yesterday from a french philosopher connecting lifting exercises to the machine-repetitions of the industrial revolution, and a new conception of the human-body-as-machine, etc. it's quite interesting. i'm all for exercise but i do think the extreme gym-going/weight-lifting crowd are basically dead inside.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
Yeah I think bodybuilding in itself is a bit weird. I'm talking those who get massive and enter competitions. Having a certain muscular aesthetic is fine IMO. Taking it to the Jay Cutler level is a bit ridiculous and looks pretty weird.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
https://sphotos-e.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/72173_677045145654873_970294193_n.jpg
DrunkFace
Germans did 911
+427|6896|Disaster Free Zone

Jaekus wrote:

Yeah I think bodybuilding in itself is a bit weird. I'm talking those who get massive and enter competitions. Having a certain muscular aesthetic is fine IMO. Taking it to the Jay Cutler level is a bit ridiculous and looks pretty weird.
I think going to the gym at all is a bit weird and going more then once a week ridiculous.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
If you want to see any results in any pursuit in life you need to do it consistently in a fashion that nets you those results. Like learning guitar, you need to practice every day for a minimum half hour to get any good. Same with the gym, you need to be going 2-3 times a week to get anywhere.
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
https://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/544946_590179761006846_1728750951_n.jpg
Adams_BJ
Russian warship, go fuck yourself
+2,054|6838|Little Bentcock
going to the gym is weird? Ok
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4470
someone born 50 years ago would find it 'weird', yeah. going to a room to do mechanical repetitions with weights for hours at a time? i'm not anti-gym, but the 'cult of the body' and the whole post 'physical sciences' wave of behaviour is very... strange. the whole fitness thing - jogging, weight-lifting, whatever - and the new market in 'fitness supplements' and whatever IS very weird. it's very strange behavior. most people in the 1800's didn't really care much for jogging, or sculpting their abs. in fact, most 'muscle men' were attractions... at freak shows.
Adams_BJ
Russian warship, go fuck yourself
+2,054|6838|Little Bentcock
Well if you are going to compare it to the views of yesteryear sure. Back when doctors brought women to orgasm to cure hysteria, and 9 out of 10 doctors recommended camel smokes.

Or even further where the fatter the woman the more desirable she was. When you think about it in that context just about anything is weird, really. Repetitive motions to increase your strength/physique/self esteem is just another thing, and it happens to be good for you in different ways. And some chicks dig it.
DesertFox-
The very model of a modern major general
+796|6900|United States of America
Think it'd have to be more than 50 years ago, 100 maybe. Reminds me of the old-timey footage of mechanical horses and that glute-massager belt thing, you know the thing I mean.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,813|6321|eXtreme to the maX

Jaekus wrote:

Ho ho ho, so funny.
Whats funny?

Downhill uses completely different muscles.
Fuck Israel
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
Go outside, it's free.

I don't understand why people go to a gym just for the treadmill.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4470

Adams_BJ wrote:

Well if you are going to compare it to the views of yesteryear sure. Back when doctors brought women to orgasm to cure hysteria, and 9 out of 10 doctors recommended camel smokes.

Or even further where the fatter the woman the more desirable she was. When you think about it in that context just about anything is weird, really. Repetitive motions to increase your strength/physique/self esteem is just another thing, and it happens to be good for you in different ways. And some chicks dig it.
that's totally different though. one is mere fashion and preference. a fashion for fat women was just an aesthetic choice. it had nothing to do with any sort of science or pseudo-science about fitness. the cult of physical science is a whole different thing, banded up with actual ideology. don't you think it's a little odd that before the industrial age, we never conceived of machine-like repetitions to 'refine' the body? it's part of a new machinic conception of the self. same with modern fitness dieting: it's a crude input/output analogy. turning the body into a figurative machine, for crunching out processes. i'm not saying that's good or bad, i'm just saying it's a curiously modern thing. not really sure you can compare it to the patchy guess-work of yesteryear's medicine.

i just remembered something i haven't read for like a year. you should check it out.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/p … ion-buildi

At the end of the nineteenth century a fanatical craze for physical fitness swept through Britain. Millions of men and women took up gymnastics, body building and other physical exercises.

Such a thing had never happened before - and it was given a name - Physical Culture.

The craze had an almost religious intensity because those who promoted it said that it was the only way to prevent the British nation - and its Empire - from collapsing. Behind this was a powerful belief that the modern world of the 1890s - the teeming cities with their slums and giant factories - was leading to a "physical degeneracy" in millions of people.

It was a fear that had started with the elite who ran Britain's public schools. Matthew Arnold warned of "the strange disease of modern life" with its "sick hurry" and "divided aims". Out of that came a movement called "Muscular Christianity" which wanted to recreate the kind of heroic human being that existed before industry and the modern world came along and corroded everything.

It was a vision of a restored physical and moral perfection in the young men who were going to run the empire. And it involved doing lots of exercises in new things called Gymnasiums. Then liberal reformers got worried about the working classes - convinced that the slums were leading to a "physical degeneracy" . So they persuaded lots more people to do exercises.

Then a figure rose up who united all of this dramatically into a mass movement. He was called Eugen Sandow.

Sandow came from Prussia, he started as a circus and music-hall performer. But then in the late 1890s he invented something he called "body-building". It caused a sensation throughout Europe and America - and he became a massive celebrity because he was seen as the leader of a crusade of Physical Culture that was going to stop the degeneracy that was plaguing Britain.
the archive videos are fascinating.

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-22 05:40:28)

Shocking
sorry you feel that way
+333|6214|...
I'm a pretty dedicated weightlifter myself but I don't understand the cult of fitness either, I don't see why someone would totally dedicate a very large part of their lives to "fitness" (fitness types are neither fit, athletic or strong as far as I'm concerned). Not competing in any sport, not doing it for work related stuff but for simple vanity. It reminds me of one of glenn pendlay's blog posts:

Prepare to prepare

Juma Ikangaa became a sentimental favorite among fans at the Boston marathon after taking second place 3 years in a row, from 1988 to 1990. In spite of this he is better remembered for the quote “the will to win means nothing without the will to prepare.”

The will to prepare. It has become almost a cliche. How many time have you heard a football coach say that championships are won in August?

The will to work hard in the off season, to put forth great effort when no one is looking, when competition is still far off. Yes, it is necessary to have this in order to be the best you can be. But is it really as special as we have come to view it? Is is really deserving of praise? Is it really what sets the great athletes, the winners, apart from those who fade in the heat of competition?

I say, NO. I say that it is not special at all, nor is it sufficient to make you the best that you can be.

Gold’s gyms all over the country are full of teenage boys doing forced reps and drop sets and super sets and whatever other painful routine Joe Weider told them to do not to go to the Olympics, not to win Nationals, but simply to get their pecs a bit more “defined” in a misguided attempt to get laid. They may be misguided, but a lot of them are working pretty damn hard, and for relatively little reward.

Have you seen an aerobics room at a commercial gym lately? I defy you to find me one that does not have 20 or 30 women engaged in some form of self torture. Hours spent daily on masochistic machines like elliptical’s and treadmills, and for what? Once again, not for a gold medal, but simply to fit into a pair of jeans a couple of sizes smaller. It may be misguided, but the amount of work and misery invested for small reward or even no reward is mind boggling.

And then there is CrossFit. Most CrossFitters are not going to the CrossFit games or appearing in magazines or getting sponsored by supplement companies. They are normal folks, with normal lives, normal jobs, kids, and mortgages. And yet there they are, in “boxes” all over the country, pushing themselves through workouts that end in complete exhaustion. Puking, or collapsing on the floor, and for what? Simply to be more fit.

So is the “will to prepare” really going to set you apart from the pack if you are a competitive athlete? I don’t think so. Not when hundreds of thousands of people are at Golds gym or a CrossFit box “preparing” and working their butts off even though they are NOT competitive athletes, are NOT trying to win Nationals or go to the Olympics. Even though they will never make a dime for their efforts, or be on the cover of a magazine, even though the world will never know their name let alone congratulate them or recognize their efforts.

What then, sets apart the competitive athlete who is indeed willing to do anything, pay any price, for victory? Well, it is nothing so easy as simply getting to the gym and putting in your time year round, in season and out of season, when people are watching and even when no one is watching. It is nothing so glamorous as the superhuman efforts you put in while training. Anyone can do that, and almost everyone does that.

No, it is none of that. It is something much harder. You have to prepare to prepare.

That is the hard part. That is the thing most are unwilling to do. What is preparing to prepare? A part of it is simple. Turning off the TV or computer at 10pm 7 days a week to get regular sleep. Taking the extra effort to prepare healthy food instead of stopping for fast food. Saying no to your friends who want to go to the bar, or to a party.

Then there are some things which are not so simple. What do you have to do to live where the best coach is, where the best teammates are? Does this require sacrifices in your job, and your lifestyle? What job fits best with your training schedule? It probably won’t be the highest paying one, or the one with the best future prospects. You might not be able to afford the nicest car, or the newest cell phone.

Does that seem a little extreme? Consider this. Somewhere out there is a guy working a crappy part time job, chosen because it does not interfere with training. He is talking on a 4 year old cell phone and driving a 10 year old car because earning the money for newer, more expensive things would require working more hours and that would interfere with his training. He is going to bed at 10pm every night, hasn’t been to a bar in several years and he trained on Christmas day, and on his birthday. He is busy preparing his meals ahead of time instead of watching “Two and a half men” or some other asinine TV program.

He is doing everything he can OUTSIDE the training hall, to allow himself to prepare harder and more thoroughly INSIDE the training hall. And he is going to be very, very hard for you to beat unless you do the same.

Last edited by Shocking (2013-04-22 05:49:36)

inane little opines
Jaekus
I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose
+957|5394|Sydney
I enjoy weight lifting and like most things in life when I turn my mind to something as a pursuit I want to do it well and achieve certain goals, however long they take. I don't let it rule my life nor think I'm somehow better than others for making certain life choices.

The thing that gets me is the moral crusade some people go on about fitness, like they're benefiting society for the greater good with some noble self sacrifice, when much of the time it's an egocentric pursuit of vanity with health benefits.
Adams_BJ
Russian warship, go fuck yourself
+2,054|6838|Little Bentcock
I think fat people were more desireable because they had food. which meant they werent peasants.
Dilbert_X
The X stands for
+1,813|6321|eXtreme to the maX

Jaekus wrote:

Go outside, it's free.

I don't understand why people go to a gym just for the treadmill.
I don't understand why people go to the gym for free weights or many of the machines TBH.

Adams_BJ wrote:

I think fat people were more desireable because they had food. which meant they werent peasants.
This.
Fuck Israel
baggs
Member
+732|6419

Dilbert_X wrote:

I don't understand why people go to the gym for free weights or many of the machines TBH.
I didn't understand why they invented acne wash, but then I remembered.

You.
Uzique The Lesser
Banned
+382|4470

Adams_BJ wrote:

I think fat people were more desireable because they had food. which meant they werent peasants.
aesthetically it probably had a lot to do with the fact that from the 1600's onwards there was a huge classicist revival with the renaissance, and most models of feminine beauty from ancient greek/roman antiquity - including the new models and masterpieces being made by the renaissance greats - were of 'curvy' and pretty bodacious babes.

once you see the venus de milo in the flesh you'll always fancy a curvy chick

Last edited by Uzique The Lesser (2013-04-24 15:46:08)

Pochsy
Artifice of Eternity
+702|5758|Toronto

Uzique The Lesser wrote:

Adams_BJ wrote:

I think fat people were more desireable because they had food. which meant they werent peasants.
aesthetically it probably had a lot to do with the fact that from the 1600's onwards there was a huge classicist revival with the renaissance, and most models of feminine beauty from ancient greek/roman antiquity - including the new models and masterpieces being made by the renaissance greats - were of 'curvy' and pretty bodacious babes.

once you see the venus de milo in the flesh you'll always fancy a curvy chick
Nah, Venus Pudica was hotter.
The shape of an eye in front of the ocean, digging for stones and throwing them against its window pane. Take it down dreamer, take it down deep. - Other Families

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2024 Jeff Minard