Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Man this thread just confirmed most of you have never stepped foot in a gym, and have genuinely no idea how natural women look like.
Cyd Gillon?
Jesus Christ dude. You know, it's kind of impolite to ignore acknowledging people's responses (or even thank them) to your last question, including your follow up ones, only to move on to ask about another woman without any lead up. Now, instead of posting your favorite natural women (that you KNOW are natural,) you are throwing random darts in the air hoping one sticks.
And to answer THIS question, no she isn't natural, which you should know because we told you that IFBB pros like Daniella Means aren't natty, and Cyd is also an IFBB pro. It also shows you are clearly ignoring what you don't want to hear.
> > How long have you been a schmoe for? It's clear Ariel is using some form of PEDs. Megsquats is a good example of a girl that's natural and has been lifting for years now
Jeez, honestly it's NOT clear. She's strong and has mass for sure, but a woman with good genetics, great training and nutrition, and lots of years under her belt could get to this picture below without PEDs. It's possible that Ariel could too, but gear helped her get there faster and easier.
This feels weird because usually I'm the one telling people that they're crazy for thinking all of these buff and ripped women are natty. It's odd to be on the other side.
I'm sorry Muscles_Toez, but it's super duper mega clear that Ariel has been juicing. Her body should be evidence enough, but let's analyze it. Her wide shoulders, it's not something that grows like crazy on a girl even when she's training hard. And just look at her chest wow. Also the thickness of her biceps. The thickness of her muscles EVERYWHERE on her body gives another hint of juicing. We could go on.
Let's look back at older pictures of her.
I think she was jucing even by this time, and this
. Her muscles grew fast (what makes muscles grow fast?) and Ariel's face shows similar changes to how Natalia Trukhina's face changed with jucing.
. I mean who in their right mind would say Ariel is natty here:
?
So today she might be maintaining her juiced up muscles in a more subtle way, but to claim that her physique is natty achievable is deceitful, even if you don't mean to be deceiving people by it.
Lastly a high body fat ratio helps in balancing the hormone levels which makes women stay more feminine looking, like Ariel and Melinda.
Okay guys, point taken.
First off, I agree and concede that Ariel is on gear. I first said that she might not be, but probably is. I never took a definitive stand. But yes, I will stay it clearly: she’s on gear and has been for a long time.
Also wow, she actually had a really solid physique back then. I’m honestly impressed, I never realized that she looked like that before. I was only familiar with her present Buff BBW era.
Don’t stress about anyone getting deceived. No girls are gonna read this thread and think that they can look like Ariel with a lot of protein powder. No girls are going to read this thread period.
And you could post up bloodwork reports from her, and there will still be a group of guys on here that believe she is 100% natural.
But we good, you can stop calling me out. Ariel is juicing and proud of it. I said it!
if you think the SEVEN TIME OLYMPIA FIGURE WINNER is natty, and has a better physique than other figure competitors who are juicing, i have a brdige to sell you (it's currently collapsed in baltimore)
she hasn't been natty since MAYBE when she was on survivor
Honestly, with as many dudes who thought Liver King was natty, and who still think Dwayne the Rock Johnson is natty, I’m not surprised Flyerboy and other dudes believe Olympia winners are natty,
Yeh Lauren could be natural. She could just ne unique and have amazingly overdeveloped delts an traps - the places where androgen receptors are most prominent and which blow up on juice..... lol
She used to be so much bigger than she is now.
The silence surrounding PEDs and fillers among female influencers isn't as innocent as it seems. Many influencers profit from promoting supplements, concealing the truth to make money and taking advantage of their female followers' ignorance. They also create unrealistic expectations about their promoted workout routines. Some followers would unfollow upon realizing the role of PEDs in achieving the promoted physique.
Even when disclosed, most influencers try to dismiss PEDs as just a cherry on top of the cake. But in reality, PEDs are more like cherry in a cherry cake.
It is just an observation, not a call for a moral cruzade.
- Then there are those who bring up the pre-PED era musclewomen. They're nice to know about, but irrelevant, because just like someone said, it used to require sacrificing your whole life to it, whereas with PEDs you get to do other things too.
I won't say they're totally irrelevant, because there can some women so obsessed with lifting that they are dedicated to sacrificing their life to it, we just can't know who just by the look of it.
But to say there can't be a woman looking like a 1940s circus athlete in todays world would be wrong, knowing that there are on earth about 4 times more people than back then, and a much larger percentage of women is hitting the gym, so there are far more chances to see genetic outliers in today's world than in the 1940s : again we just can't know who just by the looks of it.
Also remember a natural muscular girl in today's world can look like that,
This is Kortney Olson in 2010, 2 years before her first anavar shot, as she talked about in her recent video.
Bloody hell half of this thread is just full of schmoes who really try to convince themselves girls can look massive naturally lmao
who really try to convince themselves
Actually no. They believe it and are not interested in convincing anyone else. This is like you asked some kid to show his favorite Pokemon and then laughed at him. This is actually the problem. If they were attempting to convince themselves or someone else, they would first study a little and then come prepared with something more than a name and a picture.
On some level I wish I was like them and lived in a world where not everything is an argument. Of course they're wrong and of course this topic will always inevitably turn into an argument. But luckily it's possible to arrive at something resembling truth, at least for those who are interested. Those who are not will live happily ever after believing Alina Popa is natty because she has no beard.
I think we just have to admit that in the end, we really don't know what a natty FBB looks like. PEDs are so prevalent out there, and there are so many types, and taken in varying quantities and varying intervals. So, you can have a girl who looks like as muscular as a male pro bodybuilder, with the square jaw, deep voice, etc., all the way to a girl where we'd wonder if she is/isn't on PED.
To me, it becomes questionable when their biceps start to exceed 14" and still look "muscular" rather than looking "fluffy". At the end of the day, it really doesn't matter. Anyone who becomes actually serious about fitness/bodybuilding will eventually start taking at least some PED even if just to be able to keep up with their love of the gym.
We could also post women from before steroids like Luisita Leers
No steroids in the 1930s 😂.
Doesn't matter. Some of these twats will still insist she's on steroids. I'm not naive, I know most of the women do them --- but I also know that some women can develop surprising muscle without PEDS. And some women can take PEDs and still be relatively scrawny.
Some guys just think PEDs are the only relevant factor here and they aren't.
I'm honestly beyond exhausted with all the moronic PED debate here about who's natural and who isn't. Who gives a fuck. Unless someone is holding the lab results in their hands or it's just someone with ludicrous development like Nataliya Kuznetsova and/or openly admits it --- no one KNOWS definitively. So what's the point in all the arguing about it.
I generally stay out of this mental masturbation because it's a pointless circular argument that leads nowhere. I don't care who's natural and who isn't That decision is up to the women, not me. I don't care who claims to be natty but isn't, because I'm not a gossipy housewife. Seriously, grown men debating this shit and all the drama is just silly and sad honestly.
Doesn't matter.
I think it matters in the sense of making an informed choice to either care or not care. I want to know when I am possibly, probably or most certainly looking at chemically enhanced women and muscles.
Some things are obvious. And if someone denies something obvious then I don't think anyone else need worry. It is a wasted effort to try to know something that simply isn't knowable, like the status of some individual woman. But it's not a wasted effort to become educated on what generally is and what to generally expect.
Then, I would keep "who decides" and "what did she decide" separate.
One interesting thing I learned from this thread is that unnatural leanness for extended periods of time and overgrowth of certain muscles points to PED use. (Delts, said by Gatsby28.) I already remembered that extreme vascularity is one more hint.
The more I learn the more natural I feel. Drama means emotions. So I agree. Let's keep talking while keeping the emotions out of it. I'm also a fan of maintaining a FAQ if there is a recurring tempest in the teapot that always comes to the same conclusion.
Why do we even care who's natural? Shouldn't we just assume they're taking something to help?
And how do we know Alina can't grow a beard? What if she can but never lets us see it?
Why do we even care who's natural?
There is no "we" who should or could together agree to care or not care.
Why some individuals care or don't care has been said in this discussion. Your answer is already there. You only need to go and read it.
The fact that you don't care does not mean that nobody else should either.
Shouldn't we just assume they're taking something to help?
You talk like you were born a minute ago. No, we should not. Everyone can assume, to save trouble, that it is sometimes possible, sometimes probable and in some cases certain. But to simply assume it about everyone would falsely accuse those who actually do not.
I am not saying we should protect their feelings, because I assume the great majority of them will never read these discussions. I am saying it is stupid to falsely accuse someone. I assume you don't want to be stupid, even if it never hurt anyone else.
Some people are clueless. Some people are clueless and happy. Some people are clueless and beyond help or can't be bothered. This is all fine and part of life. But when someone advocates for laziness or cluelessness, then I disagree.
And how do we know Alina can't grow a beard?
We don't. And nobody said we did.
Why do we even care who's natural? Shouldn't we just assume they're taking something to help?
I used to care, but now I just assume they're all using at least something to help. For me it's the idea of seeing the type of muscle mass that's achievable by girls without extra help.
Unfortunately it appears that if there's any amount of muscle definition, you'd never get agreement that she's natty.
I'm actually a big fan of the "if you have to ask, then he/she/them is probably using" rule of thumb. On this site in particular, it's probably fair to say that of the impressive physiques, roughly 95% have been achieved with the help of PEDs at some point. With the ratio being this one-sided, "falsely accusing" anyone isn't really something I'd care about; much like in criminal prosecution, you don't stop handing out guilty verdicts just because 1 out of 500 is in fact innocent. "That person is using" should be the default assumption, and one can take the arguments from there. The idea of "innocent until proven guilty" (natty until proven juicy) has no application in bodybuilding, whose very essence is taking one's body beyond natural limits.
I don't mind being an insecure cunt, not to mention depressing and weird, as long as I get good information. Discussions like this always have five parts.
There are those who naively suggest their favorite IFBB Pro is natty because she lacks the most obvious virilization. Then there are those who jokingly or for the sake of irony do the same. Then they're told to not be silly, and life goes on. I mean, Alina Popa hasn't grown a beard, therefore she's my favorite natty.
Then there are those who bring up the pre-PED era musclewomen. They're nice to know about, but irrelevant, because just like someone said, it used to require sacrificing your whole life to it, whereas with PEDs you get to do other things too.
Then there are those who, ignoring the previous point, suggest their favorite average bodybuilders. The answer being that even though some parts of the muscularity of some of them might be achievable by natural means, in extreme cases, it is highly improbable anyway.
Then are those obviously less muscular whose results are definitely achievable by natural means, for some people, in some cases, but because it's easier to use PEDs, even if just a little, then that's what they probably have done. So no guaranteed natty there either.
The final part and actual conclusion is that the natties are sprinkled randomly here and there. There is no way to definitely tell if someone is. But there are ways to definitely tell when someone is not. So when you look at a random woman, no matter what her level of muscularity, there's say more than 50 % chance she's not natty. To understand this is the point of this discussion.
So in this quest for natties you must first remove everyone with obvious signs of virilization. Then everyone whose definition obviously points to PED usage. Then you're left with a group that has some natties in it, but you have no idea who they are. This is because of the availability and ease of use of PEDs today.
The maybe almost guaranteed natty is a slightly muscular girl who has never been to gym. I have yet to hear of farm girls getting PEDs for manual labor.
Problem is again emotions. Some deeply feel that since they have yet to hear their dearest she-hulk talk like Vin Diesel that she's probably natty. When told no, some begin to deeply feel that this whole fetish is a scam and a disappointment. "Natty? No. Natty? No. Natty? No." Then some begin to strongly object to all this and deeply feel that it's patently unfair and an outrage to believe nobody is natty.
Nobody really said that. If for example one in a hundred is natty then it's totally fair to say so. But it's normal among low IQ netizens to think the Internet is the US as depicted by Hollywood. So every casual claim of guilt or innocence, or even honesty or dishonesty, should be considered not in light of common sense but like in a court of law. So we should declare everyone natty to not commit an injustice against that one in a hundred.
Then finally comes the "this is just a fetish" aspect.
It is obvious that for many the attractiveness of these women, up to the level of Alina Popa, comes from ignoring the role of PEDs. There are many perfectly natural and logical reasons for this. At the most basic level these muscles are like a magic trick. Once you know how the trick is done, it's not as interesting anymore. This has also happened to me.
In the psychological reasons thread I have maintained throughout that there is not just one audience or one type of person interested in female muscle. Those who personally do strength sports or are part of the subculture usually have no illusions about it. At the same time the majority of the user base is here for the illusions.
To say that there's nothing shameful in PEDs misses the point on multiple levels. One is, like already said, that of course it is shameful if one lies about it or does it against the rules of her organization. But as a part of the fantasy or illusion the moral aspect does not matter, so all shaming, preemptive shaming and counter-shaming means nothing.
At its core, at the most pristine level, the fantasy is that these women have "muscular personalities" that have basically fallen from heaven and caused them to have muscular bodies. All talk of genetics, hard work or roids means you're looking at something less. Not something she is but something she does, almost a commodity at its worst.
I was initially also totally oblivious. I came to this from the fantasy angle, so I had no reason to pay any attention to it. The roids were there somewhere, hidden deep in the background. This is like joining a leaderless cult. You're drawn to it by how it appears and what it offers at first sight. Only later you become aware of the reality behind the appearances, the costs, how the sausage is made. It makes a big difference if you then wish to either welcome or deny that understanding.
There will always be those who think everything up to Alina is natty, and those who disagree are just evil and cynical, leveling accusations without any proof. Then there are also those who double down on the commodification aspect. So instead of muscular personalities from heaven they believe in the diametrical opposite, that everything is fake, and the more fake the better.