Thread replies: 4
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2
Anonymous
Ectomorph, Mesomorph, Endomorph 2017-06-23 05:14:21 Post No. 41902973
[Report] Image search: [Google]
Ectomorph, Mesomorph, Endomorph 2017-06-23 05:14:21 Post No. 41902973
[Report] Image search: [Google]
File: Bodytypes.jpg (52KB, 680x472px) Image search:
[Google]
52KB, 680x472px
I've had it with the bullshit about hard-gainers and ectomorphs so I wanted to see if this shit is rooted in any kind of science. Turns out it fucking is and it's pretty solid albeit useless for bodybuilding.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somatotype_and_constitutional_psychology
Your somatotype is not supposed to be assessed visually like all these fucking faggots on the internet do. It's a three figure number, each number being between 0-7 and assessing your affinity with one of those three body types.
The way you measure it, is by taking 10 measurements on your body (7 of which you are able to change through either changing bodyfat percentage, weight or lean mass) and that's it.
So to all skellies who don't eat enough calling themselves hard gainers or ectomorphs and all fatasses who can't put down the donuts: STFU
>>
File: Olympic-Squats.jpg (27KB, 300x264px) Image search:
[Google]
27KB, 300x264px
Although male masculinity is associated with health benefits, it is also associated with "negative" personality traits and behaviors. For example, high-testosterone men are less likely to marry, more likely to divorce and have more marital problems than lower testosterone men (Booth & Dabbs, 1993).
Men with higher testosterone are also less likely to feel a need to respond to infant cries than men with lower testosterone (Fleming, Corter, Stallings & Steiner, 2002). Masculine male faces are also ascribed antisocial traits, such as low warmth, low emotionality, dishonesty, low cooperativeness and poor quality as a parent (Boothroyd, Jones, Burt & Perrett, 2007; Perrett et al., 1998). Masculine men are also perceived to have more interest in short-term than in long-term relationships (Kruger, 2006), and masculine men have more short-term, but not long-term, partners than feminine men do (Rhodes, Simmons & Peters, 2005).
Attraction to masculinity is a function of the tradeoffs between the benefits of greater genetic health and the costs of lower investment in relationships and children (Fink & Penton-Voak, 2002; Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Little, Jones, Penton-Voak, Burt & Perrett, 2002).
Factors that affect the relative importance of these costs and benefits affect this tradeoff. For example, the benefits of genetic health for offspring can only be attained when women are able to conceive and preferences for masculine traits are accordingly greater when conception risk is high (for reviews, see Fink & Penton-Voak, 2002; Gangestad & Simpson, 2000; Gangestad & Thornhill, 2008; Jones et al., 2008). Additionally, the paternal investment costs associated with partnering with a masculine man are less important in short-term relationships than in long-term relationships. Accordingly, women prefer more masculine men for short-term than for long-term relationships (Burt et al., 2007; Little et al., 2002; Little, Cohen, Jones & Belsky, 2007)
>>
>>41903086
cont.
Somatypes are bullshit, but your frame, hormonal levels, facial development and behavior are obviously related.
A very masculine man doesnt only look, but also behaves differently than someone with below average T levels.
>>
It's an interesting read from a scientific point of view but from a more down to earth perspective, how does that shit affect my gains in any way?
Thread posts: 4
Thread images: 2
Thread images: 2