Doesn't matter the species. Just post those well muscled ladies.

File: 1d5df24dee39a72f78f7251cd234c7ae.png (350KB, 602x800px) Image search: [Google]

350KB, 602x800px

Man, why do muscle artists always feel the need to A: go overboard with the muscle, and B: stick massive tits on ladies who, by all rights, should have really small tits because of all the exercise?

File: 1465555338685.jpg (308KB, 800x727px) Image search: [Google]

308KB, 800x727px

>>5420411

File: two_close_for_comfort_by_urusaiwrangler-d9svz97.jpg (170KB, 783x1002px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 783x1002px

>>5420411
A: Because art need not be bound by the limitations of reality, and B: because tits are awesome.

>>5420411
There is no such thing as "going overboard" with muscle. There is with eating food. There is with the size of heterosexual cock. But not muscle.

The entire point of muscle is rendering yourself more efficient and effective at protecting yourself from the stuff otherwise to you. Where with other things you have the meta of that thing relative to standard life, with muscle you're just purely protecting yourself. It's not that thing vs. a standard life as eating is- it is that thing vs. everything else, cause "muscle" at the point where it's fetishized is always redundant for one living a standard life.

So, there is no ceiling, cause it's muscle vs. everything, not just muscle vs. a standard life you could lead. If you let a standard life, you would not have enough muscle to be fetishized for your muscle. Any boundary you make in your head for muscle is self-imposed, as, "I like my muscle where it's enough to do [arbitrary task] or lead [arbitrary life]."

>>5420651
This is the most ridiculous excuse for a fetish I've read this month.

>>5420651
There certainly is a limit to muscle.
It's called genetic potential, how much muscle you can maintain without the help of steroids is entirely dependent on your genetics and how much you can eat.
And even with the help of steroids, there is the possibility of the muscles generating enough power to damage tendons, hearth problems that come with having to supply a large amount of blood to massive muscles, the strain that the weight of muscles themselves put on you, the risk of cancer due to cell multiplication, how much torque your bones can support, your cardiovascular health and a lot of other things.
So yes, in real life there is most definitely a point where you go overboard with muscle.

File: 1459445539735.png (1MB, 1200x1112px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1200x1112px

Flat and delicious

File: 31f5bde43f56f5bcda5e96e12c617014.jpg (665KB, 772x1000px) Image search: [Google]

665KB, 772x1000px

>>5420411
People stick massive tits on those ladies for the same reason they stick muscles on them

File: 3f40225c5176370951286253b4b447a8.jpg (102KB, 420x1052px) Image search: [Google]

102KB, 420x1052px

This is probably one of my oldest, simplest and biggest fetishes
And at the same time it's probably one the most unrealistic ones
I wish I could break into tears over this

>>5420606
>>5420613
>>5420613
>>5420620
more?

File: 1461220729524.jpg (2MB, 3125x4000px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3125x4000px

Big Muscles + Big Tits = Ultimate Combination

>>5420537

No offense, but if I met this girl, I would ask her to crush my face

>>5441854
how is that offensive

>>5437136
source?

File: sample_f0831b5b7e58b732e76c8d96ea28f5d3b5bc16a8.jpg (138KB, 850x670px) Image search: [Google]

138KB, 850x670px

>>5420395

>>5420651

Are you retarded? Unless you literal begin to graft human muscle there is a definite limit to how much muscle you can have. Our organs can only care for so much at a time, once you get enough muscles (especially if you're going for super muscular boy builder looks) the body begins to suffer problems that are akin to being heavily obese. Hormone problems, heart priblems, fertility problems, lung problems, etc. There's a reason Olympic athletes don't look like body builders after all...

>>5453725
Are you retarded? The very definition of "overboard" was defined by both parties involved on that conversation as being opinion. If the first guy liked it he wouldn't call it "overboard" while posting an example of a female with relatively small muscle mass. If the second guy meant anything but opinion he wouldn't have used the wording "I like my muscle where..."

>>5457720
>a female with relatively small muscle mass
>relatively

There's your magic word. In real life, she would be considered ripped as fuck. So yes, going "overboard" is very much linked to what happens in reality. In other words, it's not purely defined as an opinion. It's an opinion based on what you can do in real life.

So you can very accurately define going "overboard" as "bending the rules of reality" too much. No doubt some sperglord will fail to see the point here, and claim that if you're already fapping to animal women that's unrealistic, so you might as well go whole hog. So let me pre-empt that right now and say that's a slippery slope argument, and anyone who says that might as well go fap to pictures of blank walls if they really mean it, but they never do.

This is ultimately a difference between preferring a naturally muscular look and an exagerated body builder look. There's not a whole lot to understand beyond that. So making up some bullshit story about how the exagerated bodybuilder look is "realistic" as if that will somehow make the people who prefer the former like it is idiotic, and dodges the point.

>>5458694
Are you fucking retarded??? Holy shit how are you not getting this. You are literally just aggressively and condescendingly arguing an entirely impertinent point????

>why do muscle artists always feel the need to A: go overboard with the muscle

^ This is what started this conversation. This was an anon indirectly expressing through his exemplary image be posted that he dislikes what he was questioning (read: going "overboard" with muscle mass)

>There is no such thing as "going overboard" with muscle.
>...cause "muscle" at the point where it's fetishized...
>If you let a standard life, you would not have enough muscle to be fetishized for your muscle.
>Any boundary you make in your head for muscle is self-imposed, as, "I like my muscle where it's enough to do [arbitrary task] or lead [arbitrary life]."

Do you notice the theme here? Fetish imagery? Fetish rationalization? The entire post you're aggressively arguing against was arguing the notion of going "overboard" with a fetish- the entire conversation was about a fetish. You are perhaps unintentionally exclusively strawmanning by making this about reality when in fact this was only about a fetish.

>>5458940
Jesus Christ, get triggered some more, you sissy. I'm not even going to respond to this crazy mess.

>>5459328
>I am going to spend two posts angrily arguing against myself, angrily insult the dude telling me I'm arguing against myself, then will run away from them and call them more insults when I realize they were right in saying I was angrily arguing against myself

I am so disappointed. At least your ego-stroking self-anger masturbation stops here though...