reducing leg muscle...? I want skinny legs :(

Options
12467

Replies

  • ouandi
    ouandi Posts: 135 Member
    Options
    My husband has this problem and only one thing has worked for him. Running and NO lower body workouts. He only runs and lifts heavy, heavy on upper body. I wish I had a before and after but it's dramatic. He does have a very low body fat percentage as well to get most of the fat off his legs.
  • recoiljpr
    recoiljpr Posts: 292
    Options
    I'm not a lady, so what I say may have 0 impact for you, or help you out, but it has been helping me a lot....

    The best way to describe my build is I am built like a tree trunk. My weight is distributed from calves all the way up to my shoulders. But, the past few months I have been really changing up my exercise routines. (and laugh all you want) But I have been doing a ton of step aerobics (HIIT style) lately. In the past 2 months I have lost almost 2 inches off of my thighs and that seems to be doing a lot of shaping on my thighs. I didn't go into the steps looking to shape my legs (I was quite happy with them) but as a byproduct they are currently outpacing the rest of my body.

    Just my 2 cents...
  • DopeItUp
    DopeItUp Posts: 18,771 Member
    Options
    Roll around in a wheelchair all day so that your leg muscles atrophy away.
  • Merithyn
    Merithyn Posts: 284 Member
    Options
    It's impossible for you to get bulky. You're a woman, and therefore you could not possibly have enough testosterone to build that much muscle. You're just wrong. You can't possibly know what you're talking about regarding your own body, since what you say is true doesn't fit my world view.

    /sarcasm
  • chuisle
    chuisle Posts: 1,052 Member
    Options
    It's impossible for you to get bulky. You're a woman, and therefore you could not possibly have enough testosterone to build that much muscle. You're just wrong. You can't possibly know what you're talking about regarding your own body, since what you say is true doesn't fit my world view.

    /sarcasm

    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???
  • WandRsmom
    WandRsmom Posts: 253 Member
    Options
    What's with all the leg hating on MFP?

    I understand about the tall boots - I have always had that problem, even when I was in high school and weighed 140lbs!

    But since then, I've learned that my legs are fabulous! They are muscular, strong, and can take me anywhere I want to go. I can run for miles, take back to back spin classes, stand, walk, lift, etc. And I look damn good in heels and skirt.

    Maybe you just need to start lifting some heavy weights to get some definition?

    And, why are we ashamed to ask a store clerk for something that fits? That's what they are there for! And they make boots out of stretchy material too :)

    Ladies - embrace your legs, train the heck out of them, and enjoy the results!! :drinker:


    I am with this %100. I donno if i should be embarrassed by my profile pic now or what lol. My thighs measure 1inch larger than my calves ( 19.5inch calves,20.5inch thighs) and I was feeling pretty proud of how they look until i read this . .....:ohwell:

    I may not fit into knee high boots but I can rock a mini skirt like no body's business:happy: edited to correct my measurements.
  • Merithyn
    Merithyn Posts: 284 Member
    Options
    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    Isn't it, though? She's saying her legs are too muscular, ie bulky. Which, as I've been told repeatedly on this site, is impossible for women to get. So, obviously, she's wrong. :smile:
  • chuisle
    chuisle Posts: 1,052 Member
    Options
    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    Isn't it, though? She's saying her legs are too muscular, ie bulky. Which, as I've been told repeatedly on this site, is impossible for women to get. So, obviously, she's wrong. :smile:

    It's my understanding the OP wants *smaller* legs and thus wanted to lose muscle mass. She *feels* her legs are too large for what she would like. To my knowledge no one has said it's impossible for that happen. The argument you're referencing is the one over whether or not women can easily gain muscle mass and get 'bulky'. Here I think we are talking about someone who feels she already has a lot of muscle mass. An important distinction.

    Regardless, for women who feels their legs are too big or bulky or muscular I challenge you lower your body fat to a relatively low level and then decide whether or not there's too much muscle there. I would put a lot of money on, 95 times out of 100, losing fat will solve the 'big' legs problem. Muscle isn't making you fat. Fat is making you fat.
  • dfborders
    dfborders Posts: 474 Member
    Options
    I hear ya - I am the "Thunder Thigh Queen" - even when I lose weight I still have thunder thighs compared to the rest of my body:grumble:
  • JesterMFP
    JesterMFP Posts: 3,596 Member
    Options
    Keep the diet clean and balanced and build up to lots of long slow distance running and stretch a lot to lengthen those muscles.

    Do not expect fast results, give it a year.

    You can't make your muscles longer by stretching them.
  • LorinaLynn
    LorinaLynn Posts: 13,248 Member
    Options
    YES! Exactly! I have to wear pants that do NOT fit my waist so my thighs and calves can all fit in!

    Or change your perspective from "Boo! I have huge legs!" to "Yay! I have a tiny waist!"

    I used to have really thin legs, when I was a really skinny person.

    I have significantly meatier legs now, and I love it. :smile: Those skinny little legs got pooped going for a walk. Now I can run trails and hills that a sane person would hike.

    And honestly? I think my new thicker legs look way better than before. http://www.myfitnesspal.com/topics/show/551109-that-was-then-this-is-now-14-years-later-with-pics
  • TXHunny84
    TXHunny84 Posts: 503 Member
    Options
    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    Isn't it, though? She's saying her legs are too muscular, ie bulky. Which, as I've been told repeatedly on this site, is impossible for women to get. So, obviously, she's wrong. :smile:

    It's my understanding the OP wants *smaller* legs and thus wanted to lose muscle mass. She *feels* her legs are too large for what she would like. To my knowledge no one has said it's impossible for that happen. The argument you're referencing is the one over whether or not women can easily gain muscle mass and get 'bulky'. Here I think we are talking about someone who feels she already has a lot of muscle mass. An important distinction.

    Regardless, for women who feels their legs are too big or bulky or muscular I challenge you lower your body fat to a relatively low level and then decide whether or not there's too much muscle there. I would put a lot of money on, 95 times out of 100, losing fat will solve the 'big' legs problem. Muscle isn't making you fat. Fat is making you fat.

    ^^^ This Thank you! :flowerforyou:
  • TXHunny84
    TXHunny84 Posts: 503 Member
    Options
    I hear ya - I am the "Thunder Thigh Queen" - even when I lose weight I still have thunder thighs compared to the rest of my body:grumble:

    Yep! That's my problem :)
  • drusilla126
    drusilla126 Posts: 478 Member
    Options
    I'm with ya! I've never been able to wear any of the super cute tall boots :(
  • olee67
    olee67 Posts: 208 Member
    Options
    It's impossible for you to get bulky. You're a woman, and therefore you could not possibly have enough testosterone to build that much muscle. You're just wrong. You can't possibly know what you're talking about regarding your own body, since what you say is true doesn't fit my world view.

    /sarcasm

    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    Of course it is... If you're not eating anything and laying in bed all day. Fact is, people lose muscle as they get older. Fact is, weight and size is weight and size no matter where it comes from. I'd hate to tell you, if someone weighs 400lbs with 5% body fat over a extended period of time, they lose days off their lives. It's not nearly as drastic as being 400lbs and 50% bdoy fat, but, it does stress your body. Elite athletes lean out their bodies by reducing or eliminating thier weight training. Fighters of all types build muscle and fat to gain size and strength prior to a fight and then "cut" to lean their muscles, reduce weight, and increase speed. To say losing muscle is generally inadvisable is not accurate.
  • mandorla
    mandorla Posts: 81 Member
    Options
    I was blessed with my mom's small feet (size 6) and my dad's thick calves (18"). I don't have any suggestions for slimming down the calves, I personally have never tried. I would suggestion Zappoes for boots. They're super friendly, helpful and have an awesome return policy. You can also modify the search for shoe and calf size! I found several pair of knee high boots from there. If you wear a size 8 or larger you can also try shopping the "big girl stores" for knee high boots. Lane Bryant and Torrid (which are the two in my area) stock size 8 and larger in their stores and the boots of course have more room in the calf.
  • barb288
    barb288 Posts: 1
    Options
    I hear your pain!!! But people on here are right... embrace it. I have always felt insecure about mine and have never been overly fat or anything from the calf up!!! Some societies actually think that "strong legs a woman make!!!" But, in all my years the only way for me to lose anything in my legs was to walk, walk, walk as much as possible! And also lower your carb count ! Good luck.
  • chuisle
    chuisle Posts: 1,052 Member
    Options

    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    Of course it is... If you're not eating anything and laying in bed all day. Fact is, people lose muscle as they get older. Fact is, weight and size is weight and size no matter where it comes from. I'd hate to tell you, if someone weighs 400lbs with 5% body fat over a extended period of time, they lose days off their lives. It's not nearly as drastic as being 400lbs and 50% bdoy fat, but, it does stress your body. Elite athletes lean out their bodies by reducing or eliminating thier weight training. Fighters of all types build muscle and fat to gain size and strength prior to a fight and then "cut" to lean their muscles, reduce weight, and increase speed. To say losing muscle is generally inadvisable is not accurate.

    I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. First of all, show me someone who is 400 lbs and 5% body fat. Mostly because that would be really remarkable. Second, take an example which so absurd/extreme and then tell us again what the point is?

    I *think* the point you are trying to argue with that is that muscle loss is not advisable. It's inadvisable for health purposes because strength is excellent indicator of overall health. Muscles help to boost your metabolism, prevent injury, and ultimately can boost longevity. As those elite athletes will tell you they work very hard to minimally avoid losing muscle mass while on a cut. Aesthetically, figure athletes do the same thing. The ENTIRE purpose of a cut/bulk cycle is to keep and increase muscle and lose fat.

    Regardless, this is STILL not what was under discussion. The OP isn't trying to cut and bulk or become an elite athlete or anything you mentioned. The advice that she shouldn't set out to lose muscle mass (as opposed to fat) is very solid.
  • olee67
    olee67 Posts: 208 Member
    Options

    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    Of course it is... If you're not eating anything and laying in bed all day. Fact is, people lose muscle as they get older. Fact is, weight and size is weight and size no matter where it comes from. I'd hate to tell you, if someone weighs 400lbs with 5% body fat over a extended period of time, they lose days off their lives. It's not nearly as drastic as being 400lbs and 50% bdoy fat, but, it does stress your body. Elite athletes lean out their bodies by reducing or eliminating thier weight training. Fighters of all types build muscle and fat to gain size and strength prior to a fight and then "cut" to lean their muscles, reduce weight, and increase speed. To say losing muscle is generally inadvisable is not accurate.

    I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. First of all, show me someone who is 400 lbs and 5% body fat. Mostly because that would be really remarkable. Second, take an example which so absurd/extreme and then tell us again what the point is?

    I *think* the point you are trying to argue with that is that muscle loss is not advisable. It's inadvisable for health purposes because strength is excellent indicator of overall health. Muscles help to boost your metabolism, prevent injury, and ultimately can boost longevity. As those elite athletes will tell you they work very hard to minimally avoid losing muscle mass while on a cut. Aesthetically, figure athletes do the same thing. The ENTIRE purpose of a cut/bulk cycle is to keep and increase muscle and lose fat.

    Regardless, this is STILL not what was under discussion. The OP isn't trying to cut and bulk or become an elite athlete or anything you mentioned. The advice that she shouldn't set out to lose muscle mass (as opposed to fat) is very solid.

    Okay, how about a 330lb person with 8% body fat vs a 330lb person with 42% body fat. No doubt the person who doesn't have 42% body fat is more healthy. Carry all that muscle weight into your 50's and 60's.

    My point, indicated earlier, is that not only is it healthy and there is a proper method to reduce muscle mass, but, this is also what our topic author indicated SHE wanted to do. Most people have come on here and told her she's wrong for what she wants HER body to look like and how she should embrace having legs that make her feel uncomfortable and insecure.

    Muscle mass is NOT an indicator of strength, either. What you are suggesting by saying so is that a person with large legs should be able to squat massive amounts of weight.

    Fact is, there is a proper way to exercise and eat to effectively lose muscle mass and ultimately reduce overall bulk and size. And that's what whole point of HER starting this topic.
  • WendyTerry420
    WendyTerry420 Posts: 13,274 Member
    Options
    It's impossible for you to get bulky. You're a woman, and therefore you could not possibly have enough testosterone to build that much muscle. You're just wrong. You can't possibly know what you're talking about regarding your own body, since what you say is true doesn't fit my world view.

    /sarcasm

    No one is saying that. It's simply that expressly attempting to lose muscle (as opposed to fat) is generally inadvisable. For health and aesthetic reasons. This isn't even a conversation about getting bulky or testosterone....???

    You missed the sarcasm tag! :ohwell:

Categories