Question about women losing fat/building muscle
Options
Replies
-
They ARE jiggly. They DO have cellulite, as did the women in old paintings. (See below)
The woman in the first photo looks firm mostly because of how she is posing, tasteful photoshopping (compared to the second photo) and because she's young. (As your skin looses elasticity with age, gravity HAPPENS, and the softened skin allows even more in the jiggle and sag department. Ask me how I know.)
That man has a great *kitten*.0 -
You just seem really conflicted about body types, and reluctant to either embrace yourself as you are or as a work in progress. Don't try to be an idealized thing that doesn't exist. That way lies madness.iceycoldhot wrote: »
so what's your question- what's the deal? what the aim of your comments?? I laid out the various extremes you could have. What other information do you need?
I think this perfectly sums up this whole thread. And I hear ya! It took a very long time for me to accept that I would NEVER have that hourglass shaped body. I'm cut more athletic (I was a gymnast and very much have a gymnasts body). But: since working out, lifting weights, basically taking very good care of the body I DO have, I have learned to see its beauty as well. Best of luck on your journey OP. And don't fixate on these "ideals" too much. Just do you0 -
(As your skin looses elasticity with age, gravity HAPPENS, and the softened skin allows even more in the jiggle and sag department. Ask me how I know.)
Or ask me. ( Sorry, my phone is mucking up the quote function for some reason. )
Despite never having carried any extra weight, at age 51 I have jiggly/mushy/saggy bits. In fact, they are probably more evident on me because of the contrast with the rest, which is pretty lean.
I started showing cellulite in my early 30's. Damn genetics. Possibly also partly due to tanning as a youngster.
0 -
myfelinepal wrote: »They ARE jiggly. They DO have cellulite, as did the women in old paintings. (See below)
The woman in the first photo looks firm mostly because of how she is posing, tasteful photoshopping (compared to the second photo) and because she's young. (As your skin looses elasticity with age, gravity HAPPENS, and the softened skin allows even more in the jiggle and sag department. Ask me how I know.)
That man has a great *kitten*.
They are all three mer-ladies. (Naiads or Nereids, technically)0 -
OP, the links won't work for me but I think I know what you are saying and the difference is muscle. Muscle under fat looks more toned or firm or whatever term you're happy with, than the same amount of fat with less muscle under it. There is less jiggle (why would anyone want NO jiggle??). When not eating at a deficit, women who work hard gain muscle under their fat.
People on this site talk a lot about skinny fat (healthy body weight, unhealthy body fat%) but there is little mention of the opposite - overweight with healthy body fat%.0 -
OP: Age has a lot to go with it. But also, as someone already pointed out, it depends on the amount of muscle vs. fat. And everyone is different. What's so hard to understand about this?
I look at the photos you posted and I think both of those women could could stand to lose some weight. It'll just get worse over time as gravity sets in.0 -
Some women's thickness contains a lot of muscle as well as the coating of subcutaneous fat. When these women don't lose down to low body fat but stay at like 25%, then they have the look you describe. That's what my body is like.0
-
iceycoldhot wrote: »If these women are considered overweight, then I can safely say BMI is complete *kitten* and needs to get thrown out.
BMI is not *kitten*, but it is a statistic that should be applied on a population level of scale and not something that can be applied to individuals.
That said, a body fat measurement would put both those women you linked to solidly in the overweight department as well. Probably well into the unhealthy range, too. Although one should he careful with that as well, since again, it is not really applicable as such to individuals.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »OP, the links won't work for me but I think I know what you are saying and the difference is muscle. Muscle under fat looks more toned or firm or whatever term you're happy with, than the same amount of fat with less muscle under it. There is less jiggle (why would anyone want NO jiggle??). When not eating at a deficit, women who work hard gain muscle under their fat.
People on this site talk a lot about skinny fat (healthy body weight, unhealthy body fat%) but there is little mention of the opposite - overweight with healthy body fat%.
Actually, the women in the photos have no visible muscle whatsoever, and they would not likely be considered toned by most people. The OP wants to stop being "jiggly".
OP, as others have said, they have good genetics. You will never look like them because you aren't them. It's very hard to not compare yourself to other people, I know. And I do understand what you mean about wanting to look like them.
I see all kinds of success stories about people who lose the same amount of weight as me, who are bigger than me, and they all look better than me. I am all sorts of jiggly. Losing more than 60lbs hasn't changed that. I still look like I have a lot of weight to lose, and I have cellulite and jiggly everywhere. I'm not going to ever have the flat stomach because it's been stretched out for 25 years. Some of the people who have great success stories may have only been overweight for a year or two and they respond better. Or they just have better genetics and fat distribution than I do.
It's best to just accept that, move on, and work on being the best you that you can be.0 -
When you say "thick and toned" I think of this:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/236x/78/91/97/789197b550f6de989a5915ce82a4b5d9.jpg
Not saying there's anything wrong with the pictures you posted (although the second one is CLEARLY over-photoshopped...) - but this is my idea of "thick and toned".0 -
iceycoldhot wrote: »madrose0715 wrote: »iceycoldhot wrote: »
so what's your question- what's the deal? what the aim of your comments?? I laid out the various extremes you could have. What other information do you need?
Other opinions would be nice. I came here to get peoples opinions on this subject.
Is there a particular opinion you are hoping to hear?
No, not really. I have just always been curious about this subject. I have seen thin people who have cellulite and jiggle and look sloppy. I have seen thicker people who are technically "overweight" who look firm. I have always wondered why since it goes against a lot of what I was told about fitness.
This has nothing to do with fitness in a direct way. Most of it is about connective tissue. You can be rather heavy built and have smooth and firm tissue - or you can be super skinny and have these mean dints... It has to do with age, hormones, gens, the "quality" of tissue underneath - in general women haven't got the same firm tissue than men.
Talking about pictures is not that easy because most pictures in the world wide web are photoshopped. Therefore you cannot tell if these women have a smooth and firm tissue or not
0 -
My opinion is that you find these women attractive because of where their bodyfat is distributed. Neither one of them are toned, the second pic is likely photoshopped (first could be but I can't tell to be honest). I guarantee you that first women is plenty "jiggly" and I don't say that to be mean/rude to her as I don't think jiggly is necessarily bad.
Some people just have fortunate body-fat distribution when it comes to what some people find attractive.0 -
I wouldn't really call those women you initial posted "toned". I don't mean this in a negative at all, it's just my definition of the word means to have a fairly decent amount of muscle, and a low enough body fat to show the definition of the muscle slightly.
To me, I can't see any muscle definition on her. She has what I think is very well proportioned body fat (which is largely genetics) but there's definitely fat there. If she was to lose this, she will probably look smaller, less thick.
I think it's also worth noting that you can get "thick" women, who are really toned still. There are other factors, such as their bone structure (not every woman has wide hips) and how much muscle they have. If they have a lot of muscle but a decent amount of fat so there's only slight definition, she may look toned but be in subsequently larger sizes and look thicker.0 -
Need2Exerc1se wrote: »OP, the links won't work for me but I think I know what you are saying and the difference is muscle. Muscle under fat looks more toned or firm or whatever term you're happy with, than the same amount of fat with less muscle under it. There is less jiggle (why would anyone want NO jiggle??). When not eating at a deficit, women who work hard gain muscle under their fat.
People on this site talk a lot about skinny fat (healthy body weight, unhealthy body fat%) but there is little mention of the opposite - overweight with healthy body fat%.
Actually, the women in the photos have no visible muscle whatsoever, and they would not likely be considered toned by most people. The OP wants to stop being "jiggly".
As I said, I can't see the photos, but visible muscle is not what I was describing. I'm talking about muscle hidden under fat, that makes the fat more firm.0 -
The first woman has great genetics. The second is photoshopped. I would not consider either to be "toned" but it's a very subjective word.
It's important too not to compare yourself to photos/paintings. Things like pose, lighting, and photoshop/artistic license can cover over a multitude of cellulite/jiggle/flab etc. But there are women who just have awesome fat distribution and less jiggle due to genetics.0 -
I know exactly what you mean, OP. I see a lot of women carrying more weight than I do, and they look curvy and terrific. If I carry extra weight, I don't get that cute, curvy, hourglass look- I get a belly and a muffin top. I think a lot of it is youth plus genetics, as others have mentioned.0
-
which is also not applicable to either of the women posted.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »OP, the links won't work for me but I think I know what you are saying and the difference is muscle. Muscle under fat looks more toned or firm or whatever term you're happy with, than the same amount of fat with less muscle under it. There is less jiggle (why would anyone want NO jiggle??). When not eating at a deficit, women who work hard gain muscle under their fat.
People on this site talk a lot about skinny fat (healthy body weight, unhealthy body fat%) but there is little mention of the opposite - overweight with healthy body fat%.
Actually, the women in the photos have no visible muscle whatsoever, and they would not likely be considered toned by most people. The OP wants to stop being "jiggly".
As I said, I can't see the photos, but visible muscle is not what I was describing. I'm talking about muscle hidden under fat, that makes the fat more firm.
And I wouldn't really say it makes the fat more firm-it makes the whole body more firm- but not the fat itself. it's just fat. Fat is fat. oh new hot button topid- is fat really just fat!?!?!?!
0 -
Muscle tone from the medical dictionary:Also termed tonus; the normal state of balanced tension in the tissues of the body, especially the muscles.
1. The internal state of muscle-fiber tension within individual muscles and muscle groups.
2. Degree of muscle tension or resistance during rest or in response to stretching.
The term is used loosely to describe somebody whose muscle are defined and can be seen under the skin. These women look fairly healthy but they don't seem to actually work out much. You could probably obtain that look through only dieting. They are what some call "skinny fat" which is pretty much not necessarily overweight but with higher body fat %. If you want "muscle tone" a trip to the weight rooms is in order.0 -
which is also not applicable to either of the women posted.Need2Exerc1se wrote: »Need2Exerc1se wrote: »OP, the links won't work for me but I think I know what you are saying and the difference is muscle. Muscle under fat looks more toned or firm or whatever term you're happy with, than the same amount of fat with less muscle under it. There is less jiggle (why would anyone want NO jiggle??). When not eating at a deficit, women who work hard gain muscle under their fat.
People on this site talk a lot about skinny fat (healthy body weight, unhealthy body fat%) but there is little mention of the opposite - overweight with healthy body fat%.
Actually, the women in the photos have no visible muscle whatsoever, and they would not likely be considered toned by most people. The OP wants to stop being "jiggly".
As I said, I can't see the photos, but visible muscle is not what I was describing. I'm talking about muscle hidden under fat, that makes the fat more firm.
And I wouldn't really say it makes the fat more firm-it makes the whole body more firm- but not the fat itself. it's just fat. Fat is fat. oh new hot button topid- is fat really just fat!?!?!?!
Ack, not another one of those!
0 -
Well, the second picture you posted was photoshopped and not how a body will naturally look without several pairs of spanx. Look at Kim K. It's all about illusion, squeezing into things with spanx, and Photoshop. Catch her without the spanx and you see all the cellulite the rest of the world has.
But regarding the first one, it's genetics. I see what you're saying. You don't mean "toned" but just smoothly distributed fat. Unfortunately, some people just distribute fat evenly. Others go directly to thighs. Others get a big stomach. Some are blessed with a big butt. When I go up in weight, I just spread evenly. A lot has to do with youth.
And you're also not seeing these people naked. Clothes on someone with a good distribution of fat can be very deceiving, I know personally. Don't focus on what you see in others, because it's only what you eye sees at that moment and not reality. Just work hard and make yourself the best you.0
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.4K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 388 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.2K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.2K MyFitnessPal Information
- 22 News and Announcements
- 916 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions