Any other ENDOMORPHS out there?
Replies
-
Maxematics wrote: »100_PROOF_ wrote: »nettiklive wrote: »Two professional athletes in the same sport, why do they look SO dramatically different? I doubt that Williams purposefully attempts to bulk up in order to look like she does
This is actually quite offensive. Mixing race into a conversation about somatotypes is missing the entire point. You seem to be confusing genetics with woo. If you'd like to make some point about somatotypes for arguments sake, surely you can do it without comparing African American women to Caucasian women.
Yuuuuuup. I cringed so hard when I read that, especially since they picked extreme examples. There are slim and muscular women of all races and ethnicities. That's not even considering people of mixed backgrounds. My mom is White and my dad is Latino and Asian. According to that poster I probably should be able to eat copious amounts of food and not get fat while simultaneously getting ripped or being thick but being long and lean. Okay.
Agreed.
Race doesn't need to come into the conversation about somatotypes.4 -
100_PROOF_ wrote: »nettiklive wrote: »Two professional athletes in the same sport, why do they look SO dramatically different? I doubt that Williams purposefully attempts to bulk up in order to look like she does
This is actually quite offensive. Mixing race into a conversation about somatotypes is missing the entire point. You seem to be confusing genetics with woo. If you'd like to make some point about somatotypes for arguments sake, surely you can do it without comparing African American women to Caucasian women.
The reason I picked these two women is not because of their race, but because they're good examples of two very different body types while being in the same sport and presumably having at least a somewhat similar training routine. I did also say that there are exceptions and mixtures of body types in every race; just some characteristics seem to be more common for certain races, it's not an absolute and certainly not meant in a racist or offensive way, sheesh! I lived in a place with a very large Asian population and I can tell you for a fact that the vast, vast majority of them were small-framed overall with a slighter bone structure and shorter in stature, than those of other races, and the overweight were rare exceptions; and yes, many males complained that they couldn't gain muscle in spite of working harder than their Caucasian or other friends. It is genetics - and note that I never mentioned 'somatypes' in my post, I only said body types. I do agree that diets and personality traits etc based on body types is utter BS! What I was trying to say is there seems to be a correlation between a person's genetical build and frame, how much muscle they naturally have and how they store fat, and their predisposition to gaining or losing fat and muscle throughout their life, which I thought was similar to somatypes. So people who are naturally bigger framed tend to gain fat and muscle more easily than those who are smaller. Or, like in my case, myself and my sister both have the shape of our paternal grandmother, extremely pear shaped with very thin upper body and heavy legs even at very low BMI. For both of us, we naturally have more muscle AND fat in our legs, and that is also the easiest body part to build muscle and strength, and also the first to gain fat and last to lose it.19 -
Where in your rambling does the crazy psychologist from the 40s come into play?10
-
nettiklive wrote: »100_PROOF_ wrote: »nettiklive wrote: »Two professional athletes in the same sport, why do they look SO dramatically different? I doubt that Williams purposefully attempts to bulk up in order to look like she does
This is actually quite offensive. Mixing race into a conversation about somatotypes is missing the entire point. You seem to be confusing genetics with woo. If you'd like to make some point about somatotypes for arguments sake, surely you can do it without comparing African American women to Caucasian women.
The reason I picked these two women is not because of their race, but because they're good examples of two very different body types while being in the same sport and presumably having at least a somewhat similar training routine. I did also say that there are exceptions and mixtures of body types in every race; just some characteristics seem to be more common for certain races, it's not an absolute and certainly not meant in a racist or offensive way, sheesh! I lived in a place with a very large Asian population and I can tell you for a fact that the vast, vast majority of them were small-framed overall with a slighter bone structure and shorter in stature, than those of other races, and the overweight were rare exceptions; and yes, many males complained that they couldn't gain muscle in spite of working harder than their Caucasian or other friends. It is genetics - and note that I never mentioned 'somatypes' in my post, I only said body types. I do agree that diets and personality traits etc based on body types is utter BS! What I was trying to say is there seems to be a correlation between a person's genetical build and frame, how much muscle they naturally have and how they store fat, and their predisposition to gaining or losing fat and muscle throughout their life, which I thought was similar to somatypes. So people who are naturally bigger framed tend to gain fat and muscle more easily than those who are smaller. Or, like in my case, myself and my sister both have the shape of our paternal grandmother, extremely pear shaped with very thin upper body and heavy legs even at very low BMI. For both of us, we naturally have more muscle AND fat in our legs, and that is also the easiest body part to build muscle and strength, and also the first to gain fat and last to lose it.
If you had simply said the bolded above, I don't think anyone would have had a problem. Whether or not you intended your first post to be offensive, it did come off as casually racist by your using stereotypes of African American and Asian people. The rest of your response above just doubles down on that, unfortunately.
That is why the somatotype theory is so problematic. Sheldon was trying to link psychological traits to a person's physique, and his work embedded the attitudes of the 1940's in it's foundation.
There certainly are genetic predispositions to skeletal frame, muscle and fat. Nobody here has disputed that. The idea that our bodies have a fixed somatotype is debunked, however. The Heath-Carter methodology still gets referenced for indexing populations, but when it gets used to categorize individual people to give fitness advice it's pretty much useless.
9 -
I'm a Mightymorph, like those power rangers but mightier.14
-
I'm an equalitymorph and know that stereotypes do nothing to fix things and that bringing them up only makes one seem ignorant and oblivious to the world around them.10
-
100_PROOF_ wrote: »I'm an equalitymorph and know that stereotypes do nothing to fix things and that bringing them up only makes one seem ignorant and oblivious to the world around them.
+1!1 -
WTF did I walk into with this thread... an OP asked an innocent question about some commonly misunderstood woo, got good answers, was receptive, and suddenly its turned into a racially biased genetics discussion?
I’m just waiting for Jimmy the Greek to show up at this point.7 -
Okay, another example. Strenuous ballet schools, for instance, or modeling agencies, will pick students based on physique among other traits. Famous ballet schools in Russia will look at girls as young as six and evaluate them for acceptance based on how their bodies are shaped. Every dancer and model follows a strict diet and heavy exercise, and they are all extremely slim, yet there will be some who just can't get as lean as others in spite of following the same regimen, or whose frames will simply not allow them to become small enough. Some are prone to becoming more 'bulkily' muscular than others as well.
I actually didn't know somatypes referred to personality or diets. I've only heard it in the context of a rough description of three body type categories: endomorph, ectomorph, and mesomorph, referring to overall build and how easy or hard it is for these types to gain and lose weight.8 -
There's nothing at all unusual about that. People who rise to elite levels in most sports are the people who are genetically superior in that regard. You don't see many 6'8", 190 pound powerlifters, and you don't see many 5'6", 230 pound NBA basketball players. Elite professional bodybuilders are the ones with the best genetics, combined with their workouts (and a load of steroids). Same for elite sprinters, marathoners, etc. - if you're not genetically inclined toward excellence in those sports, all the training in the world isn't going to get you there. You may get good at it - even pretty good at it - but you'll never reach elite levels like those who are genetically superior in the first place.nettiklive wrote: »Okay, another example. Strenuous ballet schools, for instance, or modeling agencies, will pick students based on physique among other traits. Famous ballet schools in Russia will look at girls as young as six and evaluate them for acceptance based on how their bodies are shaped...
As an aside, the same pertains to skinny, flat-bootied women who want to get big round booties like a Kardashian or whoever, and skinny guys who want to look like Arnold Schwarzenegger, Ronnie Coleman or whoever. You can definitely be the best you possible, but you can't be someone you're not. Genetics dictate your body shape to a large degree and there's only so much change you can effect through diet and training.nettiklive wrote: »...I actually didn't know somatypes referred to personality or diets. I've only heard it in the context of a rough description of three body type categories: endomorph, ectomorph, and mesomorph, referring to overall build and how easy or hard it is for these types to gain and lose weight.
And every bit of that is complete BS. Never mind the fact that people who fit 100% into any of those three categories are rare exceptions. Using one's somatotype as an excuse for being unable to gain or lose weight is exactly that - an excuse. Anybody can gain or lose weight if they do what's necessary to accomplish it.9 -
nettiklive wrote: »Okay, another example. Strenuous ballet schools, for instance, or modeling agencies, will pick students based on physique among other traits. Famous ballet schools in Russia will look at girls as young as six and evaluate them for acceptance based on how their bodies are shaped. Every dancer and model follows a strict diet and heavy exercise, and they are all extremely slim, yet there will be some who just can't get as lean as others in spite of following the same regimen, or whose frames will simply not allow them to become small enough. Some are prone to becoming more 'bulkily' muscular than others as well.
I actually didn't know somatypes referred to personality or diets. I've only heard it in the context of a rough description of three body type categories: endomorph, ectomorph, and mesomorph, referring to overall build and how easy or hard it is for these types to gain and lose weight.
I'm sorry you jumped into a conversation for which you were poorly prepared. Even checking Wikipedia would have give some information for you. It clearly describes the origins of somatotypes as being from psychology. No one is arguing against genetics as a factor in body shape, but that doesn't make somatotypes a thing. I do find it interesting that you used discriminatory stereotyping to describe something that has come under criticism for the exact same thing.12 -
somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.5
-
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.10 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
Yes but are these cupcakes made from free range eggs ?7 -
100_PROOF_ wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
Yes but are these cupcakes made from free range eggs ?
I know what's meant here, but I just haven't seen many eggs roaming the countryside. My brain is tired.8 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol0 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol
You may have whatever overpriced treat you would like, but only if it makes you feel superior. :laugh:3 -
I'm a metamorphosis ! Just kidding
1 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol
You may have whatever overpriced treat you would like, but only if it makes you feel superior. :laugh:
I'm sensing emergence of a new theory of TreatOTypes, right here on MFP . . . . 3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol
You may have whatever overpriced treat you would like, but only if it makes you feel superior. :laugh:
I'm sensing emergence of a new theory of TreatOTypes, right here on MFP . . . .
Hmmmm... What your favorite treat says about you and the way you should eat to optimize your weight loss.
It'll go something like this: you place the treat in front of you and have a friend sitting beside you. Every time you reach for the treat:
3 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol
You may have whatever overpriced treat you would like, but only if it makes you feel superior. :laugh:
I'm sensing emergence of a new theory of TreatOTypes, right here on MFP . . . .
Hmmmm... What your favorite treat says about you and the way you should eat to optimize your weight loss.
It'll go something like this: you place the treat in front of you and have a friend sitting beside you. Every time you reach for the treat:
this would work for awhile but would end up in a butt whooping over time lol2 -
CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol
You may have whatever overpriced treat you would like, but only if it makes you feel superior. :laugh:
I'm sensing emergence of a new theory of TreatOTypes, right here on MFP . . . .
Hmmmm... What your favorite treat says about you and the way you should eat to optimize your weight loss.
It'll go something like this: you place the treat in front of you and have a friend sitting beside you. Every time you reach for the treat:
this would work for awhile but would end up in a butt whooping over time lol
Cardio! You then earned the treat.2 -
nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »nutmegoreo wrote: »CharlieBeansmomTracey wrote: »somatypes had to do with body type and personalities. the study was never done on effects or weight loss or gain or muscle for that matter. some idiot took that study and ran with it and made it to suit them,probably to sell a product or idea Im sure.
I'm guessing $10 pretentious guilt free cupcakes.
if only there was a cupcake I liked lol
You may have whatever overpriced treat you would like, but only if it makes you feel superior. :laugh:
I'm sensing emergence of a new theory of TreatOTypes, right here on MFP . . . .
Hmmmm... What your favorite treat says about you and the way you should eat to optimize your weight loss.
It'll go something like this: you place the treat in front of you and have a friend sitting beside you. Every time you reach for the treat:
this would work for awhile but would end up in a butt whooping over time lol
Cardio! You then earned the treat.
lol true
0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.3K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.5K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 431 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.6K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.8K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions