Woman wanting to building curves but not lose weight, help!

Bret Contreras and his Strong Curves program is what’s generally the go-to for glute development. And no need to worry about being “muscly”. As a woman, you have to GRIND for every ounce of muscle you build. I promise you that you won’t suddenly wake up bulky!

sollyn23l2 wrote: »

COGypsy wrote: »

Bret Contreras and his Strong Curves program is what’s generally the go-to for glute development. And no need to worry about being “muscly”. As a woman, you have to GRIND for every ounce of muscle you build. I promise you that you won’t suddenly wake up bulky!

Depends on your genetics, honestly. I come from "strong, stocky" build on my mother's side. We put on muscle quite easily. I've had guys comment "wow, you have big arms" not long after I started strength training. My sister has a hard time finding shirts that fit right cause she's got a tiny waist but her shoulders and biceps be popping.

I think you have a point that genetics matter: I seem to add muscle more easily on upper body, whereas legs get stronger but don't show muscularity as much from similar stimulus.

For sure, OP's genetics may not accommodate a plan to have a snatched waist and bigger bum, let alone what the impact her genetics might have on visible muscularity. I'm not going to get to those goals - which fortunately I don't care to pursue - because I have a relatively narrow pelvis, a small rear even when fairly strong, and a short distance between ribcage and pelvic bones that limits how small my waist will get.

But I think COGypsy also has a point: Even for a woman who adds muscle mass relatively more readily, it's not an overnight thing. In virtually anyone who's paying attention, it should be possible to start a sensible lifting/nutrition routine and notice the progress, stop and switch to a maintenance routine when at the look one likes, or even drop the activity and gradually lose some mass or tone if that's desired.

It can be relatively quicker or more significant for some than others, but it's not going to be instant for anyone. The idea that lifting makes anyone - female or male - instantly bulky . . . well, that's very improbable. I grant that we don't know what OP's definition of "too muscular" is. Still it's common these days to want to look "toned", which does involve some muscularity, just with enough subcutaneous whole-body fat layer remaining to make the muscles look relatively more smooth rather than highly defined.

Demisadler980, there's another factor I'd point out to you: I'm close to a quite-good university rowing team. They lift heavy, in addition to rowing. I've seen them do leg workouts with multiple plates that I swear looked to me like freight train wheels ! When I see them right after a race, their muscularity looks quite defined. I've also seen them a few hours later after racing, in party dresses that are short, strapless or spaghetti-strap, and that sort of thing. After those few hours post-workout, nearly all of them look sleek and toned, with bodies I think most women would envy, even women who worry about lifting making them too muscular.

Photos you see of very muscular women are often more like that immediate post-workout kind of thing, not how the same person looks in routine daily life. With bodybuilders specifically, often the photos are at competitions or for marketing, when they've reduced body fat to what most of us would consider punitively low levels, depleted water retention, pumped up hard by just having worked out, used tanners and oils to make muscles look more prominent, then are carefully posed and lit to increase the effect.