Why Does Homosexual People Looks Muscular In Both Gender?

[japanesedude]

Homosexuals seem to have a high androgen in both men and women.
They looks more dominant and mucular,highly motivated.

 

[meatbag]

.

 

[x-ray peat]

Homosexuals actually have lower levels of androgens than straight people so I think the macho man look is mostly behavioral. According to some of my gay male friends, there is intense pressure to look your best which includes looking young and looking buff. This probably has something to do with the stigma of Aids and its body wasting stereotype but also the fact that men value looks far higher than women on their personal checklists. Just as women preen for men, homosexual men need to preen for other homosexual men. Since women aren't as shallow as us, straight men don't have to worry about it as much and hence can skip the gym more often then they should. Some gay men of course just go with their naturally lower T states and are happy to adopt a more feminine way.

I'll let someone else run the pop psychology analysis on masculine looking gay women.

 

[lvysaur]

Homosexuals seem to have a high androgen in both men and women.
They looks more dominant and mucular,highly motivated.

Traditionally "masculine" traits are often not actually masculine. Large muscles, heavy facial hair, and of course, baldness are not masculine at all in my experience.

 

[Dante]

Large muscles, heavy facial hair, and of course, baldness are not masculine at all in my experience.

What's the definition of "masculine" then in your view ?

 

[dookie]

@japanesedude @Meatbag @lvysaur @x-ray peat @Dante

Let us not forget, estrogen causes edema of the muscles, and a more "slim" stomach

 

[Herbie]

Are you talking about women with chiselled jaws, hard flat chests, low body fat, deep voice, well endowed sexual organs, low 2d:4d ratio? a more masculine woman. There could be a higher chance of them being attracted to feminine men or feminine women but its just speculation.

I have worked in an industry with plenty of gay men and there are both ends of the spectrum with the masculine ones and very feminine ones and with lesbians, the couple dynamic can be observed with the more dominant and submissive one.

With the gay men the dating circle can be competitive they can kind of behave how heterosexual women behave in regards to appearance with fashion, gym, cosmetics and hair from what I have observed.

Very masculine heterosexual men that I know are the salt of the earth types and are very low maintenance, minimalist, functional and think its homosexual to style hair, go to the gym, take any notice of fashion. The kind of men who shave their head not because they are going bald but because its too much flapping around to style hair and grow a beard due to not bothering with shaving not due to a trend. They are too busy down the mines or building a sky scraper or something constructive. They say its all in the eyes, the hair and clothes don't matter.

 

[keith]

In my experience, I haven't found this to be true. I've known gay men and lesbian women of all different shapes and sizes. I think generalizations like this often have at least as much to do with the observer's biases as with any actual trends. Without data, we can only guess based on our own limited experiences. However, that being said, it wouldn't surprise me if individuals of any group that has been as persecuted and marginalized as much as gay men and lesbian women have been, placed an emphasis on strength (or even the appearance thereof) for self-preservation.

 

[schultz]

What's the definition of "masculine" then in your view ?

A good father

 

[Mountain]

Traditionally "masculine" traits are often not actually masculine. Large muscles, heavy facial hair, and of course, baldness are not masculine at all in my experience.

I disagree with the first two since masculinity should be the complementary to femininity so you'd expect traits which lend themselves to sexual dimorphism to be typical of that gender.

What's the definition of "masculine" then in your view ?

Only those traits that arise from eating oysters and steak in the same meal

Also I haven't seen any consistent trend in physique with the gays that I've met, but they all had feminized personalities

 

[Elysium]

By gay he clearly means Village People, and that's the most this thread warrants in terms of a response.

 

[bdawg]

Homosexuals actually have lower levels of androgens than straight people so I think the macho man look is mostly behavioral. According to some of my gay male friends, there is intense pressure to look your best which includes looking young and looking buff. This probably has something to do with the stigma of Aids and its body wasting stereotype but also the fact that men value looks far higher than women on their personal checklists. Just as women preen for men, homosexual men need to preen for other homosexual men. Since women aren't as shallow as us, straight men don't have to worry about it as much and hence can skip the gym more often then they should. Some gay men of course just go with their naturally lower T states and are happy to adopt a more feminine way.

I'll let someone else run the pop psychology analysis on masculine looking gay women.

+1, much more focus on looks as they say men are shallow. also, im sure AAS use is rampant among the bodybuilding circles whatever your sexuality

 

[kayumochi]

Defining masculine traits? Through most of human history, it was the male who was the peacock and not the female. The idea of a real man not caring about his hair and clothes is quite a recent development.

 

[lvysaur]

Let us not forget, estrogen causes edema of the muscles, and a more "slim" stomach

Yup, I think that's partially to blame. Most people these days have swollen muscles. I remember Dolph Lundgren talking about how you can tell when someone's on steroids because their muscles have a very puffy swollen look; Dolph himself has very slim muscles, probably very densely built or something.

 

[x-ray peat]

Defining masculine traits? Through most of human history, it was the male who was the peacock and not the female. The idea of a real man not caring about his hair and clothes is quite a recent development.

I don't know how true that is. Yes some cultures have had the opposite but for the most part throughout history it is women who wore the make up and earrings while men demonstrated their value through achievement. I think this is the natural state of affairs and can be seen most easily in personality tests of what each gender says they find attractive in potential mates. Most women look for mates above them in the social scale while men look for women at equal or lower levels. Its is much more common for a male CEO to marry his secretary than a successful female lawyer to marry the clerk of courts.

 

[kayumochi]

I don't know how true that is. Yes some cultures have had the opposite but for the most part throughout history it is women who wore the make up and earrings while men demonstrated their value through achievement. I think this is the natural state of affairs and can be seen most easily in personality tests of what each gender says they find attractive in potential mates. Most women look for mates above them in the social scale while men look for women at equal or lower levels. Its is much more common for a male CEO to marry his secretary than a successful female lawyer to marry the clerk of courts.

In the Western world, you don't have to look very far back at all for example - start with the Regency Period and work your way back - men's fashion becomes more flamboyant the further back you go. Men's clothing as we understand it didn't even begin to come about until late in the Victorian Age. You can find similar examples from most cultures. I suspect it mirrors what early humans saw in nature: it was the male of the species that had the brightly colored feathers or other attributes to attract the female.

 

[x-ray peat]

In the Western world, you don't have to look very far back at all for example - start with the Regency Period and work your way back - men's fashion becomes more flamboyant the further back you go. Men's clothing as we understand it didn't even begin to come about until late in the Victorian Age. You can find similar examples from most cultures. I suspect it mirrors what early humans saw in nature: it was the male of the species that had the brightly colored feathers or other attributes to attract the female.

As flamboyant and ridiculous by today's standards the men's fashion may have been, the women's fashions where always much more extravagant than the men's. Also the men were always expected to achieve something either through work or service to the state. They couldn't just sit back and rely on their good looks and charms like the women could.

 

[kayumochi]

As flamboyant and ridiculous by today's standards the men's fashion may have been, the women's fashions where always much more extravagant then the men's. Also the men were always expected to achieve something either through work or service to the state. They couldn't just sit back and rely on their good looks and charms like the women could.

I never stated or implied that men didn't need to achieve. You introduced that into the conversation, not me. Achievement has often gone hand in hand with social status, as has men's dress, but not always in ways that are understandable to us today (the planet was once populated with "gift cultures" in which status was achieved not by what one had or did but what one could give away). And you are wrong on that other assumption as well, women fashions have not ALWAYS been more extravagant.

 

[x-ray peat]

I never stated or implied that men didn't need to achieve. You introduced that into the conversation, not me. Achievement has often gone hand in hand with social status, as has men's dress, but not always in ways that are understandable to us today (the planet was once populated with "gift cultures" in which status was achieved not by what one had or did but what one could give away). And you are wrong on that other assumption as well, women fashions have not ALWAYS been more extravagant.

I already said that there have been some exceptions but for the most part women were the one's who put a greater emphasis on looks and attire than men. Male achievement is important because that is how men typically signal their value to potential mates. Your statement that men have historically been the peacocks and not the women is just not true.

 

[kayumochi]

I already said that there have been some exceptions but for the most part women were the one's who put a greater emphasis on looks and attire than men. Male achievement is important because that is how men typically signal their value to potential mates. Your statement that men have historically been the peacocks and not the women is just not true.

My statement is true: Men have been peacocks for most of human history.