Login or register


Last status update:
Gender: male
Age: 25
Date Signed Up:4/27/2010
Last Login:1/30/2016
Location:In a Cryogenic Chamber
Content Thumbs: 46 total,  161 ,  115
Comment Thumbs: 24 total,  449 ,  425
Content Level Progress: 84.74% (50/59)
Level 0 Content: Untouched account → Level 1 Content: New Here
Comment Level Progress: 38.18% (21/55)
Level 0 Comments: Untouched account → Level 1 Comments: New Here
Content Views:13808
Times Content Favorited:1 times
Total Comments Made:203
FJ Points:86
Full blooded Japanese but US citizen because I was born here.

Text Posts

  • Views: 696
    Thumbs Up 5 Thumbs Down 3 Total: +2
    Comments: 6
    Favorites: 0
    Uploaded: 12/28/11

latest user's comments

#27 - Because the upper body attracts girls more, it shows off a lot…  [+] (13 replies) 02/06/2015 on Never skip leg day comp +19
#252 - ciacheczko (02/06/2015) [-]
Lies, lies, absolute lies. I'll tell you a secret: Women actually do go for the butt and solid thighs. It's an atavistic instinct - a man with strong booty and legs is obviously a good sexual partner. It's comparable to how women's wide hips work on men.

Never skip leg and booty day.
User avatar
#272 - pinethrush (02/06/2015) [-]
your argument was just as psuedo-scientific and bullshitty as the one you were trying to contradict.
User avatar
#277 - ciacheczko (02/06/2015) [-]
Nah, actually the first guy wasn't entirely wrong. Since people evolved into walking on two legs, chests became more important since now they were more in the line of sight, than the butts. That's why females started having nice, bouncy tits along the way of evolution. To "make up" for the butt that was too low in the area of vision.

In theory, men having nice chests are also appealing, but still it's proven that butts are the #1 when it comes to sexual preference, for both genders.

If it's such bullshit, prove me wrong, go on.
inb4 "im too good, i don't have to prove you anything, you prove me ur right instead blah blah"
User avatar
#376 - pinethrush (02/07/2015) [-]
Try "inb4 'I don't believe I have the burden of proof because I didn't make a claim.' "

You going "Lies, lies, absolute lies" kinda makes "Nah, actually the first guy wasn't entirely wrong" lose credibility, does it not?
#347 - cheeselol (02/06/2015) [-]
#351 - ciacheczko (02/06/2015) [-]
Well, he's the one making the claim that I'm wrong.

On a serious note though, about that image, I think that both sides of "give proof" and "no you give anti-proof" are stupid. There is this concept, it's called "the unknown". Think Shrodinger's cat. Until you can have proof for either assumption, none is entirely true or false.

For my case, anyone can look up some shit on google and read about multiple surveys and researches proving that butts rule our instincts, but I'm too lazy to do it since I literally know I am right, and don't consider this important or questionable enough to search for sauces. I am already flabbergasted that anyone would question something so commonly-known and rational
User avatar
#377 - pinethrush (02/07/2015) [-]
No. You're the one that made the claim that HE was wrong. I didn't say you were wrong. I said your argument REEKED of bullshit and guesswork pseudo-science.
#38 - Bacabed (02/06/2015) [-]
Pretty much this, people don't associate strong legs with being fit and in shape. Unless a person has a reason to try and get strong (typically athletics or if you have an intensive hobby like rock climbing or mountain climbing) they just focus on what will make them look better.

Whatever, their choice. I will say this, I've yet to meet someone who focuses on the glamour muscles that actually outlifts me with them (although that may have more to do with that fact that I'm much larger than them).
User avatar
#155 - pokemonstheshiz (02/06/2015) [-]
you're supposed to have off days though, most people alternate between legs and upper so that they work out everyday. Plus, doing it everyday makes it easier to keep doing.
I understand focusing more on glamour muscles, but to skip legs entirely seems pretty silly.
#291 - anon (02/06/2015) [-]
UB/Legs/UB/legs is not usual.

Most common is a P/P/L (Push, pull, legs) Which gives 4(or2) UB days. and 2 (or 1) leg days.
User avatar
#154 - magicalan (02/06/2015) [-]
usually people who lift for looks use a lighter weight with high reps and a less explosive manner, nice and controlled, while on the other hand more explosive lower rep high weight lifts build strength
#164 - Bacabed (02/06/2015) [-]
Yeah you're right, I guess my last comment has more to do with how I view lifting. I've always worked out to build strength rather than get a ripped body. I'm a big guy (overweight but working on it, but that's not even what I mean. I'm tall, broad shoulders, thick muscles albeit covered with fat in some places.) and so I've never bothered trying to go high reps, low weight it's just always been lifting for strength and bulk so it's kind of hard for me to look at others and understand why they wouldn't want to gain those things. I mean I sort of understand not wanting bulk it isn't for everyone but I can never understanding not wanting to push your strength as much as you can, even if you just want to lift for looks (what point are the looks if you don't have the strength to match?).
User avatar
#172 - magicalan (02/06/2015) [-]
there is a lot of people who feel the same way as you, i've always lifted for strength but ive recently started doing 4x12 on my lifts and my maxes have dropped but i have a more "swole" feeling, but hey do what ever you want, a good base strength is great for someone shifting into looks
#39 - **japanesekid used "*roll 1, cah question*"** **japanesekid…  [+] (1 reply) 12/28/2014 on mfw 0
#40 - japanesekid (12/28/2014) [-]
**japanesekid used "*roll 1, cah answer*"**
**japanesekid rolls Spoilers.**
[ 176 Total ]

user's friends