Ghazi

The "before" pic looks like he's ready to chop wood all day before slaughtering dinner with his bare hands, and "after" looks like he's going to faint if he doesn't have a protein bar in the next couple of minutes.

I like guys who are in shape, broadly defined. So anywhere from whip lean and skinny to muscular and padded (which is what I'd call that pic #1).

It's not so much about looks, as the article notes, it's about lifestyle. I want a guy who can keep up with me. Husband is fat but lifts 5 days a week at least, he is strong and healthy and muscular, just fat, overweight not obese.

I do also have hangups about being bigger than a guy, don't think I am alone in that, and I'm pretty tall, so lean towards the fit and padded category but tall and a little too skinny also good.

I do think most regular people who are in good shape aren't "shredded" because that takes an obsessive lifestyle for most people , and I don't think an obsessive lifestyle is attractive. But a level of baseline fitness is.

It's funny but that is how looks work for me in general. Look good enough, that's a yes, and looking better than good enough is not any more of a yes. Looks are a primary filter but a yes/no binary not a scale.

Some people simply look better with a few extra pounds on 'em. Apparently William Costello is one such person.

If you are a person who doesn't find the ultra fit look attractive then don't date someone who has it. If you are a person who thinks you can only attract attention by having the ultra-fit look you are wrong. Simple. No gendering is necessary.

A bunch of guys got furious that women did not appreciate Olly’s gains. And I mean, really, really furious. From accusations of “lying” to “these women are just fat insecure bitches who can’t stand a perfect physique,” to “women don’t get it and don’t know what they ACTUALLY want.”

[...] All of this immediately becomes a problem when men [...] are suddenly presented with the truth in an online poll and begin to freak out about it.

I am so annoyed with men assuming they know what I think or feel, and then arguing with me when I express the "wrong" opinion. It's the most insane version of mansplaining there is, to assume that I don't know my own opinions or may have forgotten to account for one or more variables. I chose the bear, damnit, stop telling me bears are dangerous!

And for the record, I chose Before as well. After simply doesn't look healthy in the long run - too many arm muscles, not enough torso cushioning.

The guy on the left is ripped AF.

There was a thread on The Site Which Shall Not Be Named a while back pointing out these differences using two magazine covers featuring Hugh Jackman.

The men’s magazine had him shirtless, yelling at the camera, and flexing his muscles. The women’s magazine had him smiling sweetly in a cozy sweater.

Disclaimer: I'm a lesbian so I don't have a dog in this fight, but I'm not surprised women vote more for the photo on the left. He just seems friendlier and more approachable, someone you would have fun hanging out with, so I guess that anecdotally gives credence to what the author is saying. The photo on the right looks like someone who's a bit too intense, and I say this as someone who is also trying to get somewhat ripped. It's funny because when I'm at the gym almost a lot of times I assume the super ripped dudes working out there are bi or gay, and more often than not I'm right. I know it's judging a book by its cover, but clearly that aesthetic appeals to other guys (who are also into guys).

Yeah, most of the time such extreme body remaking is either for themselves or other men, not actually for women. Shame they cannot accept this.

I would have voted for the before picture without a doubt

Seems almost obvious that the left picture is more attractive