waterpolo and bodybuilding are almost identical, both physique are liked by the faggots and apart from muscle size, thats about the only difference for the body.
the other difference is one you have 15+ guys all in one pool, doing stuff under water which we cant see clearly and occasionally someone gets dragged under water (are you thinking what i`m thinking?)
the other we have around 1>15 bodybuilders on a stage, everythings out in the open, and they flex, you can flex the gay way (king kamali anyone?) and you can do it less gay,
basketball/football/rugby/soccer/ and sports similar to those you have sweat guys rubbing against each other, using their ass to move the opponent away and sometimes you get a face full of balls (especially rugby).
bber is easy to call gay, no arguement there, but when you exam them all, if i was going to be gay, i` go do rugby or something and just start jumping on guys.
the other sports which are non-contact and "easy" are called gay because its just a bunch of sissy stuff,
chess is the least gay sport but then you cross over from the world of gay to the one of nerdy, either way there are no woman.
bottomline > get fat
^^ In what way did you do anything other than insinuate that all sports have men in them and some of those men may be gay.
BBing has deliberately marketed itself to its gay audience since its inception in physique magazines back in the 50's. If it has deliberately cultivated its image around and for this gay audience then that is completely different from aspects of a sporting contest that require physical contact. Hell I reckon all business men must be gay because they shake hands!!!
Yes there is an aspect of the intent being a matter of interpretation. But go and read the psychology stuff that has been done on BBing and other subcultures. Have a look at the history of this stuff. I'm not saying you have to be gay to like BBing, but BBing has marketed itself to the gay population shamelessly.Originally Posted by Duality
i like the point made here with the two mags (with the first one easily being the "gayer" of the two). most homosexual men (and hetrosexual women) find the level of muscular development on bodybuilders of this day and age to be unattractive. i'm sure tim is right that upon bodybuildings inception many years ago it was heavily marketed to the gay audience, but that is not the case anymore. it has far more of a cult following (meaning, you really have to have a liking to it to appreciate it, like myself) than a homosexual one.
the essence of bodybuilding is displaying the body, this fact alone means that by nature it is going to have a following that are sexually oriented. it's human nature. if anyone wants to make a blanket statement that any magazine that focuses on the human body from an physical/physique stanpoint is gay, then fine, just know your ass backwards in your thought process.