>>76740553
Once upon a time i used to effortpost a lot about it, I started the whole Vulgar vs Noble masculinity and I'm not in the mood to repeat myself, but the long and short of it is that the gym has turned into another vector of control that only seems good on the surface, but restrains you over time and imposes arbitrary rules for life (think the medical system too)
I think we're supposed to see how little the returns of gymcelling are, the gross diminishing returns. 1 years into the gym, x5, does not meat the gains of the 1st year, x5. Simple as, and at best you're only developing the strength to grab barbells and plates. At worst, and it baffles me that guys have the gall to argue about it, is that you're developing Vulgar strength: carry furniture, or washing machines, or bags of potatoes, or the strength to change your own tires. Become “useful” and thus only exist to be useful. That's the most basic definition of Vulgar Masculinity, and the Vulgar pride themselves with it (just think about how the guys in trades/blue collar act)
The main issue is due to indoctrination, we're unable to see the Noble Masculine as it is. Art. Itself for its own sake, discarding completely the façade of usefulness/functionality. So, whether you do it or not, it does not change who you are, meaning you don't identify with it.
The Noble is leisure, the most noblest of men are exempt from working, and seek only mastery and skill, in total contrast to the brute force that needs its usefulness to exist.
Noble Masculine men exist as objects of admiration, they are themselves artists and enacters and creators of consequence. Vulgar Masculine gymcels exist to be instrumentalized (military golem or workhorse)
