![]() ![]() You're just using this example to project your own misguided political frustration onto their rebranding. they did extensive market research and realized that they could make much more money this way. Gymshark is a corporation and they do not make decisions to fold to your nebulous liberalism or out of the political sentiments of their employees, which you are only guessing. If you do your job well as a marketer, then they may even feel like in order to do that they should use your product. This signals to them that even someone that looks like them can do it and that they don't have to feel bad for not looking perfect in order to start a healthier lifestyle. It's much easier for them to envision themselves working out when they see someone who has a body type closer to them. Most people are not motivated to work out when they see a roided who has a completely unattainable body, so they don't even bother. Having more inclusive models allows for more people across a broader Spectrum to imagine themselves in your clothes and the lifestyle that it represents. ![]() Having realistic idealized figures as models only allows you to reach a certain audience. It has nothing to do with what you're calling "liberalism". You’re not getting to an impressive physique without working, even if gear helps. So those are guys injecting gear AND training and they STILL LOOK LIKE SHIT. There probably aren’t a ton of impressive physiques, right? Now realize that a TON of people in there (more than you’d expect) are on gear. Gear raises the ceiling guys can achieve, but you’re never going to look even halfway decent sitting on your ass injecting stuff.įor proof of this, go to your local gym and look around. If someone looks great, they busted their ass for it in the gym and dieting (natty or not). So what it really showed is guys injecting test and sitting on their ass gained more water weight than natties training in the gym. LBM includes water weight (which anyone who uses gear knows you gain a lot of on test). Secondly, it measured LBM not muscle change. Firstly, it was a short term study (only a few weeks). I know exactly which study you’re referencing and you’re misinterpreting it. Just look at the researchĮdit: typo: "mighty obese" to "mildly." It's actually a sense of shame and futility that leads to people giving up or not trying to get in shape. The obesity crisis started long before ads started featuring fat people. If you see a picture of someone who has your body type wearing gymshark clothes walking on a track, when you become that person by buying the gymshark clothes and getting up and walking on the track, you feel a great sense of reward and confidence at completing the goal, thus releasing dopamine and endorphins which motivates you to repeat the behavior and continue.Īll of these people here saying that this is some kind of attempt to normalize obesity are quite dense and ignorant. It's just about the brain and self-image, but also positive feedback. The shame and body dysmorphia that used to guide fitness ads is less effective in statistical terms than ads that feature more inclusive imagery. Also consider research that shows that people are much more motivated by images of people that look like them doing what they would like to do, rather than unrelatable idealized images that they could never possibly believe themselves to become. This is not really counterintuitive when you consider the statistics on BMI in the N American and UK adult populations. I say this as a personal trainer with five plus years experience in big box gyms. Unless you are in an elite bodybuilding gym, most gyms are actually filled with obese to mildly obese people who are trying to get back into shape or become healthier. Your comments are so stupid that I have to reply to more than one lol. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |