Protein World "beach body" adverts

[RunkyJam]

Anyone else raging about these?

I've complained to the ASA and just signed a petition taking off over at change.org

www.change.org/p/proteinworld-arjun-seth-remove-are-you-beach-body-ready-advertisements

Absolutely BONKERS this was approved IMO.

Do men get asked if they are beach body ready in adverts?

Of course we do, it's just many women have selective vision when they're only looking for something specific.

If you're unfamiliar with the exercise cycle then most will generally pack muscle on and then burn off the fat. A huge amount of attention is given to 'bulking' and 'cutting' cycles, normally with the aim of looking ripped over the summer period.

Obviously as much attention is paid by non gym regulars with most magazines and newspapers printing 'get ready for the summer' type diet/fitness plans.

It's funny really as I'd bet that no one was aware of the Bulk Powders and campaign that also featured in London underground. I wasn't either to be honest.

www.bulkpowders.co.uk/the-core/bulk-powders-revealyourself-campaign/

I actually think the main issue is social media.

In the past you may go on holiday, take a few pictures show family and that would be it. Now it's uploaded to Facebook, thousands of people you know and don't know see it.

When I was out of shape I would duck out of photos with friends, knowing they would be uploaded. Now I'm in shape, on holiday, some of my friends didn't want to stand next to me in photos. This is men.

As soon as the photo is online you are bring judged, with likes or comments. If the next generation reject social media entirely, then you can start to reverse the idea of looks being of ultimate importance.

Buffy it's clear that education is needed then, you won't get near that body type at all without the correct nutrition, like they say abs are are crafted the kitchen not the gym. Laxitives, poor diet and starvation mode are detrimental to muscle gain and repair.

You have to eat a clean diet, no refined sugars nothing processed, I mean my diet is "boring" but it's clean, veg, meat, fruit, home made vinegrettes and sauces so I can monitor the sugar content. It's protein heavy and carb light using slow release carbs. It's as boring as they come but it aids my training and thus my image. I've still got a long way to go 8 months post partum to get anywhere near peak form but it's a work in progress.

I think if we actually sent nutritionalists to schools and showed children what a healthy diet is, and how certain body "types" are are and the hard work and dedication that goes in to them, maybe then we can get closer to grabbing the bull by its horns on this countries poor body image and poor doetry habbits.

"So it seems for the women to beach body ready, they need to lose weight and slim down, for the men, they need to bulk up and be muscley. Sounds gender bias to me."

The ironic thing is, to reveal the oh-so-important abs, you need to lose weight and slim down (cut the fat), not bulk up, so the goal is the same really.
Men would be better doing cardio than stomach crunches to reveal the abs, but the Men's Health magazines always focus on "6 weeks to amazing abs" routines.

That's an interesting point, MrNosey - weight loss would help to show off muscles, but media targeted at men rarely mentions this, instead focusing on the 'building' and 'bulking' aspect. On the flipside, women could get closer to the 'standard' by building muscle definition, but by and large the mainstream media focuses on low calorie diets and weight loss plans.

Anyone got any thoughts about why this might be?

Well, the ad in its current form has now been banned on the basis that the claims it makes are misleading. So ner to Protein World.

MrNoseybonk

To look like the man in their ads you do have to go through a bulking stage (unless your starting from being quite overweight) then you cut.

Most men in fitness ads and magazines used steroids. It's a little mentioned fact.
So, pretty unacheivable for most unless you do that.
Yes you do need to have the muscles to reveal, but the "6 week plans" and the like are always about building muscle when they should say if you already have muscle then don't bother, just do cardio and if you don't already have the muscle, don't bother build muscle and try again in 3 months.
"Anyone got any thoughts about why this might be?"
Not sure - it's the mainstream media. Some women like muscular men, some hate it, yet the MSM generally promote the muscular. Same with women. Plenty of men like athletic women and plenty curvy, but MSM generally promotes the thin exclusively.
Maybe because in the past, men have generally done the physical jobs, so a "physical" look is seen as appealling.
Maybe because women have generally not done "physical" jobs, tending to gain weight was more common, so a thin look was seen as appealling.
Just musing, by the way, not saying this is why for sure.

Those slendertone adverts showing this ripped muscley guy make me lol

Though men can have this weird perception of what they need to do of just working on their upper body (the most visible) eg arms chest and leave the bottom half alone and you see them with their disproportional stick legs.

Buffy, I would classify learning about negative affects to the body and appearance as part of education. You learn these in biology, anatomy and physiology.

But the reason appearance changes is due to health being damaged. They are not separate. So why not educate about health and appearance. You can't use one as deterrent and not the other. I don't understand how from the publications you have reviewed that health is scene as a different approach to appearance.

I do think it's tough with long term affects to deter people. If cigarettes had the reputation of say ecstasy

But isn't wrinkles about health of skin. Quickening of the reduction of collagen.
Or the wasting of teeth due to sustained bulimia, teeth corroding due to regular contact with stomach acids.
Both are appearance deterrents but definitely health related. I believe teaching the health side of it you understand the process, and therefore make the appearance affects more short term and more real. I think it's a better way to go.

Probably, people don't take notice. But from the health warnings I've seen they only tell you about the potential outcomes. Not how these outcomes occurr and the process that leads to these outcomes. So I don't see just stating a harmful health outcome as actually education. They don't highlight the steps and middle ground between a detrimental action and the extreme detrimental health outcome.

I wonder if knowledge and education are very different in this case.

Yeah I get there is no point in giving adults knowledge. I should have been clearer, I mean to have it taught in schools. Where you are made to learn.
You do real life experiments all the time in lessons to make it real for students. You learn about the respiratory system, why not add on to that the affects and process of smoking, exercise, drugs (medical or social), weight. You learn about the production of proteins, why not show the process and effects of starvation and other states.
You learn about how the body produces energy. Why not show the processes of producing energy for different states of activity and the correct nutrition required for these activities. These are just some examples, that could be easily related to real life and instill this knowledge early. Rather than allowing bad habits to form and trying to scare people in to change.

I reckon this information given to young people will change the views and attitudes of a generation. The schooling system being imbalanced may not make a total change but it's not been tried and may work.

Also, when I did physiology and school I found it too disjoint. Not relating topics to each other as whole. They didn't bring all the body functions together. I think the big picture is important along with bringing in some pathology.

I don't think it's victim blaming, because there isn't any pressure to do it. It's just giving people the best possible knowledge of how their body works. Therefore, more understanding and control. It's more about educating about processes. Rather than burger = fat, smoking = cancer. It allows them the best opportunity to make more right decisions, more often.
I think understanding and technology is always moving forward. I think schools could make it part of their duty to allow their students access to it.
Regarding sustainability, (more of a forward thinking global issue, rather than promoting personal health) it's not blaming people. I haven't seen what studies were done on sustainable fuel and pollution around the time of the industrial revolution, but studies move forward, hence you reviewing old studies. Progression is made off the back of predecessors mistakes and advancements. If no one had studied pollution would clean energies as a topic exist? Similar with sustainable fuels. I think it's unrealistic to expect a generation to stand still and say 'well they did it, so we will, it's only fair'. People putting on weight, for example, is an endemic. You wouldn't expect generations to want to do it, with increased knowledge and technology as you would expect people today to want the Black Death brought back.

*future generations