
What do we mean when we say women can be ‘too muscular'?
What does it mean when we call a woman 'too muscular'?
A muscular woman has historically been a difficult woman. The way we perceive beauty in the muscular form is influenced by many factors, not least of which is gender, and it goes far beyond aesthetics. 'Too muscular' can call into question one's identity as a woman: are you a real woman if your muscles are bigger than the societal norm? 'Too muscular' can also be accusatory: are you a cheat, guilty of using steroids or other performance-enhancing drugs?
At a 2017 talk with students at Harvard, the ballet superstar Misty Copeland spoke about close-minded ideals of beauty. 'Why am I being told my body is too muscular?' she said. 'It's code language for your skin is wrong.' The tennis great Serena Williams, in a 2016 interview with the Guardian, said that she has been described as 'too muscly and too masculine, and then a week later too racy and too sexy'. In white-dominated spaces like ballet and tennis, 'too muscular' can be code-speak for 'too Black', for bodies that don't belong – often jumbling up issues of femininity, race and power.
'Too muscular' is also used to disparage transgender women and intersex athletes with naturally high levels of testosterone. The growing controversy over the participation of transgender women in athletic competition is rooted in muscle, and the perceived unfairness of muscles that come with puberty.
This, of course, disrupts the long-standing division of sports participation based on sex. The recent establishment of non-binary divisions for major marathons including the Boston Marathon and the New York City Marathon is one way that organizers of athletic competitions are addressing the issue. There will undoubtedly be more rethinking to come.
All kinds of wacky theories around hormones have been used to delegitimize women in power, connecting the body to the body politic: menopause has been called out as something that makes women unstable leaders (see: Clinton, Hillary), and yet testosterone is the hormone that actually makes people reckless (see: Clinton, Bill).
All this is to say that pseudoscience has long governed norms around women's anatomy and biology – and, by extension, their strength and power in society. Maybe our viewing habits around muscular beauty have become a bit rigid. If we go back to the muscle itself, could that loosen up – and maybe even stretch – our thinking?
Amber Fitzsimmons is a modern-day anatomist – a professor of anatomy and chair of the department of physical therapy and rehabilitation science at the University of San Francisco, California (UCSF) who instructs students at one of the top medical schools in the country. She is also a physical therapist who has seen all kinds of real bodies enter the clinic. During my visit to her anatomy lab to observe a dissection, I asked what 'too muscular' means to her, and she reminded me that Americans have been socialized to not want to see the female weightlifter body, the bulked-up form that became especially taboo in the 1970s and 80s.
''Too muscular' means 'too masculine',' Fitzsimmons said matter-of-factly. 'You don't want to be seen as a man. And that fear still persists around women and exercise.'
Before our dissection, she'd gathered an audience of anatomist colleagues – Dana Rohde, Barbie Klein and Maddie Norris, all instructors and researchers at UCSF – on my behalf, to help unpack the vocabulary of muscle and where the gendering of those ideals comes from.
Swimmers' shoulders. Runners' legs. Gymnasts' abs. Dancers' posture. These phrases summon up different body types, all admired in one circle or another. They raise the question of what is behind the appeal of specific muscles and the characteristics they connote. Look at the way 'muscle' insinuates itself into the lexicon. Synonyms for muscle include potency and domination. When you force someone to agree with you, you're strong-arming them. To make a muscle, you contract your biceps – or more accurately, the biceps brachii. There is no more stereotypical symbol of strength than the bent-arm curl – in fact, it's the stand-in for all muscle (see: emoji).
And yet, despite its visible prominence, Fitzsimmons explained, the biceps is the strongest arm muscle only when the arm is in this 'Popeye' position – otherwise, it's the brachialis, a deeper, 'pure flexor' muscle in the upper arm, which generates the most force, relegating the biceps to a supporting role.
What does a person who studies and teaches anatomy think when they see muscles on display? The room started buzzing with debate.
'Well, if you look at bodybuilders,' Rohde said, 'sometimes their muscles are all for show – all that bulk makes it difficult for them to walk, and their lats are too big for a natural arm swing.'
Contrast this with gymnasts, Klein pointed out: 'They can lift their whole bodies with their hands, with such control – for me, what makes a muscle beautiful always goes back to function.'
Sign up to Well Actually
Practical advice, expert insights and answers to your questions about how to live a good life
after newsletter promotion
Form and function: I thought about Marvel superheroes. Are their muscles functional? When my brother and I were kids, our father gave us comic books – X-Men, Wolverine, Dark Phoenix – to motivate us to draw human anatomy. We were instructed to study superhero physiques and practice sketching. What I absorbed from those comic books – other than the multiverse of stories, which I loved – was that male superheroes were top-heavy with biceps and that female superheroes were top-heavy with boobs. And that drawing that fictive landscape of muscles was a lesson in the American cultural psyche, with impossible ideals.
I wondered aloud: 'What if you were a Hollywood trainer for a superhero movie? What specific muscles would you target to give the appearance of strength, on the ideal body, to an American audience?'
'Let's start with a quintessential male superhero: Captain America,' Fitzsimmons said. 'Certainly, the arms – triceps, biceps. Then deltoids, pectorals and latissimus dorsi, to create the exaggerated triangle from wide shoulders to a narrow waist. They overbuild the upper trapezius – that's around the neck – for a wide shoulder, then define the thorax with the external obliques' – the most superficial of the lateral abdominal muscles. And, finally, the rectus abdominis – the six-pack.
'It's funny that if we see someone with a six-pack, we automatically think they're strong and really fit,' Klein added thoughtfully. 'But they might just be naturally leaner.'
Our discomfort with muscles begins when we move too far into that same territory for a woman. 'The female equivalent is not equivalent at all,' Ftizsimmons said. 'Female superheroes are strong, but they'll have boobs and a bottom. Smaller shoulders – not too wide. You'll have a flat stomach, but you won't see a supercut six-pack. Enhanced hips and glutes, tapering to a narrow waist – a controlled hourglass. You can't be too extra. If you see the thick neck, thighs and wide shoulders that we expect on a man, it throws people off – and that's because we've been conditioned that way.'
In other words, we allow a greater spectrum of muscular beauty for men – from the lean, wiry marathon body to the big, beefcake muscles of the heavyweight wrestling body. Even among female athletes themselves, there is a self-perceived conflict between their 'performance body' in the sports context and their 'appearance body' in the social world – across multiple studies of NCAA athletes in different sports, women have expressed pride in the utility of their muscularity on the playing field, but also worry that those same muscles would make wearing jeans or dresses look 'abnormal'; they compensate by holding back in the weight room to avoid getting 'too big' and by wearing makeup to emphasize their femininity.
When it comes to the superhero body, it's all about signaling fitness and outward muscular appeal rather than actual function, no matter what the gender. Theirs are the muscles that we – the audience – are indoctrinated to receive. We absorb that information into our daily lives and respond in kind. 'All you need to do is go to a gym and see what's happening there,' Fitzsimmons said. 'It trickles down.'
This kind of thinking, it turns out, isn't just Marvel comics, Hollywood superficiality, and gym culture talking – it's embedded in our medical textbooks too. In these ways, muscle iconography in modern society can be harmful to men, too.
The social psychologist Jaclyn A Siegel has studied how the stereotypical male body ideal contributes to eating and muscle dysmorphic disorders. In the attempt to become muscular, she has said, men are vulnerable to 'the masculine norms of dominance, confidence, sexual success, and physical and emotional self-control', which make them susceptible to eating disorders. In fact, the quiet increase of boys and men seeking help for disordered eating, excessive exercise and performance-enhancing substance abuse reveals how surface ideals of muscularity can hurt us all.
Thankfully, little shifts are happening all the time. Norms vary by culture and geography, and they aren't static. Medical textbooks are beginning to feature more varied bodies; influential athletes are becoming more visible and vocal about body image and mental health; and women of all ages are lifting heavy at the gym – often because doctors have begun prescribing them that regular dose of iron.
Maybe you've heard of 'Granny Guns', AKA Marlene Flowers, the 68-year-old social media sensation who started lifting weights a decade ago and is now followed by millions. Her witty, satirical videos challenge stereotypes around ageing women and strength, and encourage others to follow her example. I know I am.
Bonnie Tsui is the author of On Muscle: The Stuff That Moves Us and Why It Matters, out tomorrow
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
3 hours ago
- The Independent
Eating more of these plant-based foods could lower your risk of heart disease and diabetes
Eating more nuts, fruits, vegetables, and whole grains may help to reduce your risk of contracting deadly heart disease and type 2 diabetes. Researchers said this week that people who consumed more phytosterols — a natural compound found in plant foods — significantly delayed both of the conditions. Furthermore, eating more of them was linked to reduced inflammation, markers of better insulin regulation, and differences in the gut microbiome that may contribute to healthy metabolism. The study was not designed to confirm why this is the case, but the researchers said their findings strengthen the evidence. More than 7000,000 Americans die from heart disease and some 101,000 die from diabetes. 'Our findings support the dietary recommendation of adhering to healthy plant-based dietary patterns that are rich in vegetables, fruits, nuts and whole grains,' Dr. Fenglei Wang, a research associate at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said in a statement. 'These findings can help people make informed dietary choices.' Wang presented the observational findings on Tuesday at the flagship annual meeting of the American Society for Nutrition. Some phytosterol-rich foods include corn, almonds, broccoli, bananas, and wheat bread. Previous research had found that eating foods with phytosterols can help to improve peoples' health by lowering bad cholesterol, and may reduce the risk of cancer. However, most clinical trials have used high doses of the phytosterols that were beyond what someone might get through just their own diet. The new research is the first to show the benefits as part of a normal diet. To reach these conclusions, Wang and his colleagues looked at data from more than 200,000 American adults that were a part of three studies. All of the participants were nurses or other health professionals and nearly 80 percent were women. Over the course of 36 years, more than 20,000 of them developed type 2 diabetes and nearly 16,000 developed heart disease. The participants' answers to food-frequency questionnaires allowed the researchers to estimate their individual intake of phytosterols, as well as three individual phytosterols known as β-sitosterol, campesterol and stigmasterol. Those who ate the most consumed the most phytosterol had about four to five servings of vegetables, two to three servings of fruits, two servings of whole grains, and half a serving of nuts each day. This made them 9 percent less likely to develop heart disease and 8 percent less likely to develop type 2 diabetes compares to those in the bottom fifth percentage for phytosterol intake, the research showed. Looking at the individual phytosterols, similar associations were observed for β-sitosterol. But, the same was not true for campesterol or stigmasterol. In addition, the researchers analyzed blood samples, looking at the products of metabolism — also known as metabolites — from more than 11,000 people and other metabolic biomarkers in blood samples from over 40,000 participants. They found that phytosterol and β-sitosterol levels were tied to favorable metabolites and metabolic markers relevant to heart disease and diabetes. That signaled a possible reason for the association. 'Our clinical biomarker and metabolomic results suggest the involvement of insulin activity, inflammation and the metabolism of metabolites associated with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease,' said Wang. 'This suggests that phytosterol might reduce risk by alleviating insulin resistance and inflammation.' In a group of just 465 participants, they examined the gut microbiome, or the trillions of microscopic organisms inside the intestines. They found several microbial species and related enzymes linked to higher intake of phytosterols that may affect the production of metabolites associated with a lower risk of diseases. 'We found that the gut microbiome might play a role in the beneficial associations. Some species, such as Faecalibacterium prausnitzii, carry enzymes that could help degrade phytosterol, potentially influencing host metabolism,' Wang said.


The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Jimmy Kimmel: ‘We are living in the golden age of stupid'
Late-night hosts looked at the latest mistakes made by the Trump administration while expressing fear at the president's sinister new portrait. On Jimmy Kimmel Live! the host spoke about how 'stupid' is the through-line of both that night's show and the moment. He said that we are 'living in the golden age of stupid right now' while talking about those who refuse to believe scientific fact and the rise in measles down to fewer vaccinations. 'The only thing we learned from Covid is how to make sourdough bread,' he joked and said that 'people who do their own research always do it wrong'. This week has also seen Donald Trump continuing to war with Harvard and with the writer Michael Wolff after he claimed that the reason behind all of this was that the president didn't get accepted when he applied years ago. Trump has claimed it is because he is cracking down on antisemitism, which Kimmel said was 'definitely why his people voted for him'. Elon Musk has also criticised Trump's 'big beautiful bill' on social media calling it 'outrageous' and a 'disgusting abomination'. Kimmel joked that 'when he's off the ketamine, he's a lot less fun' and then added that in a battle between the two he wasn't 'sure who to root for' saying that 'it's like Diddy v R Kelly'. He moved on to the much-ridiculed new official portrait of Trump, saying it was the 'last thing a McNugget sees before it dies' and that they must have 'shot it on the Death Star'. This week also saw Fema's acting chief, David Richardson, embarrass himself after apparently not knowing that there is a hurricane season in the US. 'Is there anyone in this administration who knows how to do their job?' Kimmel asked. On the Late Show, Stephen Colbert also joked about Trump's previous presidential portrait looking like a 'body in the morgue that just stood up'. The new one is notable because it doesn't feature the American flag which is the first time since 1974. 'They had to remove it from the new portrait ever since the flag filed that restraining order,' Colbert joked. He then spoke about reports of difficulties in the White House when it comes to Trump's daily intelligence briefings. Apparently he doesn't like to read, which is becoming an issue. Colbert joked that getting him to read will be the 'plot of the next Mission: Impossible'. Reportedly, his staff has tried to turn the briefings into videos styled like Fox News segments but Colbert said they should just put them at the 'bottom of a chicken bucket'. This week also saw a report from RFJ Jr's department suggesting radical changes to healthcare, which was 'rife with errors' including seven fake sources, implying that they used AI. 'Any teacher would fail this paper immediately,' he said. He has also suggested adding labels to certain foods, such as Doritos and M&Ms, calling them unsafe for human consumption. 'By the time I've finished a bag of Doritos, I'm no longer human,' Colbert said. On Late Night, Seth Meyers spoke about Trump heading to a roundtable with law enforcement figures. He joked that it was probably an 'elaborate sting operation'. He also mentioned RFK Jr who has been changing the Covid vaccination guidance. Meyers said the options will now be 'Pfizer, Moderna or a gallon of raw yak milk'. This week also saw Musk sporting a black eye and then claiming it was from his five-year-old son. Meyers joked that 'it's the first time one of his kids has made contact'.


The Guardian
4 hours ago
- The Guardian
Share your blackbird sightings with us this summer
Blackbird populations in southern England and Greater London have plummeted in recent years. The Usutu virus, first detected in the UK in London in summer 2020, is thought to be a factor behind their decline. The British Trust for Ornithology (BTO) has asked the British public to contribute to their Blackbirds in Gardens survey to help understand how they are faring. How are the blackbirds where you are? Have you noticed any changes in their number compared to previous years? Have they declined, increased, or stayed the same? You can tell us about your blackbird sightings using this form. Please include as much detail as possible. Please note, the maximum file size is 5.7 MB. Please note, the maximum file size is 5.7 MB. Please note, the maximum file size is 5.7 MB. Your contact details are helpful so we can contact you for more information. They will only be seen by the Guardian. Your contact details are helpful so we can contact you for more information. They will only be seen by the Guardian. If you include other people's names please ask them first.