[borroka]

"What's your quibble here? The use of the word unfortunately?"

Yes, that's the quibble. 'Unfortunately, you need to do resistance exercises if you want to grow substantial muscles'; 'Unfortunately, you need to stop watching porn like crazy if you want to have normal behavior with men/women'; 'Unfortunately, you need to stop stuffing yourself with food if you want to be in decent shape.'

For the first two examples, 'unfortunately' seems out of place. But for the third example, food, it seems reasonable. And it is because gorging on food until you lose your wits has been normalized, but there is nothing unpleasant about having a normal relationship with food.

[Kirby64]

I don't really see the issue with unfortunately in either example 1 or 3. 2 is a moral judgment which is unrelated.

If you could take a pill to make yourself grow muscles without downsides, it would be great. There's nothing 'fortunate' about having to spend hours of time on exercise which is otherwise meaningless.

Also, there definitely is something unpleasant about dieting to lose weight. It's not fun. Maintaining a healthy diet less so, but you are absolutely making sacrifices personally and socially if you cannot eat or drink whatever you want whenever you want.

[borroka]

I don't want to get into semantics because it usually leads nowhere. But maintaining a normal weight does not mean suffering hell on earth because you cannot gorge on Oreos. The vast majority of overweight people are not fond of delicacies, but they binge on foods that give them gas like a turbojet engine, are not as altogether capable as they could be, are tired, and experience intolerable mood swings.

But suppose all these negative consequences did not exist, would eating all day like a pig be heaven on earth? What sacrifices do you make when you don't eat ad lib to maintain a normal weight, nothing as extreme as preparing for a bodybuilding competition? I like food, but I don't feel deprived by eating portions that allow me to maintain a normal weight. And I can eat or drink whatever I want, but not all the time. That hunger feeling may last as long as you pay attention to it, a couple of minutes. If someone had a problem with alcohol, you wouldn't say to them, “I'm very sorry that you have to make this sacrifice of not drinking all day every day to have a normal life,” but for some reason eating smaller portions seems, because that's the narrative of these fat times, an unbearable sacrifice. And it is a self-fulfilling prophecy that leads to yo-yo swings in weight.

If there was a pill that would make me grow muscles without exercising would I stop exercising? I would not, it is fun and engaging, makes me test my will and my intelligence.

[Kirby64]

There's a difference between your framing of "gorging and binging" on food and the fact being that portion sizes in American are just not sustainable for many people. If a meal at a restaurant is 1000 calories, and drinks are 200 each... is having a meal and two drinks gorging or binging? I would argue no, but 1400cal in a meal is almost certainly going to lead to excess if you have even somewhat normal food the rest of the day.

I'm not suggesting that having a pill that allows you to eat unlimited amounts of food without consequence would be "heaven on earth", I'm just saying that for most people's lifestyles you are placed into an environment that by default will lead to over consumption. That's the sacrifice. You cannot choose the default behavior anymore, and it requires foresight, thought, and planning to execute. All of that is unfortunate, because it is not easy especially if you're not used to it.

[nradov]

The time spent on exercise is hardly meaningless. It builds mental discipline, and the neurological pathways necessary to use the muscles effectively. Those attributes are as important as the muscle tissue itself.

[Kirby64]

As someone that exercises a lot, that’s just cope. Sure, it has side benefits, but the primary overwhelming benefit is improving health and improving aesthetics. You can build mental discipline in plenty of other ways. You can build grit in ways that don’t involve lifting weights. At a minimum of 3 hours a week (often much more for many people), it’s a pretty big cost to pay.

Regarding building pathways to use muscles, it’s effectively like riding a bike. You spend some initial time learning good technique, but year 2, 3, 4, and onwards isn’t really doing much in that department. It’s just grinding to get stronger/more muscular.

[borroka]

I don't think it's just coping, but it depends on the level of mastery you want to achieve in the specific discipline. For any skill, including weightlifting, the more you practice, the better the quality of the skill. And becoming competent at something is one of the pleasures of life. For the amateur athlete, one has to take into account the opportunity cost of doing something else, and life is full of opportunities. As for grit, I agree it is more about showing a personality trait than developing it, and grit appears to be mostly discipline-specific: many athletes show admirable grit when training and less than admirable grit in other areas of their lives.

[Kirby64]

That’s fine if you want it to be a hobby. Admirable even. But not everyone wants yet another hobby. If you could get the benefits then the vast majority of folks I don’t think would miss anything meaningful. You’ve got to enjoy the tertiary benefits to stay sane, but I’m not kidding myself that I wouldn’t enjoy ~5 hrs/week back to pursue other activities.