What’s up, brothers?
It’s time for a female natty or not review. This time our focus goes to Natasha Aughey – a fitness icon and social media sensation.
Her stats:
Height: 5’6″ (167.5cm)
Weight: 125 – 135lbs (56.7 – 61.2kg)
Body fat: Unknown but seems fairly lean for a female. In many photos, she displays a clearly visible set of six pack abs. Judging by eyes, she seems to be around 15-22% body fat.
Factors Suggesting that She Isn’t a Full Natty Chicka
source: https://www.instagram.com/p/BvSHZPIgYYd
1. She is too big for a natty woman.
I want you to perform the following exercise. Look at Natasha’s photos and replace her head with that of a male. Mike O’Tren will be a good choice, but I am not pushing. Make your own decision. How do you feel about the outcome? Exactly. I had the same reaction – that’s one buff dude.
2. A fairly decent upper chest
Men have a hard time building up their upper chests. It’s one of those areas that can never be too big. Women have it even harder. You would be hard pressed to find a natural chicka that has an upper chest area hypertrophied to the point where the clavicle is covered in muscular tissue. While Natasha’s upper chest region is not on the level of D-bol Linn Bailey, it’s good enough.
3. Overall masculine look
Natasha has a V-taper that would make many natural men jealous. Her figure certainly does not look feminine. Hourglass figure…who was that?
Her arms, shoulders and lats are enormous. Extreme upper body development has never been common for women. Females struggle with those areas. This doesn’t seem to be the case for this particular fitness sensation.
source: https://www.instagram.com/p/BrdFXD6B_pw
4. A woman is known by the company she keeps.
Millionaires hang out with millionaires. Beggars hang out with beggars. Criminals hang out with criminals. Fake natties hang out with fake natties.
The insta profile of Natasha shows her in the company of other females with questionable natural statuses, namely Meg Squats and Stefi Cohen.
source: https://www.instagram.com/p/BnZccJJhs0B
5. She is plenty strong.
A video uploaded on September 8, 2018, shows Natasha benching 250lbs/113kg for 1 RM. That’s a phenomenal bench press for a woman. And she does it without one of those crazy arches done by mentally damaged women at powerlifting meets. At 135lbs, that’s a 1.85BW bench press – a very respectable feat of strength for a man.
Factors Suggesting that She Is Natural
1. She lifts
Judging by her videos, she is training relatively hard. Consequently, the naive souls out there can easily conclude that they can look like that if they did the same. It’s not so simple, brothers and sisters. Training can trigger an adaptive response, but it cannot stimulate protein synthesis to no end. In other words, you can only get so big and strong from lifting alone.
2. She has sick genetics.
Maybe she does, but her before picture certainly does not suggest it. She looks like an average skinny woman in it.
3. She has the most amazing nutrition in the world.
While the body certainly benefits greatly from healthy foods, nutrition alone cannot produce otherworldly results. Even if you eat Sylvester Stallone approved Argentinian beef coupled with Vince Gironda’s fertile eggs, desiccated liver tablets and milk from Mark Big Toe’s dairy farm in Wichita Falls, you still won’t be able to transform into a manly woman naturally.
If you don’t believe me, convince your sister, or better yet your girlfriend, that following this anabolic nutritional regime will make her tits grow and boost the elasticity of her collagen and see what happens to her muscles. [evil plot]. Of course, she will continue to look like a woman, provided that you don’t put anavar pills in her meals.
In conclusion
This chicka looks as natural as sitting at a cubicle for the better part of a day tailoring those TPS reports.
What about Debbie Crall trainer?
She’s over 60 and more fit than many 20 year old girls.
Women can’t look like a man body builder without pinning. Bottom line.
Are you talking about Natasha Aughey or Debbie Crall ?
100% PED’s straight away from 1st sight
Lol, she claims natural stats?
I don’t know, but I always thought it was strange to be that lean over 60 years old and still have very visible and solid muscles. She looks much younger than her age and has noticable big muscles for the relative light weights she shows on her instagram page.
What are you talking about? I was not replying to your comment, I wondered if the girl, Natasha, claims to be natural.
Sorry, my mistake.
U take suggestions Truth? If so, id like to hear your thoughts on this new Alec Enkiri guy. Hes like the Bugenhagen prick 2.0, small/half-natty enough to fool noobs, strong, and sure as hell won’t get out of my damn feeds! Anyways juicy to me
I actually think he’s natty and good about pointing out BS on YouTube.
He is strong as hell, but no beyond natty limits. Alec is defenatly a gifted athlete with his 40″ vertical. Most people with that level of explosiveness can translate to freakish strength.
His upper body lifts are nowhere near elite even for a small guy like him.
He’s not carrying that much mass and looks like what you think a strong natty lifter should.
If the before picture is not already impressive then certainly he/she is not natural, this Alec case is almost the same as a “natural” bodybuilder athlete from my country, Caio Bottura, nowadays he already admits the use because he wished to change categories but still he claims to be on low doses lol.
My penis is confused.
The Question is actually Male or Female? With tiny non child-bearing hips, male insertions, and the ugliest breasts (?) in history “Natasha” is an Ashkenazic intersex using steroids. Think of Allie Raisman or Gal Gadot. Not fully female. Not natty.
Gal Gadot is very skinny.
I’m a 173cm / 67 kg male with 5 years of regular lifting routine. The muscular look of this woman is what I achieved naturally (I just checked some pictures) at my fittest. I stopped lifting about 9 months ago due to a bad injury and today, I don’t look nearly as muscular as I did. Clearly, she is on drugs. Some of her pictures are just way too much, and yes, her face clearly shows male features that she probably did not inherit naturally.
113 kg bench press at 67kg bodyweight is quite impressive even for a man, for a girl is absolutely phenomenal, so I doubt she is natural. However in some cases time is the best answer, she can’t continue to pin his glutes forever.
People seem to think success = cheating. Haven’t any of you seen what modern crossfit style training and nutrition can do for the women? Women like this are popping up all over the place and if Natasha is exceptional, that may be what she actually is, exceptional.
I dare any of you to tell me what you think this girl is pinning. I’ve never seen a pinner look this cute in the face. Every girl using PEDs quickly looks like your alcoholic uncle in the face. If Natasha isn’t natural, then she’d be a man by now but she has a beautiful face.
I’m guessing a lot of you men thinking she’s amazing have both of two things: crappy genetics (like most of us do), and a crappy workout routine / habits (like most of us do).
Perhaps we should start a site that’s called “works out or doesn’t”. All the people you all think are natural probably fall into the “doesn’t work out” category.
Billiam Fallace
You really beleave Natasha Aughey is natural ?
Yeah right man. You’ve got girls like Cassandra Martin, Stephanie Sanzo or Paige Hathaway looking like dolls yet we need to believe they’re natural because they look smooth in the eyes. Look up Fawnia Mondey. Very feminine girl, tell me she’s not juicing. Of course she is. Shadow pinners exist, male and female. Anyone that has an impressive physique, wants to take advantage of it (make money) and posts somewhat regularly on instagram or other social media is clearly using PEDs (yes, that includes steroids).
PED or not… one thin is for sure. Many of the Pro female bodybuilders are super nice people. That’s what I appreciate.