I'm an artist myself and a pretty fair hand at it. Lots of artists have done convincing musculature and not dissected anybody.
silly boy------YOU GOT GREY's ANATOMY
We do have that advantage but men have been drawn for a long time. There's no reason to dissect below what your eyes can see and dissection is a bloody business. I don't know why you feel it's necessary.
I am not an artist----I cannot draw a straight line------hubby has Grey's anatomy. The greeks did not get them muscles down as did Michelangelo and Da Vinci---
nor did the Egyptians. PS----my drafting ability is so poor that exams that required me to make a sketch------SCARED ME
The Greeks and Egyptians used a stylized form, clearly they knew what muscles looked like. The origional Olympics were done bare naked. The whole thing about the Renaissance was it's movement towards science and reality.
Here's one take on the difference...
"What’s creepy about Michelangelo’s women is that they literally have breasts stuck on a male torso–the breasts are too small, baseball-round,and separate from each other to be real. The bodies are deliberately de-sensualized and denaturalized and made to be repulsive nudes, in a way
Greek female bodies are not (the naked Aphrodite of Praxiteles horrified Greeks who though female images should be clothed, but that apparently didn’t prevent men from trying to have sex with the statue, which is indeed pretty yummy).
You just can’t help thinking that, other than a demure clothed Virgin Mary, Christian SPIRITUAL concepts of women at that time were just plain repulsed by the sensuality of the body and couldn’t deal with it. Michelangelo just can’t seem to transfer the same freedom from medieval convention to female bodies as he can to male ones–he can’t figure out how to combine the feminine sensual with the feminine spiritual. The Greeks never had that problem in their concepts of the gods."
https://renresearch.wordpress.com/2011/02/25/men-with-breasts2//comment