Whenever the discussion turns to fitness I am always left wondering about fitness for purpose.
If the objective measure is fitness for the purpose of being competitive amongst an elite group of gay bodybuilders for the purpose of achieving some kind of victory (mating, aggrandizement, etc.) then it would seem to me that your feelings have a very logical underpinning. In any given group you may be the most fit for the competitive criteria or not. In the large set you probably fall somewhere in the upper quartile.
In any given competition it may well be an objective fact that you simply don't measure up. It may, equally, be an objective fact that your competitors don't measure up to you. Looked at in this way your feelings seem to be about right for the game that you are playing.
Do you ever question the nature of the competition itself? On an even smaller scale, have you ever considered that at least some component of the competition in which you are participating may not be based on entirely aesthetic cues? Perhaps there is a behavioral component that is being missed. A relevant question might be, is my behavior as sexy and attractive as my body?
I will always return to fitness for purpose. A Navy Seal trains to do a specific job and is fit for that purpose. A Michelin 4 star chef might weigh 300lbs. while being extremely fit for the purpose of producing sublime cuisine. Bobby Fischer wasn't much to look at, but holy fuck could he play chess.
The question is, what exactly is the point of the fitness that one is working to attain? Why work to achieve a perfect body? What do you intend to do with it? Is the competition winnable or is it necessary to eventually accept a middle position?
Over the years I've had a bunch of friends in competitive bodybuilding, powerlifting, and triathlon. I spent a lot of my own time pursuing powerlifting.
The only person that I ever met who had a realistic claim on being the best bodybuilder in the world was Lee Labrada. At any given time he may have had 4 or 5 real competitors (Lee Haney, etc.), but that was really the panorama. Labrada, btw, was always the engineer, humble, and realistic. I don't think he suffered from the so-called "Adonis Complex".
My takeaway from meeting him was that competing in that class requires winning a genetic lottery and then applying extraordinary dedication (to the exclusion of everything else) for a very long time. Anyone who doesn't have the prerequisite genetics and/or singularity of purpose must eventually accept that they fit into a continuum and will never be the best.
It seems to me that the only way to resolve this inner conflict is to identify a purpose for which it is actually possible to become fit. Furthermore, it seems necessary to accept that the game is never based entirely upon one set of criteria.
If one understands the game, understands that the game is fundamentally rigged, then maybe it is possible to calm down and get to the right mix of dedication, meditation, and civilization.