I've often heard it argued that girls only do well against boys in the lower age and weight classes and that after puberty it's a different situation entirely. For the most part that seems to be the case, but I think it is more to do with the fact that girls tend not pursue their chosen sports much beyond the ages of 15 / 16 which is a crying shame.
However things seem to be changing. There is growing evidence to suggest that more girls are taking their sports more seriously these days and are more inclined to continue competeing in the upper age groups and weight classes. There are certainly more clips emerging on the internet. Below is a good example. Not sure how old the competitors were here, but both look to be over 16, so it just goes to show that boys don't necessarily overtake girls physically after puberty - something this guy seems to have a hard time accepting....
Feel free to join the discussion?
The guy resisted for too long, I think. Expect to see more convincing women's victories from a time and on. And if you don't like it, go home.
ReplyDeleteWell, many guys will say the guy had the dominant position for 2 1/2 minutes until she got lucky. Or they will say, "She's more man than HE is." or "She's on steroids." ETC! But I know of a few 9-10 year old girls who have visible arm muscles and seem to be much stronger than their other 9-10 year old girlfriends. These young girls are not softball players or gymnasts. They just have more muscle naturally....just like some boys have more mscles than their friends. So....are these 9-10 year old girls on steroids?
ReplyDeleteGuys will say those things because their egos are hurt just seeing a girl beat a guy. She clearly had greater endurance, skill, strength, and flexibility.
DeleteI often hear people say "yeah well guys are always stronger than girls - it's genetics" However genetics is exactly the reason that statement isn't true. Genes are passed on regardless of gender. For example a physically strong man is likely to sire a physically strong daughter - there is no gender barrier to this...
Repeatedly noticed things, by me at least. I have nothing to add here, you guys got it right over here. So I just feel the need to put it simply. Haters gonna hate. All we have to do is to ignore their hate and, plus the time, prove them wrong.
DeleteMy only disagreement with Pupstar is that a physically strong man need NOT pass his genes of strength on to a boy OR girl. All baby boys are born about the same strength. Healthy boys BECOME strong and girls are KEPT weaker by mommie saying, "Now, go play with your dolls and your little bake oven and pretend to be a housewife while your brother plays war and wrestles with his brothers and get out of the way when they trhow the footballs and baseballs. Now go pretend to cook a meal for your husband." Boys become strong and some stronger than others mainly due to level of exertions during early childhood play. Then he may want to work out later on and become very strong. That doesn't mean he passes muscle strongness genes on to a daughter (OR a son) It's like cutting a tail off a mouse or cat. When they have a baby cat or mouse, the baby wil have a full tail,...not a cut off one. Thousands of years of telling little Susie to play with dolls and be cute and demure makes for much weaker females than what Nature originally intended them to be.
DeleteI see what you're getting at, but I'm talking about genetic pre-disposition to physical strength, i.e. something which is decided in the womb. A naturally strong or physically robust man or woman can pass their genes onto their offspring regardless of gender.
DeleteThat said if a person becomes strong through physical training, then it stands to reason that their offspring will have the ability to do the same - I think most humans have the ability to become stronger and fitter than their natural state...
Yes, I get you now. Some men are natrally disposed to be able to become stronger through exercise. Some guys just are not able to keep up even when doing the same exercise. Some young boys are stronger than their playmates and so are some girls. Potential through genes. But it does seem odd that 98% of teenaged girls through womanhood have no visible upper body muscles. They have no upper body strength at all and seem to be proud of it and say "I'm a woman...I'm SUPPOSED to be weak." Like that's so feminine and sexy.
DeleteYou got it - though I'm not sure that 98% of girls have no visible upper body muscles - you must be looking in the wrong places, plus strong and efficient muscles are not necessarily large in size. Sure many girls revel in being weak and vulnerable but that is a result of social conditioning and it is changing. Most people these days would say that athletic girls are the ones that are sexy...
DeletePupstar said exactly what I wanted to say at the end... The fact that strong muscles aren't always big has to do with the differences in muscle mass quality, where the female body has an incredibly big advantage over the male. I have explained this stuff in my article "Women's technical advantages", so you might want to take a look at it, if you haven't already. As for those sissy girls who revel in being weak, they get on my nerves like nothing and some day I may punch one! It's not possible for me to hold my nerves forever! You have no idea how much patience this thing needs!
DeleteThis thing with steroids is just funny. A few days ago I saw a little girl (estimated age 3-4 years), who had really good legs... I hope she takes up football. She seems perfect for it. Could she though be on steroids from such a little age? Oh, yeah, seems legit...
DeleteWell, I usually look at the easiest part o see,...arms and shoulders. In America, you see hundreds of women on tv sows and commercials. A vas percentage of them show no deltoid, tricep or bicep when bending or extending their arms. They have SMALL arms that should show toned muscles due to lack of fat layers on their arms but they still show no visible muscle. Sure many people like athletic girls but they mean the ones who can do aerobics or run or swim...but muscles on a girl..many can't accpet that yet. Strong and efficient muscles can be seen in a person's small arms due to less fatty layers around them.
ReplyDeleteIt's true that most people judge a person's strength by looking at the upper body only. On TV you will only see what the directors / marketing people believe the public wants to see and traditional views on what is feminine still prevail. Even those girls with undeveloped arms and torsos will usually have pretty impressive lower body musculature. Women's sports aren't televised that much but try watching a women's hockey or volleyball game. These women have very impressive physiques though none of them will ever get cast in a fragrance commercial...
DeleteA gymnast is better all round in full body musculature than a volleyball girl. She has more musce per square inch of her body than volleyball or hockey ayers Softball players have equal balance of power. ANYONE has strong legs. Each time you go up a flight of stairs, your one leg lifts your full body up to the next step.So loerbody strength is expected. How about women basketball players. They have impressive lower body stregnth compared to their upper body strength. But I just wonder, too, why it is that a male basketball player who is 5-9 can jump up and dunk a basketball while a woman 6'2" can barely touch the rim. And we can't say the girl isn't trying as she doesn't want to be showey. When the girls 6'5" to 6'8" DO dunk, they just about et their wrist over the rim to dunk. They do NOT tomahawk dunk it like men who are 5'11" to 6'6". And women should have great leg strength for their body size, too. Yot the 150 pound frmale can't jump up and touch the rim but the 190 pound man jumps straight up and dunks the basketball. I believe that for a girl to be as strong as guys or the claim to be stronger should have very impressive averall body musculature...upper and lower body. When you see a girl who has no visible arm muscle, you can bet her legs are mayby nice and sexy and feminine but not super strong. A girl with some arm and sholder muscle will often have even more impressive leg muscles than voleyball players who have no upper body strength.
DeleteYeah, I'm not saying that female hockey or volleyball players are the ultimate examples of upper body strength or musculature - I just gave them as examples if you haven't seen females with arm muscles as they both wear sleeveless tops. Of course a gymnast or any girl who's chosen sport is more reliant on strength will have more full body musculature...
DeleteHope we beat FIFA soon enough, so that you will be able to see the physique of pro female football players. Now that's something you guys will love:)
DeleteHere let's note something... At some time I happened to overhear that Michelle Obama took part in some TV show and beat some guy at some "fitness contests", so now many women in the USA want to have her looks, but... without training. They even go to plastic surgeons to get the job done. If this isn't laziness, what is it, can someone tell me? And you know what? These girls will be easy to tell apart, so I think they may get joked around quite a lot. The most practical way to tell them apart is to challenge them to an armwrestle or any other similar thing. You can neither fake fitness nor strength, so do not be lazy. Get up and work out. It's the only way up.
ReplyDeleteExactly. Training can get you results you won't see from such fakeries. Training gives you beauty that starts from inside, something that can't happen with fakeries. So, girls, don't be lazy. Work out as much as your body can handle. You will be pleasantly surprised by the results.
DeleteNow seriously,
DeleteYou are totally right about the brainwashing. It is unconscious. But it was supported with a reason. To sustain a community really short on resources and facing constant threats, and short life-spans as in history, women had to stay at home to rear children and men had to go to war. This is just a game of chance. We were all one specie, who propogated by asexual reproduction before. Then, we realized to serve particular purposes, we needed to do it sexually.
So A specie became 'men' who are physically stronger and less bound by boobs or periods e.g but had to take more risks.
Women had a pretty sheltered life, kid-rearing and not that strong, but with peace of mind for imagination. It's just the way all of us decided to go.
Today, we know we have enough food for everybody, the idea of war has gone, so men don't need to take risks -> growing weaker... women are less bound by strict restrictions, due to no limits on efficiency -> getting stronger.
Eventually, I think we're turning our backs on reproduction, because there is too much population in the world right now and there is no aim in life. People want to enjoy today, fuck tomorrow.
This is why what's happening is happening. Imagine, we have a space invasion.. What will happen? We'll need to go back to being efficient. Men and women will assume traditional roles without a major problem of independence in society. Why? Because otherwise the community dies. Less kid-rearing, what if you lose too many people?
But a space invasion should happen for this to happen, I think.
Tell me if you want to talk further. I'd advise you create an account on reddit, which is a wonderful site you must explore. You may even find likeminds.
Well, your point has a percentage of validity, but you forgot to mention WHY men took up the "strong" role and women the "weak" one. But I have explained this stuff...
DeleteI don't think there will be any space invasion, but no matter what happens, the female body is designed for the "strong" role. Boobs and period aren't serious limitations. I know many women with enormous boobs, who though perform an awful lot better than men, who don't have those "limitations".
childhood exercise really doesnt benefit you in adulthood. you either use it or you lose it. i was injured and had to not workout for a year.. in that time i literally lost all strength and became weaker than the average person. it only took a year of no exercise. that shows how you have to maintain ur muscles with exercise. playing sports as a kid is not going to make u a strong adult unless you never stopped exercising.
ReplyDeleteSure, you 're right. Consistency is fundamental for a decent level of fitness. I don't remember saying the contrary... Have you recovered well now? I hope so...
Delete