Men usually have bigger, more muscular upper bodies than women, but does that mean they are always stronger??? Not so according to the clip above where a cheerleader humbles a big tough football guy. This is not an uncommon occurrance judging by the hundreds of other similar clips available on the internet. Also in my own experience, whenever I've seen girl vs guy armwrestling, the girl always won. If guys are supposed to have such an advantage in upper body strength - how is it that girls win arm wrestling matches so often and with such ease too?
Anyone have any experiences to share???
Click the word "Comments" below to add your thoughts...
Nice video! But in this clip the girl has bigger muscles as well, from the beginning it's not that surpising she wins so easily..
ReplyDeleteI don't get that "ouch" thing, Pupstar... Not wanting to sound bad, I had to mention it though.
DeleteWell, it does make a bit of sense, I just wasn't expecting to hear it from you. But as time passes by, you 'll feel no pain as you 'll be free from that "male pride" thing. Admitting the pain is just the first step, I thought you had taken that step long ago. But it's nice to see that you 're on the way to psychological freedom.
DeleteFirstly - thanks for commenting! Secondly - yeah she's pretty well built, but the guy's arms and shoulders are covered so it's not certain if she had bigger muscles than him. However he is a sportsman and most people would still have expected him to win. Whatever the case, one thing is for sure - she's evidently much stronger than him..
DeleteIt’s not that clear that she has bigger muscles, it is clear that she is in shape from her cheerleading with all the acrobatics that entails. A trained eye can see instantly that she is female with muscles - therefore she is stronger, more powerful than most any man. But lets look at the guy, he is wearing a shirt so you can’t relly see how big his muscles are, but he is an american footballer – by default one of the strongest men going, and you can see he is very trim with plenty lean muscle mass (he is actually quite hot as it goes ;) ) but he gets absolutely wiped out with ease! all the sports, the time in the gym he has spent only to get so convincingly destroyed in a strength competition by a girl who probably does only half the training he does – priceless! His face when he realises that all his strength is nothing compared to a girl, love it sooo cute, if I were her I would want to take him and dominate him more xD
DeleteI’ll bet the shear forces her female muscle inflicted on his puny male muscle resulted in him hardly able to move his arm for the next few days hee hee xx>>xy #girrrlzrule. Ace
The thing is...you would have to take a toddler boy and a toddler girl and have them do the same activities as each other while playing during their young years. Then around 10-11 years old have them both work out with equal weights for the same amount of time. Then they can increase the weights when they feel they can handle it. The boy should increase quicker due to more testosterone in him. But as humans we might have pressured women for thousands of years to be the weak, gentle, cuddly sex. Men selected the girls who were weak and soft and for many thousands of years have we "natural selectioned" women out of being strong as they should be and bred only weak "estrogen laden" women? Nowadays drop in body fat and a girl doesn't have her period and can't reproduce and loses breast tissue. Was it that way thousands of years ago?
ReplyDeleteYes, what Pupstar says is correct. I have explained how this happens. Now if you have questions on my articles, feel free to ask me.
DeletePupstar is prety correct. Yet in todays society it is not likely a toddler gilr will grow up being so very physical active that her stregnth advantage is huge over the boys. Girls mature faster than boys in getting the signs of being female...soft budding breasts. curvier hips and around 12-13 demonstrate readiness to reproduce. Boys don't get their "man" signals like beards and chest hair, etc til late teens. But in today's society we have 4-6 yeard susie play with dolls and dol houses and toy bake ovens and stoves and brooms and mops while the boy throws footballs and baseballs, runs a lot and wrestles. (Girls are told not to wrestle or fight as it's unladylike. Pupstar's idea of thousands of years ago brings to mind that we think of Neanderthal man as a strong rugged brute. What might Mrs Neanderthal looked like? Would she have been much closer in size & strength to the men than what we have naturally selected OUR females to lok like today? We ended up with what we selected. Then we take that selection of irls and mentally train them to STAY the "weaker sex." Most animal species has larger stronger males than females but humans have made the strength difference way out of proportion to other mammals.
DeleteFact is that, according to Swedish scientists, the female body can handle a lot more strength than the male. Nature meant women to be the athletic gender. This doesn't remove from men the right to do sports, but it's not that smart to expect women to keep the role of the "weak gender". It simply doesn't fit us... What's more, if more women start training intensely and play sports from little ages and go on that way, no matter what the men will do, we 'll be the strong gender. This is the role nature had for us. Men took it for many years, but this thing is coming to an end, as it has to.
DeleteGood analergy - though I think the toddler girl would would advance way quicker than the toddler boy due to the fact that females mature physically much faster. By the early teens she would have a huge strength advantage over him. She would maintain this margin up to 16 /17. Therafter he would start to close the gap. I contend that if she maintained her physical regimen, she could actually maintain her strength advantage into adulthood. The problem is that physical strength is seldom ever compared between genders and we rely on social conditioning and the media for our ideas about who is strongest. I believe that thousands of years ago humans lived in larger social groups and the women were just as physically active and capable as the men. It is the way our society has evolved that has side-lined women. It's true that men feel threatened by strong women so they avoid them and breed more weak females....
DeleteHey what happened to the women’s technical advantages article? It is a shame it is gone it is a very good explanation of why girls and women if given the same training as guys since childhood will be stronger than any man, the untapped power of female is staggering!!! I have a MSc in human anatomy and physiology with female athletics being my field of interest and I can tell you what we are learning about female muscle strength is awesome and completely overturns conventional belief of male testosterone strength advantage on it’s head! Could really go into detail on it :D Xaans comment opens a whole can of worms regarding the suppression of dominant warrior women in history – you only have to look a little into the history to see that patriarchal culture has deliberately written female supremacy out of history and artificially made girls weak by preventing them from harnessing their strength. Ace xx>>xy
Deletep.s here is a little male/female muscle comparison video, the muscle they are talking about is the heart, but the same structural and performance issues are prevelant in the complete skeletal muscular system of men and women
http://www.clickondetroit.com/news/new-study-suggests-women-are-stronger-than-men
Hey ACE! Women's technical advantages is a great article, but it was written by HellfireQueen who has since left the blog in a huff, deleting all of her articles and most of her comments in the process - which is a real shame. Not entirely sure why, but things seem to have changed after the mention of American football....make of that what you will. I will see if I can re-activate this particular article so do check back again soon...
DeleteThanks again for sharing your immense intellect and for all of your hard work and research - you give this blog more credibility than I ever could alone....
That’s a shame, Women’s technical advantages was the first article I saw on this blog and is what impressed me enough to start commenting in the first place, I hope she comes back, maybe she is just taking time off with the new baby and everything? Not all sports are to all amazons tastes, but it’s good that this blog encompasses and reports on all sports that we participate in.
DeleteALL sports? Are you sure?
DeleteWell I don't have arm wrestling experience. But I had wrestling experience with my big sister and she easily dominated me. May be because she is my big sister and my respect to her restricted my abilities to some what. And when it comes to wrestling it's not just strength and she has done wrestling in college.
ReplyDeleteGood to see that your sister is into wrestling. This sport tests pretty much every aspect of the human's physical performance, including but not limited to strength. Thank you for commenting.
DeleteDear, it wasn't your respect for her that limited your abilities. A boy simply doesn't stand a chance against his big sister, indeed he barely stands a chance against his little sister...
DeleteIt's quite simple why females often easily beat males at upper body strength contests even when the male is bigger. Male muscle is simply inferior when push comes to shove. Though male and female muscle tissue has been shown to be "the same" on the cellular level when examined under a microscope, there is actually a difference due to the effects of hormones and differences in the nervous systems of the genders. On a muscle fiber per muscle fiber basis, those factors favor female muscle. A male has to be a LOT bigger than a woman to equal her muscle power, especially in endurance. When male muscle is equal in size to a female muscle it is somewhat inferior in strength and much less durable over continued exertion. Female muscle is almost inexhaustable, male muscle wimps out!
Delete