Femuscleblog now has a MeWe page and group. This was created when it was discovered that Google Plus was discontinuing its service. Femuscleblog did have a presence there, so that will be moving to another social media platform MeWe. MeWe is an alternative to major social media sites such as Facebook or Myspace. There is more freedom on the site and so far the layout is wonderful. Simple to use and limited fear of posts being deleted based on arbitrary rules. Tumblr has since implemented a strict adult content free policy and so far posts that are not sexual in nature get flagged. The reason Femuscleblog branches out to social media platforms is to reach more people. The goal is to normalize the image of the physically strong woman through exposure. There will be links to the main site here as well as exclusive material on the various social media platforms. If you do not already have an account, get one. There you can get access to the group that was created Femuscleblog Sports and Fitness.
It is a common held belief that larger muscles and bodybuilding can increase strength. Bulging biceps and rock hard abs seem to be the image of body strength. Yet research that examine muscle cells of bodybuilders and power athletes came to a fascinating discovery. The bodybuilders cells were bigger, yet they were not any stronger than power athletes or people who did not lift at all. It should be remembered that bodybuilding’s objective is not to get stronger, but sculpt a physique. There is a difference between functional fitness and fitness done for aesthetics. Weightlifters are an example of functional fitness. Force generation produced by muscle fibers is essential for strength. The rate in which the force is produced also contributes to total power output. Although some claim that bodybuilders would be ” the paper tigers” of the fitness world their are some factors that could have effected the study. Only men were used for this study, which may not be as effective at seeing strength changes in a weightlifting or bodybuilding program. Using women would have been better, because lower fitness capacity can be increased dramatically relative to their physiology from a training regimen. That way it can be seen which method is the best for building strength. The sample of men could also be questioned. One should also remember other factors that influence strength. Dr. Lee Hamilton and Dr. Angus Hunter explained the study for The Conversation are professors of exercise science and physiology at the University of Sterling. The research was published in Experimental Physiology and the study was led by Hans Degens of Manchester Metropolitan University.
The experiment was conducted by taking the muscle cells from volunteers. This was by means of biopsy. This included twelve bodybuilders, six power athletes, and average men who are physically active who do not weight train. The problem with having average men who are physically active may not make then average in the fitness sense. They would be moderately trained. Average would be the natural physical fitness capacity without any exercise. The average American for example does not even get the recommended amount of exercise according to the CDC guidelines. Already, that could have effected the study. There is a difference between the physical fitness capacity of an average person and the professional athlete. A moderate fitness level would be a person who trains only a few times with an intent on basic heath maintenance.
Beyond that, there is an intermediate level. A sports performance goal would require years of training, consistent dieting, and nutritional requirements. The experiment involved measuring the muscle cells and from that specific force was given. This was done while examining the isometric contractions. The higher the amount of specific force the higher quality of muscle. The cells of the bodybuilders were larger, yet did not produce as much force as that of the power athletes. Force was generated faster in their cells. If there was a greater curiosity women should be added to the study. If power athletes have stronger muscle cells then the cells of a female weightlifter should be compared to a male bodybuilder. The muscles of men and women are the same at the cellular level. The muscles of men and women respond similarly to training. However, men have larger muscles. If the female weightlifter’s muscle cells generate more force, then it would prove that power athletes do have more force in their muscle fibers. The sex differences in strength would not matter if at the cellular level there is no difference.
If the hypothesis holds, then that would mean Elisabeth Akinwale’s cells may be better at generating force compared to Stan McQay’s .
Another experiment should be conducted with all women to see which training method is the best for building strength. Documenting the changes may be easier in women especially with close examination of changes in upper body strength. Only then could we say that contractile tissues differ among these athletes.
The study reveals some interesting elements about exercise physiology . The power athlete is reliant on two important attributes : maximal force and power generating capacity of the muscles. Another important trait is the ability to maintain that force and power out put for a certain amount of time during high intensity physical effort. Peak muscle power and force require a certain volume and the nature of the cross sectional area of the actual muscle. There could be an inverse relationship between fibre cross sectional area (FCSA) and mitochondrial density. The mitochondrial density could be limited by maximal extracellular oxygen tension. This may limit the total muscular hypertrophy, which could effect power. Athletes who just want power and endurance can circumvent particular barriers. Focusing on peak power and isometric force can be done without a dramatic increase in size.
The reason the vastus lateralis was selected was due to its role in athletic performance. It is one of the major knee extensors of the quadriceps muscle. Being superficially located, this enables tissue to be extracted with limited complications. The study notes ” the most important goal of BBs is to increase muscle size, which is achieved by performing low‐ to moderate‐intensity and high‐volume resistance training with aerobic training elements in the precompetition weight‐cutting phase.” The opposite is true for power athletes : “For PAs instead, performance is determined by the combination of both peak force and peak power, and the ability to sustain and repeat these high‐intensity efforts for extended periods during a competition. “When a bodybuilder goes on stage, it is not about who can lift the most weight. Training diaries were also assessed by the team. The bodybuilders were doing moderate to high intensity as well as high volume training. Aerobic exercise was not reported.
There is a possibility that the number of years that subjects trained could have impacted the results of the biopsy. During an athlete’s career their performances improve with years of training and practice. There comes a stage in which an athlete can no longer make physical fitness increases . If this group was a mixture of neophytes and experienced athletes this could effect the results of the experiment. Muscle fibers do not function in complete isolation, rather they interact with the wider organ systems. When weightlifting is performed it can improve the support of the connective tissues,aid the blood vessels, and engage the nervous system. At first, this can be a conundrum. While the muscle tissue at the microscopic could have more strength, this may not translate into the whole body function. It is very possible for a bodybuilder to have both bulk and strength. There are bodybuilders who even have made switches to powerlifting, crossfit, and weightlifting.
This is the specific force related to the microscopic level compared to the entire body. There is a more complex and detailed relationship between muscle size and the force it can generate. Some exercise physiologists have speculated that maximal force and cross sectional muscle area are related. Trained bodies may have higher cross sectional area force. Sex differences may exist in cross sectional area force generation. Trained female weightlifters produced higher force to cross sectional ration compared males at lower velocities of contraction in a study. The problem is that age and sex may not be the only factors in the result. There is a science of physical strength that involves biology, endocrinology, genetics, and physiology. Simply translated, the increase in size of muscles does not automatically result in improved muscle quality. A possible reduction of essential proteins could occur, which are responsible for the function of muscular contraction. Quantity may help the bodybuilder present a sculpted physique, but muscle quality can aid performance in functional fitness tasks.
Muscle quality involves how well the muscle can perform when doing a certain task. The size of the muscle or the actual muscle cell can not be a reliable predictor of strength. Bodybuilders and power athletes train differently with weights to reach a particular performance fitness goal. The bodybuilder wants maximum levels of muscular hypertrophy while balancing symmetry, definition, and conditioning. The bodybuilder can have a genetic advantage in terms of mesomorphic body type. The Conversation acknowledges that diet and sometimes drugs produce the incredible physiques on stage. Too often, people attribute athletic success to drugs or genetic characteristics. Drugs can only enhance the physiology of certain organ systems. It does not change the structure of DNA or the genes themselves to create super athletes. A person could have the genetic potential, yet have a poor training method or a limited understanding of nutrition . This harms an athletes chances at improvement. The weightlifter has to focus on making the nervous system more efficient in reaction to the physical task. Immediate bursts of power are required to pick up large weights. Weightlifters have to maintain a certain size to remain in a competing class. Large muscles would not help them, rather a body that has type II muscle fibers generating higher specific force during recruitment.
More muscle does not mean it will mean that the quality is better for all of the tissue. Science is about questioning the natural world and it is a good practice to question the results of studies. Methods and techniques can drastically alter conclusions of an experiment.
The study required both statistical and data analysis. The study notes that “Data analysis of the force–velocity relationship has been described before (Gilliver et al. 2009; Degens et al. 2010). The last 100 ms of each isotonic release was used to determine the velocity during the step.” The result of the process found that there was a sixteen force data points, which were then applied to the Hill equation. A non-linear squares least regression. The Hill equation is a description in biochemistry used to show the fraction of macromolecule saturated ligand as a function of the ligand concentration. The ligand refers to a substance that will form a complex ( atom or ion with a surrounding array of molecules ) with a biomolecule. The next step in the data analysis was to extrapolate maximal shortening velocity ( in fiber lengths per second ) from the curve. Following this an equation was able to be used to calculate peak power: “The best‐fit values for the Hill heat constants ‘a’ and ‘b’ (where ‘b’ signifies ‘a’ multiplied by the unloaded shortening velocity divided by the maximal isometric tension) were then used to calculate peak power using the following formulae.”
These equations were used to determine peak power and the rate of force redevelopment. The rate of force redevelopment was expressed as KTR. The last formula was a non-linear least squares regression. The next process the study stated: “To determine the goodness of fit for the KTR and the force–velocity curve, the fitted curves and the measured force data were correlated using the Pearson correlation. ” There was one condition that had to be met if data was to be accepted : “for the force–velocity curve, data were accepted if r2 > 0.96.” If such a criteria was not met, then it would be disregarded in the data collection and final results. If sacromere length had changed by >0.1 μm it was not suitable enough to be included. That also included the condition that maximal isometric tension was decreased by >10% after the four sets of isotonic releases. The accepted fibers were dissolved in an SDS sample buffer. Then they were stored at −80°C for SDS -PAGE. The statistical method used was to analyze muscle fibers per type per person. Following this, it was put into a linear mixed model. It was noted in the study the participant was the induced random factor. To account for irregularity Bonferroni correction was used. This is used to counter the issue of multiple comparisons in statistics. This was only done when interactions were considered significant . The value was P < 0.05. The study explains “we tested the significance of the difference between regression slopes with an F‐test (Sokal & Rohlf, 2012).” The figures shown display the averages of fiber type per participant in the study. The single standard deviation comes for the error bars.
The graphs give a visual representation of mathematical data. The measurements were done in a total of three separated batches. The first bar graph shows the fiber cross sectional area of the muscle fibers taken form vastus lateralis of bodybuilders, power athletes, and the non-resistance trained controls.
The bodybuilders fibers were 67 and 88 % than the power athletes and controls. There was no difference between in FCSA between power athletes and the controls. The post hoc analysis did not reveal the specific location of the differences in muscle fiber types. The study expounds further : ” Peak power was higher in PA fibres than those of Cs (58%; P < 0.05), whereas fibres of BBs tended to have a higher peak power than C fibres (P = 0.07).” The second graph displayed both peak power and specific power of the skinned muscle fibre segments. Peak power was measured in watts, while specific peak power was measured in watts per kilogram. The power athletes according to the data are beat the bodybuilders in peak power and specific power. The study also acknowledged what could have effected results of the data. The use of performance enhancing substances could have been a limitation, due to the fact twelve of the bodybuilders stated they had used some steroids. It was admitted “although one might expect that this could affect the contractile properties of skeletal muscle fibres, neither previous investigators (D’Antona et al. 2006) nor we found significant differences in contractile properties or FCSA between steroid users and non‐users in our BBs.” Drugs do not create super humans, so it may not have effected the study as much as one would anticipate. Then there has to be an account for inter-individual differences.
The term “paper tigers” was used to describe bodybuilders. As the text explains that is not entirely correct. What it is stating is about force and power at the microscopic level relative to muscle quality. If this is translated into total body mass the story is different. The data showed that at the microscopic level, the bodybuilders muscle did not generate as much force as the untrained. However, this does not mean that the untrained would be stronger than the bodybuilder. Depending on height and weight the physical strength could vary among individuals. One can look strong, but may not actually be as strong as they look.
It cannot be stated as fact that bodybuilders are complete paper tigers. There are some questions raised in regards to training. Could there be a way to train the body to gain the most muscular hypertrophy and simultaneously build strength to a maximum degree? According to the study it could be difficult if attempted. The bodybuilders are not weaklings, rather they are training for a competition which does not have them develop their strength to the maximum.
The study demonstrates how biopsy and histology can be used to the benefit of exercise science. Biopsy is a medical technique used when tissue is extracted from the body to detect disease. It is one technique used in cancer detection. What was done for the study was to examine the contractile function of the muscle tissues. Histology is a branch of biology which studies the tissues of plants and animals using microscopy. Powerful electron microscopes allow scientists to see cells and tissues up close. The study had the biopsies collected in relaxing solution. After twenty-four hours the samples in the glycerol relaxing solution at 4 degrees were sucrose. It was treated, the stored at a temperature of −80°C. The biopsies were taken with a conchotome. Using this technique for exercise science and sports performance can help create more effective training regimens for athletes. What has been concluded is that as the study articulated ” although this difference may be caused in part by an apparent negative effect of hypertrophy, these results indicate that the training history of power athletes may increase muscle fibre quality, whereas body‐building may be detrimental.” Bodybuilding would not be detrimental, which is an ood way to describe a particular form of training. The more accurate conclusion is that bodybuilding may not increase physical strength to the the same degree as a power athlete.
There were some unfortunate losses in 2018. Leilani Dalumpines was an athlete of the classic era of female bodybuilding that unfortunately lost her battle with cancer. To hardcore female bodybuilding fans, she was the one to present a full and power physique of the 1990s. Leilani Dalumpines was both a martial artist, actor, bodybuilder, and later became a lawyer. She competed between the years of 1991 and 1994. Her best wins include coming in 3rd place in the North American Championships (1991 and 1994) and 2nd place in the 1993 USA Championships. Leilani even had a brief acting career in a number of cult classic films. She appeared in Ring of Fire II, Death Run in Istanbul, and DeathGamerz . Normally, she was typecast as a henchwoman or muscle to the antagonists. These films were low budget, but still have an entertaining quality to them. Considering the time period, it was rare that a muscular woman would make an appearance in film. She also had no problem making appearances in mixed wrestling productions. With her martial arts skills, it made the videos more believable. Leilani Dalumpines was a common woman featured in Baltimore Productions. Ms. Loo was a comic on L-H Art which was adopted into a video production. Leilani plays a business owner cleans the crime infested streets by beating bad guys into submission. Leilani Dalumpines may not have been the biggest names, but her physique and warmth of personality charmed fans. Samuel Oldham a director who worked on her films, stated on his youtube channel about on May 15, 2018 “she was one of my closest friends and her legacy will be remembered.”
Razib Khan is a geneticist who has written extensively for various publications that include The New York Times, The Slate, and contributes to the website Gene Expression. Besides writing about the science of genetics he also has been known to make commentary about religion, politics, and philosophy. When it was discovered that he was known to write or express views often deemed controversial or offensive to some, The New York Times terminated his contract. He has written for The UNZ Review , which presents itself as an alternative media source. However, a large portion of it either espouses some conspiracy theories, far-right ideology, racialism, or just borrows links from other legitimate alternative media sources. There could be articles that have anti-Jewish conspiracy theories, scientific racism, and alt-right rhetoric. There are articles on UNZ that are not extreme or offensive, but readers must have good critical thinking skills to establish what is credible and what is not. Khan’s two articles are on the surface not the most controversial works he has produced. They are just a statement of facts. Men are on average stronger than women should not be a shock to anyone with a basic under standing of anatomy and physiology. Not hitting women is something a rational and humane man would understand. These facts are not the problem, its Khan’s conclusions extrapolated from them. The political left and right try to use science to justify their political positions. The right see biology as designating groups as inferior and the left try to deny that biology has any impact on human existence. Khan readily reveals the dogmatic position of social construtivism of the left , but ignores the biological determinism espoused by the right. The problem that this produces in highly biased science or distortions in academia. Razib Khan may have fallen into this trap of having bias and ideology distort his scientific thought.
Men are on average stronger than women. There are both biological and sociological reasons for this. This does not mean women cannot not gain physical strength. The interesting aspect about Khan’s article title is that it states “Men are Stronger Than Women (on average ).” There is a reason why on average is put in parentheses. It should be realized that normally when some want to say women are biologically inferior they bring up physical strength. The problem with this is that all men are not stronger than all women. Khan realizes that that would be a statistical impossibility. He then turns to a hand grip study which demonstrates the difference in strength. The problem with this study is that it is not precise. Weightlifting or powerlifting records would be more precise in measurement. Hand size and fitness level could have effected outcomes. There is also a problem with the statement ” the more muscular you are the stronger you are.” Strength has to do with genetics, sex, muscle fiber type, somatotype, age, point of tendon insertion, fitness level, training regimen muscle, and limb length. Seeing as the subjects were all in their twenties, this did not effect the experiment. Fitness levels were known because it was a comparison between average people and athletes. There is an assumption that the strongest people in the sample would be the ones that have the most type II muscle fiber, not the biggest muscles. While men on average have more of this muscle fiber type it can also be determined by genetics. Using female hand ballers and judo martial artists would not be useful subjects in this case. Strength is required for their sport, but it is not the only physical fitness indicator they train for. Weightlifters, powerlifters, and bodybuilders would be better subjects.
The hand grip experiment may not be the best measure for functional strength. Razib Khan stated the data shocked him, yet this should not really. The only way to confirm this experiment is if it can be replicated and produce a similar result. The conclusion would most likely have the strongest people being male athletes, however the gap would not be as wide depending on the subjects selected and the sample size. There were only 60 women athletes and 533 average women. The total number of men was 1,654 in the study. The issue is there would need to be more women in the study . Such a factor cannot be ignore otherwise an experiment produces just accurate estimations. Razib Khan then makes the claim that a person would be a obscuranist for questioning the data and the experiment. There could be a confounding factor. This term used in statistics can be defined as ” variables related to other ones which may mask an association or create a relation that does not exist. ” Here it is more simple to see. The confounding factor be women performed lower in grip strength and therefore women are weak. This is the wrong conclusion, due to the fact there are women who are strong which contradict the result. The confounding factor is causal which is not always articulated in terms of association or correlation.
Experiments function on both dependent and independent variables. The scientific method is the means in which their can be a verification of facts. Razib Khan has a bias and even admits himself ( “I’m someone who leans to the Right, but I want to think the best of everyone, and really empirical data is my summum bonum”). Data and empirical assessment is pivotal to this process, yet there should be a level of caution. Reification can occur when their is a belief that an abstraction can be measured or that just having an immense amount of data proves a position. Relative to the hand grip experiment it could use some perfection. There can always be a margin of error in data accumulation. This is a reason why polling may not be as precise as people would want it to be. Realizing this, science like other academic subjects is not free of bias or error. The field is a constant undertaking of investigation.
The biological factors in the differences in strength can be confirmed relative to anatomy and physiology. Anatomically, women and men share the same muscles. The muscle cells are the same as well as the process of myogenesis. Female muscle responds in a similar fashion to exercise stimuli. Once puberty starts the male body gains strength spurts in relation to endocrine function. Women can carry two thirds the muscle mass compared to a man. Body size and cross sectional area are factors in strength. Bone density, tendons, and ligaments are also contributors. The nervous system also has an essential role in muscular function. Muscular hypertrophy also functions in the same manner in women. This means women who train at a high intensity level can gain strength at the same rate as a man. The difference is in total physical fitness capacity. Men will get stronger under a weight training regimen. Women actually can good portion of strength gains relative to their starting point. A woman who trains long enough can either reach a strength level equal to or near the average man. What this means is their is a difference in power scaling.
The weakest male would have more strength than the weakest female. A trained woman can surpass the untrained man. The strongest woman would have difficulty trying to match the strength of a man of equal training. The fact is women are not of equal strength of men, but they can get strong. Even Razib Khan admits “mind you, in a population of millions there will be many strong women who can beat many men.” The global population has been estimated to stand at a total of 7.7 billion people according to UN data. Out of this large number, there could be many women who could be stronger than males. Training does not negate all the differences, but it can reduce some of them. Biology can be changed to a degree through evolution and environment. Sexual dimorphism is a product of millions of years of human evolution. Genes, gene expression, mutations, and genetic drift are constantly changing organisms.
Men may have grown bigger for the reason of fighting and competing for mates. The reason for higher physical fitness capacity was to hunt for food. It is not entirely certain if this theory is correct, because our early hominid ancestors are extinct. Naturalistic observation is not possible with just the remaining fossils of specimens. The physical strength trait was most likely naturally selected and passed down through heredity . Males have on average 72.6 pounds of muscle compared to women’s 46.2 pounds. Muscle is not just the difference that effects physical fitness. Heart and lung size effect the aerobic capacity of the body. Biology is a major factor in this difference in strength, but it is not the only one.
There are sociological factors that effect women’s strength. Women are relative new comers to professional sports and fitness. The playing field remains unequal and many women are discouraged from full use and potential of their bodies. Fathers teach their sons to be physically competent by either teaching them a sport. This is not done for girls. Early in youth, girls are discouraged from the benefits of learning physical skills. Physical education has been made different for girls and boys. Girls get a low quality reduced version with a set of low level of standards. There are cases in which it is not even offered to girls in certain countries. Saudi Arabia only allowed girls to get physical education in 2017. Prior to that, girls did not have a platform in the kingdom to gain physical skills. Children could have their future health effected by a low quality physical education. What happens in the classroom could influence future behavior in regards to exercise. With heart disease and obesity on the rise, it is important to encourage a positive attitude in regards to physical activity. Women as adults face enormous body image conformity pressure. Looking different or doing an activity that challenges traditional gender roles invites ostracism and condemnation.
Women who are muscular or strong are criticized harshly by a public that is not very tolerant. Khan says ” the results from top level athletes should make us aware just how rare these individuals will be” when talking about women who are the physical exceptions. There is a reason why they would be sui generis, because sports and fitness is directed mostly at men. There was a time when women did not have access to gyms or training facilities. When that restriction was lifted then female athletic talent had a platform. There could be women who have the potential to reach a certain level, but certain barriers are preventing them from advancing. Razib Khan acts as if discrimination or sexism is not a factor, rather biology answers everything in society. He does not state this directly, because that would make too much of an extreme position. “On the whole I am willing to grant the value of individualism on the legal level” he proclaims. The law was at times used to to exclude certain people and groups from particular occupations. Their were the traditional “men’s jobs” which included law enforcement, sports, the military, and construction. Biological sexism was used to justify why women should not receive higher education or promotion in their careers. Neurosexism has been used to justify keeping women out of science,mathematics, and engineering.
When society does not have an environment that is discriminatory or sexist to women, then one can start using other explanations for why women do not have a presence in certain fields. The only reason why sex would matter is if you live in a society that is unfavorable to females. This means their will be lack of opportunity for employment, education, or basic independence.
There are two camps that have been established in regards to politicization of science. The right leaning faction consists of biological determinism and scientific rejection. The far-right faction basically believes in social Darwinism, climate change denial, seeing abortion as murder of babies, and adhere to scientific racism. The progressive liberal faction denies the fundamental biological, behavioral, and psychological differences among individuals in a vision of absolute equality. The political correctness philosophy attacks anything that challenges the idea of difference to an obsessive degree in order to create safe spaces. Culture warriors and social justice warriors have declared a war on facts and knowledge. This is more than just obscurantism its about promoting propaganda and ideology. Their are attempts to control language and thoughts directed by these two political factions attempting to influence all aspects of society. Seeing as the public’s knowledge of the sciences is limited they are more willing to believe in false information. Factions of third wave feminists deny sex differences that they believe that are not congruent with their ideology. The fact that men are stronger bothers them to such a degree they either ignore this fact or make the claim of sexism when it is discussed. The irony is that there are women who can be strong and there are men who can be weak. So, physical strength is not unique to males or an indicator of biological superiority.
Besides the more obvious differences, they want to ignore that there is a difference in female behavior. Behavior can be both sociologically and biologically driven, so there should not be controversy surrounding that. Difference is not evidence of superiority or inferiority. Denial of sex difference by certain progressives or factions of third wave feminists is as ludicrous as denial of climate change. Climate change has been occurring throughout geological history. The difference now is that human civilization’s use of fossil fuels has enabled an exacerbation of the green house effect. Combined with higher CO2 emissions, humankind has negatively effected its environment. Some who are skeptical that climate change is happening cite that their still is cold weather. They are confused with another term, that seems to have spread called global warming. This specifically refers to a long term increase in the Earth’s average temperature in the climate system. Climate change can cause shifts in which extremes of both hot and cold temperatures can occur. This explains why the US in 2019 experienced abnormally low freezing temperatures during the winter. The reason for this denial is their is an agenda driven by large corporations that have investments in fossil fuels. Science has to be debated, but now the attitude is to censor it when it challenges certain cultural or political beliefs. Intelligent design, climate change denial, anti-sociobiology movements, and the denial of biology are examples of the anti-science movement from both sides of the American political spectrum. Morton Hunt described this best in The New Know Nothings : Political Foes of the Study of Human Nature. Political organizations, religious , and special interest groups attempt to stop scientific study if it is not in line with their convictions.
Razib Khan has also made commentary about domestic violence. His article “Why Men Should Never Hit Women” deals with a sensitive topic about women being physically abused by men. It is too simple to say the root of domestic violence is based on the sole fact that men are stronger. One does not have to be physically strong to be abusive in a relationship. Razib Khan also ignores the fact that men can be victims of domestic violence. Unfortunately, they are not taken seriously or made to be some form of comedic joke. Even worse, is that MGTOW, incels, or men’s rights activists use their plight to advance their own agenda. No one should ever hit anybody, yet when women hit men there is very little consequence. Assault both aggravated and simple is a crime regardless of gender. Yet, it seems men are shown to be all the perpetrators of intimate partner violence. However, women do represent as small portion of intimate partner violence statistics. Reasons and causes vary for this type of violence. Expression of negative emotions, jealousy, control, or an appearance of toughness to make it be known they are not to be messed with are some of the reasons. There are also cases in which drug and alcohol abuse could be factors. Aggression is not only physical; it can be psychological as well. Razib Khan’s commentary bases itself of the female victim and male predator dichotomy. The reason men may be more willing to use physical violence against women is that they assume they are weaker and cannot fight.
Looking at these pictures people would react worse to women getting beat up,compared to the women beating up the men on the bottom. It is possible that women can physically harm men if the have the strength.
Gender stereotypes, sexism, and cultural mores distort the reality. Razib Khan basically believes in a conservative chivalry, which has the position men and women are so different that biology is the sole driver of their behavior. Aggression does have cultural and biological roots. The biological ones are obvious. Darwinism believed intraspecies aggression served a purpose of gaining territory and defense against predators. Charles Darwin was the developer of modern evolutionary theory and since it has been used to describe certain behaviors in humanity. Konrad Lorenz published On Aggression described that men may be more aggressive, because it the evolutionary past it was an adaptive instinctive behavior for survival. The rise of civilization did not change these behaviors, rather humanity had to adjust to a new standard of conduct. However we cannot ignore the power of environment. Khan reveals that in Bangladesh, violence against women is not as condemned in the West. Weak laws, limited access to divorce, and culture based misogyny enable the abuse. Men being stronger only becomes a minor factor when looking at the wider society. Even women who the physical and mental will to resist may find themselves in jeopardy. Without legal protection or equal rights certain members of society who are victims become targets of the justice system. The accusation that all of the left denies biology is incorrect. Most rational people who realize that humanity is a product of both its biology and ecosystem.
If a man hits a woman he is called a coward. Yet, if a woman hits a man it would not generate that much of a response. The idea that women are weak and helpless victims still seems present in the minds of many. A strong woman can hurt man if she wanted to.
Averages do not mean all and the samples of women are small compared to entire populations. This means that their is variation, yet if the data was collected in an aggregate it would still show men being stronger as a whole. Razib Khan does acknowledge this to a degree. Then it goes into his personal bias :”But it is very unlikely that in a pairwise interaction the very strongest females will randomly face the very weakest males.” It has been established that women who train can reach at least close to or equal that of an average untrained male. If the average male is not Mr.Olympia sized, she would have a good chance of physically overpowering an attacker. Another strange assessment is then expressed by Khan : ” In terms of relationships, where domestic violence occurs, it is very unlikely for reasons of assortative mating that the very strongest females will be paired up with the very weakest of males.” There is an element of truth to this, but that does not mean their are not couples in which women have the physical advantage. Human sexual attraction is more complicated because it involves both biological,cultural, and personal preference factors. There are men who actually seek out strong women.
More people may start to marry outside their race, religion, and culture . Khan’s statement at that point seems nothing more than a mere generalization. He then illustrates that the magnitude of strength is so great, that women getting hit would be devastating. He uses his wife and himself as an example. Khan believes that he would be able to overpower his wife even though they are the same height. Two factors besides muscle mass is total weight. Force equals mass times acceleration and the bigger the mass of the moving body the greater the impact will be. Khan does not give specifics about his wife expect that she is in good shape. If she just jogs, does cardio, and does basic health maintenance that will not make her physically stronger. That will keep her healthy not reach peak physical fitness. This also goes for the example of his 4 ’10 cousin and her 5 ‘8 cousin. The difference in height means a larger skeleton meaning more support for muscle mass. The difference in force and power a related to size rather than specifically sex itself. A woman and man of equal weight can generate the same amount of force. Just being big does not mean you will win a fight. Skills and technique are essential for martial arts. Judo, karate, or krav maga are fighting styles designed to have a person defend themselves against larger attackers. One major problem is that women are not taught to defend themselves and there is an assumption that men will protect them. Flawed logic such as that only creates a worse situation.
Third wave feminist state there is no circumstance in which a man should hit a woman, but never say there be no case in which a woman hits a man. What if the woman is attempting to either kill or seriously harm a man in some way? When attacked, people should have the right to defend themselves no matter who it is. True, based on the sample from the scientific study cited by Khan there was less than a 10% overlap in muscle mass distribution. That basically translates into men having 61% more muscle mass than women. Many men if hit would not retaliate simply because they are more willing to direct physical violence at other men. Then there is the realization that if it was an act of self-defense it would automatically be assumed that the man was the perpetrator. Double standards related to sex are a combination of misogyny and dated chivalry. Some double standards third wave feminists refuse to recognize.
As much as Razib Khan complains that it is a leftist delusion the ignores reality, correct that a small group can wrap perceptions. Third wave and the newly formed fourth wave feminists who favor the social justice warrior and political correctness ideology have become extremely vociferous. Debate or certain facts that are not to their liking cause them to be triggered. Merely exposing women who hit men as a perpetrator are not condemned in the same manner ( if at all ) . Doing this is also a risk seeing if it done to a man who is larger than her. There is an expectation that men will not react, but when they do that creates serious complications. If third wave feminists actually did care about stopping violence, they would support the male victims of domestic abuse. Framing domestic abuse as a “female problem” ignores how other victims such as children or the elderly are also effected, Violence should not be promoted or tolerated in any form. Yet, society has functions on two different systems of violence. Unacceptable violence is homicide, assault, or harm done in the context of crime. Acceptable violence is done in the name of the state such as police brutality or the highest form of violence war. Collectively, people engage in it even though it is unethical, but justify it on the basis that it is for security or the greater good. It is no wonder that violence spreads to other areas of society. There needs to be an understanding that no one has the right to physically attack another person . Some women who engage in attack assume that men will not retaliate when provoked. Thinking like that is dangerous. When men fight, they assess the other’s ability. Women who slap, hit, or attack a man do so thinking that their will not be a response. When such a response happens, a female perpetrator sometimes will take the role of victim, even if she initiated hostility.
Domestic abuse cases are not always the man attacking the woman. Both men and women who are of equal fighting ability could be harming one another. This is why domestic abuse calls are the most unfavorable duties among law enforcement. Children must be taught at a young age not to use physical violence as a means of solving conflict. This message is given to young boys, but girls need to understand why hitting a man is not a wise idea. Unless a woman has a knowledge of martial arts and is considerably stronger than the man she hits it could result in her being seriously injured. As Konrad Lorenz articulated, aggressive behavior may just be part of our instincts. It can be controlled. The double standard in the justice system must be addressed to prevent men who are victims from being arrested. If women want true equality then the special privileges of a restrictive gender protection code and chivalry must end.
What politics has done is created a factions in the American scientific community. There is the right-wing biological determinist and social Darwinist sympathizing section who distort aspects of sociobiology and the left wing sociological explanation for human civilization. The topic of physical strength has been used by sexist to proclaim that men are superior to women. The problem with this proclamation is that there are women who are stronger than some men, which means that strength is not a unique biological trait to males. Evolution and ecology does not acknowledge “superior” or “inferior” organisms. The dinosaurs, trilobites, and our early hominid ancestors went extinct. They would have been considered organisms likely to survive, but changes in the ecosystem caused their demise. The idea of “biological superiority” does not exist nor can it be tested by means of the scientific method. The social justice warrior feminist ignores or just does not attempt to acknowledge biology. Sexual dimorphism is real and it does have an impact on human behavior. There is a difference between men and women’s brains,just like the rest of the body. This may explain why men gravitate to engineering or science related fields and women may gravitate to the social sciences, literature, or communication based fields. This does not imply one sex is better at a particular field or a reinforcement of gender stereotypes. It is a possible explanation for the gender ratio in the workforce in particular fields. Science should be allowed to be objective without a person’s politics influencing academic study. Unfortunately, nothing can completely be isolated from politics and culture.
Valentine’s Day is that time of year in which we celebrate our most significant others. This celebration is named after Saint Valentine who was a Christian priest during the time of the Roman Empire. Persecution of the new religion was due to the fact there was a fear this group could threaten the power of government. There were many priests called Valentinus during this period, however scholars believe that he was martyred in 269 C.E. in relation to classical text. It was not until the Middle Ages did the holiday become associated with romance. Love can have multiple meanings. Sometimes it can be amorous, a sign of respect, or acknowledging a close bond with another person. There also is the possibility it can be all of these. Loving something that does not conform to the dominant cultural or social norms gets people branded as an outcast or eccentric. Saying you like muscular women can either cause reactions of ridicule, disgust, or repudiation. For this reason many male admirers of female muscle a either furtive or embarrassed about their love.This makes no sense to hide what you love. I love muscular women and there’s a good reason to. Even some supporters who say they just like women who are “toned” or “athletic” are really just saying they like muscular women. The only difference is magnitude. There are a portion of men who would reject women of great strength and they do not realize what they are missing.
The muscular woman is a different type. Her uniqueness makes her something special. This is a breath of fresh air in a world that demands conformity in thought and behavior. To the philistine and closed minded people who are different need to be ostracized. The more thoughtful individual values and respects greatness of being unique. The world has become too npc. This neologism stands for non-playable character in a video game. When applied to a person it means someone who is so conformist they are almost running on a computer program, rather than thinking for themselves. A portion of men base their preferences on either the culture they are raised in or mass media exposure.
The only image of beauty was one paradigm, yet this shifts with time and transformation of culture. The uniqueness of the muscular woman is that there are few few instances in history in which women developed their bodies to this degree. The desire to go against the status quo make these women admirable. Especially since they do this in a male dominated field. There is often the claim that women just will not be interested in certain areas no matter how many barriers are lifted. That is not true,because women have become more active in sports, science, and politics. The muscular woman is unique which can be a very attractive quality. A person and grow if they expand their horizons. Learning from different people or interacting with someone outside your regular zone can enrich you. So fellas, why not try deviating from your standard type on dates ? Just think, you are taking out a woman that is above average. It may not be something you are used to, but it is a new experience.
One reason to love muscular women is that they don’t care about other people’s negative opinions. This is something everyone should do. Faced with negativity both inside and outside their field they still persevere. The internet enables trolls through social media to attack them. Pusillanimous behavior such as that is only a sign of weakness and failure. Others may express an opinion in a civil manner, but really just are secretly supporting a desire to impose gender roles.
Society has made progress in some ways, yet remains backwards in some elements. Women are still seen as things and not independent people. Gradually, there has been more acceptance of legal and social equality. However, the freedom of choice do control a their own bodies seems off limits to women in regards to appearance and reproductive rights. People have the problem of being prejudicial without knowing a person.This behavior gets magnified over the internet. The strong woman can easily brush this off and continue to be successful. Detractors and the closed minded can be vociferous, but this does not stop them. Not caring about what others think of you is an admirable quality. Peer pressure and societal expectations keep the creative, the innovators, and the free spirits suppressed. Only when these individuals go against conformity do the reach their full potential.
I love muscular women because they have made strength both artistic and beautiful. The sculpting of the female form becomes similar to a sculptor producing a work from clay or marble. Through training, nutrition, and attention to detail they produce a physique of symmetry, size, shape, and definition. The feminine version of strength becomes both graceful and dynamic. This aesthetic is new and the general public may not appreciate it as much as the artist or fan of feminine strength. Strength is no longer viewed as masculine, grunting, and brute image. Women’s entry in the fitness and bodybuilding sports has brought about a wonderful charm.
Their bodies become living works of art. There normally is the criticism of muscular women being “too big” or “too much.” The reality is they are not “bulky” rather they have sculpted their physiques to a degree which makes them appear bigger than they are. This is not some imitation of the male physique, rather it is a strong and elegant one. The general public does not appreciate this image of woman. Figure studies and sculpture are major parts of art. What the muscle woman does on stage is like performance art, with the body acting as the work. There should be at least a level of respect for the dedication and focus required to attain such fitness. Mental strength also is essential part of this task.
The more obvious reason I love muscular women that must men can understand, is that look. The voluptuous figure seems to be coming back in vogue. The muscular woman embodies this to the greatest degree. Some fellows say that a woman is thicc, but have not seen such a thing in its magnificent glory.
The muscle only accentuates the female figure. Shape on a female body is more appealing compared to extremely thin body that has been promoted in media for so long. There are men who are threatened by the sight of large arms on a woman. Oddly, large arms on a woman can be attractive. The sculpted arm with shape enhances the chest. Having a certain type does not mean one should reject others. A thin body image should not be exchanged for a fit one. Female muscle lovers embrace numerous body types on women. This should not be strange considering they love on that is not accepted b the mainstream. Embracing a muscle woman is a great thing. She can expand your horizons and you get exposure to someone different. Sometimes it is a positive thing to go outside your comfort zone. Dating one of these women could be a fun experience. Who knows, if it really goes well a long term relationship could emerge. If you strike some good luck maybe marriage. This love of the muscular woman goes beyond mere attraction. They are make an important statement. It is a feminist message even though many would not consider themselves part of the movement or ideology. A woman can be strong, beautiful, and have power.
As the tradition goes around here, Femuscleblog celebrates Black History Month with with wonderful photographs. Celebrate African American history and the accomplishments of those who are part of the African Diaspora.