Sports Are Silly – An Essay From It’s The Women Not The Men: Surviving Feminism

Sports Are Silly

The essay produced from It’s The Women Not The Men: Surviving Feminism is an example  of dated gender roles, sexism, and the promotion of  extremist far-right politics . Feminism has a multitude of flaws, just like any other ideology, but say it is destructive to society is an over exaggeration. The author proclaims how second wave feminism has changed society for the worst and presents her writings as “warnings to young women.”  As the author describes  her  warnings as :”  my blog will show that the dramatic rise of immoral and destructive behavior among women can repeatedly be traced back to the public encouragement of this behavior, as “liberating”, by an irrational, radical, second-wave feminist “leader” or a misguided, female academic’s ambiguous feminist theory.” She explains further : “through my research, my personal experience, and that of my fifteen, formally fabulous, friends, I will illustrate the damage unleashed on our society by women wallowing in the erroneous theories of personal “independence”, “emancipation”, “freedom”, “self-expression” and “liberation”, specifically, “sexual liberation.” K.Q Duane is a self described essayist who clearly falls into the philosophy of Phyllis Schlafly. A extreme conservative who opposes social and political change in every area of life. The author clearly has a fundamentalist Christian bent saying ” the leaders of this radical, anti-Christian feminist movement were only interested in the limelight, and in the impersonal, and superficial, results of their theories. They were NOT interested in the tragic losses their troops would suffer while trying to become “liberated”, feminist “Superwomen.” It is obvious that the author does not approve of women having control of their lives or freedom. The evidence is clear when she discusses sports. She makes the claim that certain sports are designed for men and women should not take part in them. It should be understood that political extremism does not just express its self in a public atmosphere; it enters cultural spaces.

          Sports can be in a way a frivolous activity. Minus the sexism and misogyny of the author’s essay and convictions  America has become so obsessed  with sports to a ludicrous degree. There is not one day that goes by in which some one is not talking about football, basketball,  or baseball.  More Americans could probably describe sports better than how their government functions. Hardcore sports fans would be able to name their favorite athlete, theirs statistics, and how many games in a simple fashion. Sports has almost become a second religion to people in the US. The claim that the “America stopped constructing huge cathedrals more than 100 years ago and today we are building huge stadiums instead, while those same cathedrals are being closed” is false. America actually is so fanatic with Christianity it is causing a divide in our government and politics. There are Americans who reject evolution on religious grounds, oppose abortion, and oppose gay rights for the same reason. Another contradiction of the American fundamentalist Christian movement is that they say they support religious freedom, but have an intense prejudice of Muslims. Islamophobia, sexism, and racial intolerance are pillars of the fundamentalist Christian movement. Christian Identity movements are now a growing section of hate groups in America. With all this division and hate it would see as if sports could provide a unifying force.

ab0ceb8c8ec7508f6b04dea8464cc41c

Women_Collage_r3xqth82_3cs39o2j

12962597

Entertainment is thought to be a neutral ground in which conflict can be put aside. This is not true especially with sports. Sports is another extension or battleground for politics. It can serve as a distraction to a population when their are economic and social challenges. The gladiator fights were not just a method of dealing with conquered peoples or slaves,  it was a way to entertain the Roman population. The US does this in a similar manner with Football and the tradition of the Super Bowl. Focusing on a game rather than the corrupt and ineffective government in Washington stops real change from happening. Sports have become a serious element of peoples lives. It does go to an excessive degree. Professional sports generate huge profits from merchandise, advertisement, and ticket sales. It is also tied to the fitness industry in terms of athletic apparel and training equipment. Athletes can be seen in Nike and Adidas products.

Such a flow of money on games does seem comical. The funds generated from the professional sports world could best be used on infrastructure projects and public schools. There are Americans who complain about their taxes, but do not complain about the money they spend on sports related activities. Another element is how universities do exploit the students who play sports. While a sports scholarship does provide opportunity for some, there is question about priorities. A new term has emerged known as the student athlete. The priority should be to complete one’s higher education, rather than being a sports star. If this is a career path a student wants to follow they should realize that many have attempted and it is very competitive. Becoming a Micheal Jordon or Robert Griffin III is rare. Students should not be discouraged from trying  if that is their goal. It is pivotal to have other plans as a contingency if the first one does not succeed. It does seem a bit excessive how parents push their kids into sports they may not even like. There are soccer moms and football dads who think they are going to mold the next super star athlete. Such reasoning does seem ridiculous. They are children and the most important part of their development is learning how to navigate the world. The only purpose of children playing sports is to teach them how to work in teams and have a positive attitude in regards to physical activity. There are behaviors that are silly, but there is a reason that people do these activities.

          Sports for some viewers provide a refuge from the turmoil of daily life. It is another escape, which provides a level of comfort under stress. Hobbies are not just designed to occupy time; they allow for a sense of psychological relief. The constant bombardment of negative news, a failing political structure, economic struggle, and a culture of animosity can cause distress. Sports can be a shield to such negativity. People as do this with their religion. The reason people still maintain their religion is that it gives them a sense of comfort. It provides them with answers ( although not rational ones ) to a complicated existence. The problem is that people become extreme with their religion and want to impose such convictions on everyone else. The essay condemns women and men who like the idea of women playing sports “designed for men” yet fails to realize sports globally has women of various backgrounds participating. The devotion to such activities has to do with comfort and a coping strategy for uncertainty.

 Other than questions of ontology religion is also a culture. It has a set of memes passed on through the generations. Should it be that these two rituals of religion and sports are just as silly as one another? Yes, they can be. People engage in particular activities without even questioning them or believe they are absolute truths. There are norms and mores that people adhere to without a specific reason only on the basis it is a long held tradition. It is more than okay to like sports or religion, yet this should not mean you should stop using critical thinking skills. Dogma becomes so powerful that it wraps decision making skills, behavior, and conduct in daily life. Girls and women playing sports is no more ridiculous than the belief systems one chooses to adopt. Certain beliefs and actions may seem that way to others, but to particular individuals it provides solutions. For conservatives who claim they champion freedom, they do not mean this. Freedom also involves the freedom of choice. That means you believe in what you want and can do what you want just as long as it does not harm anyone else. Sports are a leisure activity in which both men and women can participate in.

          The distorted thinking about sports is that there are “men’s” sports and there are “women’s” sports. The author holds to a backward belief that certain sports are male only and are designed for men. Anyone can compete in sports or physical activity. Sexist prejudice has blinded many into thinking that sports are male only and that women are just not capable athletes. Not only is this misogynistic, it is a fabrication. There are plenty of women and young girls who show skill, strength, and speed.

Sports are not activities designed for men. Women have been a part of sports since ancient civilization. Spartan women for example run, threw javelins, and did swimming. The women of ancient Egypt participated in ball games and acrobatic dance. Africa has a long tradition of wrestling in which women also became active in. Women wrestlers could be found in the Diola, Yala, and Njabi ethnic groups. This was a ritual done more so as a rights of passage into adulthood. There are no ” sports designed for men. ” As long as one has the skill and fitness they can play them. The author cites that ice hockey, lacrosse, wrestling, and basketball are sports for males. Women are capable of playing these sports and so are girls. K.Q Duane’s objection to this is based on a strict and dated view about femininity and gender roles. Sportswomen or girls in sports in her view are not real females. She even states ” isn’t her being a girl good enough for you?” This goes to the root of sexist thought. There are some things people who have this belief think women should not do. Even if they are capable, it is not considered proper. The role of women in the social conservative and traditionalist mindset is that a woman should only be a wife or a mother. Their role is to maintain a home and produce children. This attitude does not value freedom or personal decisions. Having a wider identity is reserved for men only. This has changed and there has been a backlash to women advancing in areas that were male dominated. Sports seems to be another bastion that there is the most negative reaction directed at women from being participants in.

The pseudoscientific explanations are normally used to  justify women not playing sports or getting involved in physical activity. The persistent and factually incorrect one is that the female body is too weak for vigorous activity. The frailty myth was used a means of saying women were biologically inferior. It was once believed that if women played too much sports it would harm their reproductive capability. Women needed the rest cure when reaching puberty to handle the role of motherhood. Victorian Age 19th century medicine promoted such beliefs designed to restrict women from use of their bodies. Some women challenged this falsehood by cycling, getting involved in archery, and croquet. When it was demonstrated that women could handle physical strain, detractors used another argument. Women playing sports was simply unladylike and unfeminine. Today’s attitudes are more accepting of women of different body types, however body image still continues to pressure women. Women who exhibit powerful physiques are subject to unfair ridicule and criticism. This not only done by men, but women are also part of the systematic ostracism.  The author is part of this problem by saying  “women who deliberately act and look butchy deny themselves, and the world, their irretrievable and fleeting beauty forever, which is very sad and a great loss for everyone, especially themselves.” Projecting strength, confidence, and independence is not being less feminine, but are necessary traits  needed to survive in the world. Her homophobia is clear by using such language. To Duane the only value a woman has is in her looks, rather than the content of her character. Women are nothing more than ornaments to some people, rather then a free person. Women can be whatever they choose to be. This concept that certain women are not “real” women is backward.

7634bb57288d327f9d3248700f70da59

It is unfortunate that women’s actions and behaviors are still judged in the context of narrow minded gender stereotypes. The image of woman still continues to be one of being weak and helpless . When such falsehoods are exposed, there is a backlash. The social conservatives and the religious right view women in a lower status context. They justify this lower status designation by the Bible. Eve was the product of Adam’s rib. God created man first and woman followed second. Eve took a bite of the apple resulting in the expulsion from the Garden of Eden. Prior to this Adam did have another woman named as Lilith. However, she showed too much independence and was banished then replaced with Eve. The story of Genesis demonstrates the misogyny of monotheistic religions. Woman’s only role was to serve her husband or be a mother. Ancient civilizations worshiped goddesses. The rise of organized religion placed women in an inferior status. Many who are part of this section of conservatives do not believe women should have any role in the public sphere or workplace. Sports to them is the ultimate expression of masculinity and women playing them there for violates nature. There simply is no violation of nature, because these are games invented by people.

         The myths about women’s bodies continue to be propagated. One is that they are not designed for strength or power. The frailty myth has been used as a justification to exclude women from sports. Any athlete can be subject to injury whether they are male or female. This also is related to the idea that women must be protected from certain activities. Protectionism and guardianship limited women’s independence in a legal context. Women needed either permission from their husbands to open bank accounts or get credit cards. Women if they were not married needed to be supervised by a male guardian. The fact was this was not ensure women’s safety or well being, rather it was designed to keep them subordinate to male authority. Saudi Arabia has a system like this, but that is changing as women are needed to be active in the labor force. A woman’s body is strong than previously thought. However, it is true that women are subject to higher injury rates due to specific differences. Looser joints, smaller tendons, and ligaments increase they possibility of injury. This means there has to be considerations in contact sports. Anterior cruciate ligament tears are more frequent in the female athlete. There can be prevention of such injuries in adults and children. Working on weak muscle areas and increasing hamstring strength can help. Learning the right techniques in jumping and pivoting properly can contribute to preventing ligament or tendon based injuries.

     Another area women involved in sports  should pay attention to is the shoulders. Women are at risk for shoulder injuries, if they so not train their upper bodies properly. Musculoskeletal injuries are prevalent in women who are in physically demanding occupations. The only solution to this is that women must incorporate weight training into their fitness program. Doing so builds the bone and muscle mass required to withstand strain and force.

Athletes should be mindful of overuse injuries. Relevant to children it should be recognized that their bodies are still developing. The author discusses injuries in girls, yet people do not take the harm it does to boys. The boys are expected to withstand the abuse to an unreasonable degree. The problem with this is that it creates a culture of male disposability and sheltered female. Children should not be treated in the same way as professional athletes. Being young and sustaining concussions will effect health later in life. The health of athletes should be  a priority whether young or adult. Sports are played a little differently meaning that they are rougher. Referees should not let fouls be ignored, just because fans want to see more violence in their games. Sports injuries can be managed and prevented. Girls and women can play any sport just as long as weight classes are respected. The female body has been seen a fragile for so long people think its biological fact. There are girls that wrestle boys oh teams in schools , because there are not enough to form a girls  for them. So far, there have not been mass injuries. Being female does not automatically equal weakness.

          There is a cultural and gender bias against women in sports. Women who show strength are compared to men and are considered gender inappropriate. Sociologically, this describes the behaviors and codes of conduct men and women are going to follow in a society. Those who violate that schemata or role are shunned or excluded from the mainstream. The author proclaims “girls should be girls”  and expounds further : ”  they can volunteer at the hospital, day care center, soup kitchen or at church. She then pontificates  “they can learn to sing, paint, garden, cook, dance, sew, quilt or do needlework. ” It is almost bizarre that such ideas are still present in the 21st century.Women can still do all these activities  and play sports. Domesticity should not be the only part of a woman’s identity or function. There are women who challenge stereotypes and biases everyday.

There should be no contradiction between being strong and a woman. Religion and traditional family values if they want to survive have to change to function in modern day society. The concept that everyone should be married or have a nuclear family simply will not work in rapidly changing societal shifts. More people are in the developing world choosing not to have children or avoid marriage. There is nothing wrong with this, because it does not work for everyone. There may come a time when the social custom becomes obsolete. Families are not all the same either. There are extended families, single parent households, or adopted ones. The idea that feminism or gay marriage is destroying the family is incorrect. The destruction came from economic decline and the failure of neoliberal capitalism. Women in sports are just like other women. They are just involved in an area that has been male dominated. Prejudice and bias blinds people judgement to the extent of not making factual assessments. Strong women can display beauty and femininity. This may not be everyone preference, but there are different types of beauty.

There seems to be a movement toward body acceptance in regards to larger women. The question is why are women who are in another kind of body shape are not a part of this. Many times other women are the most vociferous detractors of women going into male dominated fields. This can be explained by how some women are raised. To extent women are raised with a level of self loathing and hate.This manifests itself in either low self esteem or be hypercritical of other women. Some even go as far to say “why are these women destroying themselves?” Sex bias is present in both the political left and right. This seems more surprising for  the left considering they pride themselves on “tolerance.”

The Young Turks do not seem liberal when it comes to body image. 

They may use the rhetoric of  gender equality, but do not attempted to advance such causes. There is only tolerance up to a certain level. The conservative view point is so blatantly misogynistic in terms of the restriction on reproductive rights and the refusal to address unequal pay.  The Donald Trump presidency demonstrates that their still is a huge amount of sex bias in American society. Donald Trump has been known for his sexual misconduct and sexism, but continues to get praise from conservative allies. There continues to be cases of both Republican and Democratic politicians who have engaged in sexual misconduct. It is no surprise that women also face the same issues in the sports world. Female athletes are paid less and are subject to disrespect. Female sportscasters are to do more to prove they are knowledgeable and also face sexual harassment in the workplace. Women who are in the sports world have to struggle against dated cultural bias, which believes women have in place in such activities. Only when these convictions change can real progress be made.

          Sports and physical activity does have benefits to health. This is probably more important for women due to differences in anatomy and physiology. Women have less dense bones and as the human body ages bone mass is not replaced as rapidly. Women have a higher chance of getting osteoporosis due to this difference. Children who have a positive attitude in regards to physical activity most likely will continue exercise habits as adults. Obesity is become a public health issue, but for women it can be more precarious. Due to differences in endocrinology it is harder for them to lose weight. Estrogen and progesterone  allow for more fat to be stored on the human body. The statement that “at the very least, most will eventually become obese” when they stop sports as children is incorrect. This can only happen if calorie intake is high and their is limited or no physical activity. It also depends on what type of diet the girl or woman is eating.It would be hard to gain mass amounts of weight on vegetables or fruit. Diets high in sugar, fat, and high fructose corn syrup can cause weight gain in a much more rapid manner. Muscles do not turn into fat when someone stops exercising; they merely atrophy. Keeping physically active through out life can prevent disease and other aliments associated with aging. You do not have to train intensely like a professional athlete. It could be just shorts periods.

   K.Q. Duane does not seem to have a grasp of exercise physiology. It is strange that conservatives normally despise science, yet they may use it to justify their discriminatory practices. The last excuse used to discriminate or say women are inferior is that men are stronger than women. While this is biological fact, it does not mean women cannot be strong. Thus, the argument that women are biologically inferior has no scientific basis. Women have more durational strength seeing as they live longer. The fact that women live longer means also they have a higher chance of getting diseases related to age. If more women are living longer than men, statistically they would be at a higher risk for dementia. Alzheimer’s disease will be a global health crisis as world populations live longer. Girls getting involved in sports is not a terrible thing. Title IX did not just address inequality in education it had an effect on women’s health. Girls and women were becoming more physically active and this was a positive development on women’s health. Being too sedentary or inactive can have a negative impact on a person’s health.

      It cannot be ignored that feminism, and particular third wave feminism has major flaws. The author has an objection to second wave feminism, but this phase of the movement was not completely irrational. Securing employment, education, and financial independence are critical to being free in society. Radical feminists were once a small and isolated section, however their idea were revived in the 1990s under the third wave. They do not want equality,but subscribe to a philosophy of power accumulation. They want policies that only benefit women ( who are white and middle class ) at the expense of other groups. The power feminism movement thrives on promoting gender antagonism. Men are demonized as either oppressors or violent brutes. Protests and discussion is nothing more than laughable spectacle. Sluts walks are a form of protest to combat sex violence, yet are lost in the frivolous action of it all.

    While protest is an effective unconventional method, there should be attempts to fight within the legal and political system. It requires more women to run for office and become familiar with the law. A successful and enduring movement is not going to happen with protests and manufactured social media consent. The reality is that while third wave feminists claim to want equality there are some aspects of life that they do not want it. The reason is that to an extent it provides benefits that suits them. Family law and conscription who in women’s favor. Women are more likely to get more out of divorce and receive alimony. Women even though combat positions are open to them are not required to register for the draft. Even basic interpersonal relationships have been to a degree distorted. Men are the ones who still have to initiate courtship and put in more effort in to a relationship. It is very rare that a woman would pay for dinner or ask a man out. Why does this not change in an age of  so called “equality “? It is the mere fact that women want the benefits of having some freedom, bu not the responsibility that comes with it. This then swings back to victim feminism in which women need so form of protection.

  It makes it seem as if women are not capable of making their own decisions and should not be held accountable for their actions. This explains why in child custody women are favored of the father, because females are viewed as automatic victims. The idea of innocent female nature is a fabrication. Women can be capable of domestic and child abuse. While the numbers in comparison to men, these cases may not be taken seriously due to notions based on gender stereotypes. The rise of Donald Trump and the alternative right has only caused more division in terms of sex relations. The racial divide is obvious, yet there is one in terms of sex has become much wider since the feminist movement and sexual revolution. More women are taking an antagonistic view in regards to men in general, even when there are a portion who disagree with the culture of misogyny. The third wave feminists alienate men who could be allies in their efforts. What America is witnessing now is a disintegration into political factions, interest groups, race based or sex based organizations. There is no solidarity even in the left-wing or progressive movement. The United States is doomed to be destroyed by its own hate and venom. Third wave feminism has become one of many contributors to America’s slow and cancerous decline. It is lugubrious that a movement for social progress degenerated in such a way.

         Any rational person can conclude that Duane’s thesis is flawed.  Her statements are nothing more than opinions, which have limited factual support:    “the point of my post was that young women should never be encouraged to play sports specifically designed for men. Football, ice hockey, baseball, Lacrosse, wrestling, soccer, etc. women cannot handle the strength requirements of those sports and as a result, they get seriously injured AND inevitably, look ridiculous!” Sports historically were games that branched off into other functions. Some historians believe they were developed for the sake of military training. Others have proposed that they were merely religious or hunting rituals. They were not designed for men; it was just that men invented them. According to that logic women should not be involved in science, because men contributed more to that as well. What was written was a distortion of historical fact. Women will continue to participate in all types of sports, whether people approve or not. They are not projecting an image of being “ridiculous” it is one of power,grace, beauty, and strength. Young girls see this image and it improves their sense of self.

 Sports can benefit young girls and women. There should be consideration for health and possible sex specific injuries. Denying girls and women opportunities is discriminatory. The repulsive part about this is that people who try to deny women equal opportunities or rights try to disguise it as genuine concern. The short little essay uses this technique. Such uninformed opinions do require thoughtful rebuttals. Women after being restricted for so long are now seeing the benefits of fitness and physical activity. This has either threatened men or made some women jealous. This should not be view as destructive, but positive. It demonstrates that if you work had enough all dreams are possible. That has been an American ideal ( although not an actual truth ). Seeing women in the Olympics when only 97 years ago they just began to vote is a remarkable leap of progress. If this nation and world is to survive, women and men must be allowed to fulfill their potential in whatever area unrestricted. Women are entering a new age in which they will have more opportunity and power than women of the past did. These developments should be praised. Sports and general are a frivolous pastime, yet it serves as a safe escape. Women are both athletes, fans, and sportscasters. This will only help the culture grow and thrive.

Advertisements
Sports Are Silly – An Essay From It’s The Women Not The Men: Surviving Feminism

BBC Future: “What If Women Were Stronger Than Men ?”

What If Women Were Physically Stronger Than Men ?

BBC Future is a section posted on there website discusses topics in regards to science, health, and technology. Its mission statement is ” making you smarter everyday.” It claims not to be a futurology based website, yet it seems to have elements of it. Predictions  that can be borderline outrageous are common with a sensational touch. BBC Future in its own words wants to be ” a guide to how to live more intelligently in a fast changing world.” Although most articles focus on technology and science, there was one that poses a question that can only be formulated through conjecture. Rachel Nuwer wrote the article “What If Women Were Stronger than Men ?”  consulting researchers and experts. There are some claims that seem incorrect.There are times in which experts make errors in assessments.This writing does not seem to be the most scientifically based. There are some facts about biology the should be reexamined. Also if this scenario were to occur it would either have to happen by means of evolution or sports medicine. The text recognizes that inequality is not sustained by physical strength, but fails to realize the phenomenon of organized mass violence as a means of oppression. Then there has to be an understanding of aggression levels between men and women. Would the relations between the sexes be different in terms of relationships? possibly and maybe not as one would expect. Society would of course change in some respects,but not in the way that the industrial revolution, sexual revolution, or decolonization changed the world.

         The only way women could possibly  end up being stronger than men is by biological evolution, genetic engineering, or mutation. There could be advances in exercise physiology or sports medicine that could alter women’s bodies.The article proposes “what would happen if women became stronger than men without thousands of years of evolution?” and expounds further the biological implications. Human evolution took 8 million years. Homo sapiens have only been around for 200,000 years.

Changes do not happen instantly in evolution. Walking upright or developing shorter intestines took millions of years. It was only six million years ago that bipedalism was demonstrated in the human species. Human beings vary in body shape and size. There are variations in muscle, adipose tissue, and skin.However,the skeleton can vary. People can either be tall or short. Sexual dimorphism was an environmental adaptation to environment. Our hominin ancestors would have struggled if they had a gestation similar to that of fish or reptiles. Terrestrial vertebrates do not produce thousands of eggs.A majority of species on the Earth show that females are larger for carrying offspring. Natural history demonstrates that there are major roles played by sex selection and natural selection in the process. Early primates just like today had different mating strategies. Species with smaller levels of sexual dimorphism tend to have multiple mates.Gibbons are known to do this practice. Gorillas have a higher level of sexual dimorphism meaning they would fight for mates. There also is a hierarchy related to this. Male gorillas rule over a group of female gorillas they mate with. This is termed a harem. Sex selection would involve females choosing the male that was deemed worthy for offspring. Natural selection would favor certain traits in an organism to be passed down through heredity. The body changes in response to environment and genetics. The human lineage saw legs of the body become longer and the arms reduce in length.

2 3 1_Family Tree 50_1000 Humanity is the last surviving species of the genus homo. The dramatic   shift in body proportions came around the period of 2.5 to 1.5 million years ago. The homo erectus developed a long legged body. This marked s change in the digestive system allowing metabolic energy to be used in other areas of the body. This was most beneficial to the brain and nervous system. Digestion of food could be done in a couple of hours, rather than days compared to other primates on a herbivorous diet. Environment plays a role and bodies that were tall as well as having long limbs were better adapted to warm weather. There is an interesting shift in strength that occurred in the genus homo. Humans developed lighter skeletons compared the much more powerful homo heidelbergensis and neanderthals. This is a mystery why homo sapiens did not inherit this feature of stronger bodies. One theory was that a more nurturing appearance may have stimulated  caring among kinship groups. Another reason was that physical strength was not as useful as brain power. Modern humans developed tools, language, and trading networks. Neanderthals may have lagged behind in these areas and thus did not survive. With the change in life style to permanent settlement and farming there was a reduction in physical activity. The life style went from being more rugged to more tame.  The sex differences between men and women remained  for the sake of sexual reproduction. While female size still remained smaller to male body size,there is obvious variation between individuals.

The Neanderthals had thicker bones and stronger bodies compared to modern day humans. 

Genetics are the reason why there is variation in populations. Genes are expressed and multiple ones can be responsible for certain phenotypic attributes. It was only in 2017 in which certain genes related to strength were identified. Both men and women can be carriers of these genes. This means if this trait is favored it can be transferred to offspring of men and women. However, environment is still a factor. A person with the ability to build great strength, but does not will not be the next athletic star. Then there is the factor of the MSTN gene which is responsible producing myostatin. It is a critical protein for regulating growth of skeletal muscle. People with lower levels will find it easier to build muscle. Genetic engineering could alter this protein enabling women to become stronger. This is more part of the realm of science fiction. Mutations do not occur by engineering; that happen naturally. A mutation such as IVS1+5G>A on the MSTN gene causes low production of myostatin. The mutation causes a disruption in the instructions used to produce myostatin. As a result it causes the body to have more muscle mass and strength. The over growth is not a cancer, because cell growth continues as normal. If this rare type of mutation were to become common in women it would result in strength gain. This shift would not require an understanding of genetics or epigenetics. Women becoming stronger than men would require millions of years of evolution and genetic drift.

            The factors that determine strength are also essential to producing a realistic scenario. The text states “while physical differences between genders has been narrowing women are catching up to men in some athletic endeavors especially ultra-marathon events.”  Women have produced impressive athletic performances, yet this does not mean the differences are narrowing in terms of physiology. When examining the muscular system, respiratory system, skeletal system, and cardio vascular system it is clear that the differences are still present even with the most physical fit women and men. Prior to puberty there is very little difference in physical fitness capacity. The strength spurt that boys get after 13 is due to changes in endocrinology. Testosterone allows for muscular hypertrophy to a greater extent. Testosterone is not the only factor in determining strength levels. If women were to become stronger it does not mean they would need an increase of androgens. While sex is a factor,body composition, muscle fiber distribution, height, and somatotype are important. It should also be clear in this scenario men do not change genetically or in regards to hormones. The SRY gene is responsible for male characteristics. This could happen without women lowering their estrogen. Women with mesomorphic body types could build considerable strength with training, because their physique allows for more results in strength gains. Simply having large muscles does not equate to strength. It depends on the total distribution of type II and type I muscle fibers as well as body composition. Fat does not contribute to strength. Height can be a factor, because a larger skeleton would mean room for muscle. Type II muscle fiber is designed for more explosive power compared to the more endurance base type I.

Naomi Kutin was just 10, when she lifted 215 lbs. Her muscles are not bigger than Margie Martin’s. This is the difference between training for strength or training for hypertrophy.     

Strength may not be dependent entirely on a person’s size. There are athletes who are smaller, but still are able to attain strength through a particular training method. It is possible to have the appearance of large muscles,but not have as much functional strength. Training for hypertrophy is commonly called bodybuilding.This increases the size of the tendons,ligaments, including the stabilizer muscles.Ligaments and tendons are strengthen at a slower pace compared to the muscles, which explains when lifting heavy why joint issues are a concern. Strength training allows the nervous system to make the muscles use the most force in collaboration with the skeletal system.

The article makes a mistake saying that basically a major hormonal shift would have to happen. The law of nature as they describe it has made women the reproducer of offspring. This means that either human beings would either just reproduce asexually or biological sex would disappear. Women could be stronger while having hormonal fluctuations  in progesterone and estrogen required to reproduce children. Strength between the sexes follows a bell curve. The average man has 10 kg more muscle mass and 40% more upper body strength. Although women are closer to men in lower body the percentage is estimated 33% as strong. These estimates are for men and women of various sizes. When the size is constant it estimated that women women can be 80% as strong. The reason why the estimate is not 100 % when the size is constant is due to the differences in the upper body. Men’s shoulders are broader meaning they can house more muscle on the section of the body. The writing does state women would have to increase skeletal structure to be strong and therefore would have to see in increase in growth. This means women would have to have broader shoulders. Bone density aids in strength.

Without those conditions women would not be stronger. There would have to be a change in physiology rather than endocrinology. The reason the athletic performance gap remains is due to this. Also, there are sociological factors that do hinder progress. Many women do not have the opportunity or access to training facilities. Living in a war zone or a society that does not give women the same rights can negatively effect their health. There also has to be a consideration that most of the scientific studies on exercise physiology are conducted on men. This does not tell us the full extent of women’s physical capabilities. What is known is extracted from sports records and other data. Since 1983 women’s sports records have remained stable.There is a 10% difference in athletic performance between males and females. Considering the anatomical and physiological differences between men and women that is relatively small. There is obviously a chance women’s records will improve. There could be individual women who reach high levels that revival their male counterparts. It may not impossible to say that women could become as strong as men, maybe not stronger. When examining cross sectional area of muscle between the sexes they seem to exert the same amount of force. The science of strength is still being explored and it is not know what the full extent of human limits are.

       If women were  did become stronger than men, it does not automatically men that that society  would become a matriarchy. Daphnie Fairbirin’s assessment is incorrect saying that it would also result in having men look after children. The reason human beings may not produce large amounts of offspring is because both the roles of the parents are important to the offspring. Unlike other animals the growth process for primates is slow. An infant is very dependent on their parents for food and protection. It is most likely the division of labor came about for ensuring the survival of offspring. Patriarchy is more sociological rather than biological. The rise of permanent settlement and property put women at a disadvantage. Framing also put the hunter gatherers at a disadvantage as well considering they could not make a food surplus. The whole basis of women being subjugated was not due to men’s greater strength, but the fact women did not have the same rights and opportunities. One problem was that women did not have control of their own bodies or lives. The rise of contraception and abortion have women more freedom than ever before. That is why reproductive rights are so essential to women’s liberation. Matriarchy is defined as ” a social system in which women hold the major positions of power.”  There have thus so far, never been matriarchal societies in pre-history or  the modern era. There has been cases of matrilineal  inheritance, but societies were still male dominated. There have been feminists who advocate some form of matriarchy to replace patriarchy. This theme has been common in feminist literature and was born out of cultural feminism in the 19th century. It found new life in power feminism. This faction cl;aims they want equality, but that is simply not true. They want a society were women dominate in which both the legal and political system favor them. To extent in the West, it seems to be moving that way in terms of alimony, child support, and divorce. The neoliberal capitalist system has indirectly caused conflict between the sexes in the labor force. Patriarchy is supported by a power structure through a social,legal, and political system. Equal rights and the rule of law can eliminate such disparities.

         There could be psychological changes in women that become physically stronger. Rachel Nuwer makes the mistake on relying on a ludicrous study by political scientist Micheal Petersen. His claim was that men with more upper body strength favored hierarchy and far-right political views. This claim seems false when analyzing the data. Their sample size included only hundreds of people from Argentina, Denmark, and the United States. African and Asian countries were not included. The researchers from the Aarhus University study found no link or correlation in women. This study is not really scientific at all. There is a link between political views, socioeconomic status, and ethnic background. The less educated and more closed minded individual tends to favor far-right views. Although left-wing politics would benefit the poor, they tend to favor right-wing views even though it could be detrimental  to them. Different ethnic and women may  favor either side of the political spectrum. What molds a person ideology occurs early in life and based around cultural or social factors. A child raised in a conservative or liberal home will most likely adopt those values. The body type does not influence thought, it is the sense of self. It would be silly to say that women who are physically stronger would be more conservative. The only demonstration of this study reveals is how people value artificial hierarchies.

    According that study this woman should be more conservative than this man. Assuming this would be ridiculous 

A ruling class justifies oppression by blaming awful conditions on the oppressed. Arguments range from biology to claims that the oppressed are just natural failures. Relevant to women, sex differences are used as a justification for unequal treatment and status. The differences do not indicate inferiority, but pseudo-scientific explanations have been used to make such statements. The idea that men are better and more powerful is enough to psychologically induce a sense of entitlement. Women who have engaged in some form of strength training say they are more confident. This new sense of self spreads to other areas of life. Gaining the full power of one’s body and skill gives women a new sense of independence. Women becoming physically stronger does not mean automatically they would be more aggressive. This theory proposed by the Aarhus University is nothing more than theories that were proposed by William Sheldon a psychologist in the 20th century. He attempted to correlate behavior to body type. Theories of constitutional psychology are discredited mainly because of its eugenic roots and inconsistent data. Although the term somatotype is still used in fitness and health circles, Sheldon classified mesopmorphs are being rugged, assertive, and dominant. Sheldon’s ideas were nothing more than an extended version of Francis Galton’s anthropometric studies.   There tends to be a false belief that if women gain too much power they will abuse it. Behavior is more complex from a psychological perspective. It is not just rooted in biology; there is a major sociological component.

         There is a difference in aggressiveness and competitiveness between the sexes. This is rooted in biological evolution and sociology. It is incorrect to say that men are just more naturally violent and women are more peace loving. Aggressiveness and competitiveness were defense mechanism in the evolutionary past. Early  hominins had to fight to either avoid predators and collaborate to survive the wilderness.These two traits are not exclusively male. Women can have aggressive behavior or be competitive depending on environment. If these traits are favored in a society, most living there will adopt it. It would be erroneous to say that the world would be more peaceful if women ruled the world. Female leaders have been known to favor war, just like their male counterparts. Margaret Thatcher favored the Falklands War, Condoleeza Rice was involved in the Iraq War, and Susan Rice advocated strikes in Libya. These women obviously did not have peace loving nature.

Hillary Clinton if she became president of the US would have followed the same aggressive war policy. Politics is a competitive environment and requires a level of aggressive thought. Women have shown that they can be just as calculating, deceptive, and skillful as men when it comes to political power. The reason why more women may not be in politics is because many may not be encouraged to have these ambitions. Even the most progressive societies still retain dated beliefs about women’s roles. The concept of the mother as the only identity a woman can have is still exalted. Women with “too much ambition” are seen as ruthless career-women. The same criticisms are not directed at men. An assertive and take charge woman is seen as either “difficult” or “overbearing.”  It is clear there are double standards and biases with in cultures in regards to women in power. The question doe not come down to either nature versus nurture. These two factors interact with one another. Sociobiology gives consideration to how natural selection influences behavior. Aggressiveness and competitiveness may be traits that were favored for human survival. At the same time excessive violence can lead to destruction of civilization.

             Violence has been a method to oppress many people. If women were stronger than men, it is not very likely violence against then would decline. Rape or domestic violence would not decline dramatically. Jackson Katz makes this claim who is president of MVP Strategies a company that works in developing programs for prevention of gender based violence. Mentors in Violence Prevention offers training and wants to change attitudes that promote such behaviors. Crime is a problem of every society, but it occurs for a reason. Violence against women is a means to forcibly put them back in a subordinate position. Organized mass violence is a phenomenon of civilization. When the first armed forces emerged the became the highest form of violence. While violence on an individual level is unacceptable ( one person murdering another), mass violence is embraced when it is controlled. Armies are an example of acceptable  mass violence , even when the actions are still murder.Women if they live in a society that does not value them will be subject to mass violence. The only way physical strength would be helpful is for basic defense, but if there is no legal or political protection this would be useless. Rape does not always involve an assailant physically beating  their victim. Alcohol or drugging of victims seems to be a common method of criminals of college campuses. What creates this atmosphere of sexual assault and violence is cultural attitudes. If society views women as nothing more than sex objects, this distorts men’s views of women. If the laws do not punish criminals or are lenient then it creates a system that works against women. Some observers calls this rape culture. While some points are legitimate, the feminist argument  that “men are taught to rape” lacks cogency. Calling this a rape culture may not even be the best description; it is a culture of misogyny. Saying that rapes would decrease if women were stronger is like saying murder would go down if more people owned guns. While a gun can provide some protection this would be negated if there were other with more or the same amount.

While this woman and man could be on the same level of strength that does not give an indication of who could be more likely to be abusive. 

Katz’s assessment is limited in terms of criminology. There is marital, acquaintance, and custodial rape. Women are not the only victims. Rape that occurs in prison does not receive that same amount of attention or outrage. There are different typologies of rapists. anger-retaliatory rapists and anger-excitation rapists are the most violent. Anger-retaliatory rapists use physical force to subdue their victims, while anger excitation rapists enjoy to a degree inflict pain on the victim. Power-assurance rapists use methods that are less physical such as drugs, stalking, or luring a victim into a place of vulnerability. Besides prevention or tougher laws, women and girls must be raised differently. Women must be taught self-defense. Girls are either taught to not assert themselves or defend themselves. Women often go around thinking ” I want to be with a guy who makes me feel safe.” Women are taught that men will protect them, when in reality they will probably be their primary abusers. This idea that women should entrust their physical protection to the men they know needs to change. Being proactive rather than just putting emphasis prevention could change the situation. Domestic violence should not be solely viewed as a women’s only problem. According to the article 19% of men report having been attacked by their partner. Women’s victim rates are higher,but physical strength is not the sole reason for that. The psychology of a partner matters. One who is overly dominant and demands compliance will most likely be more abusive. A sense of constant entitlement contributes to abusive behavior. Sexism and lack of gender equality are major factors in higher domestic abuse. There may never be completely accurate statistics on domestic violence, because victims are unwilling to seek help.

More Than 40% of Domestic Abuse Victims Are Male Report Says

The reason a person comes back to an abusive relationship and marriage  has to do with a person’s self-esteem. The victim feels as if they are nothing without the abuser. Then if they are financially dependent it makes separation more difficult. It is the unfortunate fact that through out history wife beating was not considered a criminal act. It was not until the 19th and 20th centuries did countries begin to criminalize such a practice. There is a long tradition of men having authority over women, even in intimate relationships. Some men do not abuse women simply because they can; they are allowed and encouraged to do so. Only when there is a change in this system can violence against women can be reduced.

          There would definitely be a change in gender relations in regards to interpersonal associations. Women being stronger would alters dynamics in terms of amorous relationships.Men would have to use something other than strength to define their identity. This has happened in a sense, through their careers yet that is also not healthy. Work could be unfulfilling or not available depending on the state of the economy. This explains why men have more psychological distress when they are unemployed. Resources are a method of attracting the opposite sex and have replaced physical confrontation a means for competing for women like our hominin ancestors did. Strength would not replace physical attractiveness it would just become part of it. There are today women who are very physically strong and attractive . One the ways women were able to navigate male dominated societies was to use their feminine charm or sexuality  against men. Manipulation was a useful tactic for women who did not have political or social power. To an extent physical attractiveness gave women some form of bargaining power.  Now that their is a level of financial and social independence there has been a shift in gender relations.

Men are in the West and in particular America are struggling to figure out how to create a stable life for themselves in the changing  dynamic. If man is no longer a provider or father what purpose does he serve?  Women who are well off in terms of finance may be looking for stable relationships, but cannot establish one. Men and women are still functioning on dated gender roles even when society has changed. Even women of independence are still seeking a man to “take care of them,”   while men still think they need to bear all of the responsibilities and hardships  without complaint, even if it is deleterious.Status has become the main way of determining relationships. Selecting one’s partner was not a personal choice in the past. Most marriages were arranged and they still are some countries. Marriage was historically a property arrangement; marrying for love is a recent phenomenon. The lugubrious reality is that when one’s spouse earns more it does cause a level of tension. The problem is too many people view marriage as a subordinate follower and a dominant controller dynamic. Women who make more money in the marriage may generate jealousy from their husbands. If physical strength were added there would be conflict. There are men who think that women have taken something from them and physical strength is their last bastion.

 Feminism did challenge and defeat major injustices, but it also created some negative consequences. Radical feminism and third wave feminism in particular presented all men as enemies. The idea that women should just seek power and not equality has somewhat caused tension between men and women in America. Family law favors women over men and although this is a double standard women do not want this reversed. People who attempt to debate the third wave feminist rhetoric are either told they “hate them because they are successful” or vituperated. Men are unfortunately either not attempting to establish relationships with the talented women out there or simply becoming more misogynistic. This explains why certain men with a traditional mind set are obsessed with sports such as football, boxing, and MMA. There is a sense that women will never have an advantage in physical prowess. Yet, women are also part of the sports world and have received negative reaction from people who believe in strict gender roles. physical strength is not a male only attribute, but when it is shown in women, the reactions are very negative or hostile. Sports is no longer a male only domain. Women being strong or stronger would make some men who are insecure feel threatened. Even the men who may like such a change who have to make adjustments.

  The common held belief is that marriage is better for men. Women actually have more to gain from marriage than a man. It is very rare that a man could find a rich woman to marry and become a stay at home dad. Women on the other hand can be a homemaker and gain relative security. A woman has more options than a man who has to be a provider. The burden of family life is not shared equally. The most visible change in women being stronger would be the household labor. Women would probably be expected to do more manual labor based chores. However, there could be a change in how women and men select who they will marry or have a long term relationship with. Women who reach a certain status will not be with men of lower status. Normally, the insecure men try to find a woman who they can easily control. Men who attempt to seek companionship with women of higher status will most likely be rejected. Endogamy is powerful and the adage “true love conquers all” may not be  an axiom. It is rare to see a woman with a PhD dating a man with a high school diploma or a woman business executive dating a janitor. There are still conflicts about people dating outside their own race or religion. This partially explains why online dating sites are so popular. People can just answer questions in relation to their biases ( or preferences or compatibility in a more euphemistic sense) and find a match. Sadly, a physically strong woman most likely would not want a man weaker than herself. If women were all stronger than men, it would mean men would have to compete harder to get female attention. Men who either have to have higher earning power, achieve a level of prominence, or do an act of physical daring.

It could be that women would be the competitors for male attention. Men have to approach women if a relationship is to get started. Assuming that women being stronger did not change particular behaviors and customs certain procedures would remain the same. The most radical adjustment would be that husbands may not feel entitled to bossing around their wives. There would be a change in attitude may be not so much daily living.

         The workforce would be altered if women were stronger than men. There would be more women in physically demanding occupations. The reason there are so few women in these fields is not only due to discrimination, but physiology. Women do not have as much physical strength. There are women who can do such physically demanding jobs, yet the numbers remain low due to differences in physical fitness capacity. Construction, firefighting, law enforcement, the military, and sports are occupations in which men have higher employment numbers. If women were to have more strength they would probably be dominant in these fields. Rachel Nuwer does explain that women who are competent at their jobs still may face a glass ceiling. The reason is that a system will always favor the ruling group. It does not matter how skilled or educated the oppressed is. They will be stopped from advancing economically, socially, and politically. If affirmative action was enforced it could negate such issues. Technology has in a way allowed women to advance when they at a disadvantage in terms of muscle power. Yet, this does not explain why more women did not enter the workforce during the industrial revolution. Women who were of the working class got employment in factories such as textiles. The upper class women were restricted more so obeying the middle class values of the cult of domesticity. The reason women were not given equal pay was that it would cause working families to advance themselves and therefore no longer be subordinate to a ruling class. Oppressors do not favor social mobility and attempt to prevent it. Men did not like women working, because it was viewed as more labor competition and it gave women more independence. Now it seems that women are in many fields that were once thought to be male only.

There would probably be mixed sports competition if women were stronger than men. There would still be divisions by weight classes in some cases. The reason sports are divided by sex is due to men’s higher fitness level. This is done to remain fair, otherwise a large portion of women would be cut out of sport. It would be difficult to image men and women playing a tackle football game, but this is only a theoretical scenario. Although it may not change the sexist attitudes in sports culture. Women have proven they are skilled, yet they are either ostracized or disparaged by the media. Women have been a part of the sports culture since ancient civilization, however there are still some who view women of such strength and endurance as abnormal. This view has fallen out of fashion as cultural mores become liberal. If women became stronger than men at this point in history it may not be as important. As technology advances there is a possibility the human work force could be replaced by robotics. Automation and artificial intelligence  is the wave of the future and it will cause certain jobs to disappear. There is no way in which a human being could physically compete with a machine in a manual labor job.  It will not get tired, it will not demand pay or vacation.

 A Robot will not suffer health or attrition problems like a human.

The solution has to be a form of universal income and extensive job training to help world populations adjust to rapid technological advancement. The majority of the world population will have to get an education beyond high school and be devoted to life long learning. There will need to be skilled workers to make such machines or information technology. Women if they want to close the wage gap must go into fields such as science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. They must also go into the physically demanding occupations as well. It seems that  brain power is more pivotal than muscle power.

       The text concludes that while women suddenly becoming stronger than men is more science fiction, there is some shift underway. Women are entering politics, science, and business. The one element that is missing is how women are entering the world of fitness and sports. There is a silent revolution in this regard. Women are embracing strength and transforming their bodies to their maximum. There were muscular women in the past, but none that were as impressive as seen today. More women are competing in the Olympics now than ever before. When the modern Olympics were revived in 1896 women were banned from competition.

Women compete in most sports in the 21st century. That does not mean there is equality in the sports world with the lack of media coverage. The interesting paradigm shift is that there is a growing male fan base for physically strong women. Social media and the internet have given women with such physiques more exposure. When contemplating  this shift one realizes these women are stronger than many men. It seems women have embarked on physical empowerment. This means having control of one’s body and learning physical skills. While society has not morphed into an Amazon matriarchy, it is clear that there are a portion of women have become stronger. Technology and science are also to thank for this development. Understanding anatomy and exercise physiology helped in designing training regimens for women. Exploring nutrition and diet also contributed. Supplements and vitamins have benefited women in terms of improving performance. It seems women have reached a stage in which they are developing themselves to the maximum both mentally and physically. Humans are still evolving either by mutation or epigenetic factors. It would seem impossible that women could get stronger than men. Although there is a strong possibility that women could each an equivalent level of strength through millions of years of  biological evolution. Even if there were to be a change it would not be immediately noticeable. The global trend seems to be shifting to a more sedentary lifestyle causing increased rates of obesity and heart related illnesses. BBC Future attempted to show how society would change based on speculation, but the assessments were off. One element is clear that society and civilization have always been changing. The status of women has not always been low, but has fluctuated through out time.

BBC Future: “What If Women Were Stronger Than Men ?”

Anita Sarkeesian and a Gamer’s Response

Anita Sarkeesian’s “Tropes versus Women in Video Games” generated much controversy. While there is no denying there is sexism in video games her videos present the average male gamer as a misogynist and internet troll. The unfortunate aspect of this is that there are male gamers who fit this description.  Sarkessian’s analysis and the venomous responses of some individuals represent how extreme third wave feminism and men’s rights advocates seek to divide the gaming community. It is clear that there is an agenda to promote Feminist Frequency a website run by Sarkeesian. She claims to be a dedicated game enthusiast, but it has been rare to see her actually do so, rather than criticism. Her style of debate is to make small selections of data, rather than examining the entire picture. There are also people in the gaming community who also make such outrageous claims. The video “Anita’s “Myths” Versus  Real Myths ” also represents a distortion. A Youtube user by the name Prince Asbel responded to Anita’s video in the same irrational manner. The debate centered around the concept of women being the weaker sex. Users like him only give Sarkeesian fuel and paint a negative image of the gaming community. While sexual dimorphism is a biological reality, this does not mean gender stereotypes are based in truth.

         The video wants to challenge Sarkeesian’s claim  of women being stereotyped as the weaker sex. The problem is that Asbel uses a subject that actually disproves his point. The video shows Jill mills arm wrestling  three men and losing to two of them. One should realize that arm wrestling is not a precise measure of strength. This involves a level of technique as well as strength from the wrist, pectoralis major,  and biceps brachii.

His example was to demonstrate that women really cannot be strong. Jill mills has the ability to lift cars and do many feats of strength from years of training. She is certainly not weak. If this presentation wanted to be precise it would examine bench press, leg press, and squat records of female and male athletes. Men on average are stronger. This does not mean the female body cannot acquire strength. Jill Mills can deadlift 475 lbs for reps. Jill currently can bench 286 lbs and do a 442 lbs squat. These are impressive records and the reason she could not beat these men at arm wrestling is because she had limit training for it. It would be doubtful if the men in the video can do what Jill does without any training. However, it would not be possible that Jill could out lift the world’s strongest man.

The strength difference is not solely due to muscle. The male skeleton contains denser bones, larger ligaments, and bigger tendons. The video sites that Jill is covered in muscles and therefore she should have beaten the men. Large muscles do not automatically equal more strength. It has to do with the distribution of type II muscle fibers and the rate of muscular contraction. Type II muscle fibers are critical for explosive power. It is possible for a person with smaller muscles to be stronger if they are specifically training for that purpose. A weightlifter may be able to lift more than a large bodybuilder simply because one athlete is training for hypertrophy. The bodybuilder’s goal is an aesthetic one.

The notion that women are weaklings falls into the frailty myth. Physical weakness or lack of physical skills were thought to be women’s natural state. It seems Abdel falls into this perspective, but attempts to appear non-biased by mentioning his sister. Average does not correlate to all men being stronger. There are multiple factors that play a role in physical strength. Body type, endocrinology, body composition, and fitness level. Women produce more estrogen which allows for more body fat, rather than lean body mass. Myostatin in particular determines how large muscles can grow given a training regimen. Testosterone allows for greater muscular hypertrophy, which enables more protein synthesis. Genetics play a role in both sexes in terms of fitness levels. Men have more natural strength, but women also respond to the stimuli of weight training. At the cellular level, there is no difference between male and female muscle. Men just have more type II muscle fibers. The disparity is more about quantity rather than quality.

The difference in upper body strength is the greater compared to the lower body. The average woman according to rough estimates has about 55% of males’ upper body strength. Women have a closer range of lower body strength which is between 25% to 75%. This shows that men do have larger muscle fibers. This does not mean a man who does not train will be stronger than a woman who does. A woman who trains seriously could either equal or surpass the average man in strength. Then training method is also important. Training at high intensity allows women to acquire more strength and the use of plyometrics. The physiological and biological differences explain why female athletes have to train harder than their male counterparts. The differences in physical fitness potential change during puberty, when hormonal changes alter the body. Anatomically women have wider hips and narrower shoulders, which do effect athletic performance.

There is of course overlap between women and in men. The explanation for this is that each individual’s physiology is different, which gives then a natural advantage over other competitors. There also is the factor of technique in athletic skill. Strength and speed are critical, but if one has not mastered skilled movements for a particular sport, it will ultimately effect the total performance optimum. This may explain why some women could beat men in a physical contest if the skill and technique level is high.

This man clearly is stronger, but loses. The woman has a technique that nullified the strength gap. As you can see arm wrestling is not an accurate measure of strength. 

Sexual dimorphism is the product of millions of years of evolution. This does not prove women are inferior, but different. Humans are primates of a mammal order and usually males tend to be larger than females. There are exceptions seeing as gibbons are the same size for both sexes. The reason for size and strength differences between men and women may have to do with mating strategies. Our early ancestors of the past had to compete for mates. Size and strength would have been an element of natural selection to spread particular genes. There is vast amounts of genetic diversity in the human species, which allowed it to survive. Relevant to this discussion of female representation being a woman does not make one biologically inferior or physically weak by default. Stereotypes and negative attitudes do effect peoples’ behavior  and conduct in regards to certain groups. This is why women face extra scrutiny in occupations that are physically demanding like the military, law enforcement, firefighting, and sports. The assumption is that they are too frail and incapable of such work. Men are stronger, but that does not mean they have a monopoly on  physical strength. Asbel seems to present a distorted argument just like Sarkeesian.

        The problem with Anita Sakeesian is that she does not acknowledge that women in video games do not all fall into the damsel in distress trope. This trope is older than electronic entertainment and can be seen in film, television, and literature. There is a progression which features women characters as the stars of their own games. Fans are responding positively to this new development. The Tomb Raider reboots and Uncharted Lost Legacy  are great examples of this change. They fight, shoot, and march their way through danger in their new adventures. Gamers do not care that they are women.

The wonderful aspect about Uncharted Lost Legacy  is that it features non-white characters staring in their own game. Black and Asian representation has been lacking and this was a excellent remedy to that problem. While it may be true their is a social construction that women are helpless and ineffectual, there has been a change in particular beliefs. A female heroine is not such a shock to people anyone when consuming various forms of entertainment. When gamers  found out that Samus was a woman at the end of the first Metroid  game it shocked them. Samus continues to be one of Nintendo’s most popular characters. There are male gamers who do fit the archetype of woman hating trolls who want to exclude them from the culture. They are the minority, but are vociferous and get more attention. The reason the negativity appears is because women are having a greater presence. What the maker of the video does not understand is how some people operate on prejudice. Despite this, there has been progress. Sarkeesian does not help her case by painting all men as vicious misogynists. There are many gamers who do not approve of such convictions. There are many female characters that are strong and show character development.

04f0749faae975068fd4c1a6f599a978

Screen-Shot-2017-06-20-at-6.10.22-PM.png

What should be avoided in female character creation is tokenism or predictable tropes. What Asbel calls reality actually is what he perceives. This is the same manner in which Sarkeesian presents her arguments. Ignoring that there is a problem will not magically make the issue of subtle or blatant sexism go away. Asbel want one to believe that there is no such issue. Sarkeesian wants to convince people that all gamers are rude misogynists. These are two extremes of  a spectrum. Video games and electronic entertainment should be an inclusive community. People promoting political or social agendas should look elsewhere to do so. The challenges can only be addressed if more women get involved in game design, start their own companies, and become leaders in the industry. Mere complaints will not lead to change; action must be taken to redress such grievances.

Anita Sarkeesian and a Gamer’s Response

The Significance of Kale and Caulifla on Dragon Ball Super

Dragon Ball Super has reached a milestone of 101 episodes and it proves the franchise is as lively as ever. The anime and manga series has captivated audiences globally with its action and fascinating characters. The great addition to the Dragon Ball universe is the appearance of female super saiyans. For many years fans have only conceptualized this through fan art across the internet and now it is a reality. Women fighters were a rare occurrence in the series. The character Kale was dubbed by fans as the “female Broly.” As one can clearly observe this is more of a homage to a non-canon character. It seems their personalities are similar, however Kale may see some character development. This is an excellent choice, because it is essential that Kale develop to distinguish between two different characters in the Dragon Ball universe. Caulifla who is not a homage or reference to another character has been changing as well. This must continue to avoid the problem of tokenism that occurs in various forms of media. A female character should not be there just to placate some demand by fans or be a stock character. They should have critical roles and be a part of the action. The hope is that the series takes this into consideration. One aspect that should be praised about these characters, is that they were not afraid to have a unique character design. During their transformations they displayed powerful bodies and rarely do cartoons depict women with such a body type. Fan reactions to the characters are divided, but it seems overtime audiences will warm up to them. Criticisms mostly are directed at the power scaling and what some see as a marketing gimmick by Toei Animation.

        Kale when she is first introduced is a timid and rather low self-esteem individual. When Caulifla encouraged her to enter the Tournament of Power, she was plagued with self doubt. However, before she did reach the berserker super saiyan form when triggered emotionally. Just like Broly, she was uncontrollable and murderous. Caulifa was able to calm her down and prevented Cabba from possibly being killed. Kale again goes into her Legendary super saiyan  form during the tournament, but puts everyone at risk. Goku is the first victim of her assault, but Jiren then stops her. When Kale transforms the next time she has control. This shows a progression in character development. Kale is gradually going from a timid and uncertain individual to a confident person. When she saw Caulifla in distress, she realized a change had to be made. She was becoming tired of being a burden. Once Kale overcomes her insecurities she will be a self actualized individual. Her third time transforming was not just a physical one, it was a mental one. Kale did something Broly could never do and control the legendary super saiyan form.

Kale_muscle_36

Kale_muscle_32

This change in personality is a great development and adds depth to the character. Kale still has a long way to go in terms of mastery of this form, but it will be interesting to see where it leads. If Dragon Ball Super does this correctly would could see a very entertaining character. Kale may see a transformation from fear to fierce. It is uncertain where this arc will go, but hopefully the saiyans of universe 6 will survive.

       Caulifla stands out as unique character as well. She does fall into a “tough woman” stock character. These women characters are suppose to have an I don’t need anyone attitude and generally not very emotional. While it seems that Caulifla would fall into this one dimensional role the series changes this. Caulifla is very protective of Kale and despite what appears to be a harsh personality cares about her protege. She encourages and attempts to motivate Kale even when she doubts herself. At first she comes off as arrogant when first meeting Goku, but then begins to almost befriend him when fighting. The encounter was belligerent at first. She attempted to intimidate Goku with her new form. It had power, but lacked speed.

Caulifla_muscle_10 (1)

Caulifa versus Goku

Many Dragon Ball fans remember that Trunks attempted to use this form on Cell. While Caulifla seems cocky at times, this was a point in which she took advice from a more experienced fighter. Being very talented she was able to reach super saiyan two. Astounded by its power she continued to fight with Goku. When Cabba came to recruit her for the tournament, she cared little about the fate of the universes. Her only interest was acquiring a new form to elevate her power.This could change as she meets new people. Goku could have easily knocked her off the ring, but did not. It could be that he wants her to keep fighting so her stamina would drain. These are only theories. Caulifa may have found some form of friendship with Goku. She may be opening up to being a kinder person. Caulifla has much pride, but could be learning to be more humble and learn from the experiences of others. She may prove to be a helpful ally to Goku and his friends later on.

      The character designs for both characters should be praised. Normally female characters are portrayed as thin to an exaggerated extent. Even when they are supposed to be physically strong this default character design is used. Dragon Ball Super broke that convention having the saiyan women appear just as powerful. Not only that, it is clear they do not need assistance from the male cast. It is common for the damsel in distress trope to used redundantly. Here it is not can it is apparent that Kale and Caulifla can take care of themselves. One problem is that the physically strong woman is normally presented as a threat, anomaly, or the punchline to some gender based joke. The story arc has not used any of these common stereotypical roles. The physically strong woman either falls into two notable tropes. They are either cast as the amazonian beauty or brawn hilda. The strange aspect about Kale is that she could fall into both, yet she is still an evolving character. Caulifla, while not as athletic looking in her base form may not fit in either and could be  more associated with the action girl trope. The action girls seeks adventure and danger. They rarely back down from a challenge.

It seems that they are now better fighters than Cabba himself. The animators and creators of the series were not afraid to give these female characters a different character design. Some of more conservative taste would scoff at the idea of female characters drawn this way. The point of making a cartoon character is to design them in a unique way that is recognizable to viewers. These character designs make sense, because Saiyans are a warrior race. They value fighting and physical fitness. Their civilization parallels that of Sparta, Dahomey, and Japan in regards to warrior culture. That means their whole society was invested in war and even conquest. Unfortunately for the Saiyans of Goku’s universe that were the victims of Frezia. Seeing as these characters are super powered being they might as well appear that way. Fans were either shocked see such a design or embraced this as another surprise that Dragon Ball is known for.

There are some who are even enthusiastic about these two characters transformations. Many videos, fan art, and fan commentary have been produced just for the discussion of Kale and Caulifla. The magic of Dragon Ball is that it has the ability to create lovable and enduring characters. Kale and Caulifla are now part of that family. The creation of the character design is just as important as the personality you give that character.

      There appears to be a divide over these character s in the fan community. Some complained that Caulifla going super saiyan happened too fast and was anti-climatic. Detractors also said it cheapened that value of being a super saiyan. There are some problems wit these statements. First, it should be noted that Cabba went super saiyan in the last tournament. Trunks and Goten achieved this form as children. Could it be sexism among certain fans that get vexed that this happened to Kale and Caulifla? There is very little evidence, but there are various instances in which power scaling has been inconsistent. Then there are numerous transformations going from super sayian one to four  following the new form super sayian blue. Goku and Vegeta are the strongest fighters on Earth, so there would be little to be a challenge for them. It should be remembered that Goku was holding back when fight Kale, but it seem like that Kamehahmeha blast could have at least caused some damage. This could mean several things. Kale is either stronger than people realize and their is a possibility that it can increase more. Kale could in an uncontrolled state be stronger, but runs the risk of destroying herself and cohorts. The last theory is that she has reached the full extent of her potential. Caulifla seems to be like Goku in a sense that she has the ability to master techniques fast. Others criticize this as lazy writing, but you could easily say that about Goku reaching super saiyan 3 during the Buu saga.

The point is many characters have become very overpowered and strong. Frankly, there should not be any complaint about power scaling. A franchise that has been around this long is bound to have inconsistencies in its folklore. Maybe it does not create a plot hole at at all. These are an alien species that are operating on a completely different physiological biology. This is only speculative, but more could be revealed as the arc progresses. Another prevalent criticism is that Kale is nothing more than a Toei Animation marketing gimmick. The company realizes that they have many devoted fans and Broly has been a fan favorite. Some were disappointed that Broly was not made cannon. Kale is a homage to the character in a sense as one can see from the outfit and her personality. A faction of fans still call her the “female Broly” even though it appears the character is developing into something different. There are either fans who like the character or dislike her in the series. While it is legitimate to say there should not be a character just to sell products or do fan pandering, it is unfair not to at least give the character a chance. There are fans who also fall into the camp of overwhelming support.

Anyone who has followed Dragon Ball would know there is a huge fan art community. Even before the appearance of these characters fans were drawing what they thought female super saiyans would loo like. Prior to Kale’s official appearance fans were already making art based on a leaked clip. It is wonderful that female characters are gaining popularity in the franchise. Other characters are even coming back to prominence such as Andriod 18. Action series tend to marginalize female characters either regulating them to support roles or merely having no consequence to the story. Dragon Ball was actually different. Looking back, these adventures would have never started if Bulma never came across Goku in the woods. This is significant,because it shows female characters actually doing something of importance and consequence. The arrival of Kale and Caulifla has more significance than some realize.

         Women are becoming manga and anime consumers. There is a change as the anime culture continues to expand internationally. If women are getting interested in Dragon Ball, there should be some representation. It should not just be any uninspired or random character just to placate the advocates of diversity. These should be unique and well developed characters, rather than just token based tropes. So far,it seems the series is doing this right. There could be the possibility of a Vasquez always dies trope. However, the viewer should remain positive. This arc proves to be the best yet and it is clear that the Dragon Ball franchise is not going anywhere any time soon. Just having Kale and Caulifla present sends a message that you can create interesting female characters. This could inspire younger manga artists and animators to experiment with something new. Do not be afraid to draw the women differently or have a unconventional characterization. What makes this series great is that it is very creative and that is demonstrated by its large cast of characters. Kale and Caulifla will stand out as fan favorites.

The Significance of Kale and Caulifla on Dragon Ball Super

Should “Men Are Stronger” Bar Women From Combat Roles? From Male Matters USA

Should “Men Are Stronger” Bar Women From Combat Roles

This is a blog post from Male Matters  originally posted in 2012. This site is a men’s rights website and discusses the controversy of women in combat. While the argument is for women in combat there are a few details it ignores. Then there is the issue of feminism versus the backlash men’s rights movement. This post does point out the inequality facing women who seek combat jobs, but their cause is not for social justice. The men’s rights movement is a reactionary backlash to the women’s rights movement and feminist movement. Feminism used to be about gender equality, but third wave feminism has embraced a more extremist tone. The men’s rights movement does have a legitimate argument that their is inequality in terms of alimony, child support, divorce, and the draft. Yet,  their agenda is to revert social and political relations back to a time in which men had the much of the power. The existence of this men’s rights movement  came about when male supporters of feminism became disillusioned with the movement. The movement stated in the 1970s with the men’s liberation movement breaking into two factions : one being pro-feminist and the other being opposed to feminism. This movement has at times attracted  misogynists and extreme far-right supporters.  There should be at this period in history a sex equality movement in which men and women create a balanced and healthy society. The men’s rights movement and third wave feminism has created an atmosphere of gender antagonism. When the subject of sex is discussed in terms of  military combat it causes much disagreement. Biology and specifically sexual dimorphism is used as a justification for why women should not be allowed in combat. The writing does reveal why this is a fallacy in a logical manner. However, the reason the author argues this is not for equality, but for the idea that women some how are “privileged” by not being required to do military conscription.

       The typical conservative argument is that women are too weak for the rigors of combat. This assumes that every man is stronger than all women. This obviously is a mathematical impossibility. There are women of considerable physical strength that easily pass the physical requirements. The author mentions Jill Mills the World’S Strongest Woman Champion, Joannie Lauer (Chyna),  and Cythia L. Morrison.

Nadezhda Evstyukhina an Olympic weightlifter would probably not have difficulty performing a casualty drag. These women certainly are stronger than many men. The author then comes to the conclusion that “men are stronger than women” must be rephrased. The strongest men will be stronger than the strongest women is a more accurate assessment. Cherl Haworth would never be able to  out lift her male counterparts, but she could literally lift men over head. Many women now are no longer afraid to engage in exercise and to become strong. While it is true that there are women capable of doing combat jobs these women are above average. The typical female athlete would probably be stronger than the majority of average women. The strength and muscles they have were acquired through years of training  and diet. Jenny Arthur just did not one day become an Olympic champion with minimal effort.

Women because of their endocrinology and hormones may find it more difficult to develop strength. The muscle tissue and cellular structure of both men and women is the same. The difference in testosterone means men’s potential for muscular hypertrophy is greater. Larger bones, tendons, and ligaments gives men the advantage when marching under load. Combined with combat gear, soldiers will have to use more of their physical strength. Strength is not the only element of physical fitness. Aerobic capacity and endurance are essential is physically demanding occupations. Women have smaller hearts and lungs which means their aerobic capacity would be lower. The size of the pelvis effects running speed. Women are know to have higher rates of musculoskeletal injuries in the military. This problem is partly solved by improvements to combat gear to fit the female frame and women training before entry. Doing this will help women be successful. Increasing aerobic capacity may be more difficult than increasing muscular strength. Intense training does not increase the size of the heart or lungs in women. There is obviously overlap in the spectrum of possible recruits, however even men and women of the size height and weight, me still have more upper body strength. Broader shoulders allow for more muscle to housed  on the upper body.

Women have higher fat levels yet this does not contribute to an advantage in physical fitness. Type II muscle fibers are critical for explosive power. Even the most muscular woman will still have a higher body fat percentage than her male counterpart. This does not contribute to the physical strength of the body, rather it seems to be dead weight. Women weigh less than men, who are on average bigger. This explains the difference in weightlifting records. Men have more natural strength and when trained can gain even more. Women can benefit from strength training, but not reach male performance levels .

deadstat

What can be extrapolated is that women in certain combat occupational specialties may remain the minority. This is the case with other physically demanding occupations which include construction, firefighting, and law enforcement. The standards are not going to be lowered in order to accommodate a numbers target. The US military is looking for women with the right qualifications. Lowering standards would only create resentment in an already hostile atmosphere and be an insult to women who can perform well. The author gets that point correct that standards should not be lowered , yet does not realize the challenge of prejudice and sexism. This is the part of the men’s rights argument that lacks cogency. The writer claims that “the men are stronger” concept must be overcome just like the “men are smarter concept.” The truth is both of these sexist notions have never been overcome. Women who are in the fields of math and science constantly face prejudice. Many times women have to work extra hard to prove they are capable. This is especially true in male dominated occupations. The frailty myth associates women as biological inferiors both mentally and physically. Challenging these anti-woman convictions will take time and saying that they are either gone or do not exist is simply dishonest. Women are different not inferiors. As it has been seen there are many female athletes who could meet the physical standards.

          The fixation on strength has forgotten the important aspects of combat. One could theoretically pass the fitness test, yet not be  a great soldier. If wars were conducted by doing obstacle courses, the world would be a better place. A soldier must be brave, calm, have the ability to adjust to unpredictable situations, and finish their mission. Being skilled with your weapons is also another essential aspect of combat. Hand to hand combat is used when you are either disarmed or weapons are simply not available. Wars are not won by physical strength. Technology and tactics have been the major factor in outcomes. Tanks, aircraft, submarines, drones, and guns make physical strength almost insignificant. Depending  on the military occupational specialty a level of fitness and health is required to keep up with a fast paced environment.

 It is clear who is stronger, but having the gun negates that advantage in a combat situation.

Technology has reduced some of the burdens. There are situations that still require hand to hand combat skill and fitness. Another argument against women in combat is that if they are disarmed they are completely helpless. If they are given the same combat instruction, then this will not be an issue. Martial arts like judo allow a smaller person to overcome a larger person. There is a belief that women cannot defend themselves or fight. If one examines the athletes of mixed martial arts this belief is proven false. The military is finally understanding the need to given women the proper instruction. West Point now requires women to take boxing as part of their regular courses. This teaches cadets how to throw effective punches and react to sudden attacks. Women face women in matches with some controlled sparring with male cadets.

There are also fitness double standards that must be changed to make sure women combat soldiers are up to the proper skill level. The decision to replace the flexed arm hang was an excellent one.  If there is a disparity in upper body strength women must focus on developing it. Pull-ups, push-ups, bench pressing and bicep curl exercises should be part of the fitness regimen. This will help in hand to hand combat. A woman can effectively fight if taught the right techniques.

         The other dimension mentioned in the text is about the military conscription. women still are at the moment exempt from the draft. Obviously, this is sex discrimination that is directed at men. If there are women who are capable of meeting demands of combat why would they be exempt from the selective service?There are very few feminists proposing to change this, but they are more than vocal in other areas. The fact is there is a faction of third wave feminists who may preach equality, but they want really want some advantages. When equal treatment becomes inconvenient there is a desire for a special adjustment for accommodation. If there is going to be genuine equality then women would have to register for the selective service. If advocates oppose this, then they clearly do not believe in equal treatment.

womensoldierweb  The dated belief that men should be happy to go off and die in war must be discarded. If it is the so called duty to defend the nation then it should be the responsibility of every citizen. Also, the government has the responsibility to avoid conflicts as much as possible with nations of the world. For too long the United States has used military intervention as a form of foreign policy causing instability throughout the globe. War should be the last resort in all cases. There is no force strong enough to invade or conquer the US even though pro-nation building and pro-war  factions make this claim. The problem with putting women in the selective services comes down to numbers. Given the physiological differences every woman may not be able to get past the physical fitness training. This explains why there are still more men in physically demanding occupations. There are sociological and environment based explanations ( discrimination,  sexual  harassment, and limited efforts for recruitment).  Women may continue to to the minority in such positions given the differences in anatomy, physiology, and endocrinology.

 If the average woman was built like this, their numbers in the physically demanding occupations may be higher. However, social barriers would still keep numbers low. 

However, all men may not be eligible for draft. Health conditions, physical fitness levels, and educational attainment are factors in which determine who makes a quality soldier.The American population does not get enough exercise for optimum health. Heart disease and obesity are becoming a public health crisis which also cuts out large portions of the population from military service. Education is also important, because the military requires that one has at minimum a high school diploma. If a person does not get a quality  public education or degree of higher learning, it will be difficult to function in a world that requires critical thinking skills and to mastery of technology. Reading, writing, science, mathematics, and a strong understanding of geography are necessities. So, if women have to register for the selective service their numbers may be comparatively small. Although weight training can increase a woman’s strength, it is clear women with mesomorphic body types would have an easier time meeting physical requirements. That means that there may still be positions that women are absent from.

The woman here is in great physical condition, but can still be susceptible to injury 

The possibility of higher injury rates could also be a problem. These can be resolved through better designed training regimens. Although women’s looser joints can make them more vulnerable to ACL tears. Stress fractures and scoliosis from too much armor and gear has effected many soldiers health after service. Besides differences in anatomy and physiology  there is also the problem of a particular mindset. Women either believe doing something physical is a man’s job ( lifting boxes or luggage , shoveling snow, or even opening jars for them). The assumption is manual labor is either beneath them or improper for a woman to do. Then there is an internalized belief that women just are not physically capable of doing anything that requires strength or endurance.As the female athlete has shown this is a falsehood. So, if  the conscription of women is to happen it should be asked what is the the extent to which you can physically train the female body to handle combat demands.

          The capabilities of the female athlete are extensive, but what are they for the average woman? Seeing as the natural strength ( strength levels prior to training)  are lower it would seem more of an arduous task. Women may not be able to acquire as high a level of total muscle mass due to lower testosterone production. However, this depends on genetics, diet, and training regimen. A woman of ectomorphic body type would find it more challenging to gain strength than a woman of mesmophoric  structure. Strength can still be acquired if an exercise regimen is followed consistently. It is possible for the average woman to gain at least 40% muscular strength from several months of training. Knowing this women may need extra training to build up the upper body region. Women have less total muscle fibers in this region compared to the lower body.

Mesomorphs do not have difficulty gaining muscle and strength when training. 

women do not have stronger legs than men, they are just closer in strength levels in the lower body. Women may require more time for  the physical aspects of training and may need a high physical fitness level prior to entry. Certain women just like certain men will have more potential and strengths than others. From a physical performance perspective women with endomorphic  and ectomorphic body types are at a physical disadvantage. This does not mean they cannot be trained or get into better shape. It merely means more effort will be required. Gaining strength require for a combat position is in reach, however cardiovascular endurance poses a challenge.

lifterThe pelvic structure of a woman will not change when women do endurance training. Wider hips do not allow for an advantage in speed. When examined from the aspects of the  heart and circulatory  system. Women who follow a training system designed for males may not achieve the same results in terms ventricular hypertrophy or increased Vo2 max. Aerobic capacity is only aspect of running performance. Lactic threshold and running economy  is pivotal . The conclusion of this is that women must have a running program tailored to them specifically. Solutions could range from taking branched chained amino acids, protein consumption,  consumption of carbohydrates during exercise, and using supplements prior to periods. This can help increase running performance in women. The average woman’s physiological capacity would be lower, which means there may still be a limited number of women in combat positions. There could be a possibility that women will still be absent from numerous military occupational specialties.  This further complicates drafting women. All jobs are not combat and others do not require as much physically demanding work. The fact is women are part of the US military and have seen combat even though they have not formally been given combat jobs.

        The United States has made strategic errors in waging endless wars. The result has become long guerrilla resistance conflicts in both Iraq, Afghanistan,  and Syria. Women who are a part of the US military have engaged in combat, because there no longer is a frontline. Terrorist groups and armed insurgencies do not recognize a frontline.

Continuing to ban women from combat would be impractical given the deteriorating military situation. Simply stopping qualified soldiers who could fight would be harmful. It would not be possible for commanders to stop women who are in these lands from fighting when under attack. The removal of the ban in 2013 was a strategic one to strengthen the US military. While the US can benefit from extra numbers, this will ultimately not help it in its military objectives. Nation building projects and regime change have tarnish the American image globally. The only solution to these conflicts is either negotiation or complete withdraw. Otherwise, another Vietnam scenario could emerge. Not realizing this could have a dramatic impact on the US and world as a whole.

10d45f2322df2a5f9201a942c9b2459b
Statistics from 2014 of the total women in uniform.

Destabilization and tumult from warfare threatens civilization. Disorder, violence, and hate is rapidly spreading across the globe, which is why peace should be a priority. War should be a last resort only when security is deliberately threatened. Humanitarian intervention has resulted in deaths in Yemen, Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Syria, and Mali. The modern era has seen more women involved in warfare serving the US military. Since 2001 women have been growing in numbers in the Navy, Army, Air Force, and Marines. It is not realistic to reimpose a ban due to personal prejudices or unfounded trepidation in regards to women in combat.

       Physically demanding jobs and manual labor can cause strain on the body. Men who are combat positions do suffer injuries, but women have higher levels of musculoskeletal injuries. The reason is that the male body has more skeletal and muscle mass. Over weight gear puts extra strain on soldiers. There are efforts to reduce the amount of gear soldiers have to transport, which hinders both mobility and reduces ergonomic efficiency. Carrying over 100 pounds of gear can cause health problems and medical discharges. Muscle strain which is damage to muscle fiber could occur from over stretching the muscles. More severe cases involve ruptured muscle fibers. This can be avoided by doing simple warm ups before exercise or strenuous activity. It is still unknown how long term physical stress in combat positions will effect the female body. If predictions were to be made it would appear that majority of women would have difficulty progressing far. Another scenario is that a significant portion of women do well , but the US military has not made the proper human resources adjustments for a fully sex integrated  combat unit. Besides the physical threats to health, there are mental ones. Soldiers who have seen combat tend to suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder. Without a social safety net veterans find themselves in poor health or in poverty. At extremes homelessness becomes a problem for many US military veterans.

11e591be8cf64a0c9eb0dac2149aa38c

For soldiers with families this becomes more complicated. If both parents are overseas and suffer health issues both mental or physical their children will be in a vulnerable position. The US government has not done enough to address the health problems of veterans and the strain on US military families. Women are at a disadvantage, because they are many times ignored by the Department of Veterans Affairs system. The department needs to be restructured to address corruption, long medical appointment waiting times, and inadequate medical care. Women who are in physically demanding jobs have to work twice as hard due to biological differences. If health considerations are taken into account serious injuries can be avoided.

         If women can prove themselves capable it is assumed they will have full acceptance in combat roles. This is a false notion. The harsh reality is that even if women show they are capable misogynistic  convictions are still present. Just like the racist and anti-immigrant beliefs, hate is encoded in the DNA of the United States. The nation was founded by invasion and the theft of Native American land, then empowered economically by the enslavement of Africans. It will be many centuries before this shameful legacy ameliorated. Most men will never accept women as combat soldiers no matter how capable they are. Most white Americans will never accept African Americans or  any person of color as equal members of society. This hate continues in a covert fashion. The military like other institutions has a tradition of giving privileges specifically to white male Christians. The US military like other institutions favors white males. Women like other discriminated groups will have to organize to counter resistance to their presence. The author fails to realize how women are at a disadvantage in the US military. Sexual harassment and sex crimes are rampant. Most cases go unpunished. Coercion and threat to possible promotions are the reasons  why women do not report crimes. Fear also is another factor, which is used to control behavior. It is too late to stop women from entering combat positions, but that does not stop others from undermining its progress. The solutions to this problem require women to be in high ranking positions, so that there can be policy changes. Women should not seek to just be in subordinate job positions, but rise up to leadership roles. That should be the ultimate long term goal in  combat integration.

       Male Matters despite its claim of wanting true equality, presents a false image. Men rights is nothing more than a male version of third wave feminism that is nostalgic for the era before second wave feminism. The argument presented here is why should men have to do something dangerous that women do not? This question is legitimate although, when  proposed by men’s rights advocates it is asked for the wrong reason. The argument is constructed in the context of there being “female privilege.” Relevant to the discussion of the draft women would have some benefit, because it is men only who are required to register for the selective service. Congress has not tackled this issue and appears as if they will not be doing so soon. If feminists truly believed in equality then they would challenge the current selective service system. Women should register for it if  everything is to be considered fair. While far-right critics claim this is a social engineering experiment created by feminists, they have not been involved in combat integration. The major feminist organizations have done little to help women in the military or contribute to the process of full integration. The voices remain silent. This faction of third wave feminists really do not support equality, but rather special privileges for a woman who use the rhetoric of social justice. Mostly white women of the upper middle class, their desire is to have a white supremacist system work better for them even though their sex would be a hindrance in the societal hierarchy. They advance themselves at the expense of non-white women and the poor. Third wave feminism has morphed into this and men’s rights is merely the reactionary response to it. What should be happening is a sex equality movement that discards both these ideologies. The first step could be to use a institution like the military to open combat  jobs to women. One of the best methods to tackle the wage gap between the sexes is to have women enter male dominated occupational fields. Women have entered law enforcement, professional sports,  firefighting, construction, but the military continues to be the last bastion of what were considered “men’s jobs.” Once this dated concept is challenged only then will there be equality in the workplace. Like it or not women will play major roles in the military in the future.

Should “Men Are Stronger” Bar Women From Combat Roles? From Male Matters USA

Geraldo Show (1990): “Women’s Bodybuilding Sex, Sweat, Stigma, and Steroids”

Geraldo Rivera a talk show host, attorney, and reporter  at one time had a talk show, which became popular and gave rise to what is known as trash TV. Before Jerry Springer, Geraldo pioneered this format having stage brawls, celebrity gossip,  and general low brow misconduct. This program was clearly not a place of debate or intellectual discussion. There were attempts to reformat the program to such a platform in later seasons, but it was not a success. Viewers preferred outrageous chaos , rather than civil discussion.   Occasionally, there were episodes that at least tried to be informative or stimulating. What is fascinating is that  Geraldo  had a program featuring women bodybuilders and asked athletes about their experiences and the inner workings of the sport. The  episode was aired in 1990. The reason that the episode is of particular interest is that it explores the relationship between the body and gender. At the time when this aired, female bodybuilding was only close to a decade old and many people could not image women of such  with physiques. The audience reactions reveal much. Having athletes come and explain what they do helps break down prejudices or negative preconceived nations.

          The first show that aired in 1990 opens up with examples of changing standards of beauty. Geraldo says “over the past centuries we have changed the image of feminine beauty.” He then delineates the paradigms : the softer more plump body, the thinner model appearance,  and by the 1980s a more toned and firmer body. Geraldo then poses this question: “having we gone one step further than that?” The answer obviously is yes and the proof is the rise of the female bodybuilder, specifically in a more broad sense muscular woman. The idea of the weaker sex or biological inferior becomes challenged and alters particular power dichotomies. Strong man and weak woman can no longer be the  power order if there are other models that rival that concept.

Geraldo then proceeds to introduce the women who were at the top of the sport in the 1990s : Dianna Dennis, Lenda Murray, Janet Tech, Erika Andersch, and Laura Creavalle. This seems revolutionary although many people do not realize it. Never before in human history did women achieve strength and an image like this before. Muscular women have existed before this sport, but they were never given an outlet for their talents. The reason the muscular woman induces shock is that it overturns certain notions of the female body. The female body is either associated with being delicate or soft. Here the athletes on stage formed a new image of woman. When looking at the backgrounds of these athletes, they engaged in what is considered traditional feminine activities. Lenda Murray was a cheerleader, Janet Tech was a ballet dancer, and Dianna Dennis is a mother ( her son is asked a question by Geraldo). This shows that many people have a narrow idea about what a woman a is and what she can be. Clearly, women are more physically capable  than previously thought. The female body and appearance is constantly scrutinized. Female bodybuilders face this more so, because the deviate from the mass media defined image of beauty. Geraldo asks  question ” do ever sacrifice breasts?”  which exposes  a level of subtle sexism in regards to women’s bodies. Creavalle answers the question in a civil manner, joking ” I never had large boobs anyway.” It should be understood that breasts do not disappear with weight training. Women are subject to criticism more so about their appearance than men, due to negative views of women. To some people, women’s only value is their level of sexual attractiveness. This level of dehumanization goes back to a time when women were considered property. Misogyny dictated codes of behavior and conduct for women including the concept of femininity itself.

            The second half of the program shows the athletes dressed in regular attire. The discussion then goes to femininity and gender relations. Men’s reactions to muscular women’s bodies becomes a focal point. These reactions are not always negative. Some could be neutral, indifferent, or enthusiastic. One reaction is one of curiosity. If a man never has seen a woman this powerful before, their is a level of  wonder. It is something that they may not be used to. It is not everyday that a man runs into a woman just as strong or stronger than himself.

There is a reaction that has to do with intimidation. Geraldo poses the questioned to Carla Dunlap “Are men ever intimidated by your physique ?” Carla Dunlap explains this feeling of intimidation as insecurity among particular men. They may react to women who are assertive, intelligent, or confident  in the same manner. This also Carla says could be related to self-esteem, because they may be intimidated by other men they perceive as more attractive or successful. Then the fear is that some how these women would physically harm men. There is the idea that women like this would have a more belligerent attitude to men and as some put it “smack them up if they get out of line.” The strong woman is not violent, nor seeks violence against men. There is a habit of an oppressor group making claims the oppressed want vengeance for past grievances. Some how there are men who are intimidated by strong women have reasoned are out to conspire against men in some way.

ea542c7f073a4e1c853e735b93e28817

     These false ideas and stereotypes are prevalent. This fear is more than just lack of knowledge, it could be based on sexist prejudice. Those of a more traditionalist perspective believe there a some activities that women should not attempt or be a part of. There is a misconception that physical strength is connected to toughness which is a male based gender stereotype.  The assumption based on this stereotype is that these women are less feminine, because they are strong. The questions in the second segment explore the biological and cultural dimensions of femininity. Questions asked of women then delved into childbirth and the effect of the menstrual cycle. These types of questions about child bearing potential would never be asked of male athletes. Medical research has proven that women who engage in physical activity will not harm their chances of childbirth. Amenorrhea can cause not solely by extremely low body fat levels, but by low calorie intake. The female body has been seen in terms of physical limitations and the fact that women give birth was a excuse to exclude them from various activities.  The natural feminine state in the traditionalist view was to be a baby maker. Dated concepts have been overturned, yet still persist. Women who are in the sport also to much surprise are still pressured by societal standards of beauty. The topic of eating disorders and breast implants are mentioned. Some women go to extreme lengths to achieve a particular look that could be harmful. It could be  the reverse of  a woman attempting to create a unhealthy slender body weight to resemble a model. The pressure to get breast implants also reveals another double standard that women face in terms of body appearance. The women look different on stage compared to off season.  Many times it would be hard to tell they have such physiques when fully clothed. Women who are sports have to  face this double standard in terms of acceptable feminine behavior and appearance.

           When discussing sports the topic of steroids inevitably will be mentioned. Steroids by this time where a schedule III banned substances in the United States. Laura Creavalle explains that drugs do not create  a great athlete.  Genetics, training, and nutrition are major factors to aspects of athletic performance potential. Use is not only in bodybuilding, but in track and field, baseball, football, weightlifting, wrestling, and various sports . The question of fairness is raised, however would this not be fair to a person who does not have the genetic advantage to excel? The reason this bothers some people is because it is moving humanity further to a point of transhumanism. This means humanity will be able to alter nature and biology so much through genetic engineering, biomedical science, and technology  that it will radical redefine what is human. There are numerous types of performance enhancing drugs and it is clear they are going to become more sophisticated. This debate does not have a simple answer, but one part is certain. The sports world does not need a war on drugs. The show was not afraid to mention this controversial topic.

steroids3

Sports organizations have the right to ban whatever substance they want to. However, individuals have to right and freedom to put into bodies whatever substances they decide to. Prohibition did not work with alcohol and the War on Drugs has caused major political and social damage to American society. Women are faced with a different dilemma in use. Harsh criticism and gender bias  are present for women. When people criticize muscular women, steroids are used as a justification for vituperation. It has been shown that more men use steroids than women, but women are stigmatized more so for use. The idea is that testosterone is a natural male hormone ( even though women produce it in small amounts)  and women taking the synthetic derivative violates nature . This idea has problems not only because of its gender bias, but inaccuracies. What we consider natural can be ever changing due to biology and environment. Humanity has the ability to change and alter themselves physically and mentally. The argument at that point becomes irrelevant. There are objections to use in women solely based on appearance. Women who either abused or have engaged in long term use may suffer from virilization. This shows that women are only valued for their looks, rather than genuine concerns about health. There are side effects, which could result in illness later in life, but the issue focuses more on image.   A combination of sexism and stigma make it difficult for women entering the world female bodybuilding.

         There has been an evolution in how women perceive their bodies. The athletes on the program have defined what is beautiful on their own terms rather than through a male dictation. It is a image that is both powerful and majestic, but does not lack a womanly charm. The sport continues to develop in multiple categories. Lydia Cheng  bodybuilder and judge stated on the program that the sport does change and that judges do not look for the same image every year. Since 1990,  the sport has advanced into different categories. There is fitness, figure, physique, and bodybuilding. Detractors say that bodybuilding for women is dead, but that may be the case. This is an evolution in aesthetics and the physical capabilities of the female body. Carol Ann Weber was asked the question in which direction the sport would go. Her response proved to be ahead of its time. The sport could either face challenges, dissipate, or go in a completely different direction. It seems all three of these events have happened. yet, the evolution is still not complete.

Women who engage in this activity also report have a new psychological sense of self. They feel more confident and secure about their own safety. Knowing that they are strong gives a new feeling of independence and self-reliance. Besides the transformation in both mid and body there has been a cultural impact. While not entirely accepted, muscular and athletic women have a presence in media. Crossfit and a larger arena such as the Olympics show to the public the public this new form of women’s physiques. The program seems to show the audience has a positive response to what these athletes do. However, there were audience members with an opposing view. Their ideas about femininity is that women should have a level of softness, yet they did not hesitate to say they respected their efforts and diligence. These comments of praise could be disingenuous, but they say so only to mask their beliefs in strict gender roles. The biggest irony it seems was that it was women who said they did not care for the muscular look. The positive aspect it seems that more of the audience approved than opposed. A sign of some progress at minimum in small steps. It is uncertain how many people either had their minds changed after seeing this.  An important topic left out the show was the fact that not only do these athletes find this new form of body attractive, but there are growing numbers of men who like the appearance of female muscle. The rise of the internet has only increased those numbers and it is uncertain how many male admirers there are.  This episode of Geraldo  was one of the rare cases in which it educated an audience about  a sport that women only recently got into.

Geraldo Show (1990): “Women’s Bodybuilding Sex, Sweat, Stigma, and Steroids”

William Moulton Marston : The Man Behind Wonder Woman

With the release of the Wonder Woman film in 2017, the superhero joins other DC characters that have become s staple in popular culture. Wonder Woman has appeared in television, comics, cartoons, and advertisements. The origins of the character reveal an interesting history and a more eccentric individual who created the character. William Moulton Marston (1893-1947) was a psychologist, inventor, and comic book writer  who conceived the idea of Wonder Woman . Comic books may seem like puerile entertainment to some, but they do have adventurous stories and impressive art. The stories they tell either have social commentary or a wider message. Marston’s creation was made specifically to promote  feminist ideas and  gender equality. Marston was a supporter of the suffragist movement and women’s rights. He had unconventional views about gender relations and lived a life that was rather scandalous at the time. William Marston lived in a menage a trois  with his wife Elizabeth Holloway Marston and Olive Byne. These two women were inspirations to the creation of Wonder Woman and also gave some of their input into the character.  William Marston could be described as many things: a visionary, fetishist, and a possible charlatan. However, these descriptions do not accurately capture a more complex figure. The DC comic book character he created was and continues to be more than just a cartoon character.

          William Moulton Marston did have a feminist vision of society. His thinking was to say the least different from the average man in terms of gender relations in the 20th century. Marston quote reveals much about his feminism when he stated “not even girls want to be girls as long as our feminine archetype lacks force, strength, and power.” Martson believed that women would one day acquire their rights and go on to lead the world to a new era of peace. He did not think this would happen in his lifetime, but thousands of years. The early comics do possess suffragist imagery. The cartoons of Annie Lucasta Rogers featured women in chains. During the 1910s  her cartoons appeared in various news papers devoted to the women’s suffrage movement.  The constant theme of chained woman in her cartoons was to demonstrate women’s lack of freedom in society. Martson continued that imagery in the Wonder Woman comics in the 1940s.

  When Wonder Woman was in a predicament her adversaries in most stories would tie her up. This was not just a simple trope, but had a deeper meaning. Either through her strength or wit Wonder Woman would escape captivity and defeat her nemesis. Her triumph was a metaphor for women’s struggle for equal justice and the elimination of the oppression of women. This message may not be as obvious to a reader who was just exposed to Wonder Woman comics. To the creators it was subtle when inserted into stories giving small psychological suggestions  to devoted readers of the comic.

RogersPeters  Marston was progressive in the sense he was more accepting of different sexual orientations, sexual fetishes, sadomasochism,  and transvestism. His book the Emotions of Normal people claims these elements of sexuality  and  fetishism are not abnormal. These are characteristics unique to individuals. This was written before the sexual revolution in which many of the conservative mores and practices were challenged. Moulton thought such characteristics were not just normal, but were inherited through the nervous system. This can be debated, considering environment also influences an individuals existence. Olive Byne and Elizabeth Holloway contributed to this book with research and writing. Although it was ignored and never got Marston the academic respect he desired, it does provide further insight into his thinking. Marston believed that some required emotional reeducation to accept the parts of themselves that were considered “abnormal” but were in reality normal. Women’s desire to be independent, free, or strong was not abnormal even though society condemns such attributes in women. Only when people change there emotional state in Marston’s  view would society radically change. William Moulton Marston was certain that one day women would rule the world. Matriarchy he stated would be a possibility in the distant future.

         Marston gave was convinced in his own words ” The next hundred years will see the beginning of an American matriarchy- a nation of amazons in the psychological rather than physical sense.” His predictions got even more bizarre saying “in 500 years, there will be a serious sex battle and 1,000 years women will definitely rule this country. “Marston’s predictions seem exaggerated, although may be he was talking more so about the possibilities of the rising second wave and third  wave feminist movements. Women have become more powerful compared to women of the past. The nation almost had a female president sooner than what Marston predicted in 2016.

2A3BBD2B00000578-0-image-a-40_1436042140248    The idea that their are amazons in the psychological sense, rather than physical is interesting. Men did not dominate women due to their greater physical strength. The unequal access to property, education, income disparity,  and legal protection ensured women’s subordination to men. A woman could be physical powerful, but if she has no legal. economic, and political power she could still be vulnerable to an oppressive social system. If Marston was alive today, he could be possibly shocked by the fact women in sports have in a radically different manner changed perceptions about femininity and what it means to be a woman. The female athlete has culturally become a Wonder Woman straight out of a comic book. When Martson created Wonder Woman he wanted a character that presented both beauty and strength. Strength specifically physical strength was considered a male only attribute, is no longer incompatible with beauty or womanliness. Women have never to this extent in human history have developed themselves physically. Women are beginning to define what is beautiful to them, rather than have the concept dictated to them.

Title IX has allowed for the rise of many women athletes. With modern media such as the internet and television the public is getting exposure to to these women with impressive physiques.  It seems there is a level of acceptance for the modern day amazon. These women however do not have the desire to establish a matriarchy or dominate men. Unlike Wonder Woman, they do not battle super villains or go on adventures. William Mouton Martson’s  prediction of matriarchy is clearly wrong. He was right in the regard that the sexes will have more equality in the future. Assuming there is not a collapse in civilization, progress can be achieved. Yet, there is always the threat or reactionary movements or political and ideological  extremism. These threats can happen in both democratic and authoritarian political systems. Martson’s battle of the sexes is unlikely to happen seeing as men and women need each other. It is also erroneous to assume that women want revenge for past abuses. Ever since, Hillary Clinton’s loss in the 2016 election more women have become politically active in the United States and are seeking to run for office. William Marston ‘s prediction of waiting 1,000 years  for more female leadership  could come sooner than one thinks. Various nations have in the past and present have had female leaders. The US lags behind in this regard. William Marston  took the position of cultural feminism of the 19th century, which regard women as more peace loving and that female virtues would lead to a less turbulent society. They emphasized that women’s difference made them morally upright . The problem with this argument was that it promoted gender stereotypes and stated women’s superiority. There is no “superior sex” and women are not all peace loving and nurturing individuals. There are instances in which women participated in war or contributed to their conduct. It is a myth that the world would be more peaceful if women were in control. The ethnic, national, and cultural hatreds are too powerful. Marston’s  theories of the future were not accurate, but it is obvious that he was a firm believer in  progressive era movements. This included not only the suffrage movement, but the birth control movement. When Emmeline Pankurst  was banned from speaking at Harvard University in 1911 for the Harvard Men’s  League for Women’s Suffrage, this had an impact on Marston. The Harvard freshman became more staunch in his support for women’s rights in the face of this act of censorship. When Martson entered the comics world he had already acquire a vast amount of knowledge about the women’s movement and had a Ph.D  in psychology. This allowed him to create not just a cartoon character, but  an icon and symbol for women’s equality.

           When Maxwell Charles Gains got into contact with Marston, comics were facing criticism. The father of the modern comic book  realized that this new industry was facing a public relations problem. Critics claimed comics were an awful influence on children and were too violent. Marston thought that comics were enriching to children. The issue as William Moulton Marston saw it was that there were too many male superheroes promoting “blood curdling masculinity.” Marston realized that a female superhero would stand out as something unique and also promote his beliefs. If young girls saw a strong woman, they would have the desire to become strong independent women in adulthood. The intent was to use this entertainment medium to influence young people’s ideas about women by means of psychology.

wonder-woman-sensation1-rescue

Exposure to certain images in youth does influence attitudes and mores. Here by showing Wonder Woman as a positive figure, the strong woman will not hold a negative connotation. There was special attention given to character design. Wonder Woman’s design was based of the Esquire Varga Girls centerfolds of the 1940s. The women were not rail thin, but more athletic looking and fuller. Her costume even resembled the swim suits that the models would wear. This was later redesigned to have Wonder Woman wearing a skirt. H.G Peters was responsible for the development of the character design. The final version William Moulton Marston was satisfied with. Originally Marston wanted the character to be called Suprema, however Wonder Woman seemed to be a better fit.

Wonder Woman would then make her debut in All Star Comics # 8 in 1941. From that point on she would become of the most recognizable female superheroes. Wonder Woman was unique in the sense that she broke the prevalent trope of damsel in distress. The only roles in comics that women characters filled were either supporting cast , wives, mothers, or a person for the male hero to rescue. William Moulton Marston would continue to write Wonder Woman stories for  the comics until  his death in 1947. The last years of his life were devoted to his creation an embodiment and symbol of female empowerment.

       There is another side to Dr .Marston    involved sexual fetish. The most obvious fetish was bondage that appeared in Wonder Woman comics in the 1940s. Wonder Woman many times was either chained or her enemies were restrained. The breaking of the chains is also a political metaphor, yet it also has a sexual nature to it. There is a relation between dominance and submission in regards to women and men. Marston with his theory was that if men submitted to women’s loving authority, this would create harmony among the sexes. Domination and submission should be traded off between the two sexes. To William Moulton these are harmless sexual fantasies and as long as they do not depict extreme violence or degradation, they are healthy expressions. Submission was not an awful attribute in his view. Dominating and imposing attributes he thought were. There also another element that is ignored. There is an emphasis on Wonder Woman’s immense strength and athletic ability.

peter-wonder-woman-3     This was clearly based on certain sources. The amazons in Greek mythology were warrior women noted for their skill in battle. Drawing on that context this would be an obvious attribute to give the Wonder Woman character. The women that William Moulton Marston knew had athletic backgrounds. Elizabeth Holloway was a field hockey player in college. Olive Byne also played basketball, which is of important significance. Basketball was one the few sports women got access to on US college campuses in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Alice Marble who served as editor for the comics between 1942 and 1944 was a tennis champion. Besides the bondage theme, he wanted Wonder Woman’s athleticism and physical strength emphasized throughout the comic. Wonder Woman in the comics played baseball, ice hockey, tennis, and swims in some issues There was even one in which she established a chain of fitness clubs. These comics show that Marston had more than just a simple admiration for the female form. His fetish could have been cartolagnia  and  sthenolagnia.

This arousal from the demonstration of strength and display of muscles seems more apparent in Wonder Woman’s fights and general strength feats. Even other characters take notice of her physical abilities. The golden age version of  Wonder Woman only loses her strength when her wrists are chained by a man. The metaphor basically being accepting an oppressive system will never improve anything, because Wonder Woman only loses her power if the is done willingly according to Aphrodite’s law. There has been a segment of men who enjoy a powerful woman whether it is either mental or physical power. William Moulton Marston even explained that ” frankly Wonder Woman is psychological propaganda for the new type of woman, who I believe who should rule  the world.”  Moulton’s new type of woman is one that is powerful mentally, physically, and also has a loving nature.

adc09f3c92192375b01193dbe2401c3b

The new woman has apparently arrived in some sense. There is a female presence in occupations that were mostly male dominated. Women are emerging  in the science and technology fields. This combined with areas associated with masculinity such as sports, politics,  and the physically demanding occupations means that there has been progress to a new archetype. The development is disjointed and there are disparities that still face women depending on which nation. The same prejudices and hatreds remain. Marston’s new woman has arrived. The new era of peace, however may never come. That theme may have come out the desire to see World War II end. Fascism was terrorizing the world and the idea of a peaceful future was something desirable. Mouton would be very impressed with the women of the modern world and specifically how certain women embody the Wonder Woman principles.

Some women even look more Wonder Woman than what Marston could have imagined. The strides that have been made in such a short period of time are impressive and there is much work that has to be done. Marston’s strong women were the wave of the future and his love for them presented itself through the comics he wrote for. The lasso of truth is not just a tool of Wonder Woman, it is a part of bondage imagery. Wonder Woman used it to make her enemies confess, simultaneously the image of dominatrix becomes apparent. Critics were quick to recognize this imagery.  These depictions were mild compared to a modern day standard. There were even complaints from the National Organization for Decent Literature  about Wonder Woman’s costume being too revealing . That Catholic organization added comics and specifically Wonder Woman to their banned list of books. Maxwell Gaines  tried to even get Marston to reduce  on the bondage imagery by 1943. Marston was never going to eliminate the bondage theme completely, so a solution was made by Dorthy Roubicek  to restrain Wonder Woman in different ways.She was the editor of Gaines and was able to placate member of the editorial board. The amazing element is that the early Wonder Woman comics combined feminism, sexual fetishism, psychology, action, and adventure into a truly unique comic.

       William Moulton Marston  also tended to be somewhat charlatan in certain ventures. His odd combination of careers demonstrated this dimension of his personality. Marston was part inventor developing one of the early polygraphs. The lie detector test Marston claimed was a great discovery in the detection of lies. He claimed it was the science of the detection of deception. Marston even went as far to publish a book called The Lie Detector in 1938. This was not an academic work, but was really attempting to sell an idea to the general public. There really  is not a scientific method of detecting lies. Marston argued this anyway with little evidence or research. This was more apparent with the publicity stunts Marston organized having press conferences and even erecting a booth at the 1939 World’s Fair. The problem with the polygraph is that it cannot repeat the same results. There is a possibility that a competent liar could pass the test with no problems. Marston claimed to be the master of detecting lies. It was apparent that his findings were fraudulent. The first time Marston entered in business it ended in fraud. He was an unsuccessful lawyer and failed to get his polygraph results as admissible evidence. Marston only worked for Universal Studios for one year in 1929 as a consultant before being terminated. The world of academia had pretty much by the 1930s rejected him. Demoted from chairmen of the psychology department to adjunct professor at American University few took an interest in his theories. William Marston made limited effort to explore new elements of psychology, instead focusing solely on his theories. The promotion of the polygraph may have been out of the need to create financial stability. This also explains why Wonder Woman carries a lasso of truth. It is her personal lie detector. There was a showman and conman element to Marston. However, the support for the women’s cause was genuine.

          William Moulton Marston was a fascinating figure. He was a mad who live with both his wife and mistress  and they provide input as wells as inspiration to the creation of Wonder Woman. He could not hold a job for long and was hoping someday his theories would get notoriety. The body of work he produced related to psychology appeared in academic journals or books for the general reading public. This is either forgotten today or merely part of an archive. Marston would not become a Carl Jung, Sigmund Freud, B.F Skinner, or an Abraham Maslow. Ultimately he would be remembered for his contribution to the golden age of comics. Wonder Woman was the first female superhero to have her own comic. Her popularity rivals Batman and Superman’s. There is an enduring legacy and she will continue to part of DC’s star characters. Marston did make one prediction that was correct: women will no longer accept secondary status forever. The eccentric psychologist and writer would be proud of the real life superwomen changing the world everyday.

 Further Reading

   Pollitt, Katha. “Wonder Woman’s Kinky Feminist Roots.” The Atlantic. Atlantic Media Company, 14 Oct. 2014. Web. 09 June 2017. <https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2014/11/wonder-womans-kinky-feminist-roots/380788/&gt;.

Lepore, Jill. The Secret History of Wonder Woman. New York : Vintage Books ,2015 .

William Moulton Marston : The Man Behind Wonder Woman