Women Do Have More Stamina Than Men and May Be Beating Them At Marathons

Women’s Stamina

According to a scientific study conducted at the University of British Columbia women have more endurance compared to their male counterparts.  Brian Dalton a neurophysiologist discovered this by examining men and women of the same physical fitness level. They were grouped according to age and athletic ability for precision. There is a growing body of evidence that women could be better suited for endurance based athletic events. Women may soon be breaking records in larger numbers in ultra-marathon events. This study reveals many aspects about exercise physiology. There is still much more to learn about the physical capabilities of women. Training programs have to take into consideration biological and physiological differences for maximum efficiency in physical fitness goals. Although men are more physically powerful, women do have physical advantages.Assuming this finding is scientific fact, the same results should be easily replicated. There also remains bias that has been present. Social barriers have traditionally kept women out of sports, but this has gradually changed. It may be too premature to say that women en mass will be beating men at ultra-marathon  events. However, nothing is impossible.

       Historically their has been many pseudoscientific  myths surrounding women’s bodies. It has been thought that the female body was too weak for physical activity. Then there was also cultural bias. Women who showed physical skill were either viewed a unlady like  or masculine. Other social barriers such as not having a platform to compete. Women only began competing in marathons in 1984. Katherine Schwitzer was the first woman to compete in the Boston Marathon in 1967.

The Olympic Marathon athletes from 1984 to 2016 show that even though women were excluded, they have made progress in a short amount of time.  

Ludicrous arguments were made about why women should not participate in marathons. The argument was that it would damage their health. The only way this would happen is if an athlete did over training or did not get enough rest. The idea of female weakness was discredited when more women became active in various sports. Women’s muscles do not differ from men’s muscles. They respond to strength training regimes, which means the female body is capable of developing strength.

Gender roles and the concept of appropriate femininity are still persistent biases. There are many who believe their are certain activities that women should not do. Sports,even though women have been a part of the culture and activity are still seen as a male only domain. Women who have powerful looking bodies are either ostracized or harassed by the mainstream culture. It is no wonder why many women are discouraged from participating in sports with such negativity. Combined with lack of funding and media exposure the female athlete has to struggle on many levels. Despite these obstacles new talent continues to emerge and perform well. It will take more research to fully end the common myths still prevalent about women’s physical fitness capacities. This will require more women being involved in the physiological sciences and sports.

          Surprisingly there are women who have bested men in endurance events, prior to the study. Lael Wilcox won the Trans AM, becoming the first woman to do so. She was able to beat many male riders in the race. Caroline Boller saw an impressive victory at the Brazos Bend. These performances demonstrate that women are capable of high performance. The ability of the common female athlete beating a man of similar training and or fitness level is questionable.

These two athletes perform on male levels due to their unique genetics and physiology. They are exceptions, rather than part of the mathematically normal distributions. Then it should be considered that their biological differences based on their sex do work in their favor. Women have less type II muscle fibers compared to men, but still have more type I which are more fatigue resistant. Type II muscle fiber has more power, yet it is not as fatigue resistant. This may be the explanation into why women would do well at such events.

tumblr_madpba4oYG1qcj1xb

It seems unlikely that women would be able to match men in sprinting in which type IIA , IIAB, and II B are necessary. They use more energy and have more force. It is not entirely impossible that women could beat men at marathon events in the future.

        The findings from the study revealed many interesting pieces of information.  Women after exercise were less exhausted from physical activity compared to their male counterparts. The subjects were asked to do calf raises for the experiment. Men’s power recordings dropped 15% compared to women during 200 repetitions. This led to the conclusion that women could outlast men in muscular endurance.  The same included nine women and eight men who also were asked to flex their feet against sensors as fast as they could.

The problem with this experiment is that it only studied one isolated muscle group. If this experiment were to be precise it would have to involve more than just the lower body. The question remains would the results would be the same if it were done on the upper body. It is possible that the results would be the same doubtless. Muscle fiber would behave in the same matter no matter where it is on the body. Isometric contraction studies show that women have normally had more muscle endurance. Findings from Applied Physiology, Nutrition, and Metabolism  suggest women can last longer in dynamic exercise.

While women do not reach the same levels  of strength as a men, they can last longer during exercise sessions. This leads researchers to conclude that if an ultra- ultra marathon event were to be created women may dominate it. This could have wider applications. Exercise programs could be designed to reduce fatigue in physically demanding occupations. This may also open more possibilities in understanding the physiology of the muscular system. If only this year strength genes were identified, there could be a possibility of genes related to muscular endurance. This may vary among individuals regardless of sex. Knowing such differences can make it easier for women to improve athletic performance. This study and other should fully discredit the myth that women’s bodies are not capable of anything the require physical rigor. Exercise physiology will have to do more experiments and study of women in athletics. Studies that use only men will not be helpful, because biologically and physiologically women are different. Realizing this has generated more interest in understanding how to design the best fitness program for a female athlete.

Advertisements
Women Do Have More Stamina Than Men and May Be Beating Them At Marathons

Common Strength Genes Identified

Common Strength Genes Identified

The University of Cambridge conducted a study identifying the common genetic factors in muscular strength. The data was accumulated from 140,000 subjects, with an additional 50,000 people from the UK, Netherlands, and Australia. The goal was to identify sixteen variants associated with muscular strength. Dan Wright was the author of the academic paper produced out of the Medical Research Council on Epidemiology. Wright’s analysis is that identification of such genes will allow for understanding the biology of muscular strength and relation to health. The variants were either located near or inside genes that play a role in muscular function including muscle fiber function and muscle cell nervous system communication. This reveals much about monogenic syndromes. Single genetic mutations can cause serious health problems. The difference variation among genes may explain why their is various differences in strength levels among populations. Dr. Robert Scott believes such a discovery could be a means of treating muscle weakness or other diseases of the muscular system.

       Hand grip strength was used a measure for identifying genetic variation. This normally is used as a tool for assessing muscular fitness. It has been suggested that weaker hand grip strength is associated with possible bone fracture risk and other health problems in older adults.  Hand grip strength has been linked to certain health outcomes, the correlation in regards to muscular strength in more uncertain.

There is certainly no or limited evidence that having lower strength increases the risk of cardiovascular disease or death. Higher strength did reduce the risk of bone fracture. Strength training was the best method of increasing bone mass as a preventative measure. If hand grip strength were an indication of longevity, then males would be expected to live longer. The truth is that on average men have shorter life expectancy, while having a stronger hand grip.

Male-female-grip-strength-decumulate-and-overlap There are obviously multiple factors that influence health. It is not just sex, but genetics, environment, and quality of healthcare. Diet and lifestyle choices also cam effect a person’s health. It has been speculated that people with greater hand grip strength could possibly recover from surgery. There are multiple genes and environmental factors interacting with one another to produce outcomes. The question still remains which specific factors are the most responsible for particular results. The data gathered had information on demographic, biometric, and health outcome variables.

        The genes related to muscular function include ACTG I, PEX 14, TGFA, and STY1 . ACTG 1 is responsible for muscle fiber structure and function. PEX 14, TGFA, and STY1 are essential for the communication between the nervous system and muscle cells.

Genes are units of DNA required to produce protein. These sections need to code for all amino acids to contribute to protein production. The location of the gene is on the chromosome. There can be several sections of DNA on certain regions coding for only one part of a particular protein. It is not one gene that influences traits, but a combination working together. To understand this, think of your body as a building. The rooms represent your cells. Each room (cell)  has filing cabinets ( chromosomes)   with papers (genes). The people getting access to the papers have to follow the directions written on them ( proteins).

The process is more complex than a simple analogy, which explains why mutations could occur. Not all mutations are harmful. Yet an serious error in a gene could cause health problems or disease. Variations that occur in LRPPRC, PEX 14, and KANS1 can be linked to certain medical conditions of the muscular system. There could be a possibility that there are more genes related to muscular strength.

         Added strength can reduce bone fracture risk. Strength training contribute to the health of the musculoskeletal system. As a person ages they lose both bone and muscle mass. The ossification process of bone changes during a lifetime. bone is broken down and rebuilt by the body. Osteoblasts must work to replace cells in the skeletal system. Osteoporosis and fractures become a health risk as people age due to changes in endocrinology. Sex hormone levels lower causing these changes.  Women who naturally have lower bone density are at risk. Smoking and high alcohol consumption have the ability to increase risk factors.

Race can also play a role. Women who are of European or Asian ancestry have a higher chance of getting osteoporosis. This is more so a representation of population genetics, rather than just   ethnic background. It does not mean every woman of that ethnic group will get it. Certain illness can be avoided with a change in habits. Exercise and a balanced diet can improve the quality of life. When there is a full understanding of genetics this will vastly improve the quality of the biomedical and health sciences. Beyond those two fields, there could be possibilities in terms of sports performance, exercise physiology, This may even have a level of controversy in regards what we should be allowed to do with the human body.

        It is inevitable that such knowledge will contribute to a transhumanist path. Genetic engineering is no longer an idea of science fiction, but scientific fact. If muscular strength could be determined by sixteen genes, it is possible to manipulate these genes to increase human athletic potential. The athlete of the future may be able to acquire super human strength only thought of in superhero comic books . There is the prospect of gene doping as it has been called becoming a problem for the sports world. There has to be to an extent a level of acceptance that performance enhancing drugs or genetic alteration will not disappear. Sports organizations still retain the right to ban whatever substances they choose, but would genetic manipulation still be considered an unfair advantage? If it were to be completely fair in a certain context, athlete’s with a natural advantage would have to be hindered in some way. Other competitors may be at a disadvantage simply, because of their genetics. To an extent training negates this, but it can only close a performance gap so far. There are bioethical questions regarding genetic engineering on humans that must be discussed. Like it or not humanity has reached a point in which it has become master of its own biology and soon its own evolution. The evolution has happened even without the aid of genetic knowledge or technology. Athletes now are bigger and stronger than they were in the past.

Better nutrition and training regimens has contributed to this development. The knowledge of sports science has increased vastly over the past century in terms of physiology and specific exercise sciences.  Discovering these specific genes could allow for more precise training regimens depending on an individual’s physical fitness potential. With new discoveries there is a potential for abuse. Technology and biological discovery do come with a level of risk. However, this is no excuse to remain ignorant about natural phenomena. There is still more to know about genes and cytology. Further exploration will not only help understand the nature of human health, but unraveling the mystery of life.

Common Strength Genes Identified

The Body Mass Index (BMI)

The body mass index is a calculation value for measuring the amount of body fat and what the weight should be of an individual of a certain height. This has been used to classify whether or not a person has weight related issues such as obesity. This scale has been used for both adults and children. The issue is that it may not be very precise. The measurements do not take into account muscles mass. The attempt at being a scientific measure does not seem as practical. Normally, when a person gains huge amounts of weight health problems become apparent. Aches and pains are present in the joints, because the skeleton has to support more weight than it was intended for. There is also a drastic decrease in cardiovascular fitness. The circulatory system becomes strained and the risk of certain cancers increase with an increase in body weight. The body mass index is not even accurate enough to be used as a diagnostic tool. The BMI is more of a screening tool. It may not even be as useful a screening tool as previously thought. A more precise assessment of weight related issues would involve skin fold thickness measurements, an examination of family history, and evaluations of both diet or physical activity. It is questionable that BMI can even be a measure of health.

           The body mass index at its core is a formula measuring a range of body weight that is considered healthy to a person’s height. The modern  body mass index came into existence in 1998 under the the National Institutes of Health. It was designed to be a general standard to aid doctors, researchers, dietitians, and various government agencies. Prior to this there was not a nation wide standard of determining healthy weight. Since the birth of BMI there has now been one standard.

bmiformula

bmi-chartThe BMI value can either be metric or English system of measures.  The chart does not fully account for people of different somatotypes. Those with a mesomorphic body could be classified as obese. It should also recognize that women naturally have a higher body fat level no matter what  their weight is. The thinnest or most muscular woman would still carry a higher fat percentage. A woman who is not overweight may fall into the classification. Colette Nelson a female bodybuilder would reach at total of 175 lbs in off season being 65.1  inches tall ( 5 ft 5 in ). Using the equation for the BMI ( English system of measures). Solving this mathematically would be as follows : 175 lbs divided by the square of 65 inches and multiplied by 703. This results in a BMI of 29.11 on the chart placing her in the over weight range. If 0.89 were added to that value with an increase of her weight she would be in the obese range. When looking at pictures of Colette Nelson, it is clear that she does not have a weight problem.

           When she competed it was at a weight of 145 lbs. This would make her BMI at that point 24.13 considered a healthy weight. However, there is no indication she was any less healthy with a higher body mass. Her body is mostly muscle mass and their is no way for the chart to distinguish between fat and muscle. This is not just a problem for women measured on the scale, it also happens to larger men. If we were to do more calculations with women of different somatotypes a similar problem could occur. Women who have ectomorphic body types could be incorrectly classified as underweight. Halley Berry would have a BMI of 20.13 and could fall into the underweight range. As one can see she obviously is not emaciated, just thin.

It would be simple to fluctuate between these designated ranges in the BMI scale. Adding a small amount of weight would not serious harm health. The BMI has many limitations in precision. It does not estimate accurately the total amount of body fat that is present. It does not account for sex differences and sex hormones that have an effect on body composition. A person can have a high BMI, yet not be overweight or obese. Many professional athletes if their BMI was calculated would fall in the overweight range of BMI. It has been suggested that waist circumference may be a better indicator of weight health. The reason why the BMI may be rooted in its origins.

        The origins of the body mass index can be traced back to the 19th century. Adolphe Quetelet developed an index in which weight (kilograms)  was divided by the square of height (in meters). This was known as the Quetelet index  until 1972. Quetelet was by profession by trade a mathematician, astronomer, and statistician. He had a fascination with probability calculus and wanted to apply this to the study of human characteristics. The Belgian scientist then produced the equation in 1832. When this equation was developed, the world was a different place. Corpulence was seen as a sign of good health. This made sense in a time of limited food security. Even with the green revolution of the 20th century, there are still nations that struggle with food security. Prior to this having some fat would have meant survival. It was not until the mid-19th to early 20th century did weight gain began to be seen as a potential health risk. Insurance companies took note of this and developed normal weight tables of their own to determine which policies they should give their customers. Louis Dublin owner of the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company was the harbinger in regards to normal weight charts based on a person’s height. This system was not exactly precise either. Weight was divided by a given height into two thirds. Undesired weight was 20% to 25% and the classification for morbid obesity was 70% to 100%. These measure seem arbitrary. Another problem was that these measures were done mostly on Western populations.

   The Polynesian  populations have a larger body structure compared to Europeans. This is a product of genetics, rather than race. The athletes that are from that region do not have health related issues in regards to weight. Yet, past and current weight classifications would state they are unhealthy. This is not true. East African runners may be classified as being under weight. Seeing as they have a high physical activity level it should be assumed that their health is in optimum condition. Such charts and equations do not account for the variation in populations globally. When  Adolphe Quetelet made produced his work he had no intention of using it for understanding obesity or weight related issues. He wanted to see if there was a Gaussian distribution in terms of height and weight. He did encounter issues when doing this with his statistical samples. The equation was developed to contribute to fixing possible errors. During his research he found that body mass increases during puberty height and weight stabilize. The only thin he was documenting was the average rate of growth in stages of the human life cycle. Even if a calculation is done in the metric system a person who is not overweight or obese could fall in that classification. Lenda Murray’s weigh was 74 kg and stands at a height of 1.65 m. Squaring her height and then dividing by the total weight results in a value of 27.2 BMI.

904px-BMI_chart.svg

This again places a person in the overweight range, when they do not have a weight problem. If we were to present this visually it would simple enough to see who has a weight problem. Lenda Murray during her years of competition was clearly at a high physical fitness level .    This does not mean physiognomy should be a measure of health. Women with naturally endomorphic body types would not be at a serious health risk. That would only happen if there was a drastic change in diet or endocrine related illness or disorder. Using charts and equations for weight in which it was not intended for will not give accurate assessments of health.

 The body mass index is not the best method for detecting weight problems. Studies have indicated that overweight individuals have similar or better outcomes compared to normal weight individuals in terms of cardiovascular incidents. There can be alternatives to determining healthy weight.

         The alternatives to BMI  measurement involve examining waistline. A 2012 study done in eight European countries showed that overweight people with large waists were most likely to develop diabetes just like people who were morbidly obese. Then there is the method of using the skinfold. The skinfold method measures body fat in various folds of skin  on the human body. Personal trainers use this method to help clients with particular fitness goals. There also could be more rudimentary measures. The ability to be ambulatory should be a simple marker. When people put on a certain amount of weight walking becomes more difficult. The extremely obese sometimes lose their ability to walk simply because the bones in their legs cannot support it. When weight goes up the skeleton will struggle to maintain support. Bone mass does not increase with the rise of adipose tissue. Stress tests could be given as an indirect way to see if there are potential weight issues. It is clear that everyone’s health condition is different and methods need to be developed to account for that fact.

        Health professionals continue to use BMI when there has been both historical and scientific questions to its accuracy. The body mass index does not thoroughly take into account sex and age in the measurements. As people age they lose muscle mass which can effect health. Older people may have a normal BMI, yet could be losing critical bone and muscular strength. There also has to be consideration for where the weight is gained on the body. If weight is gained in the abdominal or hip areas it can increase certain risk factors. The body mass index at least could be used to measure the probable weight health of a given population. This measure would not be a precise one. If there is an account of athletes who are larger, people who are thinner, or people of endomorphic body types this distorts the data. If this is considered the obesity rates may not be as high as previously thought. It is clear that weight related issues are on the rise globally, but there needs to be an improve method of measures. The best method to prevent or deal with weight related health challenges are the traditional ones : diet, exercise, doctor’s appointments, and controlled eating.

References

Zelman, Kathleen M. “How Accurate Is Body Mass Index, or BMI?” WebMD, WebMD, 5 June 2016, http://www.webmd.com/diet/features/how-accurate-body-mass-index-bmi#1.

Brodwin, Erin. “One of the Most Popular Ways of Telling If You’re a Healthy Weight Is Bogus – Here’s What You Should Do Instead.” Business Insider, Business Insider, 9 Sept. 2016, http://www.businessinsider.com/bmi-is-bogus-best-way-to-tell-if-youre-a-healthy-weight-2016-9.

Eknoyan, Garabed. “Adolphe Quetelet (1796–1874)-the Average Man and Indices of Obesity | Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation | Oxford Academic.” OUP Academic, Oxford University Press, 22 Sept. 2007, academic.oup.com/ndt/article/23/1/47/1923176.

Team, The MNT Editorial. “BMI (Body Mass Index): What Is BMI?” Medical News Today, MediLexicon International, 5 Jan. 2016, http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/info/obesity/what-is-bmi.php.

The Body Mass Index (BMI)

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.

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

Are Women Physically Fit Enough For Space Travel ?

As astronomers and astrophysicists discover more about outer space and the universe as a whole, there is the possibility that in the future humanity will regularly explore space. There could be chances in which humankind will engage in terraforming. There does exist exoplanets that may be Earth like. There will of course be the need for astronauts in the movement for wider space exploration. Such a journey either to reach a star or another planet would have a level of danger. Humanity reached the moon in 1969, which was the product of the Space Race during the Cold War. At that time most of the astronauts were men. Gradually, women began to become astronauts. There was and continues to be a common myth held that women are not physically fit enough for space travel. This is scientifically incorrect, yet there are still some considerations in terms of physiology and biology of a female space traveler . The environment of space can effect human health and the body. Some changes are sex specific and others occur in both. radiation, weightlessness, and effects on fertility are hazards. There are also other variables to consider for a long journey into space.

     There are particular requirements to be an astronaut. Education wise astronauts must have a master’s degree or higher in a science that could include mathematics, engineering, astronomy, biology or chemistry. There are many with very diverse scientific backgrounds on ships. There is a physical an astronaut must pass. Applicants must be in the best physical condition. One requirement is that a person has 20/20 vision. Candidates must be able to handle pressure on their bodies. Under water exercise has to be done to acclimate them to the pressure of space. They must be able to swim three laps in a 25 metre pool. This has to be done without stopping. Then the same action is performed with the space suit.

The Women pioneers of space exploration as shown above include Mae Jemison, Valentina Tereshkova, Sally K. Ride, and Liu Yang. 

Astronauts are basically given a scuba diving instruction. There are points in which water landing could occur and water survival training is critical. There is a height requirement which demands you be 190 cm tall to be a commander or pilot astronaut. Being a mission specialist the height requirement is less ranging from 149 to 193 cm. This may be the hardest obstacle for women,because on average they are shorter than men. This could be negated one day when spacecraft becomes more advanced. An astrouat’s routine fitness regimen involves running, biking, and weightlifting the are  most essential. Endurance is required to handle the weight of space suits weighing close to 300 lbs (136 kg) .   There has to be an exercise regimen while in space to prevent bone and muscle loss in space.  The lack of gravitation does not give the body the work that the skeletal and muscular system need. There also has to consideration for the circulatory system. One requirement is that an applicant must have a  blood pressure  of 140/90. This has to be at the reading when sitting. There are situations in which face low and high levels of barometric pressure. There also involves training in reduced gravity aircraft. This contributes to a space explorer getting acclimated to microgravity environments.

These requirements need an individual to be in great shape and health. Applicants must also have some flying experience. Flying experience is only required if you want to be a commander or an astronaut pilot. The training for astronauts has become more efficient compare to when it began in the 20th century. When the simulations began in 1957, applicants had to get in planes, while sustaining the aircraft’s sinusoidal or parabolic maneuvers. A colloquial phrase for reduced gravity aircraft became the “vomit comet.”  Around 1973 NASA took supervision of the the training program from the US Air Force. Then by 2008 a private company known as Zero G Corp became responsible for training. Flying in a wave pattern and reaching the midpoint of the parabolic motion allows the passenger to experience weightlessness. During this period weightlessness only lasts about 25 seconds. This will have to be done consistently to adequately prepare space travelers. This can make people ill with changes in motion.  A person with extreme motion sickness may find it difficult to become an astronaut. These requirements do not seem as intense as other physically demanding occupations, but are still rigorous.

         There must be a consideration of sex differences in physiology and biology. The muscular and skeletal structure are important to physical fitness. Men have on average more muscular strength compared to women. This does vary depending on health condition, age, and genetics. Men have a larger portion of upper body strength estimates vary women contain at least 40% less skeletal muscle in the upper body and 33% less in the lower body.

The reason for this is based on endocrine function. Women produce more estrogen and progesterone allowing for more body fat. Even the most muscular woman is carrying more body fat compared to a man. Androgens and specifically testosterone allow for a greater amount of muscular hypertrophy. This does not mean women cannot build muscle or strength. When a training regimen is the same for both men and women it would still result in men having a higher physical fitness level. The gap has to do also with staring point. If men have more muscle mass prior to the training regimen the gains would be higher. Weight training still has the same effect on a woman’s body, just not to the same extent. Men have more type II fast twitch muscle fibers. However, the body does switch been the more endurance based type I and  the more powerful type II muscle fiber. Strength doe not only depend on the actual muscle, but the neuromuscular activity. The rate of muscular contraction is critical to exerting force. Women do experience muscular hypertrophy in which muscle grows and repairs after exercise. Relevant to space travel for extended periods of time, it women do not exercise they would experience atrophy at a faster rate.

      To counter this it is essential that women build up as much strength as they can to prepare for a microgravity environment. The more musculoskeletal strength the more suited an individual is to space and longer travel. Women have lower bone density. This explains why they could be more susceptible to osteoporosis. The female skeleton has a wider pelvis and smaller thorax compared to the male skeletal structure. The reason men have an upper body advantage is that wider shoulders can allow more muscle to be housed there. More muscle correlates to more fibers being recruited to produce force. The skeleton is the frame that holds the body together, while ligaments and tendons contribute to movement as wells well as acting as structural support.

Cardiovascular fitness is also pivotal. Women have smaller hearts and lungs which effects how Vo2 max functions. Oxygen is transported to muscles to aid in the production of adenosine triphosphate for muscle contraction. A larger heart means that more blood is going to the tissues. Women have lower levels of hemoglobin which means their aerobic power is lower. Hemoglobin is a protein that must transport oxygen from the lungs to other tissues. Besides the muscular, skeletal, and respiratory system there are also considerations related to the reproductive system. Menstruation is not an issue or a hindrance. The only difference is that hygiene will have to be performed in a different manner. The more threatening waste management problems that involve urination and defecation. Gynecological health will not be effected from being on a space ship. However, there is a concern relevant to both men and women in regards to radiation in space. This could cause fertility issues, which explains why most female astronauts wait before having children. It possible for humans to procreate in outer space, but no such experiment has been attempted. It is unknown how a baby would develop in a space environment. This is why there are some restrictions on what female astronauts can do while pregnant. Female astronauts cannot do neutral buoyancy training while pregnant. Underwater dives which could last to eight hours could have negative effects on a developing child. There are some differences in how men and women react to extremes in the outer space. Reduction in oxygen supply (hypoxia), varying temperatures, acceleration, isolation,  and impact are examples of sex differences. These are minor and vary depending on the individual.

         There has not been an extensive study of female astronauts in terms of  health and physical performance. The reality is that there have been few female  long duration astronauts. The few that exist are individuals and such a small sample would not reveal anything about a much larger group of women. Female astronauts could be at higher risk for ovarian and breast cancer. Urinary tract infections are also another health concern for female astronauts. Even bacteria on women’s bodies can be altered during spaceflight. Another observation is that some astronauts suffer vision loss. There are many problems that can occur to the organ systems of the body in space. If bone is shed too much this will  lead to kidney stones. This is a health problem that effects more men rather than women. There needs to be more studies of female astronauts and more in general. If humanity is seeking to colonize space or other planets women have to be a part of the process. There is obviously a gender bias in the sciences and space exploration. NASA conducted tests from 1960 to 1961 to see if women could handle the rigors of space travel. Jerrie Cobb who was a pilot who did the same medical and physical tests for Mercury astronauts at NASA. Her score placed her in the top two percent of qualified candidates. Yet, it was a period of sexist prejudice and NASA was simply not looking for female astronauts. Such barriers are being broken, but there still needs to be improvement.

 Staying in space would have long term effects on health and the human body. The reason has to do with how humans evolved. Our ancestors developed in an environment with gravity and space has a zero gravity environment. That is why bones and muscles are effected from a sudden change in environment. Human beings are just like other animals in the sense that their biome is essential to their survival. Outer space is a more rough terrain than any desert, polar ice cap, or ocean. The health effects can only be fully understood when one stays in space for a period of time.

          Remaining in space can cause a change in the human body. The semimotor system gets disrupted to a degree. The inner ear is responsible for balance an when this is disturbed one can get nausea. Sinuses could get clogged due to the fluids of the body floating upward. The skeleton can lose mass and it is possible for astronauts to lose about 1 percent each month. Muscles can atrophy from not being used in a microgarvity environment. There is a solution to such problems which include taking vitamin D supplements and exercising 2 hours and 30 minutes six days a week. The cerebrospinal fluid may be effected by the microgravity, which results in changes in vision. Although there is the possibility of changes in physical health, mental health is also given attention. Being with a small crew away from larger populations can effect emotional states. This information can reveal much about how women would fare in long term space exploration. Seeing as their muscle and bone mass is lower it would be wise to do strength training prior to training as a astronaut. The rate of muscular atrophy would be faster compared to men. Men and women with ectomorphic body types may be more vulnerable to bone and muscle loss.

Doubtless of sex each person could react differently to space. Long journeys are complicated by radiation and the fact that the magnetic field of Earth protects us from such hazards. Going further into space would require more technology to maintain a healthy body. Even with exercise equipment, muscles of astronauts can lose up to 40% of their capacity for work. Planning an expedition to Mars would be vary precarious. The Journal of Physiology conducted a study in regards to the effect of weightlessness on muscles. The results showed that astronauts lost about 35% of their muscle fiber force. NASA has estimated it would take at least 10 months to reach Mars and 10 months to get back for one mission. Space does pose health hazards, but it is an unexplored wilderness still filled with unknown possibilities. There are exoplanets, blackholes, stars, nebula formations, and dark matter.

The solution to the threat to muscular health was to develop the Advanced Resistance Exercise Device. It is unknown if this new technology would be as effective in combating muscular atrophy. The only way to know with certainty is to measure the amount of muscle loss astronauts sustained when coming back from space. This exercise technology has been around since 2008, prior to that there was very little effective workout equipment for training the muscles. Exercise and high quality diet can prevent health issues on flights.

       NASA did conduct a study in which it examined how men and women handle spaceflight. The problem is the study only contained about 57 female astronauts. There were more men representing a total of 477. The records were examined between 2013 to 2017. The report showed that men had a greater tolerance for spaceflight in particular categories. Women were less likely to have hearing loss or vision impairment. Women according to the study lose more blood plasma and have a higher heart rate under stressful situations. There is very little difference in immune system response to space. Both men and women suffer from motion sickness during space travel. It happens at different times. Women experience it when arriving in space, while men have it coming back to Earth. The overall leading heath risk seems to be visual impairment intracranial pressure syndrome. NASA and the International Space Station want to extend missions beyond six months to a year .

cuqfzzhm9hfv38lbfxiv
The different effects of spaceflight on female and male astronauts. 

The conclusion that one would automatically come to is that women do not make quality astronauts. This is not true, but it reveals how possible solutions can be developed. More women are need for such studies to ensure precision in experiments. Spacecraft will have to either increase in speed or navigate in a manner in which one can easily travel from one point of space to another instantly. This has been theorized by astrophysicists in which traversable wormholes could be used to go long distances. Doing so would allow humanity to avoid certain health hazards. Distance is the biggest obstacle. Alpha Centari another closest to Earth is 4.4 lightyears away. This means it would take light 4.4 years to reach Alpha Centari  from Earth. One astronomical unit is equal to 150 million km ( 93 million miles ). Humanity will have to go far to reach something of interest. NASA must then study the problem of long term spaceflight from perspectives of exercise physiology, health science, biology, aeronautical engineering. and the general astrophysics of space.

          Women are capable enough to handle spaceflight. There are some considerations that should be taken into account in terms of physiology and fitness. Muscle atrophy and bone loss are serious concerns. They can be negated to an extent through training and technology. There are sex specific health related issues that must be examined. Some wonder why explore space at all. There are legitimate and practical reasons. The first reason  is that it part of human nature to be curious and explore. Since the first hominins migrated off the continent of Africa humanity has been colonized the Earth. The Bantu migrations, the Polynesian migrations, the Turko-Mongol nomads, and the Age of Exploration prove humanity does not remain still. The next step will be to go into space. Another reason for space exploration is to find and colonize Earth like planets. Seeing as the Earth is being destroyed by climate change and disregard for the preservation of the environment that would be more reasonable. There will be more exploration in the future and it will only be a matter of time before masses of people will travel through space. Hopefully a generation of female astronauts will be contributors to this project.

 

References

 MailOnline, Jonathan O’Callaghan for. “Battle of the Sexes in SPACE: Nasa Studies Medical Records to Discover Which Gender Fares Better in Zero-Gravity Conditions.” Daily Mail Online, Associated Newspapers, 20 Nov. 2014, http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2842813/Who-makes-better-astronauts-men-women-Females-suffer-vision-loss-males-deal-stress-better-study-claims.htm

McNally, Jess. “Astronaut Muscles Would Wither by Mars.” Wired, Conde Nast, 4 June 2017, http://www.wired.com/2010/08/astronaut-muscle-waste/.

Monaghan, Sheila. “NASA ASTRONAUTS ARE INCREDIBLY FIT.” Furthermore from Equinox, Furthermore from Equinox, 5 May 2017, furthermore.equinox.com/articles/2017/05/nasa-astronauts-workout.
Koren, Marina. “What One Year of Space Travel Does to the Human Body.” The Atlantic, Atlantic Media Company, 1 Mar. 2016, http://www.theatlantic.com/science/archive/2016/03/scott-kelly-mikhail-kornienko/471717/.
Lunau, Kate. “Why We Desperately Need to Study More Female Astronauts.” Motherboard, Motherboard , 19 Apr. 2016, motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/4xa38j/why-we-desperately-need-to-study-more-female-astronauts-NASA-Sally-Ride.
Sivasubramanian , Shami. “The 7 Requirements to Be an Astronaut.” SBS, SBS, 15 July 2016, http://www.sbs.com.au/topics/science/space/article/2016/07/15/7-requirements-be-astronaut.

 Juan 28 Jul 2006 at 12:18 tweet_btn(), Stephen. “What Issues Are There for Women in Space?” The Register® – Biting the Hand That Feeds IT, The Register , 28 July 2006, http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/28/the_odd_body_women_in_space/.

Spencer, Henry. “Why NASA Barred Women Astronauts.” New Scientist, New Scientist , 8 Oct. 2009, http://www.newscientist.com/blogs/shortsharpscience/2009/10/why-nasa-barred-women-astronau.html.
Taylor, Nola. “Vomit Comet: Training Flights for Astronauts.” Space.com, Space.com , 25 Aug. 2017, http://www.space.com/37942-vomit-comet.html.
Are Women Physically Fit Enough For Space Travel ?

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 ?”