[Nachtrafe]

Originally posted by Gabrielles blades: id just like to point out that the language you did use is by its nature saying women are weak. the word stronger, it means x is more strong than y, which in the context used means you are putting down women. If you wanted (which i dont think you do) to say entirely positive things about men, you could say things like men are strong; as this doesnt by its nature say they are better than another.

GB...since you're from Florida, I hope I'm correct in assuming that English is your first language, otherwise, this grammer lesson is going to be wasted. [img]smile.gif[/img] For the record, I think you are way off base. The word 'stronger' is a relative. The word 'weak' is an absolute. Saying that someone is 'stronger' does *not* equate to saying someone else is 'weak'...it equates to saying they are 'weakER'. There's nothing derogotory or sexist about that...it's a simple fact of life. There are some people that are stronger than others. That doesn't make everyone else 'weak'. It just makes them 'weaker'.

I think I phrased myself very well on every occasion. I used relative terms. I said men are stronger. Yes, by implication, that means women are weaker...again, that's a fact of life. But, by no means did I say, or even imply, that women are *weak*.

In fact, I said, quite specifically, that I was impressed by, and admired the work that all of the women bodybuilders that were being used as examples went through. None of those women could be considered, in *any* way, weak. But, from a purely physical standpoint, when compared against a man with similar background and training, they are *physically weaker*.

As for the whos better at super body building; youll probably note that the men are in an entirely different weight class, you wouldnt expect a man who weighs 180 lbs to be able to do the same things that a man who wieghs 300 lbs to be able to do the same things now would you? so why expect a woman to be able to? If you were going to run an experiment to determine whom has the most potential, a man or a woman when it comes to body building you would first have to set certain rules. For example, before they begin the man and woman must weigh the same, have same height/width, have the same body fat percent, have the same mentality, do the same exercises the same amounts of time etc etc. Now it would be more difficult to do such an experiment the earlier in the childs life you start it. it would be best probably to choose people who are past the growing phase so that you wouldnt have to redo the experiment because of differences in height/width etc.

Yeah but, I *did* provide an example of two similarly built people in a previous post, and in every weight lifting category, the man was able to lift more weight...every category! Sure, I agree with you, putting a 300lb man against either a 180lb man OR woman is completely unfair. That's why I provided the example of Chaplin and Hayworth. They are about the same height, about the same weight, and about the same age. In fact, she's just a little bit taller than him, but he's still able to lift more.

And, even if you move away from the arguement of genetics, you can simply look at compiled data(the height/weight charts that I posted earlier). It also shows that men are larger, on average, than women. And therefore, by simple deductive logic, the *average* man will be stronger(larger size generally = larger muscle mass) than the *average* woman.

Originally posted by Gabrielles blades: As for being hit on...yes ive been hit on when ive been roleplaying as a woman, it doesnt happen very often. usualy its flirting, being hit on is rare. When it does happen i generally put them in their place.

Personally, I prefer claymores(the exploding kind, or the pointy kind, makes no difference to me).

EDIT: To add the last paragraph.

[ 08-29-2003, 09:35 AM: Message edited by: Nachtrafe ]