Male Gender Roles and How They Specifically Affect Men

The Batlord · 10-02-2015, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude

I'm positive that if Scarlet Johanson grew up doing whatever it was that John Ceva did/does that makes you feel more comfortable with him than her, she'd be just as capable.

There is no way that she could develop the same muscle mass that he could. Women's bodies are simply different from men. If they were both at their physical peak, he would be stronger, faster, etc, than she would ever be.

~~John Wilkes Booth~~ · 10-02-2015, 08:18 PM

individual women can be stronger than individual men

but as a general rule men are stronger

it's just a matter of specialization... and "strength" in that way is becoming less and less important in terms of being a provider... but the area where it still does matter is that females largely still have the same biological instincts as their ancestors and are thus more likely to sexually select for physical strength in men. even though we don't (typically) hunt with spears and **** anymore.

GuD · 10-02-2015, 08:26 PM

I'm sure there are women who outperform men at their peaks, too. And I'm sure that while it might never happen in our lifetime genetics disparities are reversible, possibly at unknown costs. Either way talking about being able to hunt mammoths is pretty irrelevant, don't you think?

GuD · 10-02-2015, 08:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Wilkes Booth

individual women can be stronger than individual men

but as a general rule men are stronger

it's just a matter of specialization... and "strength" in that way is becoming less and less important in terms of being a provider... but the area where it still does matter is that females largely still have the same biological instincts as their ancestors and are thus more likely to sexually select for physical strength in men. even though we don't (typically) hunt with spears and **** anymore.

If those instincts are real, which I doubt they are, I'm sure marketing has a bigger role.

The Batlord · 10-02-2015, 08:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude

I'm sure there are women who outperform men at their peaks, too.

Statistically speaking, those women would be the equivalent of anecdotal evidence, unless we're talking about the kind of string bean men who would have been irrelevant in sexual competition amongst our mammoth-hunting ancestors.

Quote:

And I'm sure that while it might never happen in our lifetime genetics disparities are reversible, possibly at unknown costs. Either way talking about being able to hunt mammoths is pretty irrelevant, don't you think?

You're the one who brought up hunting.

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhateverDude

If those instincts are real, which I doubt they are, I'm sure marketing has a bigger role.

If I were the strawman type, I might infer from that that you believe instincts in mating preferences don't exist.

~~John Wilkes Booth~~ · 10-02-2015, 08:34 PM

you don't think humans have instincts?

The Batlord · 10-02-2015, 08:50 PM

well played.

Neapolitan · 10-02-2015, 09:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Batlord

There is no way that she could develop the same muscle mass that he could. Women's bodies are simply different from men. If they were both at their physical peak, he would be stronger, faster, etc, than she would ever be.

Who's Ceva? I guess WD is talking about Michael Cera? (I thought his name was Michael, mabye it's John) Anyway I think Scarlet Johanson could run rings around Michael Cera.

Even if a guy is muscle-bound, doesn't make him stronger or healthier than some guy who is not. I guess people look out body-builders and hold them up as the pinnacle of health. But some of these guys are on steroids and that stuff can actually do more harm than good. So I don't the point to point out a muscle-bound guy and say he is bigger or stronger.

DwnWthVwls · 10-02-2015, 09:47 PM

Muscle bound guys are bigger and stronger.. always, that doesn't mean anything when it comes to being a skilled fighter or survivalist. Being that big allows your to have incredible burst power, their muscles are not built for endurance. There are people who can't bench the 400+ lbs they rep, but can out rep them at lesser weights. There is no such thing as "best shape", you work out for the type of physical activity you need/want to perform.

The Batlord · 10-02-2015, 09:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neapolitan

Who's Ceva? I guess WD is talking about Michael Cera? (I thought his name was Michael, mabye it's John) Anyway I think Scarlet Johanson could run rings around Michael Cera.

learn to white trash.

10-02-2015, 08:26 PM	#93 (permalink)
GuD Dude... What? Join Date: Oct 2013 Posts: 1,322	I'm sure there are women who outperform men at their peaks, too. And I'm sure that while it might never happen in our lifetime genetics disparities are reversible, possibly at unknown costs. Either way talking about being able to hunt mammoths is pretty irrelevant, don't you think? __________________ I spit bullets in my feet Every time I speak So I write instead And still people want me dead ~msc

10-02-2015, 08:18 PM	#92 (permalink)
~~John Wilkes Booth~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 2,235	individual women can be stronger than individual men but as a general rule men are stronger it's just a matter of specialization... and "strength" in that way is becoming less and less important in terms of being a provider... but the area where it still does matter is that females largely still have the same biological instincts as their ancestors and are thus more likely to sexually select for physical strength in men. even though we don't (typically) hunt with spears and **** anymore.

10-02-2015, 08:34 PM	#96 (permalink)
~~John Wilkes Booth~~ Account Disabled Join Date: Jul 2013 Posts: 2,235	you don't think humans have instincts?