Scroll Down to Read Other Opinions
They literally can't though.
Your statement is literally false though :/
It's not. It hasn't been proven that women who train can be just as strong as men who train. You can look at any weightlifting records, any sport records, and see that men out-compete women in all of them. That's why there are separate categories for men and women in every sport where physical strength matters.Hand-grip strength is also a big indicator of overall physical strength, here's a study done on that:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17186303From the study:"ean maximal hand-grip strength showed the expected clear difference between men (541 N) and women (329 N). Less expected was the gender related distribution of hand-grip strength: 90% of females produced less force than 95% of males. Though female athletes were significantly stronger (444 N) than their untrained female counterparts, this value corresponded to only the 25th percentile of the male subjects.""The present findings show that the differences in hand-grip strength of men and women are larger than previously reported. An appreciable difference still remains when using lean body mass as reference. The results of female national elite athletes even indicate that the strength level attainable by extremely high training will rarely surpass the 50th percentile of untrained or not specifically trained men."Elite female athletes who compete in sports which require the highest levels of grip strength are still not as strong as 50% of men who don't train at all.
This isn’t true at all, you ever been in a gym for fighting?
I have yes, I've fought boxing and muay Thai. When I moved from boxing to muay Thai one of the girls I trained with was a champion Thai boxer. She was very skilled obviously, but no power. I was used to sparring with and getting hit by 250lb monsters. Sparring with her was like sparring with a very good 12 year old boy.
I don’t believe that at all, okayyyyyy sure And even if that was the caSe maybe your gym sucked
Believe what you want, the proof is there. What you're saying isn't true, it's never been proven. Check this fight out. Lucia Rijker, considered to be the best female Thai boxer of all time, undefeated against women - Vs a less experienced man of the same weight who was nowhere near good enough to be a champion. She got KO'd in the second round, the strength difference was too much:https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=X2QgDWSfQik
Transsexual men break every world record in womens sports when they go head to head with women.Elite women athletes train for years but still are only that tiny bit better than average males who dont train.A good example of women's physical inferiority compared to men would be in tennis most lauded battle of the sexes where 29 year old professional female tennis player billy jean king triumphed against a 56 year old retired pot bellied alcoholic smoker who threw the match to pay off his gambling debts. In a similar match the Williams sisters were trounced after boasting they could beat any professional male tennis player by Karsten Braasch then no203. Karsten Braasch drank a few beers that morning, played a round of golf, smoked a few cigarettes and then proceeded to give the William's sisters the worst trashing of their lives in back to back matches.Another good example is women' soccer
... teams playing under 15 boys school teams and getting trashed. That is world cup professional womens soccer players getting hammered by 15 year old amateur boys lol
Lol the guardian. It proves the opposite
No, just no.
Yes just yes. Professional female athletes beaten by underage boys lol
Women do have an advantage when it comes to surviving illnesses, that's true. That's not the same as being stronger physically.The reason for this is simple. We used to live in small tribes of up to 150 people. We did this for 99% of our existence as humans. We evolved in these ways because it was essential to the survival of each tribe.In order for a tribe to survive, children need to be born and they need to survive. Women are the ones who give birth to and nurture young children, who are physically helpless for a long time. This in itself made women too vulnerable for long periods of time. Not only that, but without enough women giving birth to children a tribe would not survive. That's why nature/evolution led to women having stronger immune systems. A tribe and the children of that tribe would be more likely to survive if the women were not so easily wiped out by illness. They'd also pass on that immunity to the babies through breastfeeding.At the same time they were physically vulnerable, which is why it was up to men to protect them. The only tribes who'd survive would be those with men strong enough to protect the women and children from predators and rival tribesmen. As well as to hunt large game - which tend to be very big, strong, dangerous animals - and they hunted them with sharp sticks and rocks. That's why men evolved to be stronger physically.
Proof is in the pudding. Professional elite female athletes get beaten by teenage amateurs.