Forum
>
General / Nonfiction
>
Thread
Log in |
Register
Some actual evidence and statistics: https://law.duke.edu/sports/sex-sport/compara...
The problem with the link you provided is that it compares trained women to trained men/boys. In that case, it is safe to say that more often than not trained men will outperform trained women.
My question was specifically about trained women vs. UNTRAINED MEN.
I'll just leave it at that, as you seemed to ignore that aspect of my question and its not worth having debates with people like you who ignore the details, like you did with my question. Plus, if you don't like this thread, just unsubscribe from it.
> I think most of the naysayers here are overestimating the "average guy".
They are, which is what makes it so comical.
Yes, I get that I'm (supposed to be) bigger than this, but their deep-in-their-"masculine"-feelings responses on this forum is high comedy.
For some, it's just pure chauvinism, but for many, they see themselves in that place and - for their own self-worth - NEED certain things to be true, even if they're not.
No need to hold back bro. It's good that your calling things as they are.
I think most of the naysayers here are overestimating the "average guy". I've been going to the same gym for years, and see average guys all that time (myself included). It's very rare that I've seen guys lift the types of weights that I've seen many of the girls on this site lift. Granted, my gym is most definitely not a "bodybuilding" gym. It's just a gym for the average person who wants to be fit, and I've never seen any truly jacked person there.
With that said, a lot of the girls on this site are much stronger than many of the guys I see at my gym in terms of what they can lift. Beyond that, endurance is also a key factor. When you see a girl who can lift heavy, and also perform 10-15 pullups I wouldn't underestimate her.
Ultimately, I think many of these girls here, with their years of heavy gym lifting, and endurance training would wreck the average untrained guy. Assuming he's no more than 50lbs heavier.
Very well said.
Not only are the naysayers overestimating the average guy. But they are also underestimating the typical woman in this site. They seem to think that typical woman in this site is like a typical skinny 5'3 110 pound actress. I tend to see that the typical woman in this site is much muscular and heavier than the typical actress.
And I'm also the first guy to dismiss the "girl boss" portrayals you see in the media or movies where these 5'3 110lb actresses beating up and throwing around 200lbs guys. It's ridiculous. I'm also one that would be realistic enough to note that, the girls on this site are not your average females. They are very strong and rare and that for me, is the allure of it.
Case in point, Karla Rodrigues.
She's 5'5 and about 135lbs and I'm pretty sure she'd wreck me in a fight. This is based on a number of videos I've seen of her. In a competition, I saw her crank out 21 pullups to win the women's division---that indicates big functional strength and endurance. In a HB video, she mentioned that she had never curled more than 30lb dumbells, but Sean had her go for max and she was able to hammer curl 60lb dumbells. and her biceps measured in at 14"
Beyond that, she also talked about how she used to be a correctional officer in a male prison and how her strength helped her in her job when she had to physically control male prisoners bigger than her.
Point is, she's small in stature, but if you think that because she's a girl and not huge, she wouldn't f up an average, untrained guy in a fight, you're delusional. I doubt the average guy can manage even 5 strict pullups without training for it. So, let's stop underestimating these girls and stop overestimating the guys.
Great example. Karla Rodrigues is a typical example of a woman in this site.
Although, don't be surprised if there are naysayers who say you're "moving the goal post" or "cherry picking", as I was told that. Lol!
I'm not subscribed to it. But am interested in how entrenched in your clearly uninformed opinions you are. Why ask a question and then get so bitter and start insulting people who give you an answer you don't like, it's just childish. One thing to consider is whether in all the tiers of sport there are any women able to compete on a physical level with men? For example, in soccer/football, there is not a single woman able to compete with men in even the lowest level teams, until you get into just 'for fun' levels of sport. Surely this says everything you need to hear. I would say don't ask a question if you don't want people to disagree with you. It's frankly ridiculous how you guys are carrying on. There's no real point debating as you've skewed the semantics in your favour in your own head. I have nothing more to say, except try to be a bit more resilient and have fun! 👍😄
I'm not subscribed to it. But am interested in how entrenched in your clearly uninformed opinions you are. Why ask a question and then get so bitter and start insulting people who give you an answer you don't like, it's just childish. One thing to consider is whether in all the tiers of sport there are any women able to compete on a physical level with men? For example, in soccer/football, there is not a single woman able to compete with men in even the lowest level teams, until you get into just 'for fun' levels of sport. Surely this says everything you need to hear. I would say don't ask a question if you don't want people to disagree with you. It's frankly ridiculous how you guys are carrying on. There's no real point debating as you've skewed the semantics in your favour in your own head. I have nothing more to say, except try to be a bit more resilient and have fun! 👍😄
Again, it seems as if you seem to be ignoring the important detail about UNTRAINED MEN. I'll just leave it at that.
Again, it seems as if you seem to be ignoring the important detail about UNTRAINED MEN. I'll just leave it at that.
Exactly. I don't think anyone would disagree with the FACT that, no professional female athlete will win against a male professional athlete in the same sport. A good male high school basketball team would absolutely demolish the best female WNBA players. It won't even be close! I don't think anyone is disputing that.
The question was about the average dude off the street who's not trained. These guys on here just can't concede that there could possibly be any female who could best a male in anything... no matter how much the female trains, and no matter how untrained the guy is. It's just ridiculous.
Exactly. I don't think anyone would disagree with the FACT that, no professional female athlete will win against a male professional athlete in the same sport. A good male high school basketball team would absolutely demolish the best female WNBA players. It won't even be close! I don't think anyone is disputing that.
The question was about the average dude off the street who's not trained. These guys on here just can't concede that there could possibly be any female who could best a male in anything... no matter how much the female trains, and no matter how untrained the guy is. It's just ridiculous.
Amen bro!
Thanks!
Also for what its worth, more than half the answers in the poll so far have been for 40% to 100%. If it weren't for insecure "Andrew Tate" type trolls, I think the answers would have been close to two-thirds for 40% to 100%.
We have people using one woman as the basis for their argument. Unless you can demonstrate that the majority of the women here are capable of doing 21 pull-ups and curling 60 lbs, then you don't have an argument, you have an anomaly.
In other words, it takes more than one small yet strong female to establish a case.
So if you're stating that x% of the site can beat the average man, and you're basing that on their strength (nevermind everything else that matters in a fight) - then x% of the site must exhibit the same strength for that argument to be valid. If you're assuming that because this little girl can do it, then everyone else probably can, then your argument boils down to nothing more than wishful thinking. That said, we all know her strength and background isn't representative of the majority here. So if that's what it takes to beat a man then you've supported my argument more than your own.
Bearing in mind that no one (to my knowledge) ever said that every woman here would lose. The dispute is how many.
To go further, how does the FBB win? What's their path to victory? How do they overcome the numerous disadvantages they would face?
I'm curious as to how you guys think this would actually play out, specifically:
Most of the women here would be at a disadvantage in terms of reach. That's not something we can just dismiss. The guy would be able to land punches before she's in range to do anything effective. That also means it would be easier to dodge her punches. With no boxing training, how does she negate that?
What reason do we have to believe that FBB's technique would be better? How would that go? Again, that doesn't mean that guy's technique would be good.
What about their reaction speed which influences their ability to dodge. Given "The mean fastest reaction times were 23 ms shorter in men than women" ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3198384/#:~:text=The%20mean%20fastest%20reaction%20times,and%20131%20ms%20for%20women. How do they negate that as well?
And still the testosterone disadvantage. Even on steroids, most women won't exceed the natural test levels of the average male. Can she become as aggressive and violent without the natural ability to do so?
We have people using one woman as the basis for their argument. Unless you can demonstrate that the majority of the women here are capable of doing 21 pull-ups and curling 60 lbs, then you don't have an argument, you have an anomaly.
In other words, it takes more than one small yet strong female to establish a case.
So if you're stating that x% of the site can beat the average man, and you're basing that on their strength (nevermind everything else that matters in a fight) - then x% of the site must exhibit the same strength for that argument to be valid. If you're assuming that because this little girl can do it, then everyone else probably can, then your argument boils down to nothing more than wishful thinking. That said, we all know her strength and background isn't representative of the majority here. So if that's what it takes to beat a man then you've supported my argument more than your own.
Bearing in mind that no one (to my knowledge) ever said that every woman here would lose. The dispute is how many.
How many women are featured on the site?
How many men are members of the site?
Let's start with those estimates.
> I think most of the naysayers here are overestimating the "average guy".
They are, which is what makes it so comical.
Yes, I get that I'm (supposed to be) bigger than this, but their deep-in-their-"masculine"-feelings responses on this forum is high comedy.
For some, it's just pure chauvinism, but for many, they see themselves in that place and - for their own self-worth - NEED certain things to be true, even if they're not.
I wish I was wrong. I wish someone would prove me wrong. It would significantly increase the appeal of a lot of women on this site. But I can't let fantasy influence reality.
We have people using one woman as the basis for their argument. Unless you can demonstrate that the majority of the women here are capable of doing 21 pull-ups and curling 60 lbs, then you don't have an argument, you have an anomaly.
In other words, it takes more than one small yet strong female to establish a case.
So if you're stating that x% of the site can beat the average man, and you're basing that on their strength (nevermind everything else that matters in a fight) - then x% of the site must exhibit the same strength for that argument to be valid. If you're assuming that because this little girl can do it, then everyone else probably can, then your argument boils down to nothing more than wishful thinking. That said, we all know her strength and background isn't representative of the majority here. So if that's what it takes to beat a man then you've supported my argument more than your own.
Bearing in mind that no one (to my knowledge) ever said that every woman here would lose. The dispute is how many.
Really, you have the audacity to assume that people are basing their arguments on 1 woman? Speaking for myself, I know I definitely am not basing my argument on 1 woman, as the basis for my argument is based on dozens of women who I've seen on this site, elsewhere in the web, including being a fan of various different fit/muscular women for many years, and having to meet some of them personally.
I'd also think that others who are on my side of the argument are also basing their arguments on dozens of women. But unlike you, I won't make any assumptions and I'll let those individuals speak for themselves.
Having said all that, before you make an assumption, maybe you ought to ask how we came to the conclusions that we did. Just because a person put out 1 picture of one woman, doesn't mean that he is using that particular woman as the basis of his argument. It's just one example that he may be using as part of his argument and there's probably more to what he's trying convey.
Also, the fact that you make such an ignorant assumption, that people are using 1 woman as the basis of their argument, really ruins a lot of your credibility and discourages reasonable people to take you seriously.
I wish I was wrong. I wish someone would prove me wrong. It would significantly increase the appeal of a lot of women on this site. But I can't let fantasy influence reality.
No. I don't think anyone has time to prove you wrong. You need to go educate yourself. Just go away. Regardless of what you say, you won't be taken seriously because, you clearly don't read all of the points that are made and you make ignorant assumptions.
Just go away and educate yourself. Don't waste your time here and don't waste our time here.
I think most of the naysayers here are overestimating the "average guy". I've been going to the same gym for years, and see average guys all that time (myself included). It's very rare that I've seen guys lift the types of weights that I've seen many of the girls on this site lift. Granted, my gym is most definitely not a "bodybuilding" gym. It's just a gym for the average person who wants to be fit, and I've never seen any truly jacked person there.
With that said, a lot of the girls on this site are much stronger than many of the guys I see at my gym in terms of what they can lift. Beyond that, endurance is also a key factor. When you see a girl who can lift heavy, and also perform 10-15 pullups I wouldn't underestimate her.
Ultimately, I think many of these girls here, with their years of heavy gym lifting, and endurance training would wreck the average untrained guy. Assuming he's no more than 50lbs heavier.
I imagine that the average weight here is around 150-160lbs, so most likely the guy will be 50lbs heavier.
Either way, you're basing someone's fighting ability solely on strength?
I find it comical how strongly some of you guys feel about it. There's no real objective data to draw on, so it's all largely opinion. Loving your amateur pseudo psychology too and attempts to negatively label opinions you don't agree with. You should do more research into this if you feel that strongly. There is evidence around females competing with males in other sports and elite female teams getting thrashed by low level male teams, e.g football, tennis etc... But whatever, you can choose to play around with semantics and not do any real research into it and keep subtly insulting these you disagree with.