Therumancer said:
It's not the complete lack of differances, but the degree to which those differances appear and the number of them. It's not a popular point, and I understand you don't like it, but it's just the way things are.
Excuse me? "That's just the way things are", when did that become a valid argument. It's one I see lots of people making in this thread, mostly men but one I've heard women make in the past. "That's just the way things are so why bother trying to change." You realize that if this argument rang true women wouldn't be wearing pants, going to work, or voting. The Civil Rights movement wouldn't have happened, we would still have slavery.
Therumancer said:
The reason why you don't have lady versions of Hulk Hogan in pro-wrestling is because that's not how girls develop. You get a guy who pumps iron and gets into an ideal body-muscle ratio he's going to wind up a lot differant than a girl who does the same thing, and can simply put do a lot more differant things with his body and form it in differant ways.
Give me a break, the reason why we don't have lady versions of Hulk Hogan in pro wrestling is because the vast majority of male viewers are turned off by the female body builder. Some of them are what you'd expect from the female form, as you stated below. The others... not so much no. There's a wide variety of what a woman can do with her muscles depending on what she decides to focus on. The fact that you're calling up Pro Wrestling as an example is actually pretty silly. Like the men, it's not an honest representation of variety. Why? Pro Wrestling is not a sport, it's an entertainment medium. They can work their body and be extensively physically fit, but not push it to the point where it becomes unattractive.
Therumancer said:
Likewise due to the way guys are structured a sumo-type regime can produce a very powerful if odd-looking physique that is functional for what it's intended for, a girl really isn't going to be able to support and function that way.
Possibly. I'd like you to support actual evidence of that first, before deciding it's so. After all, the Sumo profession in Japan is a man's profession and a man's sport. Japanese culture dictates certain behavior sets along with class and gender differentiations that would make it impossible for a woman to try to break into that field.
Women come in a wide range and variety of body types and builds just like men do, depending on genetics, eating habits, and work out types. Now, there is a certain build that is ascribed as "feminine perfection" which is pushed by the media. That includes a specific facial feature set.
Wait, this isn't one of those: this is why men are superior to women in terms of combat arguments is it?
Therumancer said:
Now in an ideal world, this wouldn't be true, but we don't live in one, and guys and girls have some substantial differances in our physical makeups. Men are simply more capable and varied physically, maxxing out much higher. This basic truth comes out in heroic fantasy.
Oh dear god... no. To argue what real women look like we're going to argue over what fantasy women look like? Fantasy women. Right.
Never mind that a large portion of fantasy literature is written as coming of age stories, which may in fact have absolutely nothing to do with the author deciding when they are planning on writing their character.
Therumancer said:
When it comes to the AGE of characters in video games, there is some truth to that, but again I think it comes down to reality and the way both genders age. Men tend to remain physically viable/imposing a lot longer than women for a lot of differant reasons.
Wait, what? I was actually going to try to argue with you seriously, but no. Not when you're using fantasy as a depiction for the way things are in real life. It's not. Yes, younger women are more flexible, no this does not mean they are in their prime. Women can remain extremely flexible a lot longer than men. The Olympics is based around the competition of non-professional athletes, not professional ones, and there are many, many, many women in their thirties and forties who are just as capable now as when they were in their prime. Some, in fact, are better.
Women have a higher pain tolerance than men. This is a known fact. Women have a lower center of gravity than men which means it's harder to knock them off their feet. Ask any professional and most will tell you: the toughest people to grapple with are the ones who are short. Women have a longer life expectancy than men. Women can be absolutely vicious in combat, I know, I've fought them. I've met women who were exceedingly rotund and still exceptionally capable fighters. She was also well into her thirties.
Basing your opinions of women, combat (because you are), and their bodies on fantasy or mass media or even the Olympics is only going to get you in trouble. There are many different sports out there and billions of women with many different body types, the vast majority of which are not presented as "ideal". Yes, they may seem similar but they really are different in fundamentally important ways. If you can't see why, then I really can't help you.