Sexism is a blade that can swing both ways, cutting the fighter as well as the bearer. Its tiring to have people shoving what they believe a woman should be down your throat, be they male or female. Me, I think I'd just as soon not buy into it, thanks. I figure, the people you train with are the only ones who matter in this debate, if they treat you well then that's all that is important.
What your sensei said was ridiculous. There's no need to say "ladies." In my school when there are newer or weaker students in the class, the teacher makes no mention of gender, he justs tells the class to "do what they can, go on your knees if you have to." There are some male students that can't do real pushups either. I think the use of the word "athletic" is a bit problematic here. No doubt, men are naturally more muscular and have a natural advantage in many sports, but athletic implys all sports. It could be said that women have a natural advantage over men in sports that rely more on being flexible and limber. I'd take Katarina Witt over Brian Boitano easy
One note on push ups from knees: There is an arguement that they are better for women to do because of anotomical weight distributions. Knee pushups, from my understanding, reduce the stress on the lower back for women. I tend to do them for the same reason (as my lower back for a variety of reasons can't support too much weight). The trick is to then go for higher repitition. In our school we'd rather have people do push ups from their knees correctly then full out ones incorrectly. - Matt
If your abs are pretty strong do you still have to worry about damaging the low back? I've had some low back problems before, (not since I made my stomach all nice and strong) now you've got me all worried
I have a word for that, but I can't post it because it would only appear in asterisks, and it would get me kicked off the site. I know, really ****es me off. There are just as many crap males as crap females, but only the crap females get slated for it.
Tell me what would be the difference as far as the fitness requirement if say a person did 20 full body pushups and someone with a bad back did 50 knee pushups. I think as long as you give 100% all the time and keep inproving that’s all that matters.
Look. Outside of a scifi novel where alien hive-women keep half nude men as slaves in their womanly plutionium mines, there is no "reverse sexism". First of all, sexism has no negative of itself. You're either sexist or you're not. It's not a particle with a corresponding antiparticle. Second of all, pretty much every man i've ever met who complains about feminism "going too far" is a bitter, "nice guys finish last", mysoginist, dong gobbler.
Look. First of all, sexism does have a negative of itself. It is used to mean discrimination in the direction opposite to the more common or original direction. Similar concept with racism. It's not my fault you don't read enough. Google, motherfizzle http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=reverse+sexism Secondly, I'm not every man you ever met, and I bet there has been a lot of them, hasn't there? And why all the "sodomic" imagery. Why do you want to be talking about dongs all the time? Well, as they say, "fishermen talk about fish".
That doesn't make "reverse sexism" a viable or even grammatically useful concept. It's like "anti-grappling", an attempt to introduce a third answer into what is essentially a binary question: Are you or are you not sexist? One can no more be "reverse sexist" than one can "anti-grapple" or "anti-strike". My goodness. ::Scarlet points out that my overtly homoerotic posts are, indeed, overtly homoerotic.:: ::He is promptly dragged into a hot tub by fourty, well-oiled latinos::
There are many phrases in the english language which don't make gramatical or logical sense. They are usually called idiomatic expressions. If you don't like the term, I suggest you take it up with the academics who decided to start using it. Magnitude, and direction, motherfizzle. :love: :love:
OK Scarlet Mist- As we live in a capitalist society, and money = power etc. one could say that all political equality movements are at their core about monetary equality or class equality. For example, even though the black civil rights movement has made great strides in terms of social acceptance etc. here in the US, african americans are still at a dramatic class disadvantage to european americans, so there is still a lot of work to be done. The same is true for women: even though we can now vote and work etc. the average female wage is still only slightly more than 2/3 of the average male wage, and this might be for the same position at the same company (I've witnessed this myself) Feminism is an attempt to combat the institutionialized discrimination that women encounter on a regular basis. Feminism is not reverse sexism. Reverse sexism would be some moron on the street saying "I hate you cuz you're an evil man." That's not feminism at all. Here is a quote from the first site that came up on google for "reverse sexism" http://thunder.prohosting.com/~tlennon/Sexism.html "These forms of sexism begins early in childhood. A boy's crying is tolerated less then a girls. They are told to take discipline "like a man." They are called sissies or pansies if they happen to like dolls, play with too many girls or hurt themselves. They don't get the attention or hugs as readily as girls do when they are upset or in pain. If a mother dresses a little boy in a skirt, someone is likely to call the local asylum to have her put away; however, if she dresses her little girl in pants, a baseball cap and tennis shoes, nobody will think twice." Feminists are as against this form of social discrimination as anybody, if not more so. The gender binary responsible for this social inequality is the same reason women face political and economic inequality. It's interesting to note that the boys described above are "discrimated" against because they are "feminized" or girly. So in essence, it's still about discrimination of women! Imagine that.
IMO I think a good fighter is simply a good fighter. I would have to say the one with the better strategy is the winner. Its not nessessarly the stronger, more skillful or most flexible people who win, its the ones who can use these attributes, aswell as whatever else is around them, during the situation to there advantage. Just an oppinion ~Pest
Agreed. No one deserves to be discriminated against and just because it is women who have a history of being discriminated against, does not mean they have the right to do the same to men, that only makes them just as bad. Equality for everyone.
In response to DMH's post, Women might actually be making more than men in many positions, and the figures regarding the 2/3 difference are really misleading, they're basically comparing all bachelors degrees to each other i. e. teacher vs engineer, and comparing pay. Anyways, you might or might not agree, but nevertheless you might find the information on the following links interesting: http://counsellingresource.com/features/archives/2005/politics/men-earn-more http://www.bankrate.com/nsc/news/career/20050307a1.asp
Yes, it is a lot more complex than the 70% figure, but I do think it's safe to say that single women have in general a tougher time financially than single men. But recent trends have more women going to college and receive graduate degrees than men (at least in the US, even though they're mostly going for those "worthless" liberal arts degrees) so things are a changin'. Admitedly, I have an axe to grind with a former employer and their starting wages (I made the mistake of asking several employees their starting and current wages and found a rather large gender discrepency, right in line with the 70% figure, I would have been happier if I hadn't known) In response to those articles, you also have to look at why women choose the "softer" and less money driven careers that they do, society still (although less and less) encourages women to go towards the liberal arts etc. And also, why on earth should an elementary teacher be paid less than that of a prison guard? Granted, working in a prison is dangerous, but in terms of society's needs, I'd say a teacher is more vital.
With one, the person in the job risks death, at the other, the worst you really expect is to be driven crazy by your kids. The associated risks is what I'd say causes the difference combined with how many are willing to do the job, I dare say you have quite a few more people who are willing to teach children than guard criminals etc. I've known several people who've come out of that line of work, and they are by no means eager to go back. As for your experience, I'd say that's unfortunate and certainly not right, but I think that's an exception rather than a rule. Personally, I've never actually seen a situation like yours or even really similar. Well, is it any comfort knowing that the scales are probably balanced out to the tune of over 36billion in payments to women each year by men? That is a low estimate of the amount paid out each year in child support by guys who have no children. Edit to add: As far a societal needs relating to pay, which does society need more, a Police officer or a Baseball player?
Fair enough, point taken I'd love a world in which top atheletes are paid on par with police and fire fighters etc. (or maybe less). Unfortunately I myself will never be able to "benefit" from child support payments (said with evil grin) so I'll just have to figure out how to make it on my own. I should add too that society has changed a lot in the 10 years since I was in high school. I was actually prevented from taking a wood shop class, believe it or not. Girls today are being encouraged to go into the more "masculine" fields, but I didn't find that to be the case when I was younger.
One thing that definately doesn't help is male exihibitionism. A lot of guys at my dojo actually get dressed on the stage in front of everyone. If you are not a secure person it is hard to feel good about being a girl in a male dominated environment and especially so when they show off. I remember when we were all early belts and our sensei was trying to show us exactly where to hit when you aim for someone's solar plexus, and he pulled open his jacket and stuck his fingers in between his abdominal muscles. It was disturbing, no other word for it. Like when a baby plays with his body with no regard for everyone else's awareness. Except that's appropriate. When a grown man does it, it's disgusting, arrogant obscenity with a hint of domination. Like how I would imagine a sexual offender to act. Another example is when I used to have a severe problem with tension and he was trying to teach me to be conscious of it and relax my body more. He went and stood in front of one of the seniors like he was going to fight him, took off his jacket and let his stomach wall relax so that his gut stuck out convexly, and said 'You can be like this when you're fighting, you don't have to be all tensed up.' This was rather recent though, after I had gone through the process of seeing role models like Milla Jovovich and Carrie Anne Moss and thinking 'What do I have to feel inferior about?' so I treated this piece of exhibitionism with idle contempt instead of taking it seriously. But you have to be kind of 'secure' to do that, and not everyone is. Hell, I wasn't for a while.
Don't know if I get what you're saying shotokan warrior. Is your sensei really fat and ugly? Naw, I do understand what you're saying, but unless he was being lewd or crass about it, I think he may have had to take off his top to make a point. Can't see much through a gi. Now if he was sighing and rubbing his stomach or something, that would have been really disturbing. If you're that uncomfortable with his behavior though, you maybe should find a new teacher. I've only been made to feel uncomfortable by a man once at my current school, he disappeared pretty soon after, and it was nothing too bad, just "I'm really strong, grrrr" kind of stuff. Oh, and Milla Jovovich is hot. Edit: If this is a kid's class or he's constantly taking his shirt off in front of a particular student, or just female students, that would be really inappropriate. The context of this is really important.
