Originally Posted by
Reynolds
Just the opposite, I don't question the human part but the "nature" part. I don't believe there's something inherent to being human, except for our great ability to adapt - that is, not having an unchangeable "nature".
We used to debate "nature vs. nurture," but every day the case becomes so much stronger for nature that I can't believe anyone would doubt this. Every day there are discoveries of our genetics and what they determine for us, how nature has set us up to be this or that. How can anyone seriously deny this?
Originally Posted by
trigger
The one thing that hasn't been mentioned is that overwhelmingly professional sports and mass media outlets (TV, radio, magazines etc) are owned by Men. (followed by the usual, admittedly accurate, complaints about this situation). and...
The decision to participate is not simply one of choice either. You participate in the sexually based marketing or, in many cases, you don't participate in the sport. Or at least you participate with much less support, funding etc.
More accurately, you chose to do so or you don't participate in the sport and media that men have created for other men. But last time I checked, women were free to develop their own media outlets and sport leagues and so on. And last I checked, it was fairly well accepted that women have the abilities to do such things just as well as men do. Therefore, it's kind of silly for women to complain about the way men have chosen to set up their sports and media. If it doesn't suit you, if anything in society doesn't suit you, then simply get to work and create something new. That's what men did after all, right?
In other words, women can't both argue that they are as capable as men and argue that they need men to take it easy on them. It's either one or the other. I prefer to believe the former and so don't particularly like the latter because of what it does to undermine the notion of how intelligent and strong women are.