yeah it's interesting that a girl toddler wearing jeans and a spiderman t shirt is so much more socially acceptable than a boy toddler wearing a party dress.
re this:
Sometimes men simply have to be role models.
Because his son likes to wear skirts Nils Pickert started with it as well. After all, the little one needs a role model. And he thinks long skirts with elastic bands suit him quite well anyways. A story about two misfits in the Province of southern Germany.
My five year old son likes to wear dresses. In Berlin Kreuzberg that alone would be enough to get into conversation with other parents. Is it wise or ridiculous? „Neither one nor the other!“ I still want to shout back at them. But sadly they can’t hear me any more. Because by now I live in a small town in South Germany. Not even a hundred thousand inhabitants, very traditional, very religious. Plainly motherland. Here the partiality of my son are not only a subject for parents, they are a town wide issue. And I did my bit for that to happen.
Yes, I’m one of those dads, that try to raise their children equal. I’m not one of those academic daddies that ramble about gender equality during their studies and then, as soon as a child’s in the house, still relapse into those fluffy gender roles: He’s finding fulfilment in his carrier and she’s doing the rest.
Thus I am, I know that by now, part of the minority that makes a fool of themselves from time to time. Out of conviction.
In my case that’s because I didn’t want to talk my son into not wearing dresses and skirts. He didn’t make friends in doing that in Berlin already and after a lot of contemplation I had only one option left: To broaden my shoulders for my little buddy and dress in a skirt myself. After all you can’t expect a child at pre-school age to have the same ability to assert themselves as an adult. Completely without role model. And so I became that role model.
We already had skirt and dress days back then during mild Kreuzbergian weather. And I think long skirts with elastic bands suit me quite well anyways. Dresses are a bit more difficult. There was either no reaction of the people in Berlin or it was positive. They’re used to spacy people. In my small town in the south of Germany that’s a little bit different.
Being all stressed out, because of the moving I forgot to notify the nursery-school teachers to have an eye on my boy not being laughed at because of his fondness of dresses and skirts. Shortly after moving he didn’t dare to go to nursery-school wearing a skirt or a dress any more. And looking at me with big eyes he asked: “Daddy, when are you going to wear a skirt again?”
To this very day I’m thankful for that women, that stared at us on the street until she ran face first into a street light. My son was roaring with laugher. And the next day he fished out a dress from the depth of his wardrobe. At first only for the weekend. Later also for nursery-school.
And what’s the little guy doing by now? He’s painting his fingernails. He thinks it looks pretty on my nails, too. He’s simply smiling, when other boys ( and it’s nearly always boys) want to make fun of him and says: “You only don’t dare to wear skirts and dresses because your dads don’t dare to either.” That’s how broad his own shoulders have become by now. And all thanks to daddy in a skirt.
I don't even have a son and I think I'm going to start wearing skirts. It's like sweatpants without the hassle. I don't know what i've been doing all this time NOT wearing long skirts. =P
0
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
Oh lord. Please don't try to compare women's suffrage with there being insurmountable physical differences in men and women that make certain sports noncompetitive for one side.
Not going to use this thread to continue this particular discussion, but my opinion remains that there aren't going to be 230 pound women with 8% body fat playing in the NFL any time soon, not unless they figure out some miracle way that doesn't include a needle to start producing a man's level of testosterone as a teenager.
Joshmvii on
+2
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
Oh lord. Please don't try to compare women's suffrage with there being insurmountable physical differences in men and women that make certain sports noncompetitive for one side.
what I'm comparing
is the idea, long held, that women's different brains make them unsuitable for working in particular intellectual roles, more suited to working in the home, unable to comprehend government in a capacity which would allow them to have a meaningful reason to vote.
It seems to me like a pretty valid comparison.
One last thing, before I shut my mouth and let people have different opinions:
Imagine a ~150(or less) pound woman trying to block a 250 pound linebacker or even a 220 pound cornerback. She'd be thrown to the ground like a rag doll in an instant, if not outright injured.
Why would we ever imagine that situation? That is a ridiculous situation before gender even comes into it. Imagine a 150 pound (or less) man trying to block a 250 pound line backer. He also would likely be injured.
A female super heavyweight boxer would wipe the floor with a flyweight male boxer! It is an unfair comparison!
Women also have the capacity to get real big and swole and have amazing technique and be powerful, but most of them are denied the chance, more still have vastly different expectations put on them, and 100% of them have less incentive to do so.
KakodaimonosCode fondlerHelping the 1% get richerRegistered Userregular
With all the problems I've had with concussions and injuries from playing various high contact and combat sports, I'm not really keen on any of my current or future children playing any of them, regardless of sex.
Just to make my point clear, and then I'm really done.
I'm 100% in favor of women's athletics being completely on par with men's in terms of money, opportunity, and whatever else is holding them back. I'm 100% in favor of women playing on men's teams, and vice versa for that matter because why shouldn't a guy play field hockey, and I think it's plausible that women could hang with men up to and probably including major college sports.
But if we're talking about the major leagues of football, basketball, etc. where you're dealing with the .001% of all top level athletes, no, I don't think women can hang. I just don't. I'm sorry if in some peoples' view that makes me a sexist or a pessimist or a bad person.
Of course a woman's brain should never be considered less than a man's for the purpose of anything. But the potential of their muscle growth is a whole different thing. It's not like Sexual Dimorphism is a controversial topic. We're animals, and inside our species, males are bigger than females. Testosterone is a huge factor. To compete with 230 pound men who have 8 to 10% body fat, a woman needs to be that same size.
The problem is, women can't get that same size naturally. Do you think women should compete directly against men in MMA or boxing?
Remember the Fallon Fox controversy after she revealed she was transgender after her first 2 MMA fights that she won against women by brutal knockouts? That's a woman who had undergone years of hormone replacement therapy to neutralize some of the advantages she had as a man in terms of testosterone, but still her bone structure, larger hands, larger shoulder joints, etc. give her an advantage over female opponents.
I love watching Ronda Rousey fight, she's amazing. But I don't want to watch BJ Penn brutalize her because someone wants to think male and female athletes aren't physiologically different in major ways.
Oh lord. Please don't try to compare women's suffrage with there being insurmountable physical differences in men and women that make certain sports noncompetitive for one side.
what I'm comparing
is the idea, long held, that women's different brains make them unsuitable for working in particular intellectual roles, more suited to working in the home, unable to comprehend government in a capacity which would allow them to have a meaningful reason to vote.
It seems to me like a pretty valid comparison.
One last thing, before I shut my mouth and let people have different opinions:
Imagine a ~150(or less) pound woman trying to block a 250 pound linebacker or even a 220 pound cornerback. She'd be thrown to the ground like a rag doll in an instant, if not outright injured.
Why would we ever imagine that situation? That is a ridiculous situation before gender even comes into it. Imagine a 150 pound (or less) man trying to block a 250 pound line backer. He also would likely be injured.
A female super heavyweight boxer would wipe the floor with a flyweight male boxer! It is an unfair comparison!
Women also have the capacity to get real big and swole and have amazing technique and be powerful, but most of them are denied the chance, more still have vastly different expectations put on them, and 100% of them have less incentive to do so.
Comparing this to the Suffrage movement is asinine. The only other thing I'm gonna comment on in this tangent is that you're final statement is medically inaccurate. Maximum muscle mass of any individual is highly determined by testosterone levels. The football situation you're talking about isn't ridiculous because it's not fair to compare a smaller woman to a larger man. Even controlling for weight it's not a fair comparison. The men's Olympic weightlifting records at the lowest weight-class of 56kg are 137kg Snatch, 168kg C&J, and 305kg total. That beats the women's world records for every weight-class except the highest class of 75+kg. It doesn't make one gender "better" than the other. This isn't sexist, and it's not a value judgement. It's just a medical fact that women and men are physiologically different. And there's nothing wrong with that.
0
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
I love watching Ronda Rousey fight, she's amazing. But I don't want to watch BJ Penn brutalize her because someone wants to think male and female athletes aren't physiologically different in major ways.
BJ Penn would also brutalize a lesser skilled male fighter. But Rousey would be a pretty even match for that fighter. I think you're seriously misconstruing my intent. I do not think that the best female cruiserweight in the world should fight the best male cruiserweight just for equality's sake. I think she should be given the chance to fight an equally matched male fighter, just like is already the case in male/female competitions.
Seriously, there is hours of footage on youtube of intergender MMA with women dominating. Their higher level of skill, fitness, technique, tactics etc etc etc overcome their lower brute strength.
Also, reminder that were Rousey to fight Penn, she would not die, she would not be permenantly injured, the fight would be won and stopped just like normal fights. Just because your male instinct to protect the pretty lady from being beaten up is pushing through doesn't mean she shouldn't be given that chance if she earns it.
Speaking of sex differences, I am looking forward to raising a daughter. I hear they are easier than having sons, and while my son is a good kid, oh boy is he lazy.
MulysaSempronius on
If that's all there is my friends, then let's keep dancing
Speaking of sex differences, I am looking forward to raising a daughter. I hear they are easier than having sons, and while my son is a good kid, oh boy is he lazy.
I've heard that it swings depending on age. Every parent I've talked to has pretty much agree that raising young boys is more challenging than young girls, but once they hit puberty that flips the other way around. No idea how accurate that it. Anecdotal evidence. Etc.
+1
#pipeCocky Stride, Musky odoursPope of Chili TownRegistered Userregular
Sorry for gumming up the thread, dudes.
I do not disagree that men are physiologically stronger than women, I just do not believe that should be a valid reason for denying them the chance to compete on whatever level they're able and aiming higher than they're allowed.
Yea, I've always heard it the other way around. Often with colorful anecdotes that I won't bother repeating.
I think the basic takeaway is that individual variance will completely dominate any possible bias in "difficulty of raising a child" along gender lines.
I love watching Ronda Rousey fight, she's amazing. But I don't want to watch BJ Penn brutalize her because someone wants to think male and female athletes aren't physiologically different in major ways.
BJ Penn would also brutalize a lesser skilled male fighter. But Rousey would be a pretty even match for that fighter. I think you're seriously misconstruing my intent. I do not think that the best female cruiserweight in the world should fight the best male cruiserweight just for equality's sake. I think she should be given the chance to fight an equally matched male fighter, just like is already the case in male/female competitions.
Seriously, there is hours of footage on youtube of intergender MMA with women dominating. Their higher level of skill, fitness, technique, tactics etc etc etc overcome their lower brute strength.
Also, reminder that were Rousey to fight Penn, she would not die, she would not be permenantly injured, the fight would be won and stopped just like normal fights. Just because your male instinct to protect the pretty lady from being beaten up is pushing through doesn't mean she shouldn't be given that chance if she earns it.
Don't project on me. This has nothing to do with trying to protect women, and everything to do with not wanting to see people who have no chance of competing because of biology put with competitors they simply can't match up to.
Here's a video of Fallon Fox's 39 second knockout of Erika Newsome. She put her out with a brutal knee to the head that most likely has some lasting damage. Go to about 0:45 in the video. That's a man who's had years of hormone replacement therapy to diminish the raw advantage a man has against a woman. Now imagine a man with normal test levels. The fight wouldn't even last that long, and yes, people can get badly injured in MMA. You don't always get to tap out. Sometimes a striker just puts your lights out, and it's just not fair to put people up against competition who outclass them due to biology.
Rousey is a UFC champion. She's the best of the best of female UFC fighters. So if what you're saying is "I think the best female UFC fighter might be able to compete against a crappy male fighter but not a good one," then I think that's the same thing as saying she shouldn't be competing in the men's divisions. When you compete in MMA, you're trying to fight the best to prove you're the best. So I doubt Rousey wants to just fight some random crappy guy who she could out technique but not fight an equally skilled man who would dominate her.
I mean, Rousey said herself she would fight Fallon Fox but she'd know going in to it that Fox would have an advantage, not in hormones(hormone therapy) plus they check their test levels, but Fox has the bone structure and hand size of a man. Rousey herself isn't interested in fighting against male UFC fighters, because she understands that she'd have no chance against them because of biology.
I don't think there should be explicit rules in men's sports saying women can't compete in them by the way. I really don't. In fact, I don't even know that the NFL and other sports even have such a rule right now. It's just that no woman would try to get on an NFL roster because it'd be impossible. Women have tried and succeeded to get on college football teams. If I recall, it was maybe Colorado who had a woman who place kicked for them I think? But she'd never make it in the NFL. She'd never have the leg strength to kick a 55 yard field goal, no matter how hard she worked.
The problem too is once you open the door that way, you open the door for some male athlete who isn't quite good enough to make it to the NBA but could dominate the WNBA deciding he wants a chance to play in that league. And if he does it, he ruins the competitive balance of that league.
Speaking of sex differences, I am looking forward to raising a daughter. I hear they are easier than having sons, and while my son is a good kid, oh boy is he lazy.
I've heard that it swings depending on age. Every parent I've talked to has pretty much agree that raising young boys is more challenging than young girls, but once they hit puberty that flips the other way around. No idea how accurate that it. Anecdotal evidence. Etc.
Counterpoint: I was a model child as a young boy. Absolutely horrible as a teenage boy. I like to think I've evened out in the time that has followed.
Also, counterpoint to my counterpoint: Our girl is seeming to be 10x easier to handle than our friend's boy who is about a year older and my sister-in-law's boy who is 9 months older. So we get to see how this plays out pretty closely here.
Triple counterpoint: All kids are great, except when they aren't!
I do not disagree that men are physiologically stronger than women, I just do not believe that should be a valid reason for denying them the chance to compete on whatever level they're able and aiming higher than they're allowed.
Well shit, you could have started with this and we could have all saved some time and gotten beers.
0
Quoththe RavenMiami, FL FOR REALRegistered Userregular
Side point. Field hockey is played by both groups down here. Throughout school and into professional levels.
Coworker just had her new nephew born! Such a cutie! And he gets an Ahava blanket too!
I am totally reaping the benefits right now of the resurgence of knitting/crochet culture in our age group. This kid has so many awesome blankets/hats.
lonelyahavaCall me Ahava ~~She/Her~~Move to New ZealandRegistered Userregular
My old manager has had his first child, and I'd been working on things for him since he told us that his wife was pregnant. Mom and Baby are still with her family in India. But the 9 months has seen me finish up a blanket for the baby, with 3 matching beanies, a shawl for his wife, and a little bath bag complete with a small washcloth.
I've got an entire storage container full of baby things that I make 'just because' and on the off chance that somebody I know will have a baby and I can give them something.
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, ModeratorMod Emeritus
edited May 2014
We don't really know any knitters or crocheters to make my son blankets, so he hasn't had that.
ceres on
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
Of all the euphemisms for female anatomy that's the worst
+3
ceresWhen the last moon is cast over the last star of morningAnd the future has past without even a last desperate warningRegistered User, ModeratorMod Emeritus
?
And it seems like all is dying, and would leave the world to mourn
+1
FortyTwostrongest man in the world The Land of Pleasant Living Registered Userregular
Posts
I don't even have a son and I think I'm going to start wearing skirts. It's like sweatpants without the hassle. I don't know what i've been doing all this time NOT wearing long skirts. =P
give it time.
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
...Because Sex is a distinction imposed by Nature which precludes Man and Woman from playing similar sports equally well.
what I'm comparing
is the idea, long held, that women's different brains make them unsuitable for working in particular intellectual roles, more suited to working in the home, unable to comprehend government in a capacity which would allow them to have a meaningful reason to vote.
It seems to me like a pretty valid comparison.
One last thing, before I shut my mouth and let people have different opinions:
Why would we ever imagine that situation? That is a ridiculous situation before gender even comes into it. Imagine a 150 pound (or less) man trying to block a 250 pound line backer. He also would likely be injured.
A female super heavyweight boxer would wipe the floor with a flyweight male boxer! It is an unfair comparison!
Women also have the capacity to get real big and swole and have amazing technique and be powerful, but most of them are denied the chance, more still have vastly different expectations put on them, and 100% of them have less incentive to do so.
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
I'm 100% in favor of women's athletics being completely on par with men's in terms of money, opportunity, and whatever else is holding them back. I'm 100% in favor of women playing on men's teams, and vice versa for that matter because why shouldn't a guy play field hockey, and I think it's plausible that women could hang with men up to and probably including major college sports.
But if we're talking about the major leagues of football, basketball, etc. where you're dealing with the .001% of all top level athletes, no, I don't think women can hang. I just don't. I'm sorry if in some peoples' view that makes me a sexist or a pessimist or a bad person.
The problem is, women can't get that same size naturally. Do you think women should compete directly against men in MMA or boxing?
Remember the Fallon Fox controversy after she revealed she was transgender after her first 2 MMA fights that she won against women by brutal knockouts? That's a woman who had undergone years of hormone replacement therapy to neutralize some of the advantages she had as a man in terms of testosterone, but still her bone structure, larger hands, larger shoulder joints, etc. give her an advantage over female opponents.
I love watching Ronda Rousey fight, she's amazing. But I don't want to watch BJ Penn brutalize her because someone wants to think male and female athletes aren't physiologically different in major ways.
Comparing this to the Suffrage movement is asinine. The only other thing I'm gonna comment on in this tangent is that you're final statement is medically inaccurate. Maximum muscle mass of any individual is highly determined by testosterone levels. The football situation you're talking about isn't ridiculous because it's not fair to compare a smaller woman to a larger man. Even controlling for weight it's not a fair comparison. The men's Olympic weightlifting records at the lowest weight-class of 56kg are 137kg Snatch, 168kg C&J, and 305kg total. That beats the women's world records for every weight-class except the highest class of 75+kg. It doesn't make one gender "better" than the other. This isn't sexist, and it's not a value judgement. It's just a medical fact that women and men are physiologically different. And there's nothing wrong with that.
I want them to be given the chance, absolutely.
BJ Penn would also brutalize a lesser skilled male fighter. But Rousey would be a pretty even match for that fighter. I think you're seriously misconstruing my intent. I do not think that the best female cruiserweight in the world should fight the best male cruiserweight just for equality's sake. I think she should be given the chance to fight an equally matched male fighter, just like is already the case in male/female competitions.
Seriously, there is hours of footage on youtube of intergender MMA with women dominating. Their higher level of skill, fitness, technique, tactics etc etc etc overcome their lower brute strength.
Also, reminder that were Rousey to fight Penn, she would not die, she would not be permenantly injured, the fight would be won and stopped just like normal fights. Just because your male instinct to protect the pretty lady from being beaten up is pushing through doesn't mean she shouldn't be given that chance if she earns it.
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
I've heard that it swings depending on age. Every parent I've talked to has pretty much agree that raising young boys is more challenging than young girls, but once they hit puberty that flips the other way around. No idea how accurate that it. Anecdotal evidence. Etc.
I do not disagree that men are physiologically stronger than women, I just do not believe that should be a valid reason for denying them the chance to compete on whatever level they're able and aiming higher than they're allowed.
Need some stuff designed or printed? I can help with that.
I think the basic takeaway is that individual variance will completely dominate any possible bias in "difficulty of raising a child" along gender lines.
Don't project on me. This has nothing to do with trying to protect women, and everything to do with not wanting to see people who have no chance of competing because of biology put with competitors they simply can't match up to.
Here's a video of Fallon Fox's 39 second knockout of Erika Newsome. She put her out with a brutal knee to the head that most likely has some lasting damage. Go to about 0:45 in the video. That's a man who's had years of hormone replacement therapy to diminish the raw advantage a man has against a woman. Now imagine a man with normal test levels. The fight wouldn't even last that long, and yes, people can get badly injured in MMA. You don't always get to tap out. Sometimes a striker just puts your lights out, and it's just not fair to put people up against competition who outclass them due to biology.
Rousey is a UFC champion. She's the best of the best of female UFC fighters. So if what you're saying is "I think the best female UFC fighter might be able to compete against a crappy male fighter but not a good one," then I think that's the same thing as saying she shouldn't be competing in the men's divisions. When you compete in MMA, you're trying to fight the best to prove you're the best. So I doubt Rousey wants to just fight some random crappy guy who she could out technique but not fight an equally skilled man who would dominate her.
I mean, Rousey said herself she would fight Fallon Fox but she'd know going in to it that Fox would have an advantage, not in hormones(hormone therapy) plus they check their test levels, but Fox has the bone structure and hand size of a man. Rousey herself isn't interested in fighting against male UFC fighters, because she understands that she'd have no chance against them because of biology.
The problem too is once you open the door that way, you open the door for some male athlete who isn't quite good enough to make it to the NBA but could dominate the WNBA deciding he wants a chance to play in that league. And if he does it, he ruins the competitive balance of that league.
Counterpoint: I was a model child as a young boy. Absolutely horrible as a teenage boy. I like to think I've evened out in the time that has followed.
Also, counterpoint to my counterpoint: Our girl is seeming to be 10x easier to handle than our friend's boy who is about a year older and my sister-in-law's boy who is 9 months older. So we get to see how this plays out pretty closely here.
Triple counterpoint: All kids are great, except when they aren't!
Well shit, you could have started with this and we could have all saved some time and gotten beers.
Coworker just had her new nephew born! Such a cutie! And he gets an Ahava blanket too!
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
I am totally reaping the benefits right now of the resurgence of knitting/crochet culture in our age group. This kid has so many awesome blankets/hats.
Steam ID: Obos Vent: Obos
I've got an entire storage container full of baby things that I make 'just because' and on the off chance that somebody I know will have a baby and I can give them something.
Democrats Abroad! || Vote From Abroad
You should try taking up crochet yourself, most people I know who try it for a while just get hooked.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube
Heyooooo!
Guess what Internet?
I am having a baby!
The wife and I have successfully reproduced!
Fortytwo's blog about fatherhood, life, and everything.
Well, about 13 weeks ago!
Fortytwo's blog about fatherhood, life, and everything.
Of all the euphemisms for female anatomy that's the worst
?
Fortytwo's blog about fatherhood, life, and everything.
Mmm... meat pie.
twitch.tv/Taramoor
@TaramoorPlays
Taramoor on Youtube