Ever thought about
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 4,985
From: Denver, CO
Well, the correlation is that as women grow competitively in the workplace, they have inherently taken up less physical space. They've gone from being physically strong to being physically diminutive.
In response to this, men have been required to present the strength or the appearance of strength to continue to be viewed as masculine, and therefore more competent than smaller male competitors. They've gone from physically average for their frame size to a good bit above average.
In response to this, men have been required to present the strength or the appearance of strength to continue to be viewed as masculine, and therefore more competent than smaller male competitors. They've gone from physically average for their frame size to a good bit above average.
Super Moderator
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 2,535
From: VA
Originally Posted by Sinful7' post='812602' date='Apr 7 2006, 12:37 PM
Well, the correlation is that as women grow competitively in the workplace, they have inherently taken up less physical space. They've gone from being physically strong to being physically diminutive.
In response to this, men have been required to present the strength or the appearance of strength to continue to be viewed as masculine, and therefore more competent than smaller male competitors. They've gone from physically average for their frame size to a good bit above average.
This phenomenon is so utterly complex that it could never be fairly summarized in just a few sentences. The various social and economic variables affecting physical stature in males and females could very well fill a book. Work habits, amount and use of leisure time, diet, genetics, social conventions, marketing influences, etc. etc. etc. Do the observed changes in physicality occur only in working women, or in those playing a more traditional role as homemaker as well? And why is it that so many top managers are weasely, scrawny twerps who ruthlessly excel in management as a way to compensate for their physical shortcomings?
Super Moderator
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 12,288
From: Amityville, New York
Originally Posted by Sinful7' post='812589' date='Apr 7 2006, 12:06 PM
It appears as though while women are migrating to a more equitable role in the corporate work environment, they have become physically smaller. Men, by contrast, have become more muscular and physically larger.
its ok to have a few chins
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
Originally Posted by 1988RedT2' post='812597' date='Apr 7 2006, 09:55 AM
I understand Napoleon was a little fella. Hitler too, I think.
napoleon was so small he built HUGE monuments, like the arc de triumph, it celebrates some small french military "victory"
Senior Member
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 22,465
From: California
Originally Posted by Sinful7' post='812977' date='Apr 9 2006, 08:39 PM
I just thought it was interesting. BTW, I found an educational video on the subject but it's $275. I wonder if the library lends DVD's?
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 2,467
From: Portland, OR
full figured women were considered attractive, goes back much further than the 1800s, lots of junk in the trunk and what have you
For some reason the ribcrackers of today are now the "attractive" ones. There is nothing more attractive than a woman that turns sideways and disappears. I wanna drive through LA, with a potato gun, shooting in-n-out burgers down the gullets of these skinny little bitches.
eat something and stop slammin dope!
For some reason the ribcrackers of today are now the "attractive" ones. There is nothing more attractive than a woman that turns sideways and disappears. I wanna drive through LA, with a potato gun, shooting in-n-out burgers down the gullets of these skinny little bitches.
eat something and stop slammin dope!
