Where Biology Ends & Sexism Begins

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-Jm7IaNebUtc/UBktm-iunjI/AAAAAAAADv4/e4bpXBpZPbc/s1600/wimp1.png

"Though he does not stop to trouble himself with the problem for long, Straus makes a few remarks in the attempt to explain this "remarkable difference." Since the difference is observed at such an early age, he says, it seems to be "the manifestation of a biological, not an acquired, difference" [p. 157]. He is somewhat at a loss, however, to specify the source of the difference. Since the feminine style of throwing is observed in young children, it cannot result from the development of the breast. Straus (1966) provides further evidence against the breast by pointing out that "it seems certain" that the Amazons, who cut off their right breast, "threw a ball just like our Betty's, Mary's and Susan's" [p. 158]. Having thus dismissed the breast, Straus considers the weaker muscle power of the girl as an explanation of the difference, but concludes that the girl should be expected to compensate for such relative weakness with the added preparation of reaching around and back. Straus explains the difference in style of throwing by referring to a "feminine attitude" in relation to the world and to space. The difference for him is biologically based, but he denies that it is specifically anatomical."
-Irish Marion Young, Throwing Like a Girl, page 138

Anyone who has ever read a Cosmopolitan or a Seventeen magazine has probably stumbled across an article that announces to the reader all the Differences Between Men and Women, written by a Very Important Person With Credentials So You May Actually Believe Their BS. Even if you have never ventured into this section of Barnes and Noble before, you have probably heard these myths being announced somewhere else, whether it be in an pseudo-academic text or a Facebook post. Many people have been convinced that men are from Mars, women are from Venus, and that the two will never be able to understand each other because their differences span the length of the Milky Way. All astronomical references aside, it is absolutely vital for the sake of feminism that one understands these myths as myths, with no legitimate facts to back any of them up.

Physically speaking, men and women are indeed different. This is not a lie. What do boys have that girls don't? A penis and the rest of the male reproductive system. Girls also have their own unique reproductive system, one that is able to grow and sustain human life. These are the basic differences that should be celebrated: men are able to impregnate women with their parts, and in turn women are able to bring a child into existence with their own.

When Straus tries to cite biological differences between boys and girls as the reason their athletic capabilities are supposedly unequal, his logic falls through. He has nothing substantial to back up his claims because before puberty, few anatomical differences keep boys and girls divided, and the ones that do will not have an impact on their ability to perform in sports. If the biological difference is not anatomically based, then what is it exactly? Is there a genetic component that has an effect on one's physical capabilities as a result of their genitalia? Are estrogen and other "feminine" hormones the cause of this? I may not be anything close to being a biology expert, but a little common sense helps me draw the conclusion that neither of their theories are true.

I once read a quote somewhere that said something along the lines of, "The easiest way to insult a man is to call him a woman." Judging by the way we treat women and men with what are considered womanly features and characteristics, their is validity in this idea. Throwing like a girl is a quick and easy way to throw a man under the bus, because God forbid a man be anything less than a raging ball of testosterone and aggression. Athletic men, the ones that I have come to know at least, live in a strange world that goes back and forth between 50s style blatant misogyny and enlightened sexism. They fear being called a sissy and go out of their ways to prove themselves as manly to everyone around them. I see their self-esteem falter as they struggle with their identity as a man. They don't quite understand how to define manhood in their own terms, which leaves them feeling uncertain and disillusioned. As a result, many are prone to strictly adhering to hypermasculine norms in order to be able to fit in somewhere; not necessarily because they agree with it, but because they feel like they have to. When the other option is to be insulted and degraded for their femininity, this is hands down the more preferable route to go. None of this can justify misogyny in sports, but it easily explains the roots in the attitudes in behaviors.

When people attempt to find significant differences in men and women, it allows the patriarchy to flourish. Keeping the two sexes in separate categories allows for us to remain divided and unequal; simply closing the gap between the two would allow milestones of accomplishments to be had in feminism, but our culture's inability to let go of these gender binary rules makes it difficult, borderline impossible, for any progress to occur. Where biology ends and sexism begins, a culture of binary norms keeps the oppressor strong and the oppressed subordinate, allowing these hypermasculine men to continue benefiting from this system.