2007-03-11 17:18:33 · 10 answers · asked by K B 2 in Sports ➔ Wrestling
In absolute terms, all other things being equal--height, weight, and lean muscle/body fat ratios especially--yes, this is technically true, a woman does have on average 50% more of her body's muscle mass in her legs and lower torso than a man of the same size and musculature would.
But...all things are *almost never* so equal. A man in good physical shape has around 4-6% body fat...a woman with body fat this low is endangering her health and ability to have children in the long run, and your average female athlete does good to get her body fat percentage down to the 8-10% range. Also consider that men on average have *ten to twenty times* as much serum testosterone in their bodies as women of the same weight do. This means men are *much more* pre-disposed to developing muscle *anywhere*, upper body and lower body too, than women are.
I'm not being sexist here, I am just trying to state clear biological facts. We know that women rarely if *ever* have as much lean muscle on a pound-for-pound basis as a man does at the same height and weight. And we also know that most women just *don't* end up as tall or as heavy as most men, especially in athletic endeavors.
Think it isn't so? Ask yourself this one.....how many wrestlers/sports entertainers in WWE have measured five feet, two inches tall in height? How many? I can name two, one man, one woman.
Stacy Keibler stood 5'2" and weighed all of 105 pounds.
Rey Mysterio stands the same height, gets his weight announced at 155, but has gone into the ring as heavy as 175.
Would Keibler stand any chance of having the same leg strength as Mysterio? I sincerely doubt it.
Trust me, even if the woman in question had a slight weight advantage over the guy, she'd still have to fight dirty to *keep up*, a lot of that is just ordinary male biology for you....
(well, that and the strength-intensive nature of wrestling, be it staged entertainment or otherwise...other competitive sports have separate weight classes and men's/women's divisions for a good reason....in most cases women just don't have the muscle mass to keep up, sorry)
So yeah, I'd just say it was hype, kafaybe, all about moving a *story* forward more than anything (a female David versus a male Goliath perhaps?).
2007-03-11 17:39:20 · answer #1 · answered by Bradley P 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
I think I may be wrong but women ware hi heels using the muscles in there legs not to loose balance so there lower body is stronger
2007-03-12 17:24:01 · answer #2 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
If she's an abolute expert on Muay Thai, then yes. That technique and style is one of the most powerful of all kicks.
2007-03-12 00:27:15 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nooo... But if she kicks a guy in the right "spot" her legs don't have to be stronger than a man's! :)
2007-03-12 00:26:51 · answer #4 · answered by Joseph, II 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I think they are makeing a joke about the fact, after sex mean go weak in the knees, It's the Samson syndrom.
2007-03-12 00:27:27 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
yes..men are stronger with their upper bodies, and women with their lower bodies. it's the way we were designed...of course cause of child birth reasons..
2007-03-12 00:26:35 · answer #6 · answered by avie 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
no, but women's center of gravity is lower, so maybe that has something to do with it
2007-03-12 00:21:56 · answer #7 · answered by annc 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
maybe if it's chyna but she's kinda a man, it's all about skill anyways
2007-03-12 00:25:59 · answer #8 · answered by zaroo21 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
NO!
But they can kick you in groin!
2007-03-12 00:20:36 · answer #9 · answered by Triple H 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
no
2007-03-12 00:24:45 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋