well to take your question a bit literally, men have quite a long history of being pressured into soldiering. First thing that hit my mind when i read your question: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_feather

You of course realize that this was the same kind of social conditioning and gender role pressure that the grandparent post is downplaying?

No, the grandparent post was saying that men were similarly influenced by societal pressures. It wasn't downplaying the societal pressure.

No one said they weren't. And then he called the statement sexist.

It's being used to downplay the original statement -- not add to it.

I was responding to varjag's post, which was saying that the grandparent post was downplaying the societal pressure, which it wasn't. It was a correction to that false statement.

The situation for the genders is asymmetric and so the effects of non-conformance have different outcomes. If I had to post an "all lives matter" argument in a thread about racism on blacks it would absolutely be downplaying racism, even if the statement is technically correct.

I am not familiar with this 'all lives matter' thing, so I will ignore that for the moment, it also seems to be off-topic.

Did you know that the effects of non-conformance have different outcomes with different people. You might say that is a useless thing to say, and you'd be right. Just as the non-explanation you put about genders and non-conformance is as well. And my post had nothing to say that it wasn't asymmetric, so your response was changing the subject.

The grandparent post you mentioned in your post before was asking for evidence before assuming that females were more susceptible to societal pressures, as that is playing to a stereotype. He suggested that it is wiser to take a neutral view. My post corrected you when you said that that post was trying to downplay the societal pressure, it wasn't.

Your response with the "all lives matter" sideshow is changing the argument again and is quite dishonest. Just like you misrepresented the "grandparent post".

I would like to mention my sympathies are with that lady, saying that it was here fault for not being rude is obnoxious. There is way too little being done about stalking and other repeated behaviours that aggregate to the detriment of someones life.

Just so you don't get me wrong.

How many women can physically dominate an average man?

Humans aren't averages. A randomly chosen woman will almost always have some fraction of men out there she can physically dominate. And some women are just plain tough and could physically impose on nearly all men. And yet men don't worry and walk faster when the woman they're alone with in the parking lot looks like she could bench a truck.

I'm not certain what your point was intended to be, but human men are far stronger than human women with very rare exception. A randomly chosen women is unlikely to be able to physically dominate any man at all, absent deformity. The difference is quite stark.

Certainly a highly trained female body builder is an exception, but they are also vanishingly rare in the population and very unlikely to be randomly chosen.

Sorry. This is one area that feminism doesn't cover with its hypothesis of equality.

I'm not sure what this whole chain of reasoning has to do with the argument at hand.

Most of the violence and rape committed to male victims has male perpetrators. Does it follow that most men can overpower an average man? Are feminists still to blame here?

Do we count the men she can get help using social leverage? One only needs to watch the videos of domestic violence experiments where they swap genders. The reactions show that while men might be able to win if they were isolated on an island, the total power within society is not in the man's favor. Unless you are in a culture which tolerates DV regardless of gender, in which case men do have it better.

like, with weapons or are those metaphysical, or surreal or why do you ask?