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?