@greasyshoes
Oh. I see. I mean development squads, grass roots looking for girls, women to participate. I mean the ACE style funding, I mean everything from 5 - 20 years old that is different now than it was say 50 years ago. I mean EVERYTHING in and out of sport that has become more equitable between men and women, boys and girls.
While it may have become "more equitable", I think this is misleading because obviously sport for girl's does not receive the same funding or attention, and girl's aren't pushed to do sport the same way boys are. As a boy, I was pushed to play football, and do physical activity. I never saw girls being pushed the same way. And despite that, there are loads of women who are physically far stronger than I am. That can only mean biology is a small part of it.
Oh! The logic leaps continued!
Look, greasy whilst you obviously think that is all fine and dandy you are still ignoring the obvious. Lots of girls are stronger than boys? Yes. Individual comparisons allow you to make all sorts of statements that are true but do not represent the whole cohort. This strong girls, those weak boys would either be a mismatch or would be statistical outliers.
Do you not think that scientific investigation is a tad more involved than "I know a girl who was stronger than me"?
Like the Williams sisters. They are a lot stronger and faster than many men. Yet when against men who have trained the very same skill sets, are their make equivalent, they will lose. And we all know why.
That you are arguing that grass is pink doesn't make an inherent, innate truth from existing.
You supposed clever statements only serve to illustrate your simplicity of thought, lack of critical thinking.