Do feminists admit men are physically stronger than women

Question

i think it is a fact though there must be some exceptions such as a bodybuilder woman and a stick skinny small man. anyway why can't they deny that argument about physical strength even though there are machines and weapons invented and extensively utilized by all men and women, which doesn't make the physical strength special and advantageous anymore?

I might sound shallow, but I personally think it's now the money or education that determines who's more powerful in this post modern, high-tech society.

Answer 1

Yeah, I can't say I've ever seen a feminist claim otherwise, either. They'd use the physical difference to back up the idea that male-on-female violence needs to be taken seriously - not that female-on-male violence ISN'T serious, but the average unarmed man is capable of doing far more harm to an average unarmed woman than vice versa.

And while most men are not violent towards women, I think that many don't realise that women grow up being afraid of this - that if they were attacked by a man they wouldn't be capable of fighting back. Women aren't free to walk around, say at night, without fear in the same way a man is - a physically fit man, anyway. It is actually one source of the defensiveness you see in some of the angrier feminists who take this fear out on all men - not that that makes it right, but it's one of the reasons for it.

But of course, as you say, physical power isn't the only kind of power and women are commonly quite adept at mental manipulation.