G.L.Piggy [at] gmail.com
Error: Twitter did not respond. Please wait a few minutes and refresh this page.
1. Why women can’t do pull-ups. Jezebel embraces these findings and argues that it doesn’t really matter anyway because pull-ups are a social construct invented to perpetuate the patriarchy. A better way to look at this, as one would look at exercise in general whether it be strength training or mile time, is to seek to improve your number of reps compared to where you started. A pull up is a good test of a whole host of muscles that are functionally important and also make you look good when they’re well exercised. If you can do 1 pull up at time A, then being able to perform 10 pull ups at time B indicates vast improvement. You’ll probably also be more fit overall. If you can’t do a hang pull without help, there is a machine that lets you offset weight. It assists your pull ups. Like any other exercise in the gym, increasing your reps at a given weight or decreasing the support overall is an indication that you’re improving a very key bodily component. So because women suck at pull-ups doesn’t mean that the entire exercise is worthless and not a good indicator of fitness. As for using fitness tests in school, kids quickly figure out who is the most physically gifted, strongest, and fastest of their peers. The Presidential fitness test is mostly redundant.
Update: Gawker’s pipsqueak fitness guru Hamilton Nolan comes through and obliterates his sister site’s anti pull up post by telling women that they too can do pull ups if they just try really, really hard. He makes a similar argument to the one laid out above except he sounds like he thinks he’s an expert about it which should be expected when you’re the in-house exercise guy at a website largely visited by cat ladies and fanbois of cat ladies.
2. Audacious Epigone compiles information on the economic success of immigrants in the U.S. He also discusses the bubble from within which pro-immigration academics ignore the full impact of immigration down at the bottom end of the economic/cultural ladder (h/t Heartiste):
Open borders apologists like Russ Roberts and Tyler Cowen don’t cross paths with a large swath the socioeconomic spectrum, though. They don’t experience poverty firsthand in any capacity, so discerning difference in poverty rates is an exclusively academic exercise for them. They do spend more time with those in the upper echelons than the average layperson does, however. And in these circles, immigrants are overrepresented.
3. UConn women’s basketball coach Geno Auriemma believes that lowering the rim would increase scoring in the sport and lead to increased attendance. A Slate writer disagrees and thinks that because the infrastructure favoring men’s rules already exist (10 foot rims are everywhere except the pee-wee leagues), this would crowd girls out of the game. Seems like she’s missing an opportunity for Title IX. A nine foot rim in every school. In reality though the only thing that could possibly lead to a marked improvement in attendance to women’s basketball would be a complete revamp of uniforms and an improvement in the overall attractiveness of the players.
I think in the full spirit of egalitarianism, though, that feminists should mandate that men’s hoops should be raised to 12 feet.
4. The NFL will use pink referee’s flags after an 11 year-old kid sent a handwritten letter to NFL commissioner Roger Goodell. This world is empty.
5. Christina Hoff Sommers on the latest research from the American Association of University Women which addresses the gender pay gap.
7. A reminder that Warren Buffett is just like the rest.