> The company is currently focused on drawing in women, in large part because they are the primary drivers of lifestyle fitness.
Am I the only one who sees the term "bro" as disparaging? If not, why disparage men who lift by calling them "bros" but women who keep fit "women"? If the article called women "babes" or some "bro" equivalent, people would take the writer to task.
This bias against masculinity has spread as women and femininity have become more prominent and powerful in society.
The feminine attitude is opposite the masculine in many respects, so it's natural that the two would dislike one another and come into conflict.
As our society shifts to one in which the feminine is embraced rather than rejected, and the masculine continues to be seen as a menace to society, it's considered more acceptable to mock "bros" than a female or feminine equivalent.
Edit: both the feminine and masculine aspects of personality have their strengths and weaknesses. Neither is really better than the other in some objective sense. Different situations call for different attitudes.
I could buy this except for the fact that I think there are a lot of "masculine men" who aren't "bros". The word "bro" brings to mind specific (negative) traits of anti-intellectualism, party hard mentalities, and rudeness.
I appreciate the road to metric can be unsettling to the holdouts, but this doesn't feel like a good way to do it.
I'd argue it would be better described as 1 gram protein to 500gm (half a kilo) of body mass. That's actually a ratio, in the sense it can then be written simply as 1:500.
You could translate that to US imperial as the ratio 0.032:16 -- assuming ounces all the way down, of course. Convenient!
Microbloits to the parsec, football fields to the ocean, grams to the pound -- these are all just whacky to most people.
Babe is not a bro equivalent, and here you can see plenty of men who lift using the term: