[motohagiography]

> Are you implying that because women can do the same thing as men today that it somehow devalues men doing the same work? That because the same work can be done by a woman, that the work now no longer provides any dignity?

Specifically, while women are absolutely athletic, a man who competes with women does not get status or dignity for it among other men, or arguably among women either. My original statement has a logical direction your comment reversed.

It's not when women can do the same things that diminishes the status of an activity for men, it's when women do the things men do to demonstrate the activity is not a source of masculine status to them that diminishes the dignity of it. Examples would be things like crossfit, skydiving, dog training, yoga, horsemanship, archery, and other formerly manful activities that are no longer competencies that confer masculine status.

The article was about men doing difficult things together as a way to develop personally and form relationships. It included a criticism based on an assumption that the way women communicate in their friendships was applicable to how men actually relate, and this assumed it's meaningful for men to be held to feminine standards of communication. I'm saying we're different. The article was matronly and not constructive to men finding ways to relate to one another.