> The whole implication is that "girly = bad" which is sexist, and then you have guys who are going to be emasculated if they enjoy a "girly" thing which is also sexist.
Cars are designed with specific genders in mind.[0][1][2]
I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing, but it is. The linked articles come to some conclusions as to why.
Also please note that no one made the 'girly=bad' assertion but you.
> Also please note that no one made the 'girly=bad' assertion but you.
It was implicitly made. They dislike the Bolt's look so described it as "girly" (using the term as a negative). So unless you're claiming that they meant "girly" as a compliment, my point stands.
If they didn't mean "girly=bad" then their entire statement makes no sense. It only makes sense if they meant it negatively.
Cars are designed with specific genders in mind.[0][1][2]
I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing, but it is. The linked articles come to some conclusions as to why.
Also please note that no one made the 'girly=bad' assertion but you.
[0]: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2012-02-02/hormones-f...
[1]: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ohim/womens/chap6.pdf
[2]: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/10077069/Designing-cars-...