Why yoga classes are mostly female

Jason Ashley Wright (tulsaworld.com, 5/30/11)

Misconceptions keep classes heavily female, instructors say
Despite the threat of tornadoes and hail, Jerry Lamp made it to yoga. Sirens started blaring by the time he made it out of class, padding barefoot from the studio to a bench at Inner Peace Yoga, 7718 E. 91st St., Tulsa, OK.

"I was in pretty rough shape when I started," Lamp said of himself when he started taking yoga in February 2010. "Blood pressure was through the roof. Just generally unhealthy."

Now, 15 pounds lighter with more muscle tone and greater flexibility, Lamp can't get enough of it. "I feel like a deadbeat if I don't do at least one set in a day," Lamp said. "It just keeps getting better."

Yes, he's heard the stereotypes and misconceptions about yoga that "It's for sissies," said Meghan Donnelly, Inner Peace's owner and instructor, who sat on the bench next to Lamp.



"That's a big misconception, that yoga is not manly," she said while we waited between classes, the next one at 8:30 p.m. with five or six guys in their 40s and 50s.

One who braved the storm was Mark Meese. "I always thought of yoga, before I started doing it, as something for women and little weird East Indian guys," said Meese, a general surgeon with Surgical Associates of Tulsa.

He knew yoga had a stigma. "Real men wouldn't do that," he said.

Funny thing is, men invented yoga, Donnelly said -- in India, as many as 3,000, even 4,000 years ago. It's only been in the past few centuries, maybe even as recently as 100 years, that women have been allowed to practice it in public.

In the 1960s and '70s, when yoga started growing in America, most teachers were male, Donnelly said. Now, most are women. And most of those taking classes are female -- 70 percent of her classes. More

• Yoga for Men at Tejas Yoga, Chicago
• No Rapture, No Surprise
  
• Amy Poehler speaks at Harvard graduation

Male Genital Mutilation must be banned!

Wisdom Quarterly (COMMENTARY)

• BreakTheIllusion.com: Foreskin Poll

Circumcision (Male Genital Mutilation or the removal of the most sensitive part of a man's body, equivalent to the female's clitoris) should not be performed on helpless children using either religious, moral, or even preposterous medical excuses.

Who can believe that Mother Nature, Evolution, a Creator God, or naga geneticists accidentally left this small bit of protective skin on males?

What a wonderful thing that it is available for adults to choose if they buy the medical industry's scare tactics, self-interested studies, or line of reasoning. But to force it on males out of fear or our own discomfort with human sexuality and even direct mention of sex organs and erogenous zones.

If our protective sheaths were left in place, we might preserve sensitivity and not be prone to excess. And what is the real reason for excising a very special type of ultra sensitive skin? Jewish-Christian religious nonsense -- yet nowhere do biblical sources say to mutilate infants. That is simply an expedient means of fulfilling another command.

Fortunately, San Francisco and Santa Monica have the foresight to pass legislation in favor of common sense and against religiously sponsored elective surgery. Is it all simply an aesthetic thing by now? If so, the Western world will soon get used to the natural look. The current look will still be on full view with every erection and from those who fearfully opt for surgery.

• Male circumcision opponents propose ballot measure in Santa Monica: A group called MGM Bill wants to make it illegal in Santa Monica to perform a circumcision, even for religious reasons, on minors. The group placed a similar measure on the Nov. 2011 ballot in San Francisco. Performing a circumcision on a boy under age 18 -- even for religious reasons -- would be illegal under a measure that a San Diego group hopes to place on Santa Monica's November 2012 ballot. A similar initiative this month from the anti-circumcision group known as MGM Bill garnered enough signatures in San Francisco to place it on that city's November ballot. MGM stands for "male genital mutilation."
• San Francisco could ban male circumcision: A controversial new measure could make it onto the ballot in San Francisco in November: city resident Lloyd Schofield says that he's "on track" to gain enough signatures for his proposed measure, which would make it illegal to perform circumcision on males below the age of 18. The act would be a misdemeanor carrying a $1,000 fine. Schofield is claiming that this is a human rights issue, in part because the city has already made female circumcision illegal. Needless to say, it has angered some San Francisco residents. The Anti-Defamation League, the local Jewish Community Relations Council, the Board of Rabbis of Northern California, and the American Jewish Committee condemned the measure, saying that they were "deeply troubled by this initiative, which would interfere with the rights of parents to make religious decisions for their own families." More
• VIDEO: Davey Wavey goes in search of his foreskin
• VIDEO: Traditional tribal circumcision
• VIDEO: Mom says no to circumcision
• VIDEO: TSA unveils new genital visualizers
• Ampio premature ejaculation drug shows promise
  (Reuters) Ampio Pharmaceuticals Inc. said its drug to treat premature ejaculation showed statistically significant results in a late-stage trial in Europe. The drug, called Zertane, is taken as needed before sexual activity and is not required to be taken on a daily basis.