well they cant. anything physically demanding is automatically thrown out because dimorphism, this is arguably all sports because even ones that are not considered physical demanding (think chess or curling) are still grueling both physical and mentally when you get into tournament play. Men just cope with that much better. Sure maybe a women could get called up to the a certain pro league if a team goes through a freak string of like 10 injuries on a single position. Will a women ever be on a regular roster of a sports team? not unless that sports team is forced to or they are rent seeking.
The mental strain is too much, women cant detach from criticism as well as men. All them hormones.
Those examples are mostly examples because it gets guys rocks off, not because its actually good. Also female MMA will soon be dominated by trans man lol unless dana white is a big enough UHG CISSEXIST SHITLORD to stop it (see fallon fox)
There is space for womens sports though. For example I dont miss a womens curling event during the winter.
For fun watch this, its like hes wrestling his little sister or something. hes hardly putting in an effort.
lol.
wow you're right, I probably would get beat up by someone who has trained all their life to beat people up. You have shook my world view.
But actually I think rounda would have difficulty cracking the top 500 MMA fighters in her weightclass. Or she gets turned into a vegetable her first match.
You always have these funny fantasies about me getting beat up when we argue. I just guess thats how the limp wristed have to live.
Name one.
I dont think it would be much of an exchange. Sadly, im sure there are people who would support men vs women boxing. It would end up killing some poor girl.
As Ive said twice before, I don't advocate mixed sports where there is a lot of physical contact, my ronda rousey remark was mainly just a kiss-off response to your BS statement but she would still kick your butt and not break down and cry if you make a fist. Some of the reasons you gave to the subject are occasionally releveant admist all the typical misogynistic ignorance you continue to display, but if a women can pitch at a major league level or a LPGA golfer can compete in a men's league (the exceptions I have given more times before) you honestly think she should be automatically disqualified because her two x chromosones innately dictate that she will automatically break down in competition? I donno maybe my response is too emotional, must be all those hormones I have.
Edit: went a little far with that last paragraph, but Bong's continuously chauvinistic and snarky hate-filled "assertions" (more like homophobic & misogynistic ignorance dressed up as bogus faux-science, or his own brand of "truthiness") are becoming too much. Do you honestly talk to people like this in real life Bong?
Do you honestly talk to people like this in real life Bong?
i honestly picture bong in a smoke-filled room playing poker, e-cig dangling from his mouth, with a giant yellow and black flag on one wall and a framed copy of the First Amendment on another, chattering into the night with his friends about how the obvious conclusion of a utilitarian ethics is the elimination of all people who don't look and act like them. occasionally one or more of them will lose fingers to accidental discharges of their ankle-holstered handguns. when they get really wild, they'll go move the theory books they dislike at the local Barnes and Noble to the fiction section or go buy tickets to Adam Sandler movies as protest against the SJW-ification of Hollywood. so, in short, i believe he probably does.
source: i am unemotional, impartial, hyper-rational, hyper-intelligent, and completely 100% correct in everything i say because i, like bong, am a white male
anything physically demanding is automatically thrown out because dimorphism, this is arguably all sports because even ones that are not considered physical demanding (think chess or curling) are still grueling both physical and mentally when you get into tournament play. Men just cope with that much better.
While I do think the phenotypic difference between men and women supports having separate leagues, it does not follow that women cannot do physically demanding activities at all. There are women performing at an exceptional level in athletic competition all the time. There's a great example happening right now in fact.
i honestly picture bong in a smoke-filled room playing poker, e-cig dangling from his mouth, with a giant yellow and black flag on one wall and a framed copy of the First Amendment on another, chattering into the night with his friends about how the obvious conclusion of a utilitarian ethics is the elimination of all people who don't look and act like them. occasionally one or more of them will lose fingers to accidental discharges of their ankle-holstered handguns. when they get really wild, they'll go move the theory books they dislike at the local Barnes and Noble to the fiction section or go buy tickets to Adam Sandler movies as protest against the SJW-ification of Hollywood. so, in short, i believe he probably does.
Smoke-filled room? Sure. But he'd certainly be sitting alone, doing some selective reading of an anthropology book. _________________
Generally what zdwyatt said. Any sport which requires athletes to push their bodies to the extreme in order to be fastest/strongest/most powerful, would be dominated by men, and it's just fairer to women to have their own category. EVEN though the best female athletes would kick most average Joe's asses, and EVEN if some of them may even be good enough to compete amongst men.
The other question is about sports that don't require as much physical strength - the thing is, even though there is very little to prove that women wouldn't have the ability to compete on the same level as men in some of those sports - you don't have a lot of women who do, and in most of these sports, the competition is still split to male and female. Why is that? I asked myself this question a number of times as I've been playing competitive chess since I was a kid, and the competition is split according to genders since the youngest ages (under 10). Moreover women even get special female chess titles ("woman grandmaster" et al). But guess what, even before "them hormones" kick in, there's less girls playing chess, and the top girls are generally (consequently?) always worse than boys. This disparity carries on to the older categories, especially once the primary school finishes (over here at ages 14-15). When I was playing on the under 18 national championships in Slovenia, our category had about 15 boys competing, while the girls had maybe 4-5.
So, if there's an answer to the question why the girls/women in chess aren't on the same level as boys/men, you would have to first look into why there simply aren't as many girls that want to compete! I suppose it's kind of similar question to why BEA is such a sausage fest and the answer to both of these questions would probably have more to do with cultural and societal reasons than the hormone explanation that /pol/ bong is trying to push forward (even though I don't want claim there isn't absolutely nothing in the biological difference). The existence of female categories would in this case be more of a form of encouraging younger girls to consider a professional path in the sport. One of the better female chess players, Alexandra Kosteniuk wrote about this a while ago. I don't agree with everything, but it's worth reading. I wonder how much of this also translates to other "non-phsyically demanding sports"
And I know that bong most of all just wants to rile some people up again, but I think I'll respond to something anyway.
bongritsu wrote:
I doubt most women could cope with the pressure of actual professional sports, Even if they could compete at the same level.
Most people* cannot cope with pressure of professional sports. Even though in the sports that are based on physical ability, female athletes generally can't perform on the same level as male athletes, there's nothing to suggest that those on the top don't endure the same amount of mental stress as males, and don't have the same of pushing their bodies to the limit.
Re: "all them hormones", if that was the main reason for nale/female athletes disparity you'd generally assume there would be more mental breakdowns in female competition, that there would be more "ups and downs" in a career of an average female athlete compared to men's, that there would be more emotion shown in female competition, but is that really the case?
With all that said, there are some sports where women don't have their separate category, I'm thinking mainly in various forms of racing, and while again the female representation isn't great, there are some examples (Danica Patrick, Simona De Silvestro, several drag racers) which are pretty impressive, all things considered - especially as how racing has historically always been seen as a "male" activity. This I suppose the reason there's no female category but also ironically a rare platform where women can compete with men head to head on equal terms.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
