ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags cycling , LGBT issues , Rachel McKinnon , sports incidents , sports issues , transgender incidents , transgender issues

Reply
Old 17th October 2018, 12:49 PM   #161
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,485
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because historically women weren't allowed to participate in the newly organised sports because of the cultural and societal values of the time, women who wanted to participate in sport were forced to participate only with one another.

We still see the result of this discrimination today with female versions of even professional sports being much less popular than the male versions, the prize purses being substantially lower and so on.
Female sports are often less popular because female competitors just aren't as good as the male competitors (for example, NBA vs. WNBA). The male version is more exciting because of the higher skill level. The money involved is generally lower for women because the fan base is generally smaller. Neither of these factors has anything to do with past historical discrimination. You could describe the preference of viewers for male competitors as present discrimination, but people have every right to prefer whatever the hell they want to, and preferring better competitors to less good competitors is entirely reasonable.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 12:54 PM   #162
luchog
Neo-Post-Retro-Revivalist
 
luchog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 15,594
Originally Posted by Cavemonster View Post
And then we get to the psychological effects. While people can indeed be very excited to be the best in tier 12, it's certain to dim enthusiasm if that's the best fully half the population can hope for. We're all aware that sex segregated sports exist because men and women aren't competing at the same level, but quantifying exactly how much lower the women's level is, and identifying the levels they can reasonably compete in by labels that specify how much lower they are then the top is going to seriously kill the excitement.

That isn't really an artifact of the sport, but of culture, and Anglo-American culture not really valuing women in sports. As has been noted by myself and others, women's sports at any tier are overall nowhere near as popular as men's sports even at lower tiers, they don't have the exposure, money, or popular acclaim that the upper tiers of men's sports have, and likely never will without huge changes to the culture.

In the US at least, men's collegiate sports are much more popular, and bigger business, than their professional female equivalents. Continued segregation isn't really going to change that.

The problems with a mixed-gender tier system are not notable worse than the current female sporting ghetto, and may actually improve things a bit by allowing the best female athletes into the higher tiers dominated by men.

As a matter of full disclosure, I'm not particularly a fan of professional sports as a whole, sport should be more participatory, and less spectacle.
__________________
"All opinions are not equal. Some are a very great deal more robust, sophisticated and well supported in logic and argument than others." -- Douglas Adams
"The absence of evidence might indeed not be evidence of absence, but it's a pretty good start." -- PhantomWolf
"Let's see the buggers figure that one out." - John Lennon
luchog is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 01:12 PM   #163
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,485
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
That isn't really an artifact of the sport, but of culture, and Anglo-American culture not really valuing women in sports.
I see zero evidence to support the contention that a preference for men's sports over women's is in any way peculiar to Anglo-American culture.

Quote:
As has been noted by myself and others, women's sports at any tier are overall nowhere near as popular as men's sports even at lower tiers, they don't have the exposure, money, or popular acclaim that the upper tiers of men's sports have, and likely never will without huge changes to the culture.
Given that male competitors are just plain better in general, and thus a competition between top male players is just more exciting than a competition between top female players for the same reason that a top tier male competition is more exciting than a lower tier male competition, the change you seem to want is... unlikely. The fact that we even have professional female athletes at all is basically an artifact of lots of people actually preferring female players over male players on the basis of sex rather than talent.

Quote:
In the US at least, men's collegiate sports are much more popular, and bigger business, than their professional female equivalents.
In many cases, the men's collegiate sports competitors are simply better than the women's professional female equivalents. The US women's soccer team regularly scrimmages against highschool teams for practice, because even at the highschool level the boys are competitive against the women. This isn't even mentioning the additional popularity that collegiate team sports such as football and basketball get because they feed players into the men's professional sport.

Quote:
The problems with a mixed-gender tier system are not notable worse than the current female sporting ghetto, and may actually improve things a bit by allowing the best female athletes into the higher tiers dominated by men.
That's fanciful thinking.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 01:39 PM   #164
xjx388
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,994
Originally Posted by TragicMonkey View Post
I think I understand. For reasons of fairness, rules should be made to ensure people have an equal chance at winning. Intervention should be made to prevent accidents of nature from creating unfair advantage that would prevent whole classes of people from achieving success. A certain number of contests should only be open to classes of people so they have the opportunity to win one, even if the winners are not the best in the overall field. The competitions are too important to many people to leave unregulated and at the mercy of chance and the unfeeling happenstance of nature. Is that right?






I'm just wondering why those precepts should apply to sporting events but not to politics or the economy. Sports should be regulated heavily but not businesses. Women should make up a certain number of bicycle race championships but not political office or CEOs. Fairness demands compensating for nature in racing but affirmative action is unjust. Bicycle racing is important but everything else can be left to chance and market forces. Fairness is a principle for games but nothing else.
Men have no inherent biological advantage over women in the economy or politics. Men have systemic advantages in that the barrier to entry is artificially limited by irrational biases. "Women don't have leadership skills." "Women aren't good at math and science." ******** like that.

A woman will never make it in the NBA. Skill for skill, ability to ability, a woman simply cannot out -jump, -maneuver or -muscle a male competitor in that sport. Oh sure, a female professional basketball player can surely beat the average joe like me, but not the average male professional basketball player. I can't think of any sport where men and women can compete on equal footing. Maybe car racing, but that isn't so dependent on pure athletic skill.

So to answer your question, because sport is relatively unimportant, we are OK with "separate but equal" tiers of competition for men and women. But in the economy and politics, which are extremely important, we are generally not OK with continuing the long tradition of effectively preventing women from competing on equal footing.
__________________
Hello.
xjx388 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 02:18 PM   #165
Brainster
Penultimate Amazing
 
Brainster's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 16,564
Originally Posted by luchog View Post
In the US at least, men's collegiate sports are much more popular, and bigger business, than their professional female equivalents. Continued segregation isn't really going to change that.
Desegregation is going to end women's sports. If enough men decide they want to play on the LPGA tour, or women's tennis, they will start to dominate and you can kiss those sports goodbye. Some of the advantages are already cooked into an adult male--he is taller and heavier than most women. Even if you take the testosterone away, he's going to have big advantages. And if you don't take it away, fuggedaboutit.
__________________
My new blog: Recent Reads.
1960s Comic Book Nostalgia
Visit the Screw Loose Change blog.
Brainster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 02:41 PM   #166
angrysoba
Philosophile
 
angrysoba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Osaka, Japan
Posts: 25,063
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because historically women weren't allowed to participate in the newly organised sports because of the cultural and societal values of the time, women who wanted to participate in sport were forced to participate only with one another.

We still see the result of this discrimination today with female versions of even professional sports being much less popular than the male versions, the prize purses being substantially lower and so on.
So let’s combine them. What kind of prize money do you think Serena Williams would get in that situation?
__________________
"The thief and the murderer follow nature just as much as the philanthropist. Cosmic evolution may teach us how the good and the evil tendencies of man may have come about; but, in itself, it is incompetent to furnish any better reason why what we call good is preferable to what we call evil than we had before."

"Evolution and Ethics" T.H. Huxley (1893)
angrysoba is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 03:03 PM   #167
Meadmaker
Penultimate Amazing
 
Meadmaker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 19,110
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
That's fanciful thinking.
I'm not sure "fancifiul" is the right word to describe it.

I'm also not sure "thinking" is the right word to describe it.



One of the things I've noticed over the years of debating this sort of thing is that anyone willing to entertain the notion of desegregated sports seems to not be a sports fan. People who actually like sports, either as spectators or participants, seem to think that men and women should compete separately, and there is overwhelming support for biological males to be confined to men's divisions.
Meadmaker is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 07:14 PM   #168
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,264
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because historically women weren't allowed to participate in the newly organised sports because of the cultural and societal values of the time, women who wanted to participate in sport were forced to participate only with one another.

We still see the result of this discrimination today with female versions of even professional sports being much less popular than the male versions, the prize purses being substantially lower and so on.
Wow, seriously, just wow.

I remember back in the day when the people on this board seemed a bit slanted this way or that, but we were still all JREF. Didnt really always see eye to eye on the latest politics, but at least valued critical thinking.

Now it just looks like an echo chamber
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 07:31 PM   #169
citizenzen
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,454
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Wow, seriously, just wow.

I remember back in the day when the people on this board seemed a bit slanted this way or that, but we were still all JREF. Didnt really always see eye to eye on the latest politics, but at least valued critical thinking.

Now it just looks like an echo chamber

But you didn’t addressed his argument. You just complained about it.

And I have no idea how it fits into the echo chamber.

Could you please help me understand why that post made you so sad?
citizenzen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 07:57 PM   #170
Ziggurat
Penultimate Amazing
 
Ziggurat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Posts: 43,485
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
But you didn’t addressed his argument. You just complained about it.

And I have no idea how it fits into the echo chamber.

Could you please help me understand why that post made you so sad?
I can't speak for pipelineaudio, but I addressed some big problems with Darat's post quite directly in post 161.
__________________
"As long as it is admitted that the law may be diverted from its true purpose -- that it may violate property instead of protecting it -- then everyone will want to participate in making the law, either to protect himself against plunder or to use it for plunder. Political questions will always be prejudicial, dominant, and all-absorbing. There will be fighting at the door of the Legislative Palace, and the struggle within will be no less furious." - Bastiat, The Law
Ziggurat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 08:22 PM   #171
Cain
Straussian
 
Cain's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Los Angeles
Posts: 12,846
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Wow, seriously, just wow.

I remember back in the day when the people on this board seemed a bit slanted this way or that, but we were still all JREF. Didnt really always see eye to eye on the latest politics, but at least valued critical thinking.

Now it just looks like an echo chamber
This.
__________________
April 13th, 2018:
Ranb: I can't think of anything useful you contributed to a thread in the last few years.
Cain is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 09:02 PM   #172
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,264
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
But you didn’t addressed his argument. You just complained about it.

And I have no idea how it fits into the echo chamber.

Could you please help me understand why that post made you so sad?
The factual issues with it were addressed by others. What makes me so sad is that ten years ago, we would have seen creationists react in such a predictably scripted, NPC manner. Its like we didn't learn from our fight with them, except to steal all their tactics.
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 09:39 PM   #173
BrooklynBaby
Muse
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 842
This is one of the absolutely dumbest things the left has ever embraced, and that includes mountains of dumb. I mean, the left has absolutely no bottom.
BrooklynBaby is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 10:12 PM   #174
citizenzen
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,454
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
The factual issues with it were addressed by others. What makes me so sad is that ten years ago, we would have seen creationists react in such a predictably scripted, NPC manner. Its like we didn't learn from our fight with them, except to steal all their tactics.

Huh. I thought Darat had a valid point. It’s certainly not the only basis for what we see today, but it shouldn’t be dismissed as mere echo chamber.

Maybe you guys just have too much history between you.
citizenzen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 10:13 PM   #175
Venom
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: United States
Posts: 2,487
Originally Posted by BrooklynBaby View Post
This is one of the absolutely dumbest things the left has ever embraced, and that includes mountains of dumb. I mean, the left has absolutely no bottom.
Venom is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 10:19 PM   #176
pipelineaudio
Illuminator
 
pipelineaudio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,264
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Huh. I thought Darat had a valid point. It’s certainly not the only basis for what we see today, but it shouldn’t be dismissed as mere echo chamber.

Maybe you guys just have too much history between you.
Darat is someone I have looked up to for years. I really, really didn't expect the Standard Narrative response that I could have picked for myself were I making a strawman of someone....Its just not Darat

People have just gotten too insanely polarized I think...We all just need to go to the beach for a while
__________________
Don't fear the REAPER, embrace it
pipelineaudio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 11:08 PM   #177
River
Illuminator
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 4,962
Originally Posted by Cain View Post
This.
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Wow, seriously, just wow.

I remember back in the day when the people on this board seemed a bit slanted this way or that, but we were still all JREF. Didnt really always see eye to eye on the latest politics, but at least valued critical thinking.

Now it just looks like an echo chamber
+1
Now it's a SJW haven when it used to be a critical thinking hub. IMHO
__________________
"I've seen more Bigfoot creatures than Mountain Lions and Wolves combined here in KY." ― ChrisBFRPKY

"I've observed 1 creature eating bark from a pine tree and enjoying like it was cotton candy." ― ChrisBFRPKY
River is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 11:57 PM   #178
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by angrysoba View Post
So let’s combine them. What kind of prize money do you think Serena Williams would get in that situation?
You seem to have missed the context of my post. I was explaining when and why the initial segregation occurred. The history of the segregation is a fact regardless of the situation today.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 11:58 PM   #179
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Wow, seriously, just wow.

I remember back in the day when the people on this board seemed a bit slanted this way or that, but we were still all JREF. Didnt really always see eye to eye on the latest politics, but at least valued critical thinking.

Now it just looks like an echo chamber
Eh? Did you not know the history of the segregation of the newly founded sports bodies like the FA?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 17th October 2018, 11:59 PM   #180
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Ziggurat View Post
I can't speak for pipelineaudio, but I addressed some big problems with Darat's post quite directly in post 161.
The problem with a historical fact?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 12:02 AM   #181
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post
Huh. I thought Darat had a valid point. It’s certainly not the only basis for what we see today, but it shouldn’t be dismissed as mere echo chamber.

Maybe you guys just have too much history between you.
I think it shows that people sometimes read what they want into a post regardless of what the poat actually said!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 12:05 AM   #182
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Darat is someone I have looked up to for years. I really, really didn't expect the Standard Narrative response that I could have picked for myself were I making a strawman of someone....Its just not Darat

People have just gotten too insanely polarized I think...We all just need to go to the beach for a while
I would suggest you reread my post, you seem to be for whatever reason adding your biases into what I posted. Look into the founding of the FA if you want to see an example. The historic fact is that women were excluded when the professional bodies began because of the societal and cultural views of women back then. That can't be changed until we have time travel.

ETA: this is the official FA site and their official history: http://www.thefa.com/womens-girls-football/history

A key quote "The FA banned women’s football from its clubs’ grounds but its view that football was ‘quite unsuitable for females’ changed towards the end of the 1960s."
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you

Last edited by Darat; 18th October 2018 at 12:10 AM.
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 12:24 AM   #183
3point14
Pi
 
3point14's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 17,747
Originally Posted by pipelineaudio View Post
Wow, seriously, just wow.

I remember back in the day when the people on this board seemed a bit slanted this way or that, but we were still all JREF. Didnt really always see eye to eye on the latest politics, but at least valued critical thinking.

Now it just looks like an echo chamber


I'm really, really struggling with your reaction here. I really want to know what you think you read. Just going through it:



Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because historically women weren't allowed to participate in the newly organised sports
I'm fairly sure this is true

Quote:
because of the cultural and societal values of the time, women who wanted to participate in sport were forced to participate only with one another.
I'm fairly sure this is accurate

Quote:
We still see the result of this discrimination today
Fairly sure this is true.

Quote:
with female versions of even professional sports being much less popular than the male versions, the prize purses being substantially lower and so on.
I'm also fairly sure this is true.




Which bit are you railing at? Hell, which bit do you think is "SJW" opinion rather than simple reporting on past and present.


I can't even see which bit you're taking issue with because nowhere in it does it say "Therefore we should all do X".

There's literally no politics in that post. Perhaps you think it's revisionist?
__________________
Up the River!

Anyone that wraps themselves in the Union Flag and also lives in tax exile is a [redacted]
3point14 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 02:49 AM   #184
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Because historically women weren't allowed to participate in the newly organised sports because of the cultural and societal values of the time, women who wanted to participate in sport were forced to participate only with one another.

We still see the result of this discrimination today with female versions of even professional sports being much less popular than the male versions, the prize purses being substantially lower and so on.


No, it's been explained before in this very thread why women have their own categories, and it isn't because we hate women. It's in fact the opposite: we want them to be able to win.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 02:57 AM   #185
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by xjx388 View Post
Men have no inherent biological advantage over women in the economy or politics.
That we know of.

Originally Posted by Darat View Post
You seem to have missed the context of my post. I was explaining when and why the initial segregation occurred. The history of the segregation is a fact regardless of the situation today.
But even if you're correct, we would've segregated the sexes anyway because of the actual reason they're segregated now.

Originally Posted by 3point14 View Post
Which bit are you railing at?
I'd think it was the part where Darat claimed that segregation now is due to segregation then. See above.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 03:00 AM   #186
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,110
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
No, it's been explained before in this very thread why women have their own categories, and it isn't because we hate women. It's in fact the opposite: we want them to be able to win.
Historically, I'm not sure that's true; typically men's events have not in general been open to women, even in those rare instances where a woman was able to beat the best men. It has become a means of allowing women to compete in events they have a reasonable change of winning - at least, I'm reasonably sure that's what it is now - but I don't think that's how it started.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:06 AM   #187
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8d02120248.jpg

No, it's been explained before in this very thread why women have their own categories, and it isn't because we hate women. It's in fact the opposite: we want them to be able to win.
Provided an example using the FA above that supports what I stated. Ignore the actual facts if you wish.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:06 AM   #188
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...8d02120248.jpg

No, it's been explained before in this very thread why women have their own categories, and it isn't because we hate women. It's in fact the opposite: we want them to be able to win.
Who ever said that or anything even resembling that?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:11 AM   #189
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Who ever said that or anything even resembling that?
Are you familiar with the concept of hyperbole?

Quote:
Ignore the actual facts if you wish.
You don't get to twist facts to your advantage. That women were not allowed in sports has nothing to do with the current segregation of the sexes. It's been explained over and over that allowing women to compete with men would essentially kill female participation in sports. The smart thing to do is to keep them separate.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:15 AM   #190
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
Historically, I'm not sure that's true; typically men's events have not in general been open to women, even in those rare instances where a woman was able to beat the best men. It has become a means of allowing women to compete in events they have a reasonable change of winning - at least, I'm reasonably sure that's what it is now - but I don't think that's how it started.

Dave
As the FA put it football was ‘quite unsuitable for females’.

Despite of course it being very popular and very successful for a couple of decades before the FA in effect banned it because football was ‘quite unsuitable for females’.

I am quite surprised that people don't know how the segregation of sporting events arose. Thought it was quite common knowledge. We can go even further back in time to the original Olympiades to see the same segregation based on what society at the time considered suitable and unsuitable for women.

These are simply historical facts, I really do not understand why people have become so emotional, almost hysterical about having these facts pointed out.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:21 AM   #191
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
I am quite surprised that people don't know how the segregation of sporting events arose.
No you're not. You know exactly what you're doing.

My question was about why women and men compete separately NOW. Your response had nothing to do with that, because we're not then, we're now. Plus, you're only broadly and 'technically' correct about the history.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:21 AM   #192
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Are you familiar with the concept of hyperbole?
You can't ignore over a hundred years of history (or even thousands) because you don't like the facts. Well you can but it is a tad silly.
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You don't get to twist facts to your advantage.
Goodness knows what you are going on about, twist what and to what advantage?


Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
That women were not allowed in sports has nothing to do with the current segregation of the sexes.
Yes it does, as it is where the segregation began, again ignore history if you want but it is a tad silly to do so. Goodness me are you unaware of the modern controversy to have women admitted as full members in some golf clubs, cricket organisations and so on? Hard to practice your sport when you aren't allowed on a green or pitch.
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
It's been explained over and over that allowing women to compete with men would essentially kill female participation in sports. The smart thing to do is to keep them separate.
You do know that has nothing at all to do with what I have posted?
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you

Last edited by Darat; 18th October 2018 at 04:22 AM. Reason: what what no want
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:28 AM   #193
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
No you're not. You know exactly what you're doing.

My question was about why women and men compete separately NOW. Your response had nothing to do with that, because we're not then, we're now. Plus, you're only broadly and 'technically' correct about the history.
Yet it does as it helps explain the current situation regarding the lesser popularity of female sports even at professional levels and so on and we have examples from the likes of the cricket and golf clubs showing how that attitude prevails to modern times.

And I am fine with being technically right or as it is usually called: being right.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:32 AM   #194
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
You can't ignore over a hundred years of history (or even thousands) because you don't like the facts.
Stay OUT OF MY HEAD!

Seriously, I've told you exactly why your post was wrong and irrelevant. Why do you now pretend like the reason is completely different?

Quote:
You do know that has nothing at all to do with what I have posted?
It has everything to do with it, since your initial reply was to this:

Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
TM, in an effort to bring things back to the topic, do you understand why women and men don't usually compete against one another in sports?
The question isn't "Why weren't women and men competing together a thousand years ago." The question was the above. It was about why segregation exists NOW. The answer to the question is what you now say has nothing to do with what you posted even though what you posted was in response to the same question.

You're tying yourself in knots, here.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:37 AM   #195
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Yet it does as it helps explain the current situation regarding the lesser popularity of female sports even at professional levels and so on and we have examples from the likes of the cricket and golf clubs showing how that attitude prevails to modern times.
Are you contending that female sports are less popular because, in some distant past, we didn't 'allow' women to compete? Don't you think it might instead have something to do with the fact that women just aren't as good in those sports as men? And that's the very same reason why they have their own category.

Quote:
And I am fine with being technically right or as it is usually called: being right.
That's pretty terrible and sad motivation for anything: find something to be technically right about, even if it's otherwise wrong, and then defend that to the death.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 04:57 AM   #196
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 86,250
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Are you contending that female sports are less popular because, in some distant past, we didn't 'allow' women to compete? Don't you think it might instead have something to do with the fact that women just aren't as good in those sports as men? And that's the very same reason why they have their own category.



That's pretty terrible and sad motivation for anything: find something to be technically right about, even if it's otherwise wrong, and then defend that to the death.
You seem to think that something can only be the result of one thing, but the real world is complicated and the "cause" of most of what we do as humans is also complicated, often multifaceted and often very obscure.

The world cannot be reduced to the simplistic level you want it to be.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 05:01 AM   #197
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
You seem to think that something can only be the result of one thing, but the real world is complicated and the "cause" of most of what we do as humans is also complicated, often multifaceted and often very obscure.

The world cannot be reduced to the simplistic level you want it to be.
The above is nothing but a dodge to avoid discussing the point I've made, throwing in an insult for good measure. My, it's good to be the king, right?

Do you think that women and men should compete against one another in sports or not? If you answer yes, then let's try that. If you answer no, then that is an overriding reason to keep them separate regardless of why women were not historically part of high-level sport events.

Just answer the question.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 05:14 AM   #198
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,110
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Do you think that women and men should compete against one another in sports or not? If you answer yes, then let's try that. If you answer no, then that is an overriding reason to keep them separate regardless of why women were not historically part of high-level sport events.
There is of course a third option, which would be to have either women's events or open events. That might be a workable middle course, because it might then be possible to arrive at a more rigorous definition of the term "woman" without excluding anyone from competition.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 05:17 AM   #199
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 82,507
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
There is of course a third option, which would be to have either women's events or open events. That might be a workable middle course, because it might then be possible to arrive at a more rigorous definition of the term "woman" without excluding anyone from competition.

Dave
Sure, but then I'd expect it to have essentially no difference with the current situation: open events will have almost no women, and women's events will, of course, have no men.

And Darat'll be along to say that it's because of historical discrimination.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th October 2018, 05:21 AM   #200
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 29,110
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Sure, but then I'd expect it to have essentially no difference with the current situation: open events will have almost no women, and women's events will, of course, have no men.
In appearance, yes; but it would explicitly allow everyone to compete in at least one category regardless of gender, which I'm not certain is necessarily the case at present in all sports.

Dave
__________________
Me: So what you're saying is that, if the load carrying ability of the lower structure is reduced to the point where it can no longer support the load above it, it will collapse without a jolt, right?

Tony Szamboti: That is right
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:18 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.