Roided Up "Boy" Wins Girls' State Wrestling Championship

[luchog]

Of course overlap is possible. It's just that women would rarely appear in any competitive event.

You keep asserting that, but with nothing to support it; and are consistently ignoring the fact that that is the entire point of weight/skill classes to begin with, to enable competition at multiple levels. This already exists in a number for sports. For example, professional boxing maintains 18 different weight classes for just this reason. You appear to insist that it's impossible for any other sport to follow suit and provide a set of weight/skill classes that can accommodate women. Why would that be?

If anyone is dead set against women being able to compete against men, it appears to be you, since you won't even acknowledge the possibility, despite the fact that such competitions actually exist, particularly in sports were raw power is less important than precision, speed, and finesse, like tennis. Some of us are old enough to remember Billy Jean King trouncing Bobby Riggs in a game that Riggs, even at his age, should have won if it was about strength.

 

[Belz...]

You keep asserting that, but with nothing to support it; and are consistently ignoring the fact that that is the entire point of weight/skill classes to begin with, to enable competition at multiple levels.

How the hell can I ignore something that I actually, explicitly mentioned? Are you even reading my posts?

I've even given you an actual example where what I'm talking about happens.

For example, professional boxing maintains 18 different weight classes for just this reason. You appear to insist that it's impossible for any other sport to follow suit and provide a set of weight/skill classes that can accommodate women. Why would that be?

I don't know. Ask your strawman.

If anyone is dead set against women being able to compete against men, it appears to be you, since you won't even acknowledge the possibility, despite the fact that such competitions actually exist, particularly in sports were raw power is less important than precision, speed, and finesse, like tennis.

Holy ****, luchog. I've said IN THE QUOTE YOU USED that it's possible, and now you say that I don't acknowledge the possibility. Are you being dishonest, or simply incapable of understanding what you read?

 

[luchog]

How the hell can I ignore something that I actually, explicitly mentioned? Are you even reading my posts?

You mean where you wrote this?

Of course overlap is possible. It's just that women would rarely appear in any competitive event.

You're contradicting yourself. The entire point of weight/skill classes is to enable competition between sufficiently similar opponents.

Take this example: there are "e-sport" events involving video game competitions, and although there are plenty of women (fewer than men of course) in the running, when they're compared all together, out of the top 100 players or teams in most games, you'd probably get one, maybe two, female ones.

That's because there are dramatically fewer women, and still a great deal of institutionalized sexism, involved in e-sports. And e-sports are one of the arenas where there are no appreciable differences between men and women. Physical strength is utterly irrelevant. All that matters are reflexes, where there are no appreciable differences; and possibly physical endurance, where women have the advantage. You're reaching really badly here.

 

[Belz...]

You mean where you wrote this:

You're contradicting yourself.

How is it a contradiction? Do you not understand that people seldom appearing in competitive events doesn't mean it's impossible? Where do you see a contradiction?

and still a great deal of institutionalized sexism, involved in e-sports.

A claim I often see stated but never supported. How about you do like you ask others and provided support for this assertion.

And e-sports are one of the arenas where there are no appreciable differences between men and women. Physical strength is utterly irrelevant. All that matters are reflexes, where there are no appreciable differences

See, I thought that too, but it turns out that reflexes have a lot to do with muscle strength. And fingers require muscles too. There are ways to check how many operations per second the players make, and to my surprise, though it shouldn't be surprising when you think about it, men still outclass women there, too, by a significant margin. It's not numbers or sexism. It's biology.

and possibly physical endurance, where women have the advantage.

Citation needed.

You're reaching really badly here.

No, you're simply incapable of seeing beyond your ideological bias. You're one of those people who want "equal" to mean "equal in all things". I'm really sorry, but reality doesn't work that way, nor will it bend to your wishes.

 

[luchog]

How is it a contradiction? Do you not understand that people seldom appearing in competitive events doesn't mean it's impossible? Where do you see a contradiction?

You clearly don't understand what weight/skill classes are. By this logic, there are seldom any competitive events for the lower Boxing weight classes, since those boxers are not as strong as the upper weight classes.

A claim I often see stated but never supported. How about you do like you ask others and provided support for this assertion.

There are entire studies pointing this out; and entire threads here discussing the issue. I've seen your comments on this problem in the past, not going to even bother dredging up that tired denialism.

See, I thought that too, but it turns out that reflexes have a lot to do with muscle strength. And fingers require muscles too. There are ways to check how many operations per second the players make, and to my surprise, though it shouldn't be surprising when you think about it, men still outclass women there, too, by a significant margin.

This is so patently ridiculous I'm not even going to attempt to address it.

Citation needed.

You first, see above.

No, you're simply incapable of seeing beyond your ideological bias. You're one of those people who want "equal" to mean "equal in all things". I'm really sorry, but reality doesn't work that way, nor will it bend to your wishes.

It's clear there's no point in trying to debate this any further.

 

[Newtons Bit]

You clearly don't understand what weight/skill classes are. By this logic, there are seldom any competitive events for the lower Boxing weight classes, since those boxers are not as strong as the upper weight classes.

Are you under the impression that women and men in the same weight/skill class will have similar capabilities?

 

[marplots]

No more women's tees on the golf courses then?

 

[jeffas69]

No more women's tees on the golf courses then?

Don't stop there! There would be almost no women on the golf course. At least not in competition. It would be very very rare for a woman to make the cut. Extreme even.

 

[Belz...]

You clearly don't understand what weight/skill classes are. By this logic, there are seldom any competitive events for the lower Boxing weight classes, since those boxers are not as strong as the upper weight classes.

No, you simply don't understand what I'm saying: women would be consistently ranked below the vast majority of men if they were ranked by skill, and would have little to no chance of winning if ranked by weight. In other words they'd get about as much TV audience as the weakest boxers. Again, why would you want that?

There are entire studies pointing this out; and entire threads here discussing the issue.

Either present your evidence or admit that you have none. Accusing an entire industry of sexism is a serious accusation.

I've seen your comments on this problem in the past, not going to even bother dredging up that tired denialism.

In other words you're tired of people disagreeing with you.

This is so patently ridiculous I'm not even going to attempt to address it.

How is it ridiculous? How are reflexes NOT related to muscle strength? If you have more powerful muscles, you can move your limbs faster. This isn't controversial, but it seems to go against the conclusion you _want_ to reach.

I have reality on my side and the numbers to prove it. You're trying to come up with excuses such as "sexism" to explain why men outperform women in physical tasks.

 

[luchog]

Are you under the impression that women and men in the same weight/skill class will have similar capabilities?

Since that's the point of the classes...

 

[marplots]

Don't stop there! There would be almost no women on the golf course. At least not in competition. It would be very very rare for a woman to make the cut. Extreme even.

I misspoke. In golf, they are referred to as "ladies."

But I thought golf was a game of skill. Like chess.

 

[luchog]

Don't stop there! There would be almost no women on the golf course. At least not in competition. It would be very very rare for a woman to make the cut. Extreme even.

Do you know what the difference is between the "women's" and "men's" tees is on most golf courses? About six to twelve feet.

 

[Belz...]

Since that's the point of the classes...

It's the point of skill classes. As I told you earlier, it wouldn't work with weight classes since men have a higher bone and muscle mass for the same weight. It's an important factor.

Do you know what the difference is between the "women's" and "men's" tees is on most golf courses? About six to twelve feet.

Yeah, there's a reason for that.

 

[jeffas69]

Do you know what the difference is between the "women's" and "men's" tees is on most golf courses? About six to twelve feet.

So they are almost equal. Amazing. How does this change my assertion that women would still rarely ever make the cut in competitive golf if the genders were not separated?

 

[BobTheCoward]

You keep asserting that, but with nothing to support it; and are consistently ignoring the fact that that is the entire point of weight/skill classes to begin with, to enable competition at multiple levels. This already exists in a number for sports. For example, professional boxing maintains 18 different weight classes for just this reason. You appear to insist that it's impossible for any other sport to follow suit and provide a set of weight/skill classes that can accommodate women. Why would that be?

If anyone is dead set against women being able to compete against men, it appears to be you, since you won't even acknowledge the possibility, despite the fact that such competitions actually exist, particularly in sports were raw power is less important than precision, speed, and finesse, like tennis. Some of us are old enough to remember Billy Jean King trouncing Bobby Riggs in a game that Riggs, even at his age, should have won if it was about strength.

I have long wanted to scrap weight classes/skill classes/style classes from the Olympics. There are.now 32 swimming events and I want to shrink it to 5....50,100,200,4000,1500m swim.

 

[luchog]

So they are almost equal. Amazing. How does this change my assertion that women would still rarely ever make the cut in competitive golf if the genders were not separated?

You are aware of how long golf fairways are, right? That this distance is such a tiny fraction of a percent of the total length it may as well not exist?

Men in general would have the power advantage, but that's only an advantage on the longest fairways. Golf is much more a game of precision.

 

[quadraginta]

Your appeal to authority is in no way evidence of anything.

Your misapplication of an "appeal to authority " argument is clear evidence that you either don't know what you are talking about ...

An argument from authority (Latin: argumentum ad verecundiam), also called an appeal to authority, is a common type of argument which can be fallacious, such as when an authority is cited on a topic outside their area of expertise or when the authority cited is not a true expert.[1]

... or are intentionally attempting to evade the clear and compelling evidence you have been presented.

Perhaps you could cite the actual clear and compelling evidence that tells me I am wrong in my assumptions.

<snip>

I did. The decisions of qualified professionals in the field under discussion are clear and compelling evidence.

The use of authorities within their field of expertise is not an argument from authority fallacy.

Of course, you knew that, but chose instead to try and evade the evidence presented by making up spurious claims about fallacious arguments.

 

[marplots]

Do you know what the difference is between the "women's" and "men's" tees is on most golf courses? About six to twelve feet.

You are aware of how long golf fairways are, right? That this distance is such a tiny fraction of a percent of the total length it may as well not exist?

Men in general would have the power advantage, but that's only an advantage on the longest fairways. Golf is much more a game of precision.

Which makes the whole idea of separating the sport by gender even more troubling. It's as if men and women golfers are playing essentially the same game, on the same course, with the same rules, but we don't let them compete against one another directly. What are we, the Taliban?!

Let's make it like chess, where men and women can compete directly for the same prize money.

 

[Shepherd]

The CBS news program 60 Minutes did a segment this past year on a transgender person who was recruited for the women's swim team at Harvard but who ended up swimming for the men's team instead.

As a female competitor in high school she was one of the best in the nation, and due to her times in her strongest event she was believed to have the potential to set a new school record at Harvard, but later as a man, he was the slowest on Harvard's men's team. ...and, to be honest, it sounds like he might have been given special treatment to even be on the men's team.

He said he went from trying to win the races in the women's to trying to beat at least one person in the men's competitions, which he did manage to do on 7 out of 8 occasions.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-harvard-transgender-swimmer-schuyler-bailar/

Also, apparently the NCAA rules are that she could have competed as a "man" on the women's team as long as she didn't take male hormones.

Here's an interview with the coaches involved:

"WATCH: Harvard's Swimming Coaches On First Transgender Swimmer"



No matter what our individual beliefs about such things, I think that maybe we can all agree he can no longer be the breaststroker she used to be.

(Sadly, this also reminds me of a nightmare I had as a child - something involving disembodied mammary glands and Porky the Pig, though it's possible I'm conflating two different highly disturbing nightmares.)

 

[jeffas69]

Your misapplication of an "appeal to authority " argument is clear evidence that you either don't know what you are talking about ...

​

... or are intentionally attempting to evade the clear and compelling evidence you have been presented.




I did. The decisions of qualified professionals in the field under discussion are clear and compelling evidence.

The use of authorities within their field of expertise is not an argument from authority fallacy.

Of course, you knew that, but chose instead to try and evade the evidence presented by making up spurious claims about fallacious arguments.

If you wish to consider them experts that is fine. I will still contend that their decision to allow female to male competition "without restriction" is not "evidence" that taking testosterone to bring a female body into the "normal" range for boys would not give an unfair advantage over some of the boys. Not at the high school level anyway. Why not have the rule where the bottom of the range is the limit for competition. If Mack's levels are at the bottom of the range I would let him wrestle with the boys.