Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 52

Thread: Men v. Women

  1. #11
    Ipurr4u's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Age
    51
    Posts
    33,590
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    77,237.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    77,237.00
    Donate

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frankiegalleywood View Post
    i guess if it comes down to pure physical strength men would win .thats as long as you are accepting that both sexes are at the top of their game and top physical strength.

    now if it comes to just pure ability and talent . there is no reason why the both sexes couldn't play with each other in the same team.
    thank you... and to segis



  2. #12
    exuro non meus animus
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Age
    52
    Posts
    400
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    7,262.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    7,262.00
    Donate

    Default

    Well I agree that women and men should be allowed to compete against each other in some circumstances. But since on average men have a physical advantage over women in strength and height among other things, I think at the top levels women will always have a small enough disadvantage that they won't be able to compete successfully. For example I am an ex-competitive runner, and in coed road races both sexes typically run together, and the top woman may be in the top few percent overall, but it is exceeding rare for a woman to win the whole race.

  3. #13
    ~missed~ Segismundo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Not where I should be
    Age
    56
    Posts
    6,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    20,922.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    20,922.00
    Donate

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frankiegalleywood View Post
    i guess if it comes down to pure physical strength men would win .thats as long as you are accepting that both sexes are at the top of their game and top physical strength.

    now if it comes to just pure ability and talent . there is no reason why the both sexes couldn't play with each other in the same team.
    I agree with the theory, but in practice, how do you separate the two? In most sports, a premium is placed on strength and speed. Any of the major sports will require fast and strong competitors. Where those traits aren't needed as much, I agree the sexes can compete together.

    But what sports don't require them? Golf? Tennis? Horse racing? Ping pong? Shooting? Archery? Auto racing? I'm sure arguments can be made that either strength or speed is needed in some of these.

    I can't think of many other sports where speed and strength aren't needed in great quantities. Even gymnastics has separate events because of the differences in the relative physical abilities of men and women.

    It's not that I oppose women in sports with men on the basis of their gender. I just don't think they measure up physically. In some instances, the women play the sport more purely than the men do. But their production isn't as great as most men's production, and for that reason I don't think they should be in the men's leagues.

  4. #14

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    uk
    Age
    58
    Posts
    13,192
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    9,146.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    9,146.00
    Donate

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Segismundo View Post
    I agree with the theory, but in practice, how do you separate the two? In most sports, a premium is placed on strength and speed. Any of the major sports will require fast and strong competitors. Where those traits aren't needed as much, I agree the sexes can compete together.

    But what sports don't require them? Golf? Tennis? Horse racing? Ping pong? Shooting? Archery? Auto racing? I'm sure arguments can be made that either strength or speed is needed in some of these.

    I can't think of many other sports where speed and strength aren't needed in great quantities. Even gymnastics has separate events because of the differences in the relative physical abilities of men and women.

    It's not that I oppose women in sports with men on the basis of their gender. I just don't think they measure up physically. In some instances, the women play the sport more purely than the men do. But their production isn't as great as most men's production, and for that reason I don't think they should be in the men's leagues.
    not sure what you mean by production.

  5. #15
    ~missed~ Segismundo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Not where I should be
    Age
    56
    Posts
    6,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    20,922.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    20,922.00
    Donate

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frankiegalleywood View Post
    not sure what you mean by production.
    Statistically, do they help their teams win? Do they score more, assist more or do they allow the other team to score more. Sure, players bring intangible benefits to their teams, but for better or worse, measurables are used to evaluate players' values to their teams. Production.

  6. #16

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    uk
    Age
    58
    Posts
    13,192
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    9,146.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    9,146.00
    Donate

    Default

    my thoughtis, they wouldnt necessarily score or assist more. but they would bring something to a team maybe an outlook which is i guess what you are meaning by intangible.

  7. #17
    ~missed~ Segismundo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Not where I should be
    Age
    56
    Posts
    6,499
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    20,922.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    20,922.00
    Donate

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by frankiegalleywood View Post
    my thoughtis, they wouldnt necessarily score or assist more. but they would bring something to a team maybe an outlook which is i guess what you are meaning by intangible.
    It could be that or something that aids team chemistry. Nowadays, how many teams can afford to keep a person on their squads who adds nothing in terms of on-the-field production just because she's good for team chemistry, and pay that person a couple of million a year to do so?

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    uk
    Age
    58
    Posts
    13,192
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    9,146.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    9,146.00
    Donate

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Segismundo View Post
    It could be that or something that aids team chemistry. Nowadays, how many teams can afford to keep a person on their squads who adds nothing in terms of on-the-field production just because she's good for team chemistry, and pay that person a couple of million a year to do so?
    NONE.

    winning is everything , second is nowhere.

  9. #19
    Dick Barsteward's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Oop north, it's grim
    Age
    45
    Posts
    336
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    887.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    887.00
    Donate

    Default

    It just wouldn't work. Fact is, men and women are different physically. Men produce a shedload more testosterone, which leads to physical advantage in physical sports.

    It's not a slight on women's sports, it's just a fact.

  10. #20
    markwh's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    west midlands
    Age
    49
    Posts
    235
    Post Thanks / Like
    Points
    300.00
    Bank
    0.00
    Total Points
    300.00
    Donate

    Default

    I think it depends on the sport and would have to be looked at carefully

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •