J.C.MacSwell Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 1 minute ago, zapatos said: Pull facts out of your ass much? Do you believe Div 3 teams generate more revenues than the div 1 teams at that tournament? Don't be an ass. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapatos Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 7 minutes ago, J.C.MacSwell said: Don't be an ass. LOL! That's pretty funny coming from you. 😂 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 3 minutes ago, zapatos said: LOL! That's pretty funny coming from you. 😂 Good one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 14 hours ago, MigL said: Cheating implies circumventing rules. Your solution ... Have no rules, so there are no cheaters. Yeah, that seems fair 🙄 ! OK, with that well thought out arguement, I'm getting off this merry-go-round, I'll leave you with this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Intoscience Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 1 hour ago, dimreepr said: OK, with that well thought out arguement, I'm getting off this merry-go-round, I'll leave you with this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis) These sort of matches are just a promotional spectacle and shouldn't be taken serious. John McEnroe who got slated for making a comment about Serena Williams at the time when she was ladies world No1. His comment was something along the lines of "If Serena competed on the men's circuit she would not rank any higher than 700th" I'm not sure of the exact details, but though controversial, this figure was just plucked out of his head and shouldn't be taken as "you cannot be serious" (sorry couldn't help myself). But it was generally accepted to some degree, and even by Serena herself, she went on to play an exhibition match against a male player ranked 203rd at the time and lost the match. This does not take away the fact that Serena Williams is one of the greatest tennis players of all time, and is an elite athlete who should be recognised equally as much as her male counter parts. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 2 hours ago, Intoscience said: These sort of matches are just a promotional spectacle and shouldn't be taken serious. John McEnroe who got slated for making a comment about Serena Williams at the time when she was ladies world No1. His comment was something along the lines of "If Serena competed on the men's circuit she would not rank any higher than 700th" I'm not sure of the exact details, but though controversial, this figure was just plucked out of his head and shouldn't be taken as "you cannot be serious" (sorry couldn't help myself). But it was generally accepted to some degree, and even by Serena herself, she went on to play an exhibition match against a male player ranked 203rd at the time and lost the match. This does not take away the fact that Serena Williams is one of the greatest tennis players of all time, and is an elite athlete who should be recognised equally as much as her male counter parts. Fair point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 4 hours ago, dimreepr said: OK, with that well thought out arguement, I'm getting off this merry-go-round, I'll leave you with this. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Sexes_(tennis) Yeah, I was a teenager when that happened, and, even then, recognized it for what it was. Sorry JC, I didn't mean to include you. My rant was directed at Zap ( who should know better ) and ScienceNostalgia101. Zap used it as an excuse to ramble on about misogyny in sports, when he has been advocating that for many pages. He wants to give physiological males ( with a few missing pieces ) who identify as females, the ability to compete ( and dominate ) against cis women, yet doesn't see that as unfair to cis women. If he's that upset about misogyny in sports, maybe he should ask a woman how she feels about the situation. I'm not saying trans women cannot compete, but they need to compete in a catagory where training and effort, not physiology, are the determining factors, AND which doesn't put women back where they were 100 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 12 hours ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said: Wasn't part of the point of sex-segregating sports to make sure it's primarily a test of athletic skill, rather than of skill at not being distracted by one's opponent? No. Where did you get that information? WTH is “distracted by their opponent?” The problem wasn’t that sports weren’t segregated, it’s that there were only (or mostly) opportunities for boys In the US this was addressed by title IX, driven by this lack of opportunity No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Nothing about tests of athletic skill, or “distraction” nonsense, seeing as it encompasses more than sports. We didn’t sex-segregate classrooms. “distraction” didn’t enter into it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 (edited) 1 hour ago, MigL said: Yeah, I was a teenager when that happened, and, even then, recognized it for what it was. Sorry JC, I didn't mean to include you. My rant was directed at Zap ( who should know better ) and ScienceNostalgia101. Zap used it as an excuse to ramble on about misogyny in sports, when he has been advocating that for many pages. He wants to give physiological males ( with a few missing pieces ) who identify as females, the ability to compete ( and dominate ) against cis women, yet doesn't see that as unfair to cis women. If he's that upset about misogyny in sports, maybe he should ask a woman how she feels about the situation. I'm not saying trans women cannot compete, but they need to compete in a catagory where training and effort, not physiology, are the determining factors, AND which doesn't put women back where they were 100 years ago. We're all, well most, talking past each other on this; I'm not saying that trans athletes can't have an advantage or that further regulation's/categories shouldn't be introduced to level the playing field, but there will always be outliers in any given sport. As in my example of Jonah Lomu (the England rugby captain called him a freak), but if IRC, NZ didn't win that world cup because other team's worked out a way to play them. My point has always been let them play first and then work out why/if it's unfair and adjust the field accordingly. Is the treatment of Castor Semenya fair? It's like asking Usain Bolt to wear a hobble... Edited July 16, 2021 by dimreepr Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zapatos Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 1 hour ago, MigL said: Zap used it as an excuse to ramble on about misogyny in sports, when he has been advocating that for many pages. I fail to see where I am guilty of misogyny ("dislike of, contempt for, or ingrained prejudice against women"). As that is a charge I don't take too kindly too, I'd appreciate it if you would cite specific comments I've made to support your charge. Quote I'm not saying trans women cannot compete, but they need to compete in a catagory where training and effort, not physiology, are the determining factors, AND which doesn't put women back where they were 100 years ago. I also believe trans women need a place to compete. I think I've been advocating for that all along. I also don't want to be unfair to cis-women. I think I've been advocating for that all along. Quote not physiology, are the determining factors Physiology will always be a determining factor, in all sports, whether transgendered people compete or not. Training, effort and better physiology will always win out over training, effort and worse physiology. Quote AND which doesn't put women back where they were 100 years ago. Good line to use for effect, but unless you can explain how transgender women competing in sports will result in a situation we had 100 years ago you are just playing to people's emotions. Quote Women and girls had limited opportunities for sports in the 1920s. Most schools had physical education classes for girls. Some educators thought that running, jumping, and sweating were not very ladylike. They opposed athletic competition for women. Women had to fight for the right to compete. Many, but not all, colleges and high schools had basketball teams for girls. Some girls competed in sports such as golf, tennis, or swimming. https://www.ncpedia.org/sports/golden-age-sports Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScienceNostalgia101 Posted July 16, 2021 Author Share Posted July 16, 2021 2 hours ago, swansont said: No. Where did you get that information? WTH is “distracted by their opponent?” The problem wasn’t that sports weren’t segregated, it’s that there were only (or mostly) opportunities for boys In the US this was addressed by title IX, driven by this lack of opportunity No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Nothing about tests of athletic skill, or “distraction” nonsense, seeing as it encompasses more than sports. We didn’t sex-segregate classrooms. “distraction” didn’t enter into it. Possibly because the real "education" they got was on their own minds through close proximity to several members of the opposite sex. You can teach them all the biology you want to (and in some private schools, parents still get to pay to separate them from the opposite sex) but experiencing it for itself tells you what to believe about what applies to you, and what doesn't, and in turn who to believe about biology based on advocates of any narrative get right about you, and what they get wrong about you; who has discredited themselves, and who has not. Anyway, I don't think we should stack the deck against gender stereotyping any more than in its favour. The "anti-discrimination" legislation may be well meaning, but that doesn't mean the effects of hormones and anatomy should be ignored. Distraction by your opponent could mean anything from looking behind yourself during a race to get a better look at her and tripping up, or subconsciously being unwilling to give it your all because you'd deep down rather look at her from behind than win. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MigL Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 That is ridiculous ! I almost want to change my rule of not giving neg reps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimreepr Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 24 minutes ago, MigL said: That is ridiculous ! I almost want to change my rule of not giving neg reps. And you wonder why I want to get off this merry-go-round? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 5 hours ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said: Distraction by your opponent could mean anything from looking behind yourself during a race to get a better look at her and tripping up, or subconsciously being unwilling to give it your all because you'd deep down rather look at her from behind than win. Which, ridiculous as this is*, only happens if there are co-ed teams. Can you provide evidence of there being many of these in the good old days? *if this is what motivates you, you deserve to lose, and possibly get cut from the team. It doesn’t require legislation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScienceNostalgia101 Posted July 16, 2021 Author Share Posted July 16, 2021 23 minutes ago, swansont said: Which, ridiculous as this is*, only happens if there are co-ed teams. Can you provide evidence of there being many of these in the good old days? *if this is what motivates you, you deserve to lose, and possibly get cut from the team. It doesn’t require legislation. But it's not called an "athletics & self-control" competition. It's called an "athletics" competition. Can't self-control be assessed in separate competitions, so as to give credit where credit is due on the otherwise athletically skilled ability of someone low on self-control? If people admire athletic ability so much that they pay to see it, why would they fail to give credit, where credit is due, wherever they see it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swansont Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 1 hour ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said: But it's not called an "athletics & self-control" competition. It's called an "athletics" competition. Yes. Can you figure out why? 1 hour ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said: Can't self-control be assessed in separate competitions, Why would you do this? 1 hour ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said: so as to give credit where credit is due on the otherwise athletically skilled ability of someone low on self-control? If people admire athletic ability so much that they pay to see it, why would they fail to give credit, where credit is due, wherever they see it? Athletes tend to have discipline, or develop it. What about gay athletes? What of their self-control? Why haven’t we seen widespread reports about gay athletes unable to properly compete because of “distraction”? (because this is ridiculous?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phi for All Posted July 16, 2021 Share Posted July 16, 2021 7 hours ago, ScienceNostalgia101 said: Distraction by your opponent could mean anything from looking behind yourself during a race to get a better look at her and tripping up, or subconsciously being unwilling to give it your all because you'd deep down rather look at her from behind than win. ! Moderator Note I'm tempted to pin this as an example of bad-faith arguments for posterity. You've obviously reached the bottom of this particular barrel, so rather than watch you continue to scrape, I'm closing this. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts