Sports and sex segregation

[Ennuid]

The Roland Garros and the women's football WC this week reminded me again what I hate about sports : sex segregation. It simply reinforces the idea that men's sports are the real deal, while women's sports are a second-class. What we need to do it stop segregating boys and girls at young ages, just let them play in the same teams or events as they do before the teenage years. This way society won't see women as ''physically inferior'' and a sort of sub-par version of men. No team should be called the male or female this or that and not allowing the other sex to join, if good enough, should be illegal. Something similar happened in the US around the middle of the last century : black athletes were not allowed to compete against whites not only because of pure racism, but also because blacks were considered inferior athletes. The moment they were allowed to compete against whites was the moment they started taking over US sports and these days they almost completely dominate the most popular sports across the pond.

Women are not inferior, sub-par or a lesser version of men. They shouldn't be forced to compete in their own leagues and events. Sports are a huge part of our society and great for building confidence and teaching structure to young people. What kind of message do girls get so early in life when they are told that they should go play in a league of their own because boys are better? No wonder women grow up believing they can't go for a STEM degree or negotiate their salary ''like a man''!

there are many active sports where both genders can compete on equal terms. But they don't involve running about, kicking balls or throwing things, hence we never hear of them. That said, could footie have mixed teams? (it's of no interest to me so I'm not sure what is involved, although I know it needs fitness and agility)

equestrian sport, archery and sailing are the three that come immediately to mind. Plenty of others.

for some sports it won't work though. That's how it is.

Did you enjoy the canada- China game last night, OP?

So women are to compete against men in all sports hence they won't win many medals. Then you'll have even more to whine about. A horse can outrun a man does that mean a horse is superior. No. It means it can run faster.

"Blacks"

The reason that women are not represented / under represented in games and sports and activities that do not involve physical strength are due to a variety of reasons including no / little investment, no / little encouragement or roles models, playing "catch up" where a few decades ago we weren't allowed to compete, not getting the best coaches / trainers, and so on and so forth.

I suspect this is not an entirely genuine question though.

What fun on a Sunday afternoon to go to a Feminism board on a predominantly female website and try to get the posters to "admit" that yes actually women are shit.

This OP and subsequent posts sounds incredibly familiar. Have you posted on this topic, and made the same argument before, op?

"A horse can outrun a man does that mean a horse is superior. No. It means it can run faster."

Nice one Vivienne.

Shall I mention again the differential of prize money in snooker?

I think the OP (who I don't think is a troll fwiw) is getting a bit of an unfair kicking here. I don't think she has articulated it especially well but I suspect that the nub of her thinking is that, if men's and women's sport were truly integrated then over time the gap would narrow. This could in part be a result of exchange of know how between men's and women's sport. But I think that, if you were to make sports unisex, in most disciplines, talented women would find a way of competing.

First, I think it's possible to overstate the physical differences. The women's 100m sprint record is only 109% of the men's. The gap is closer in endurance events.

Second, and particularly in some team sports, there are plenty of top players who key attributes are not physical, but are mental, technical and/or tactical. Just taking the recent history of the England football team for example, off the top of my head, all of Teddy Sheringham, Paul Gascoigne, Glenn Hoddle, Nigel Clough and Peter Beardsley all had fantastic careers without being any sort of natural athlete. You could even put Beckham in this category, who wasn't quick or strong (his main phyiscal attribute - which people tend not to recognise because it's not sexy - was that he could run all day, but a woman could emulate that.

Also look at cricket. There's also no physical reason why a woman couldn't be a world-class opening batsman, spin bowler or wicketkeeper. Maybe in mixed cricket women could carve these out as their niches - with the big hitting middle order batting, and fast bowling, positions being more male-dominated.

Now if I'm honest, intuitively I'm not sure I buy into the above, but I hope the above persuades one or two people that the OP's position is not as daft as everyone's making out.

Snooker the tables are massive and women are generally shorter and so that makes it trickier if you haven't got the reach. Also it is not a "female friendly" atmosphere and less so now that bloke who used to do the boxing has got hold of it and got women in skimpy clothes parading around for no apparent reason (at least there were when I saw it a few years back just after he started).

I used to be shit-hot at pool though

I don't think there are any bars to women competing in the major tournaments in snooker (I may be wrong) but that they simply don't qualify HOWEVER the women's game is coming on.

recent snooker

"Reanne Evans loses to Ken Doherty in Worlds qualifier

Reanne Evans has failed in her bid to become the first woman to play in the main draw of the World Championship.
England's 10-time ladies' champion, 29, put up a thrilling fight but lost 10-8 to 1997 world champion Ken Doherty in the first qualifying round."

Good stuff!

What about Equestrian sports?

In all the Olympic Equestrian disciplines, women compete on equal terms with men.

Charlotte Du Jardin charlottedujardin.co.uk/ is the best dressage rider in the world, and holds a lot of world records in the sport, competing directly against men. Obviously dressage is a sport where technique and mental attributes count for more than brute strength, as regardless of how strong you are, the horse will always be stronger :p. I would say high level dressage competitions are usually made up of roughly equal teams of men and women.

Pippa Funnell [[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pippa_Funnell] is the only ever winner of the Rolex Grand Slam in Eventing- meaning she won the Badminton, Kentucky and Burghley events in one year. Several men have won two out of three, but no-one else has succeeded yet. Again, I would say that eventing is a sport with a good mix of women and men at the top levels, and certainly one with a huge number of female role models.

I think if you want to give girls positive role models in sport, getting them into horse sports is the way forwards.

I think, in some sports, for example athletics, which are mainly testing one physical attribute, men and women can't really compete in the same competitions.

Other sports, which are more of a mixture could be contested in mixed competitions.

and a different tournament GO REANNE!

Look at the difference in prize money (see near the start of the article) for a reason the women are not in evidence:

"Now Evans is guaranteed the biggest cheque of her career.
She collected just £400 for winning the ladies' world title last month, but will collect a minimum of £3,000 just for appearing in the first round of the season's first ranking tournament, demonstrating the gulf in rewards between the men's and women's games."

Bear, we had a very similar thread a few months ago, which is the source of much of the scepticism, along with OP's other posts today.

I do agree with you that if there was more cross over then sportswomen would benefit.

Excuse the slight tangent-offing but would like others' thoughts on the following as it falls under same category;

DD's sports day last weekend. 'Mums' race' consisted of a 40m sprint with a bean bag on head, 'Dads' race' was a full 400m.

Prior to this however the P1 children had a full 400m sprint, boys and girls competing together (for the record two boys came first and second, girl came third).

I'm not sure what the point of my post is really - I applaud them (the school) for the joint P1 sprint but why the difference in parent races? Can't women sprint long distance? I assume they've had complaints from the mums in the past

Yeah there's no need for that is there.

Our school the mums and dads races are separate (and HIGHLY competitive lol)

Well, physically, many women do have problems running post birth. Is it 1 in 3 who have pelvic floor issues?

blackrider I don't think she's articulated her point very clearly or elegantly but I don't think there's anything that strongly suggests she's on a wind-up. I don't get it, troll hunting is considered not cool on most forums but seems pretty de rigeur here.

I mean separate but they run teh same distance in both the sprint and the "egg" and spoon

Shit example for the children.

Yonic, women can compete with men in snooker and a couple have but with very poor results. Nobody is stopping them from entering the main competitions, the same with chess, darts etc. I just can't understand why men still dominate sports or games like snooker when nothing physical in involved.