Interesting real life stats on boys/girls sports

[Ozgirl75]

My 8 year old son recently competed in a cross country event. This was for around 25 schools, each of whom did their own cross country at school and then sent the fastest 5 runners to compete in this event.
This is all primary, being age 8/9, 10, 11 and 12.
I received the results today. I would have assumed that because the 8/9 and even 10 year olds were well below puberty, that boys and girls were similar speed runners.
Well they weren’t at all.
My son came 54th in the boys, running 2k in 9minutes 24 seconds. In the girls race this would have put him in 7th place.
The fastest boy was 40 seconds faster than the fastest girl. And this is 8/9 year olds.
This is relevant as the top 15 runners go on to trial at another event where the fastest runners of that run for the state and then eventually, Australia (obviously the pool gets smaller and smaller!)
My interests firstly are, why? Why are Pre pubescent boys significantly faster runners than Pre pubescent girls? For example, my son isn’t really even a runner, he’s just an all rounder and plays lots of sport, but he would have finished one place behind a girl at his school who already runs for NSW (and obviously runs and trains pretty hard).
And secondly - wow. If this is the difference before puberty, what will the difference be like after? (Rhetorical question). It makes me see even more strongly before that sport should be segregated for the absolute protection of girls’ sports and scholarships.

And that's lung capacity that developed from birth, no lowering of testosterone will change that.

One of my issues with (my interpretation of) GC feminism is that my experience of having children of both sexes is that there IS an innate difference between them. I would place behaviours on overlapping bell curves of distribution, not two completely different sets of behaviours of course, but in my experience whilst all my toddlers had dolls and a buggy my dd was much more interested in the nurture play. She did play with the train track and cars occasionally, but those were a favourite of the boys. She made her little characters whole lives and told stories as she moved them around the dolls' house; the boys played with it every now and again if I joined in but rarely chose it. She was more tuned in and interested in domestic routines from being tiny, and by 18 months she would try on new clothes and twirl in the mirror in a way her brothers just didn't. This doesn't mean the boys don't help around the house - they do - or cook - they do, and she climbs trees and had long since outgrown princess dresses. One of my sons loves fashion - happiest in a tie and velvet smoking jacket, obviously doesn't wear it to school but would love to!

So despite me being determined that gender was entirely imposed and buying my kids a range of toys, from babyhood my children followed different pathways that were sex predictable. My sister's kids are just the same and she was even more radical about the imposition of gender on girls than me. I could have prevented my daughter from having princess dressing up clothes (she also had a doctor's outfit, a spiderman, a zombie etc ) but why would I, when I, for example, bought Thomas the Tank Engine toys when my ds1 loved them? She has spotted the passivity of many disney princesses now she's older!

Of course this doesn't mean that some males prefer traditionally female toys, roles, activities and vice versa and like many I don't perceive that this "makes them" really a girl, or a sporty active girl is "really" a boy. But I do perceive that by and large there are gender manifestations and these are innate. It makes sense to me as presumably females are biologically programmed to nurture babies and children and males are biologically programmed to be fond enough of the kids not to want to hurt them, but also to be driven to hunt etc.

AvaCallanach - 100% agree with everything you’ve said there.

The thing is, as mum to two boys, the gender stereotypes from the outside world start influencing young children very early indeed.

Humans are very social and relate to peers and older peers very early on, including tv etc.

Baby boys clothes in 2012 were horribly dull and tractor covered in M and s, I vividly remember. The girls had lovely tones of purple and teal and stylish flowers. I found it really hard to find colourful clothes for him. Things have been different for my now 3 yr old.

They pick up on gendered stereotypes quickly. My son was looking at a book with weird stylised animals going into space and labelled the mummies and daddies based on things like eyelashes or broad shoulders (amusingly his own are enormous!)

I noticed birthday gifts for my son's age 4 party were devoid of crafty things, full of fast cars and junior Lego whereas my friend's with girls had umpteen bead threading kits, glittery sticker things etc. It was similar at age 3 parties.

It's no coincidence to me, as a teacher of children with autism, who are sometimes not interested at all in what peers are doing or interested in, that they're more likely to be immune to the sex/gender stereotypes in fashion and interests.

I'm already having the pink is for boys two argument with my 3 yr old, even pointing out his older brother's pink tee shirt!

I think they've found some sex biology differences in things like sight and brain processing of sight; Lisa Mosconi says that on average girls see a wider range of colours that boys and elsewhere I've seen research that says boys react more to fast moving images, but the key thing is that you'll always get outliers, it doesn't mean they're not the sex they are, nor can't study or follow opposite stereotyped pursuits.

Gina Rippon explores this a lot in the gendered brain.

My eldest boy was always more sociable if very hyper, and liked the little people in the cars rather than the cars that peer boys would line up. He never did that. Second boy does do that. Eldest had only female friends till school as he preferred their imaginary games.

Second boy likes house work and routines. He is calm and likes to sit and draw. Eldest is teaching him to "fight" and play ninjago etc, if it weren't for him I don't thing he'd be interested in any of that. He loves his baby doll and push chair and goes "shopping."

It's no coincidence to me, as a teacher of children with autism, who are sometimes not interested at all in what peers are doing or interested in, that they're more likely to be immune to the sex/gender stereotypes in fashion and interests.

This one intrigues me, because it seems that it can go either way.

I feel my basic response to this gender stuff is a kind of light autistic trait - I can't handle untruths, and can't really relate to the sort of peer things, and that's like you describe. I've seen a fair few people here talk about how as autistic they find stuff like being expected to not "misgender" very difficult. It's hard to not say what they see.

But autistic people are hugely overrepresented in the trans community. Some autistic people latch onto gender as a path to explaining something. It's a "sorting box" for them to make sense of themselves of the world.

I wonder what explains those two different paths.

(The children I work with have additional learning difficulties too. But sometimes as a result of not being able to engage with mainstream school
Systems. Or rather, mainstream school systems don't meet their asd needs)

If there's one thing I do know it's that no one child with autism is the same as another. And many are very sociable and do want to be the same as and be included with peers.

But also, how much of that experience is a result of the current culture? As a teen of the 90's, I knew that I could wear and do what the boys did. Gender non conformity was cool, for the boys too. It seems to be very different these days.

I do remember that in my mother’s’ group the boys did tend to be off crawling to the edges of the play area while the girls would sit right near their mums, but even then I assumed there were some socialising things going on, like us mums of boys would give them more freedom or something, even though I couldn’t specifically see it happening. Plus this was from 6-8 months old, surely too young to be affected by socialisation in that way?
But to see those physical differences already coming in to play by age 8 absolutely reinforces my view that sex based protections are necessary for women and girls.

I think the differing shape of male and female pelvises makes a difference. Male pelvises are better shaped for running

Meant to add, "truth" to the current teenagers can be that you can change sex.

Depends what they've been told/ taught/ seen on YouTube.

There are separate percentile growth charts for babies by sex too.

like us mums of boys would give them more freedom or something

There's been studies that this is the case. Ironically in saw it explored in a bbc program with Alice Roberts and Michael Mosely; Alice was firmly saying and showing that there was no 'brain' difference and it was all how people treated the baby/ toddler if they thought they were male or female...(she clearly did a reverse ferret soon after.)

Mums of boys were shown to allow them to explore independently a bit further than mums of girls over a high ramp.

Strangers treated babies dressed in blue differently to babies dressed in pink.

I mean I’ve always known that being a woman or a man is more than just clothes and make up, but it’s fascinating that through all the discussion of puberty blockers and things, there is almost this idea that children are little blank canvases on a gender basis, and it’s only puberty that slots them into male or female roles.

Yes, I’ve only got boys so I don’t know how I would treat a girl baby, but I can certainly believe we DO treat them differently as there is certainly a feeling that it’s a good thing for a boy to be adventurous and risk taking, even as a small child.

Another point is that our general visual culture on TV and in books is very "hetero." Youngsters who are same sex attracted from a young age don't see themselves reflected a great deal in society.

There must be some sex linked differences as schools like mine are very boy heavy. We are a mix of moderate learning difficulties and autism. An OT once said she always seems to be supporting boys with handwriting in sen and mainstream schools.

.So despite me being determined that gender was entirely imposed and buying my kids a range of toys, from babyhood my children followed different pathways that were sex predictable.

Mine didn’t. So whose anecdote is more valid?

As @WarriorN says, gender influences start very early, long before children are able to express a preference themselves.

It even started in utero for me. If the baby was kicking it was either boys are so active, he’s a little footballer, or girls always gives their mum a hard time. Or if the baby was quiet, it was a “lazy boy”, or girls are so good until they hit teenage years..

Presents at birth- pink, soft toys, jewellery for girls. Blue, cars, balls for boys.

Two of mine are the same sex. One is nurturing, likes dolls, prams, quiet play, books. The other likes trains, climbing trees, sport. Interestingly the one who enjoyed tv and films from early on was the one who followed their gender roles more closely.

Watch this link- socialisation into gender roles starts early, and happens even when people don’t think they are..

m.youtube.com/watch?v=nWu44AqF0iI

Interesting post OP - an extra dimension for me (as a sporty mum who was keen to encourage my daughters), is the effect of embarrassing adolescence on teenage girls in mixed sex schools. Some girls report not wanting the boys to see them get sweaty and be competetive and to feeling awkward in skimpy sports gear. I attended a single sex girls school and there were plenty of competetive sporty girls. Of course this doesnt preclude any natural physical advantage that boys might have but it does play a part in how many girls carry on being sporty after puberty.

Really interesting discussion, and echos many of the concerns I’ve had for a while.

Yes, I’m fully supportive of individuals wanting to live as their true selves.

But my concern is with women (and girls) / females as a class and the impact each of these decisions has on us as a class.

Sexual dimorphism isn't just dimorphism of secondary sex characteristics at puberty. We are very dimorphic, evolution has made the sexes diverge significantly. It is genetic specialisation for our reproductive roles but also survival as a community, not just as an individuals. People who ming on about sex as a spectrum don't understand that we are sexually dimorphic BECAUSE of the binary. The binary drives us in different directions. That doesn't start at puberty. It starts at conception, possibly before since sperm are either x or y and I read somewhere that certain conditions (famine etc) can slightly favour one or the other.

Sorry missing the post of the thread but:

@InvisibleDragon - thank you for that quote - it hit me right in the chest. I have ordered the book. Thank you.

Oh gosh mine too blue. One very tiny and skinny; Dh fretted over him being bullied in the playground and was forever trying to encourage him to be brave. Another rather on the large side, and I kept having to tell mum to stop calling him a bruiser. A girl wouldn't have been called that.

I've actually wondered if I've seen all the gender shit a bit more as a result of having boys; I was one of two girls and a gender non conforming mother so had never seen the other side of the coin.

It was easier to be non conforming as a girl growing up. Less so as a boy, and still more taboo.

@avacallanach I think it is very difficult to unpick what is nature and what is nurture. My ds was very into playing with cuddly toys and dressing them up when he was younger whereas his female twin was not at all - I can't remember her ever playing with dolls. I also have an older ds who is totally different to his brother. That is why I think the only coherent message is "dress however you like, do whatever you please but sex matters - and this applies to sport too".

@mollythemeerkat yes I wondered which way it would go in high school as both my children are still primary age.
There are lots of single sex schools around us and we are one of the few co Ed private schools in the area - certainly there seems to be a cachet amongst the girls of being accepted onto a “boys”’sports team (girls are able to play on boys teams but not vice versa) and so far the avoidance of activity due to sweatiness hasn’t come up.

I was waiting for someone to raise stamina and endurance but as nobody has, I will. Pelves aren't the key thing, I think. Women have an advantage in running because the upper body is less broad and muscular and the legs don't have as much to carry, proportionately. Swimming sees a huge male advantage with those arms and shoulders and the water takes the weight. Men with their long bones and big muscles grown on testosterone will always have the edge in competitions that demand short, explosive bursts of effort. High drama, lots of Olympic events fit here. Wonder why? 🤔

Where women start overhauling men is in the ultra-long endurance events that take place on venues like remote hillsides and in the dark because they take 12+ hours. Less featured in the Olympics. 🙄

I read recently that pregnancy puts a woman's body into marathon mode with everything operating at peak demand, and of course it goes on for months at a time, usually while the individual holds down a full-time job or is toddler-wrangling, or both! Of course we're best at ultra long-haul super endurance events because our bodies have to work that way to sustain the race.

I suspect that school sports are designed to showcase boys' physiological strengths and downplay girls'. Likewise most high profile sporting events and competitions.

No surprises, really.

Interestingly the one who enjoyed tv and films from early on was the one who followed their gender roles more closely.

This is a really important point.