Apologies, I am going to do that rude thing again!
Just as many women are precluded from competing at the highest levels in women's sports as men are precluded from competing at the highest levels of a theoretical "open" category. Strictly, this is due to a combination of genetic factors, and cultural/societal (i.e. access to facilities, competition and a tradition of focusing on particular sports).
Mmm! Somewhat outdated argument there, not just here in the UK either. I'll go onto genetics etc next but: Over recent years with a change in attitude, training regimen, dietary knowledge etc etc, there are a growing number off sports that men are beginning to see parity, and the occasional win, by women. Ironically at grass roots they all have name like Iron Man, Ultra REALLY Hard, Double Deca (that one is real) etc.
In less than a decade we have gone from research concluding It seems very unlikely that women will ever outperform men in ultra-triathlons from Ironman to Double Iron ultra-triathlon.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4035499/
To ultras being won, in stages or overall, by women. The donination remains, but is being whittled away and science is beginning to catch up and re-address the possibilities.
In practice it means many sports would not just be dominated by men. They would be dominated by small groups of men. For example, sprints by men of West African origin, distance by men of east African origin (in particular the Kalenjin tribe), equestrian events by rich men, basketball by tall men, ice hockey by men from icy regions, etc. Leaving aside the financial distraction. East and West African men aren't necessarily winning because of their race, or even their genes. That has been dismissed as lazy thunking for decades - probably since a year or so after Mamo Wolde and Abebe Bikila dominated.
- BMI. Living and training skinny. One genetic advantage dos reside n the lighter musculature of many African runners - Then again, Australians and flipper feet!
- Barefoot running. Being poor
- Diet. Again, being poor, having restricted dietary ingredient. Not to say this is nutritionally poor. Just that our Western excess plays a role.
- Psychological. Well, you said it yourself, I think. East African runners are unbeatable! And they believe that too! Trite? Well, not really. Being poor = making a choice to devote yourelf to a sport. Some counttries have boxing, and dominate the world scene, East Africa has distance running.
- Geography. That really expensive high altitude traning comes for free
- Economics. Again, we go back to being ppor as a direct motivational factor
They can be beaten. Ask Jordan Hasay!
Below the highest levels this ceases to be the case. Women are competitive in "open" competition at club level, so they are not precluded from competing.
Erm. The step between club and elite is still lacking for female athletes. And, for many, the first step at grass roots is missing too! Which is why school sport is so important.
Moreover, at the club level it is often clear that the other factors precluding competition are more significant (e.g. if you investigate the top 100 runners in a marathon, the majority are male, but if you do physiological tests you will find ALL of them share characteristics which enable them to run fast. Similarly if you look at those in the middle and the back of the pack, you will find they lack the characteristics to run fast.
I refer you back to points 1 - 6. But more, I have no idea what you mean by that. Generally, broad brush strokes, I see what you are driving at. But specifically? Look at any riunning club and tell me they are predominantly male?
So I'm not sure the argument women would be precluded adds anything to the reasons normally given, (e.g. safety).
Ooh, I missd that link too. Do you men adding women to preodminantly male sports hardly happens so there is no significant additional risk?
There are similar arguments about why it is important for women's representation to equal men's representation (e.g. proportion of women on boards of large companies). The difference here is that men came from a much wider range of backgrounds are represented. There were a lot working class men who worked themselves up from the shop floor. Men were given opportunities explicitly because they were men. It wasn't the case that only a very small proportion of men could attain these roles. The competition really was open to a large proportion of men. And as female representation has increased this has also included women from a variety of backgrounds. If instead it was simply a case of replacing some privileged men with some privileged women then it would be questionable how much this achieved relative to instead broadening across by other factors, e.g. class or race.
Yeah, well, we're all for taking down the old boy's network, dismantling the status quo. But seriously, this is 2021!
What sport is "about" depends on people's attitudes. Is it really about elite sport, with all levels below acting on as feeders to the elite? (i.e. we only do sport at school in order to see if we are good enough to qualify for the Olympics or have a professional career) Or is sport really about the lower levels (and if so, is it more about participation or competition?)?
And the answer is all things to all people. Some will be fun runners, others will be elite. And there should be room for all within that. Which takes us back to equity, or parity. Which will differ depending on each sport.
But ALL sports can be equally open to male and female, rich, poor participants. There just has to be a will to make it so... and no male preening to preventit.
Think about the one single solitary man who vetoed women ski jumping. I am not saying I wished him dead but now that he is (just this year) maybe things will cage in the International Ski Federation. They may drag their thinking out of the Victorian era!
Think about Rugby (until veyr recently) who chamioned garss roots for all and changed teh club/youth game to make it viable and then pumped money in to make women's rugby well funded.
More esoteric? Think about polo and how many kids get into the sport. Then look at cycle polo and tell me that lateral thining gets you nowhere!
People play sport for may reasons. Their genetics do not come into it, intially. Unless you are an exuberant stocky child in the Eastern Bloc of course!-