Snooker

[TeenPlusCat]

I've been dipping in and out of the snooker this week, and a bit came up this afternoon about the women's world championship, and the fact that 2 women are now qualified to go on the main tour.
Anyway, they mentioned in passing that the first transgender (MtF) snooker player had got to the semi finals (Jamie Hunter).

Now obviously there is no obvious physical disadvantage to women playing snooker (except I suspect height and reach will still make a difference), but there is obviously a women's competition for a reason....
A teen boy hanging out playing pool/snooker would be a lot more usual than a teen girl, so at the age Jamie was developing their skills, a girl would be much less likely to have felt welcome?

This is a version of the Phelps advantage.

yes. Many sports have elite athletes that tend to favour a set of attributes - eg. Basketball and height.

The issue is that within a sex category there is more chance that an athlete will have the opportunity to win without those characteristics. For instance Phelp’s records either have or will be soon broken because someone with a different combination of attributes will beat them.

But females that have similar attributes to Phelps are still being beaten by many males.

That is the whole point of sex categories.

You may be tall for a female, and you may have longer arms than some males, but those males will have other advantages. That means you may less chance at winning against that shorter male than another male competitor the same size as those shorter males has of winning against them.

That is the point. A shorter male has a greater chance to win against you than a shorter female has to win against you.

However, you may in fact be the more skilled / better athlete than either of those small males. They just will win based on their biological advantages.

Really fish

So the way to deal with negative sex discrimination is just to give in to it?

OK you women who are amazing at sports, give up. No one is interested. Yous are not trying hard enough to beat the men. Or in the case of international football… the under 15 boys!!!

That is the way I read your posts.

Unless the female can make it against males, then get rid of female sport because it means those females are inferior. In fact, get rid of children’s categories and the master’s categories and any other categories. Only the open category is worth keeping, Fuck off everyone else.

is this really what you mean?

I think there are a lot of sports where males and females can compete

What are sporting competitions about?

why do sports at all?

Which sports apart from darts which you mentioned, do you think female can compete fairly against males and have a chance at winning? Let’s start a list.

‘Perhaps we need racial splits as well as white athletes don't do as well as coloured athletes’

You again don’t seem to understand what sports competitions are measuring. I am sure you think this is the ultimate ‘gotcha’ but it really just shows your own lack of understanding about the topic.

It used to be that competing was about having fun enjoying sport

yeah. Right. It was never about winning at all. We get it.

Hmm, so far my list is equestrian, and darts.

Ah I see the “but Michael phelps” argument has arisen again

differentiation within sexes is completely different to differentiation between sexes e.g Ryan lochte & missy franklin are both Olympic gold medalists in swimming. They are the same height 6ft 2 & have the same “wingspan”. They both won golds at 200m backstroke. Lochtes fastest time at that distance is 1.46.68, franklins 2.04.06. That’s about half the length of a pool

but as I said earlier, I couldn’t give a fuck if Jamie was the worst snooker player ever, they still don’t belong on the womens tour because they’re not a woman. Let the mens tour demonstrate how wonderful & inclusive they are by having Jamie play there but I expect that wouldn’t be validating enough for Jamie. It is not womens job to validate Jamie’s identity

But women can enter the ‘men’s’ championship?

I think a lot of the non athletic type sports go in here, you know the sort

bowls, archery, shooting, curling etc, I'd even go as far as golf.

bowls, archery, shooting, curling etc, I'd even go as far as golf.

then you misunderstand those sports.

Some types of shooting may allow females to compete fairly, but not all shooting.

The others all will mean males will have the advantage over females.

based on the list of events in the Tokyo Olympics, here's my generous (to the trans lobby) take on the sports in which women & men could possibly compete equally, ie where strength isn't crucially important. emphasis on 'could', ignoring current differences in participation levels etc.

"events" isn't quite the right word, it's more like sports or disciplines, when you think of the huge number of different medals available for different swimming and running distances etc, the true picture is much bleaker than this.

I'm wondering about hip rotation/pelvis swivel.

Yes @DomesticatedZombie The Shakira Effect will have a negative impact on the angle of lean and stability. When standing on two legs women have a more stable base because of the wider WQ angle at the hip. On one leg though that wider angle become less stable, you want you leg directly under your body weight and men, with their narrower Q angle, have the advantage.

Archery?
Mixed sex archery?
I tried it once and couldn't even draw the string back.

Yep. Almost as if nature gave female arms an additional bend to negotiate tits!!

being exceptionally generous to the trans lobby it would probably be theoretically possible to have a distance/maximum bow poundage at which competition could be halfway equal, hence my question mark above.

I quite agree @BigFatLiar and was very surprised your post got removed by the moderators. We need to be reducing the number of special categories where the best are excluded we wouldn't do it where other groups have a perceived or actual morphological advantage so why do it with women unless it massively distorts the competition.

Women compete in BSB, NASCAR, equestrian, darts, lawn bowls. I agree the vast majority of sports don't allow women to complete at the top for biological reasons, but then it isn't that surprisingly that ask the average person to name the best athletes in the sport the are all going to be from the open category where they complete against the best. People watch sport where the product is the best (this in tern drives revenues and should be financially rewarded) and this is the open category.

Let me see. Just one issue er sport, there are more,, but these are the ones I think we can see, have experienceed ourselves:

Q angle and stability on one leg would be a detriment to women in bowls.

Archery: Women are more stable so have the advantage - once the bow is mechanised and phsyical strength remived from the equation

Shooting - women are more stable. Women should have the advantage, but guns are actually heavier than you think - I shoot, I know!

Curling, see bowls. If you watch you will see the knee-on-the-ice drift outwards that women fight and men do not!

People watch sport where the product is the best (this in tern drives revenues and should be financially rewarded) and this is the open category. Which is in effect the men's category... as we can see on a daily basis.

So what would you like - no women / all transwomen in women's sports. Or will you gracioulsy allow the female leagues? Maybe even watch them every now and then?

So the ability to have longer breaths have an impact on target sports and the ability to take more time to aim.

Also the strength needed to maintain your bow and aim in archery.

As I mentioned up thread, males have a quicker reflex time between seeing something and reacting for shooting.

sailing can be about strength and weight etc. strength in the speed it takes to wind that pulley up.

Have you ever watched those climbers? Males are generally taller, have stronger grip, can jump higher and faster, and have greater strength in general. I am sure these are just some obvious ones.

You could even go so far as to say male floor routine gynasts have many advantages including strength to throw things up in the air and faster muscles including jumping and twitch muscles to perform accurate and greater risk tricks waiting for that ball or ribbon to get back to them. (Worth seeking out the YOUTUBE clip of ex-women’s champion female gymnasts watching males do their routines and adding tricks and degrees of difficulty that women have never achieved (not because they haven’t tried).

The same applies with any acrobatic sport such as BMX and skateboarding. Muscle differences and speed etc make a huge difference in the height that can be gained to do tricks.

And fencing…. Longer arms? Twitch muscles, and again that eye reflex time all come into play.

At this level of sport, these minor differences can make the difference between getting into the team, getting into the final and getting a podium.

Also imagine what having menstrual cycle impacts would do? Ligaments, being more at risk of injury, and energy levels , and that is if you don’t have problem periods.

Shooting also covers those activities such as combination sports (particularly at winter) and being able to aim after running or skiing or whatever will advantage males.

Bottom line is sports are sex segregated, not gender segregated. Bodies play sport, not identities, and a woman is not basically a man with low testosterone! If this person is allowed in the women's game then it's a mixed sex event and anyone of either sex should be permitted to compete.

Article on difference between male & female archers
Difference male & female archers

TLDR men are taller and stronger so their bows are heavier with more tension so arrows fly further

On average men are taller and stronger and therefore can hit a golf ball much further than a woman. That makes a difference in their ability to par a hole or birdie/eagle it.

In shooting mens rifles are heavier than womens

men often use heavier stones than women in curling

as I said, it was a generous take. in almost all cases anything like true equality would require tweaks to scoring systems etc. but my main point was that the events where competition couldn't ever be fair hugely outnumber the ones where it might be. none of the red crosses are remotely debatable.

And FFS. Please name the female winners of NASCAR championships? How many compared to male winners?

do you honestly think it is only social issues that have meant this disparity?