Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[EuchreJack]

They're still segregated by gender.

They're segregated by sex. That isn't the same thing.
Historically, the decision was made to extend extra protection to sporting activities for female persons, who cannot compete at the same level as males in the vast majority of popular sports, and whose separate sports leagues rarely had enough interest to really justify the expense of running them, so that many sporting opportunities at the time were available only to males. If we still wish to guarantee equality of opportunity to female athletes, specifically, and not just as a side effect of their being the majority of 'women athletes', then some kind of accommodation still has to be made. In general, I don't see why anyone would think it would be wrong to support female athletes too. The problem seems to be the use of the dated terminology 'women's sports', which was understood to refer to female athletes.

I would also like to express a second time, just to be clear, that... well, first, "hormone levels read[ing] 'woman'" isn't really a thing. Hormones don't work like that. But second, more importantly, hormone levels are not significant to the difference in athletic performance, which is caused by gross skeletomuscular structural differences that cannot ever be changed.

Your sleazy law school article from Duke has already had it's methodology questioned.
The sample size of 8 men and women in your Springer Link article is too small.
"A cross-sectional study of muscle strength and mass in 45- to 78-yr-old men and women"...is not the age group of most athletes, and thus irrelevant.
"Hand-grip strength of young men, women and highly trained female athletes" while it's questionable why the sample size of men exceeded women by three-to-one, I am just going to say that firm handshakes do not solely define all athletic prowess, especially in cycling, and move on with my life.
Finally "But, women are actually more prone than men to suffer many of the most common sports-related injuries. There are a variety of reasons for this "gender gap," and there is much about it that remains uncertain." Does NOT justify segregation of gender in non-contact sports such as Cycling.

Got any real science to back up your junk pseudo-science beliefs?

[Strongpoint]

Under the rule change, she must Abandon her gender and fake the gender she was assigned at birth, or not participate.

It is not true. Participating in the male (by sex) league has nothing to do with her gender. Yes, she will be DEMOLISHED in the male sport but... well it is one of the effects of body autonomy. You can't do things to your body that make you a worse athlete and then expect special rules just for you. And it doesn't change if you have good reasons to do so.


And I am amazed that some people pretend that leagues are segregated separated because of misogyny.

[EuchreJack]

Under the rule change, she must Abandon her gender and fake the gender she was assigned at birth, or not participate.

It is not true. Participating in the male (by sex) league has nothing to do with her gender. Yes, she will be DEMOLISHED in the male sport but... well it is one of the effects of body autonomy. You can't do things to your body that make you a worse athlete and then expect special rules just for you. And it doesn't change if you have good reasons to do so.


And I am amazed that some people pretend that leagues are segregated separated because of misogyny.

You clearly don't get the point, and frankly should leave this thread.

[Maximum Spin]

Your sleazy law school article from Duke has already had it's methodology questioned.
The sample size of 8 men and women in your Springer Link article is too small.
"A cross-sectional study of muscle strength and mass in 45- to 78-yr-old men and women"...is not the age group of most athletes, and thus irrelevant.
"Hand-grip strength of young men, women and highly trained female athletes" while it's questionable why the sample size of men exceeded women by three-to-one, I am just going to say that firm handshakes do not solely define all athletic prowess, especially in cycling, and move on with my life.
Finally "But, women are actually more prone than men to suffer many of the most common sports-related injuries. There are a variety of reasons for this "gender gap," and there is much about it that remains uncertain." Does NOT justify segregation of gender in non-contact sports such as Cycling.

Got any real science to back up your junk pseudo-science beliefs?

Do you seriously not believe there are differences in athletic output between males and females? Have you ever actually watched a sport?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33572280/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8477683/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8194544/
https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/jab/7/1/article-p3.xml
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10671315.1979.10615607
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00140138708969760
https://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Abstract/1983/15030/Biological_determinants_of_the_sex_difference_in.7.aspx
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/036354657900700415
https://europepmc.org/article/med/1275845
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15795811/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7942046/
ETA: Accidentally left off this one https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/brzycki/files/mb-2002-01.pdf

I could keep going. The only reason I stopped after a handful of links last time is that I didn't think anyone would seriously contest one of the most replicated and, frankly, blatantly obvious effects in the field.

[Strongpoint]

Under the rule change, she must Abandon her gender and fake the gender she was assigned at birth, or not participate.

It is not true. Participating in the male (by sex) league has nothing to do with her gender. Yes, she will be DEMOLISHED in the male sport but... well it is one of the effects of body autonomy. You can't do things to your body that make you a worse athlete and then expect special rules just for you. And it doesn't change if you have good reasons to do so.


And I am amazed that some people pretend that leagues are segregated separated because of misogyny.

You clearly don't get the point, and frankly should leave this thread.

What exactly don't I get?
I should leave the thread because?

[EuchreJack]

Your sleazy law school article from Duke has already had it's methodology questioned.
The sample size of 8 men and women in your Springer Link article is too small.
"A cross-sectional study of muscle strength and mass in 45- to 78-yr-old men and women"...is not the age group of most athletes, and thus irrelevant.
"Hand-grip strength of young men, women and highly trained female athletes" while it's questionable why the sample size of men exceeded women by three-to-one, I am just going to say that firm handshakes do not solely define all athletic prowess, especially in cycling, and move on with my life.
Finally "But, women are actually more prone than men to suffer many of the most common sports-related injuries. There are a variety of reasons for this "gender gap," and there is much about it that remains uncertain." Does NOT justify segregation of gender in non-contact sports such as Cycling.

Got any real science to back up your junk pseudo-science beliefs?

Do you seriously not believe there are differences in athletic output between males and females? Have you ever actually watched a sport?

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33572280/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8477683/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8194544/
https://journals.humankinetics.com/view/journals/jab/7/1/article-p3.xml
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10671315.1979.10615607
https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/00140138708969760
https://journals.lww.com/acsm-msse/Abstract/1983/15030/Biological_determinants_of_the_sex_difference_in.7.aspx
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/036354657900700415
https://europepmc.org/article/med/1275845
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/15795811/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7942046/
ETA: Accidentally left off this one https://scholar.princeton.edu/sites/default/files/brzycki/files/mb-2002-01.pdf

I could keep going. The only reason I stopped after a handful of links last time is that I didn't think anyone would seriously contest one of the most replicated and, frankly, blatantly obvious effects in the field.

Well, I learned one thing today.
The US Government is clearly in support of the gender divide in sports.

[Maximum Spin]

Well, I learned one thing today.
The US Government is clearly in support of the gender divide in sports.

Well, it is mandatory under Title IX.

[EuchreJack]

Under the rule change, she must Abandon her gender and fake the gender she was assigned at birth, or not participate.

It is not true. Participating in the male (by sex) league has nothing to do with her gender. Yes, she will be DEMOLISHED in the male sport but... well it is one of the effects of body autonomy. You can't do things to your body that make you a worse athlete and then expect special rules just for you. And it doesn't change if you have good reasons to do so.


And I am amazed that some people pretend that leagues are segregated separated because of misogyny.

You clearly don't get the point, and frankly should leave this thread.

What exactly don't I get?
I should leave the thread because?

What you don't get is that this is the LGBTQ+ Thread, which would appear to me to be a thread to support the LGBTQ+ community, not to attack their members.
What you don't get is that you are attacking one of their members, Emily Bridges
What you don't get is that you are LYING about their member, Emily Bridges, by stating that "she will be DEMOLISHED in the male sport" because she was excelling in the Male side until she decided she couldn't live that life anymore. You don't KNOW how she might do against the males, you just ASSUME what you WANT to assume.
YOU are committing misogyny. Hopefully unintentionally.
YOU are at risk of being banned, hence my not-so-friendly suggestion that you might want to leave this thread before Toady drops a nuke on us all.

[EuchreJack]

Well, I learned one thing today.
The US Government is clearly in support of the gender divide in sports.

Well, it is mandatory under Title IX.

You are mischaracterizing the law. The law clearly states:
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

It does NOT divide the genders. In fact, it has been used to force male teams to accept female athletes.
FAKE NEWS is YOU

[EuchreJack]

Why is a cisgender male fighting the culture wars with two anti-woke knuckleheads at 1am?

[MrRoboto75]

Why is a cisgender male fighting the culture wars with two anti-woke knuckleheads at 1am?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvdBrF5qaww

[EuchreJack]

Why is a cisgender male fighting the culture wars with two anti-woke knuckleheads at 1am?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xvdBrF5qaww

LOL
Thanks, I needed that.

[Strongpoint]

What you don't get is that this is the LGBTQ+ Thread, which would appear to me to be a thread to support the LGBTQ+ community, not to attack their members.

I assume that on a public forum topics exist to... discuss topics. As long as it is done within the rules of the forum and respectfully.
 

What you don't get is that you are attacking one of their members, Emily Bridges

I didn't attack anyone. Did you miss the part where I said that I personally don't mind her participation because I don't think that potential advantage is large enough?

What you don't get is that you are LYING about their member, Emily Bridges, by stating that "she will be DEMOLISHED in the male sport" because she was excelling in the Male side until she decided she couldn't live that life anymore. You don't KNOW how she might do against the males, you just ASSUME what you WANT to assume.

The key word there WAS. If she will compete with men now, after reducing her testosterone levels, she will be demolished.

YOU are committing misogyny. Hopefully unintentionally.

In homo sapiens (and most mammalian species) males are physically stronger than females. It is the reality of biology. If holding this view is misogyny then I guess I am committing it.

Other than that, please, point out any example of my misogyny.

YOU are at risk of being banned, hence my not-so-friendly suggestion that you might want to leave this thread before Toady drops a nuke on us all.

Banned for breaking what rules?

[Maximum Spin]

You are mischaracterizing the law. The law clearly states:
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

It does NOT divide the genders. In fact, it has been used to force male teams to accept female athletes.
FAKE NEWS is YOU

That is the text of the law, yes. One of the key reasons it was adopted was explicitly to force colleges to fund "women's" leagues, and that's also the most common way it was used immediately after it was passed. The argument has been that female athletes are "denied the benefits of" combined leagues because they can't compete. You can disagree with that argument, but it's what courts accepted.
It's not fake news if it's documented history.

Calling me "anti-woke" is just childish. I believe that respecting people as individual human beings is not only compatible with, but demands an awareness of the limitations of biology and of history.

[Doomblade187]

Will people please stop spamming the thread with "muh skeletal structure" and increasing page count for no good reason?