Should men and women compete against each other in athletics?
tornACL2012
Posts: 38
Does it work better in some sports like soccer, but not work for things like martial arts?
0
Replies
-
I took krav for a few months. One of the strongest people in the room was a woman who is about 5'10 and 120lbs. She was routinely paired with males and was able to defeat them.
At my 10mi road race, most of the female finishers in the top 3 for the 20-40ish age groups were faster tham their male counterparts
ETA: I'm faster and stronger than most of my male coworkers. And many people in my running club say they want to run with me if we're attacked since I have the strength and explosion (plus viciousness and anger) to fend off an attacker.0 -
This content has been removed.
-
I want to add and I'm too lazy to edit...
It all depends on the determination of the people.
The weak-willed will always fail regardless of gender.
0 -
lishie_rebooted wrote: »I want to add and I'm too lazy to edit...
It all depends on the determination of the people.
The weak-willed will always fail regardless of gender.
So how does that translate on an elite level?0 -
tornACL2012 wrote: »Does it work better in some sports like soccer, but not work for things like martial arts?
Funny, you picked two that work exactly opposite than you said - martial arts is a great example of something for even footing.
Soccer, and other team sports, on the other hand are different.
At the pointy end, nothing prevents a woman from besting a man at martial arts, or anything else technique based.
At the pointy end, physiology prevents a woman from besting a man at most team sports and athletics. The 5000m at London was won by a man at 13:41. The fastest woman ran a 15:04.
But, if your not competitive, nothing matters either way.0 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »lishie_rebooted wrote: »I want to add and I'm too lazy to edit...
It all depends on the determination of the people.
The weak-willed will always fail regardless of gender.
So how does that translate on an elite level?
I don't think someone who is mentally weak would even make it that far0 -
lishie_rebooted wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »lishie_rebooted wrote: »I want to add and I'm too lazy to edit...
It all depends on the determination of the people.
The weak-willed will always fail regardless of gender.
So how does that translate on an elite level?
I don't think someone who is mentally weak would even make it that far
Kind of my point. I didn't think this post was limited to just the average person.
I mean, when I run a local road race, we may have male/female winners and age groupers, but we compete against each other as well regardless of gender. But if we are going to eliminate those, wouldn't it transfer over to the elite level.
And if we don't compete against each other at elite levels, why not and why should we at lower levels?0 -
In most sports, men just have an insurmountable size advantage.
All other things being equal, size usually wins.
Running? Every stride a taller male takes eats up more ground. A shorter woman has to take x number more strides to cover the she ground.
Martial arts? The larger man has a reach advantage, and is probably more able to throw his lighter female opponent than vice versa.
There are probably some sports where it could work though. Tennis? Golf?0 -
This content has been removed.
-
Definitely not in sports that require bodily contact with each other, such as wrestling or football. Performing those sports requires physical contact that is inappropriate between people of the opposite sex.0
-
dougpconnell219 wrote: »In most sports, men just have an insurmountable size advantage.
All other things being equal, size usually wins.
Running? Every stride a taller male takes eats up more ground. A shorter woman has to take x number more strides to cover the she ground.
Martial arts? The larger man has a reach advantage, and is probably more able to throw his lighter female opponent than vice versa.
There are probably some sports where it could work though. Tennis? Golf?
Tennis no. Golf no. Men in tennis hit harder and are quicker. In golf, men hit the ball father and can get to the green sooner.0 -
No, at least not in contact sports. Men have a size and strength advantage. While a specific woman could be faster or stronger than a specific man, the strongest and fastest are always men.0
-
Because at the physical pinnacle, men would beat women every time in most sports. There's records to prove it and everything. For instance, Flo Jo's world record is almost a second slower than Usain Bolt's.
That would then lead to women not getting sponsorship/funding at all because there's no chance of them being in the elite and you would see women in sports becoming even less visible than they are currently.
That's not to say that some sports (think pub sports e.g. darts, snooker) women could compete as equals to men. Horse racing has had more female jockeys introduced recently, for instance. Formula 1 and other motorsports also have the ocassional women drivers.
But, out and out physical sports it would ruin women within that sport because they'd have no chance to be best in the world.
That would include tennis (30 mph difference in fastest serve speed) and probably golf (35 yd average driving distance difference.)
My resources are google and wikipedia, so not gospel, but you get the idea.0 -
Lumpy52403 wrote: »Definitely not in sports that require bodily contact with each other, such as wrestling or football. Performing those sports requires physical contact that is inappropriate between people of the opposite sex.
What if they're gay?0 -
lishie_rebooted wrote: »I took krav for a few months. One of the strongest people in the room was a woman who is about 5'10 and 120lbs. She was routinely paired with males and was able to defeat them.
At my 10mi road race, most of the female finishers in the top 3 for the 20-40ish age groups were faster tham their male counterparts
ETA: I'm faster and stronger than most of my male coworkers. And many people in my running club say they want to run with me if we're attacked since I have the strength and explosion (plus viciousness and anger) to fend off an attacker.
Thank you for this hilarious post, I had to re-read it a few times to catch the full impact of what I was looking at.myfelinepal wrote: »Because at the physical pinnacle, men would beat women every time in most sports. There's records to prove it and everything. For instance, Flo Jo's world record is almost a second slower than Usain Bolt's.
That would then lead to women not getting sponsorship/funding at all because there's no chance of them being in the elite and you would see women in sports becoming even less visible than they are currently.
That's not to say that some sports (think pub sports e.g. darts, snooker) women could compete as equals to men. Horse racing has had more female jockeys introduced recently, for instance. Formula 1 and other motorsports also have the ocassional women drivers.
But, out and out physical sports it would ruin women within that sport because they'd have no chance to be best in the world.
That would include tennis (30 mph difference in fastest serve speed) and probably golf (35 yd average driving distance difference.)
My resources are google and wikipedia, so not gospel, but you get the idea.
Pretty much all of this. Off the top of my head, there are some women that have done pretty well in auto racing. In fact, being small is generally an advantage if not a requirement. Trying to fit into one of those F1 cockpits for example is not for 6'4" dudes. Lighter means faster too as oftentimes the minimum race weight is just for the car, not including the driver.
But yeah, to the OP, anything involving athletics would be silly to pit men against women. It's not an insult, it's just reality.0 -
uconnwinsnc1 wrote: »dougpconnell219 wrote: »In most sports, men just have an insurmountable size advantage.
All other things being equal, size usually wins.
Running? Every stride a taller male takes eats up more ground. A shorter woman has to take x number more strides to cover the she ground.
Martial arts? The larger man has a reach advantage, and is probably more able to throw his lighter female opponent than vice versa.
There are probably some sports where it could work though. Tennis? Golf?
Tennis no. Golf no. Men in tennis hit harder and are quicker. In golf, men hit the ball father and can get to the green sooner.
With golf, I was assuming ladies tees were employed.0 -
Yes, they should. I played three on three sand volleyball today, the other team had woman. She was far better skilled than me in back court, which gave her team a competitive advantage over us. Women have always been given crutches, many use them even when they don’t need to. I’d take a committed woman over an uncommitted man any day.0
-
AllanMisner wrote: »Yes, they should. I played three on three sand volleyball today, the other team had woman. She was far better skilled than me in back court, which gave her team a competitive advantage over us. Women have always been given crutches, many use them even when they don’t need to. I’d take a committed woman over an uncommitted man any day.
Obviously, but that isn't really a fair comparison. At the highest level of any sport requiring athleticism, men are the better bet to win. If we are going to do a true comparison in athleticism, it makes no sense to bring dedicating and commitment into it since those are really unmeasurable traits.0 -
tornACL2012 wrote: »Does it work better in some sports like soccer, but not work for things like martial arts?
Why not? We're equal.
I'd like to see Junior Dos Santos against... well... anyone.0 -
tornACL2012 wrote: »Does it work better in some sports like soccer, but not work for things like martial arts?
Why not? We're equal.
I'd like to see Junior Dos Santos against... well... anyone.
My dream fight is Ronda Rousey versus the 135lb men's champ (currently Dillashaw). I wonder if she'd make it through a round. I severely doubt it, a minute or two would be pushing it.0 -
uconnwinsnc1 wrote: »If we are going to do a true comparison in athleticism, it makes no sense to bring dedicating and commitment into it since those are really unmeasurable traits.
You know it when you see it, and that’s all that matters. You could be bigger, stronger and faster, but if you’re not making an effort, someone who is less endowed can kick your *kitten*. Since the OP was talking about general competition, I don’t immediately jump to the top of the food chain in each sport. I also don’t assume she meant sports that men would always have a physical advantage in (you and I would look pretty weak playing a in a college level field hockey match).
0 -
tornACL2012 wrote: »Does it work better in some sports like soccer, but not work for things like martial arts?
Why not? We're equal.
I'd like to see Junior Dos Santos against... well... anyone.
My dream fight is Ronda Rousey versus the 135lb men's champ (currently Dillashaw). I wonder if she'd make it through a round. I severely doubt it, a minute or two would be pushing it.
Her vs GSP would be good for me. To hell with weight classes.0 -
AllanMisner wrote: »uconnwinsnc1 wrote: »If we are going to do a true comparison in athleticism, it makes no sense to bring dedicating and commitment into it since those are really unmeasurable traits.
You know it when you see it, and that’s all that matters. You could be bigger, stronger and faster, but if you’re not making an effort, someone who is less endowed can kick your *kitten*. Since the OP was talking about general competition, I don’t immediately jump to the top of the food chain in each sport. I also don’t assume she meant sports that men would always have a physical advantage in (you and I would look pretty weak playing a in a college level field hockey match).
Meh. I've seen monster athletes with no motivation absolutely stuff people in competition who are trying hard. Then they just laugh and walk away.0 -
I don't know? There are physiological limits. In some sports, men only compete with other men in their weight class, probably for good reason.
The women at the top 10% probably represent our limits, but I do think that the anemic feeder systems for women in a lot of sports means we have no idea what kind of potential just isn't being tapped. Who knows what things could look like if young girls had the same encouragement and infrastructure boys have enjoyed.0 -
AllanMisner wrote: »Yes, they should. I played three on three sand volleyball today, the other team had woman. She was far better skilled than me in back court, which gave her team a competitive advantage over us. Women have always been given crutches, many use them even when they don’t need to. I’d take a committed woman over an uncommitted man any day.
What about a committed woman vs a committed man? Why is it always 'Good thing vs bad thing' and not 'good thing vs good thing'.
This reeks of 'Balanced diet Vs Only poptarts and chocolate'0 -
AllanMisner wrote: »Yes, they should. I played three on three sand volleyball today, the other team had woman. She was far better skilled than me in back court, which gave her team a competitive advantage over us. Women have always been given crutches, many use them even when they don’t need to. I’d take a committed woman over an uncommitted man any day.
What about a committed woman vs a committed man? Why is it always 'Good thing vs bad thing' and not 'good thing vs good thing'.
This reeks of 'Balanced diet Vs Only poptarts and chocolate'
In sports that both women and men play, men have consistently been better than the women. So, apples to apples, men win. Is that what you needed to hear?
0 -
No.0
-
AllanMisner wrote: »AllanMisner wrote: »Yes, they should. I played three on three sand volleyball today, the other team had woman. She was far better skilled than me in back court, which gave her team a competitive advantage over us. Women have always been given crutches, many use them even when they don’t need to. I’d take a committed woman over an uncommitted man any day.
What about a committed woman vs a committed man? Why is it always 'Good thing vs bad thing' and not 'good thing vs good thing'.
This reeks of 'Balanced diet Vs Only poptarts and chocolate'
In sports that both women and men play, men have consistently been better than the women. So, apples to apples, men win. Is that what you needed to hear?
I just like things to be straight forward and not skewed by silly conditions and 'if' statements. To put qualifiers like 'dedication' and 'will' on things makes them meaningless statements.0 -
Lumpy52403 wrote: »Definitely not in sports that require bodily contact with each other, such as wrestling or football. Performing those sports requires physical contact that is inappropriate between people of the opposite sex.
I used to do no gi jui-jitsu and regularly trained with guys (where you have a guy between your legs or vice versa hald the time) as there were no other women. It was totally fine and appropriate.0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 393.4K Introduce Yourself
- 43.8K Getting Started
- 260.2K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.9K Food and Nutrition
- 47.4K Recipes
- 232.5K Fitness and Exercise
- 426 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.5K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 153K Motivation and Support
- 8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.7K MyFitnessPal Information
- 24 News and Announcements
- 1.1K Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.6K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions