Gender segregation is usually done to encourage less dominant groups in sports. Like chess, for instance (good comparison to video games).
Women have higher avg IQ than men. Sex based physiological differences have zero impact. Women are in theory just as good as men at chess.
In practice, women do not perform well at chess compared to men in high level competitive play. Why? Fewer women play chess because of sociological/cultural reasons, therefore by the law of large numbers we don’t yet have a Magnussy Carlsen.
The solution? Create womens leagues where they can compete against other women in the game and see more success. If womens chess leagues continue to gain traction, inspire more women to play chess, increase the size of the talent pool, then eventually womens leagues won’t be necessary - the talent pools between genders will homogenize.
Another example is football (soccer), but between countries. American atheletes have dominated a great many sports at various times - basketball, american football, track and field, swimming, tennis. Why has the USA never won the world cup? Relatively few Americans play football compared to other countries, so the talent pool is smaller and the USA doesn’t have major global talents like other countries do. The answer? Build the domestic competitive infrastructure needed to produce talent. If the US does this, eventually it will not suck at football because the talent pool will be larger and it will have global talents.
Nitpicking but it’s worth mentioning the US women’s soccer team was insanely dominant for most of 2010 -> 2020, Rapinoe, Morgan and gang inspired tons of young girls to get into football, while the men’s never achieved anything
That’s a really good point - especially because soccer in the US is more popular among girls. Less so now, but traditionally more women played soccer in highschool/college than men - who were more drawn to basketball/baseball/football. I was just talking about mens soccer, but womens is a great example.
If you have to justify it based on sociological and cultural reasons, that’s not a good example cause at that point one could use the same arguments to justify racial segregation.
That’s a crazy comparison to make. Segregation excludes people while women’s sports includes people. Many “men’s” leagues are actually just open. The only reason women don’t join is due to sociological and cultural reasons. As women integrate more into the culture, women’s leagues are less and less needed since the women who want to compete will prefer the open league. It’s an inclusive force.
Frankly, if you start by trying to include women and end up segregating based on race, I question whether you were ever working in good faith.
Tbf I don’t think there should be mens leagues. Just an open league. So i don’t entirely disagree. But regardless that is supposed to be the point of having separate leagues.
The solution? Create womens leagues where they can compete against other women in the game and see more success.
Sorry, in terms of solving the root cause of the problem this suggestion doesn’t make sense to me.
The solution is to decrease people from making judgements based on in most cases* meaningless differences like gender or skin colour, e.g., to not think “You got beat up by a girl? How pathetic!” anymore. Basically prevent any prejudiced, juvenile, or toxic male thought patterns which scares people from ever trying something. I hate that running competition results are still segregated by gender. I don’t give a rats ass what the gender or country of origin of the person was who beat me, I simply care about the thrill of competing and the festive yet athletic mindset that comes with it.
An analogy, I think it was a stupid decision to make emoji distinctions by skin colour. Why? It exactly undermines the entire purpose of having done so for inclusivity by putting even more emphasis on differences in skin colour. Yellow was perfect because nobody is yellow so it simultaneously represents everyone an no one, except for sick people who are jaundiced.
* Exceptions: pregnancy, sickle cell disease, et cetera.
An analogy, I think it was a stupid decision to make emoji distinctions by skin colour. Why? It exactly undermines the entire purpose of having done so for inclusivity by putting even more emphasis on differences in skin colour. Yellow was perfect because nobody is yellow so it simultaneously represents everyone an no one, except for sick people who are jaundiced.
Well goddamn, the history and backlash behind 🙂 totally came out of left field. I knew I should’ve used black and white Unicode emoticons instead; ☺ ☻ *. However, I stick to my point though, and at 18:39 the interviewee pretty much agrees.
Ehhhhhh… Sure some genders will have benefits in certain sports, but… so what?! Let the individuals with the skills be recognized.
At the level of world-class athletes, they’re ALL genetic freaks of nature. Who the flying fuck cares what’s between their legs?! They’re already uniquely gifted. Just let the entire spectrum of humanity shine, for fuck’s sake.
False, because “you’re wrong but I won’t tell you why” is not a valid argument and a useless contribution.
“It is better either to be silent, or to say things of more value than silence. Sooner throw a pearl at hazard than an idle or useless word; and do not say a little in many words, but a great deal in a few.” ―Pythagoras (570–496 BC)
Probably because you’re a weirdo that “criticized” them by stalking their account and mentioning irrelevant details in an attempt to insult someone that was trying to argue with you in good faith. The edit here is hilarious because you just make yourself look like more of a douchebag.
Yeah dude, you’re a weirdo and a douchebag for clicking on someone’s public profile and commenting on completely unrelated shit because you couldn’t think of a better retort.
I’m also sorry that you are so out of your depth with me that you are unable to understand the concept of hyperbole, a basic literary device that everyone in the entire world engages in.
Let me clarify, I am a douchebag. But, no, we won’t be diving into this “paradox of tolerance” bullshit.
You were being an asshole for the sake of being an asshole. I called you out for being an asshole. That doesn’t make me an asshole. It just makes you a crybaby that can’t handle what they dish out. Grow up.
I know you like engaging in internet arguments, especially to “win”. I know this because you left an edit on your comment after you were blocked and you wanted the last laugh.
Here is the reality. You lost this argument. You can come back if you want, but you’re blocked! And you can comment again to try and get your last laugh, but I promise you, any audience reading this will be making fun of you.
In my perfect world, sports wouldn’t be gendered, but would have some sort of class system like boxing weight classes. The best boxers in the world will be the heavyweights but smaller people can still compete against somebody their size. Why did boxing figure this out before basketball got height classes? I’ll never know.
Another way of interpreting your comment is dismissing differences and simply making people all compete against each other. This would obviously exclude all women from most sports so you’d have to be a pretty committed misogynist to think that was preferable to gendered sports.
Like your boxing example.
On lichess.org new accounts gets the average Elo rating from where they can work their way up or down. In sports one can simply go to a club and start off with the beginners or where they or a coach think they could manage and work their way up.
Another way of interpreting your comment is dismissing differences and simply making people all compete against each other. This would obviously exclude all women from most sports so you’d have to be a pretty committed misogynist to think that was preferable to gendered sports.
This wouldn’t be misogynist but bullying because heavyweight men/women would beat up featherweight men/women too.
Gender segregation shouldn’t be done in anything as far as I know. Just pit skill against skill.
Gender segregation is usually done to encourage less dominant groups in sports. Like chess, for instance (good comparison to video games).
Women have higher avg IQ than men. Sex based physiological differences have zero impact. Women are in theory just as good as men at chess.
In practice, women do not perform well at chess compared to men in high level competitive play. Why? Fewer women play chess because of sociological/cultural reasons, therefore by the law of large numbers we don’t yet have a Magnussy Carlsen.
The solution? Create womens leagues where they can compete against other women in the game and see more success. If womens chess leagues continue to gain traction, inspire more women to play chess, increase the size of the talent pool, then eventually womens leagues won’t be necessary - the talent pools between genders will homogenize.
Another example is football (soccer), but between countries. American atheletes have dominated a great many sports at various times - basketball, american football, track and field, swimming, tennis. Why has the USA never won the world cup? Relatively few Americans play football compared to other countries, so the talent pool is smaller and the USA doesn’t have major global talents like other countries do. The answer? Build the domestic competitive infrastructure needed to produce talent. If the US does this, eventually it will not suck at football because the talent pool will be larger and it will have global talents.
Nitpicking but it’s worth mentioning the US women’s soccer team was insanely dominant for most of 2010 -> 2020, Rapinoe, Morgan and gang inspired tons of young girls to get into football, while the men’s never achieved anything
That’s a really good point - especially because soccer in the US is more popular among girls. Less so now, but traditionally more women played soccer in highschool/college than men - who were more drawn to basketball/baseball/football. I was just talking about mens soccer, but womens is a great example.
If you have to justify it based on sociological and cultural reasons, that’s not a good example cause at that point one could use the same arguments to justify racial segregation.
That’s a crazy comparison to make. Segregation excludes people while women’s sports includes people. Many “men’s” leagues are actually just open. The only reason women don’t join is due to sociological and cultural reasons. As women integrate more into the culture, women’s leagues are less and less needed since the women who want to compete will prefer the open league. It’s an inclusive force.
Frankly, if you start by trying to include women and end up segregating based on race, I question whether you were ever working in good faith.
Tbf I don’t think there should be mens leagues. Just an open league. So i don’t entirely disagree. But regardless that is supposed to be the point of having separate leagues.
Sorry, in terms of solving the root cause of the problem this suggestion doesn’t make sense to me.
The solution is to decrease people from making judgements based on in most cases* meaningless differences like gender or skin colour, e.g., to not think “You got beat up by a girl? How pathetic!” anymore. Basically prevent any prejudiced, juvenile, or toxic male thought patterns which scares people from ever trying something. I hate that running competition results are still segregated by gender. I don’t give a rats ass what the gender or country of origin of the person was who beat me, I simply care about the thrill of competing and the festive yet athletic mindset that comes with it.
An analogy, I think it was a stupid decision to make emoji distinctions by skin colour. Why? It exactly undermines the entire purpose of having done so for inclusivity by putting even more emphasis on differences in skin colour. Yellow was perfect because nobody is yellow so it simultaneously represents everyone an no one, except for sick people who are jaundiced.
* Exceptions: pregnancy, sickle cell disease, et cetera.
Why Are Emoji Yellow? by Lily Alexandre 33 minutes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vio9Yr0x4YY
Well goddamn, the history and backlash behind 🙂 totally came out of left field. I knew I should’ve used black and white Unicode emoticons instead; ☺ ☻ *. However, I stick to my point though, and at 18:39 the interviewee pretty much agrees.
* In case one of these shows as an emoji, the intention is to render these as non-emoji black and white Unicode glyphs:
.
Removed by mod
Ehhhhhh… Sure some genders will have benefits in certain sports, but… so what?! Let the individuals with the skills be recognized.
At the level of world-class athletes, they’re ALL genetic freaks of nature. Who the flying fuck cares what’s between their legs?! They’re already uniquely gifted. Just let the entire spectrum of humanity shine, for fuck’s sake.
False, because “you’re wrong but I won’t tell you why” is not a valid argument and a useless contribution.
Removed by mod
I’m sorry you feel that way. To avoid ambiguity, I’m criticizing your argument, not you as a person.
Removed by mod
Probably because you’re a weirdo that “criticized” them by stalking their account and mentioning irrelevant details in an attempt to insult someone that was trying to argue with you in good faith. The edit here is hilarious because you just make yourself look like more of a douchebag.
Removed by mod
Yeah dude, you’re a weirdo and a douchebag for clicking on someone’s public profile and commenting on completely unrelated shit because you couldn’t think of a better retort.
I’m also sorry that you are so out of your depth with me that you are unable to understand the concept of hyperbole, a basic literary device that everyone in the entire world engages in.
Let me clarify, I am a douchebag. But, no, we won’t be diving into this “paradox of tolerance” bullshit.
You were being an asshole for the sake of being an asshole. I called you out for being an asshole. That doesn’t make me an asshole. It just makes you a crybaby that can’t handle what they dish out. Grow up.
I know you like engaging in internet arguments, especially to “win”. I know this because you left an edit on your comment after you were blocked and you wanted the last laugh.
Here is the reality. You lost this argument. You can come back if you want, but you’re blocked! And you can comment again to try and get your last laugh, but I promise you, any audience reading this will be making fun of you.
So good luck bud 👍 have a good night
You’re a bad person aren’t you.
What do you mean “skill against skill”?
In my perfect world, sports wouldn’t be gendered, but would have some sort of class system like boxing weight classes. The best boxers in the world will be the heavyweights but smaller people can still compete against somebody their size. Why did boxing figure this out before basketball got height classes? I’ll never know.
Another way of interpreting your comment is dismissing differences and simply making people all compete against each other. This would obviously exclude all women from most sports so you’d have to be a pretty committed misogynist to think that was preferable to gendered sports.
Like your boxing example.
On lichess.org new accounts gets the average Elo rating from where they can work their way up or down. In sports one can simply go to a club and start off with the beginners or where they or a coach think they could manage and work their way up.
This wouldn’t be misogynist but bullying because heavyweight men/women would beat up featherweight men/women too.
It would be bullying and misogyny.