this post was submitted on 02 Jul 2024
67 points (92.4% liked)

Asklemmy

43953 readers
789 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy πŸ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_[email protected]~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] -3 points 4 months ago (2 children)

The "people who control sports organizations" only made separate leagues for women because some mens' feelings get hurt when they lose to women.

There's no other point to segregating sports by gender, just straight white cis dudes getting bent out of shape by any challenge to their supposed superiority.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago) (1 children)

I think you mean sports without a physical activity aspect; and even then, sports like chess don't separate males and females (they offer female-only competitions).

There’s no other point to segregating sports by gender, just straight white cis dudes getting bent out of shape by any challenge to their supposed superiority.

What are you on about? There are two HUGE reasons: safety and fairness:

  1. Especially in contact sports, allowing women to play with men is not safe, and would only lead to an environment conducive to women getting injured.

  2. There would be zero professional female athletes (excluding sports that only require mental strategy ofc) if there were no separate leagues for women. They wouldn't perform at even close to the same level as the men, AND would be at increased risk of injury.

I don't know what fantasy world you live in, but here are biological factors that make it necessary to separate men and women in order to have fair competition. Female athletes would be infinitely worse off if forced to try to compete in a single league shared with men, because they aren't be able to.

[–] [email protected] -2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

I think you mean sports without a physical activity aspect

No, I do not.

Mens egos are so fragile that women were banned from minor league baseball when Jackie Mitchell struck out Babe Ruth and Lou Gherig in 1931.

Figure skating was segregated in 1903 for the same reason, Madge Syers took the silver medal from a man.

The history of womens' sports is rife with examples like this, most sports started out as co-ed and only stayed that way until women started winning.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago

Figure skating is a perfect example of a performance sport, there isnt any physicality. Also, I think its absolutely ridiculous to claim that Jackie Mitchell striking out an aging Ruth and Gherig in an exhibition match is a woman 'starting to win'.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Which sports do the women often beat the men in?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Ultra-endurance sports such as marathons (women show a statistical advantage over men above the 150-mile mark), Figure Skating (Madge Syers beat two men for the silver medal in 1902, women were then banned from competing until the sport was gender-segregated in 1906), Baseball (Jackie Mitchell struck out Babe Ruth and Lou Gherig in 1931 and was kicked out of the league a month later), Shooting sports (Zhang Shang took the gold in shotgun skeet in 1992, women were't allowed to compete again until the sport was gender-segregated in 2000, and women average higher scores in the rifle category to this day), etc etc.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 4 months ago (1 children)

Shootings an interesting one. Most people familiar with guns notice women take to shooting accurately more easily and quickly than guys (with rifles, not handguns). I've seen this lots personally. My theory involves lower heart rate and lower muscle mass being conducive.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

I dont know what they're on about with Mitchell.

(Jackie Mitchell struck out Babe Ruth and Lou Gherig in 1931 and was kicked out of the league a month later)

This lacks SO much context, it was an EXHIBITION match and she never played in the MLB, she played in the minors. Anyone reading that would assume she struck out two greats in a real game and was banned by the MLB.

There's a lot of truth to she shooting thing, that should absolutely be co-ed.

However, my point still stands: women and men should be separated if the sport has a physical component to its competition. (i.e. any sort of contact.)