Should women's sports have separate websites on BBC Sport, Sky News, etc.?

fez said:
Funnily enough, you would think that but even in sports that don't appear to have a particular advantage in physicality, women are still almost always second best. Fundamentally, any competitive endeavour that is a sport gives you some advantage when you are stronger, faster, have faster reactions, more aggression etc.

Even things like snooker, darts, motor sports, they all are dominated by men. Some of that will be societal and might change as more women take part but men and women are built differently and wired differently. You have to accept and celebrate that difference rather than try to directly compare.
Click to expand...

Yep , Men are naturally more at home in a competitive environment and have a stronger desire to win. Much like we compete for females.

Men are wired up differently and women tend to be more passive.

Sports probably derived from civilised humans trying to move away from gladiatorial battles to the death so it's not surprising the strongest still dominate :)
 
Hedge said:
Yep , Men are naturally more at home in a competitive environment and have a stronger desire to win. Much like we compete for females.

Men are wired up differently and women tend to be more passive.

Sports probably derived from civilised humans trying to move away from gladiatorial battles to the death so it's not surprising the strongest still dominate :)
Click to expand...
I guess the thousands of years of hunter gatherer leads shows up in modern day competitions.
 
opethian said:
That's a very likely scenario, and thank you for taking the time and having the patience to explain that in detail. :)

I stand corrected on my stance, with a small reservation, as I think there would be sports where sex might not be a bigger factor (or not even a factor at all) compared to others.
Click to expand...

Nice to have a civil discussion on the internet! Agree that there are some sports which aren't impacted as much, or at all, by sex of the competitors. The Equality Act 2010 makes reference to this by stating that exceptions where discrimination based on sex is permitted are in 'gender-affected' sports. Defined as:

"A gender-affected activity is a sport, game or other activity of a competitive nature in circumstances in which the physical strength, stamina or physique of average persons of one sex would put them at a disadvantage compared to average persons of the other sex as competitors in events involving the activity."

Some people mistakenly (or deliberately) misinterpret that as stating that all males are stronger than all females, which is clearly not the case. It's when you look at the range of performance across all members of each sex that it becomes clear, with the upper limits on performance far greater for males in the 99th percentile, which then cascades downwards, so that someone in the 50th percentile of male performance will always be stronger/faster than a female peer in the 50th percentile of female perfomance.

Sports where strength/speed aren't the prime determinants can allow female competitors to compete with and in some cases exceed the performance of male athletes. One that springs to mind is one of the ultra-extreme 'loop' endurance events, which is determined more by ability to tolerate pain and mental tenacity and was won by a woman.
 
Von Luck said:
Nice to have a civil discussion on the internet!
Click to expand...

Yes! I would like to think that we can all learn from discussions from people we come across, regardless if it's in person or virtually - as you have proven, thanks.

I am curious however how the topic of trans-athletes will be resolved. If we can't get rid of male/female categories, are we introducing a third one then? It's all getting a bit complicated and you have trigger-happy -overwoke people ready to pounce even on the uninitiated when you inquire about things.
 
Participant said:
Whxd6OI.png

Definitely the most important sporting story in the world at the moment, yessir.
Click to expand...

Nice to seem them do well, however nobody cares about Scottish football:

Untitled.jpg
 
opethian said:
Yes! I would like to think that we can all learn from discussions from people we come across, regardless if it's in person or virtually - as you have proven, thanks.

I am curious however how the topic of trans-athletes will be resolved. If we can't get rid of male/female categories, are we introducing a third one then? It's all getting a bit complicated and you have trigger-happy -overwoke people ready to pounce even on the uninitiated when you inquire about things.
Click to expand...

The option which sporting bodies like British Triathlon are going with is to have two categories; 1. female-at-birth only, 2. open. That provides full inclusion and avoids female competitors competing against males with an athletic advantage (unless they want to try their luck in the open category). Transmen not taking extrageneous testosterone would be eligible for the female-at-birth category, those taking testosterone would need to apply for a Theraputic Use Exemption (as it's a banned performance enhancing drug) which if granted would permit them to compete in the open category only.

It's a model that I support as a good balance between fairness, inclusion and low administrative overhead.
 
resurgam said:
We get it, you don't like women's sport, but I'm not sure it needs you to necro your own thread everytime there's something you don't like on the BBC Sport website.
Click to expand...
Not a lot of the posting on this forum is anything to do with need.

To be clear it's nothing to do with the fact that it's women, it's because it's poor quality. Women's sport promotes the opposite of equality because superior ability gets less airtime since it's based on who has a fanny rather than skill.
 
Participant said:
Not a lot of the posting on this forum is anything to do with need.

To be clear it's nothing to do with the fact that it's women, it's because it's poor quality. Women's sport promotes the opposite of equality because superior ability gets less airtime since it's based on who has a fanny rather than skill.
Click to expand...
So focus should only be given to peak ability? So no focus on football below Premier League for example?

More exposure to women's sport will lead to more investment and more women and girls playing sport, which will raise ability, which is a good thing according to your criterion.
 
LabR@t said:
Equality is not giving everything/one a label.

We are becoming more divided by the day under the pretence of equality
Click to expand...

Funny how all these big corporations, studios, large organisations, govts, tv channels etc are totally 100% behind every form of equality known to man - except financial...
 
Participant said:
It is utter dross. Hell even women don't show up to support and further women's sport. They'd rather watch Strictly and I'm a Celebrity.

So with a lack of women supporting their own, it falls to men to feign interest (on pain of death it sometimes seems) and cross subsidise an inferior product.
Click to expand...
get some fitter looking players if they want it to be popular
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom