|
On November 21 2011 23:45 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 23:30 Holytornados wrote:On November 20 2011 13:08 qrs wrote:On November 20 2011 13:02 Syth wrote:
So you're saying those boys shouldn't be allowed to swim then?
Seriously, it's school swimming. Who actually cares if boys are competing with girls. Competition is competition. Trust me, people care. And I'm saying that those boys shouldn't be allowed to swim on the girls' team. If that means that they can't swim for the school at all, because there isn't a boys team, well that's too bad, but it's no worse than not being able to swim because your school doesn't have any swim team. Which, for instance, my high school didn't. It's really not as tragic as you're making it out to be. Put it differently, suppose that for whatever reason there was a swimming program in a middle school but not the associated high school. Would you say that high schoolers should be able to swim against middle schoolers because of "fairness"? That's a pretty backwards way to look at it, imo. Remember, I'm not saying that they shouldn't be able to use the pool. Just that they shouldn't be able to compete against girls in state-sanctioned competition. To me that seems like common sense. If this would have happened with the sexes reversed, I feel like you wouldn't be making this argument. You're right, I wouldn't be, because boys aren't disadvantaged by having to compete against girls.
yes they are. just because some boys are above even the best girls, the vast majority of people can easily find a girl more physically capable than them. yet theres no special effort made for 5ft and under boys. maybe there should be but there isnt, and its the same situation as being born a girl.
|
[B]
Seriously, fuck organized sports. Berkeley is giving her a full ride scholarship for her ENTIRE education
While that is terrible, surely she still won't be able to get a job with said grades? So it will hurt her eventually?
@Holykitty
Sports exist to get viewers. There is a market to watch girls compete. Same with disabled. But people who are merely disadvantaged? No one would show up to watch.
|
On November 20 2011 12:57 qrs wrote:[center] ![[image loading]](http://www.heraldnews.com/archive/x1655832308/g2e22e20000000000000ae03aefb2d3c2159d4b35352cbe338ef24559a0.jpg) Norwood’s Will Higgins, center, recently took first place in the 50-yard freestyle at the Girl’s South Sectional MIAA meet.
lmao at the skinny dude at the bottom flexing when he got beaten by a bunch of girls
|
holy shit lol. Best idea ever... -.-
this is so silly... i mean stop saying its fair to do so. guys and girls are physiologically different and thus shouldn't compete in equal arenas, without any trace of sexism. and when you let the guys compete, there's going to be that girl in 2nd who should have been 1st, forever only able to be 2nd because a guy who shouldn't even have swam took 1st, and thats just heartbrekaing
|
On November 22 2011 08:05 CeriseCherries wrote:
holy shit lol. Best idea ever... -.-
this is so silly... i mean stop saying its fair to do so. guys and girls are physiologically different and thus shouldn't compete in equal arenas, without any trace of sexism. and when you let the guys compete, there's going to be that girl in 2nd who should have been 1st, forever only able to be 2nd because a guy who shouldn't even have swam took 1st, and thats just heartbrekaing
Did you read the thread?
The boys are joining the girl teams because the schools don't want to fund a boys team.
blame the shitty state governments and their poor funding of the US education system.
|
On November 22 2011 08:07 SafeAsCheese wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 08:05 CeriseCherries wrote:
holy shit lol. Best idea ever... -.-
this is so silly... i mean stop saying its fair to do so. guys and girls are physiologically different and thus shouldn't compete in equal arenas, without any trace of sexism. and when you let the guys compete, there's going to be that girl in 2nd who should have been 1st, forever only able to be 2nd because a guy who shouldn't even have swam took 1st, and thats just heartbrekaing Did you read the thread? The boys are joining the girl teams because the schools don't want to fund a boys team. blame the shitty state governments and their poor funding of the US education system.
Or, more appropriately, blame Title IX. More males want to participate in sports than females, but we have to have balance regardless.
|
On November 22 2011 07:46 Soleron wrote:
While that is terrible, surely she still won't be able to get a job with said grades? So it will hurt her eventually?
She doesn't need an education. She will make so much money swimming professionally that it won't even matter. She ruined her family financially and is emotionally and educationally stunted beyond all belief (she throws temper tantrums. Literally. On the ground, kicking and screaming.)
Yeah, sports are all about personal growth. She never has, and never will, take responsibility for anything in her life.
|
On November 22 2011 07:49 SpeaKEaSY wrote:
lmao at the skinny dude at the bottom flexing when he got beaten by a bunch of girls
lmao at people who think those girls couldn't kick their asses. Have you ever seen competitive swimmer girls? They're horrifying. Built like dumptrucks with shoulders like incontrol's. I met a girl from Berkeley that was wearing a shirt so tight her biceps were literally bulging out of it, like the fabric itself was about to give way, all she-hulk style.
|
Let him swim on the team. Give him access to the training and experience. He should not be allowed to compete. He looks like he has a 20 - 30 pound muscle advantage just for starters.
|
On November 22 2011 08:29 Honeybadger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 07:49 SpeaKEaSY wrote:
lmao at the skinny dude at the bottom flexing when he got beaten by a bunch of girls lmao at people who think those girls couldn't kick their asses. Have you ever seen competitive swimmer girls? They're horrifying. Built like dumptrucks with shoulders like incontrol's. I met a girl from Berkeley that was wearing a shirt so tight her biceps were literally bulging out of it, like the fabric itself was about to give way, all she-hulk style.
Guys have a humongous advantage over girls. For example, the qualifying time to make the girls' State-wide competition in Washington is something like 28 seconds for 50 meter freestyle. It's 26 seconds for boys. On a typical boy's team, 28 seconds is usually the average time for the worst swimmer. In other words, the average high school boy who knows little about swimming could easily become one of the top swimmers on a girls team given enough instruction on his form and some weight lifting.
There is really no good reason to allow boys to compete in girls events, where they are likely to dominate. The whole point of segregating the sexes is to give girls a chance to compete in events; that is equality, not assuming away physical differences between girls and boys. If the high school doesn't offer a boys swim team, then they can go swim with their club swim team.
|
On November 22 2011 07:45 macil222 wrote:Show nested quote +But don't you agree that from the perspective of a school that wants to get the maximum amount of prestige by winning a lot of stuff, the ideal choice of action would be to simply overfund one male team, like f.E. football, and spend all of the other money on girls teams for varying sports where males are physically favored, and then fill those girls teams up with males who "sadly" have to compete in the womens league because the school "sadly" does not have a males team for that sport? And is that situation not inheretly absurd? It would be absurd but it is not at all realistic, it would never happen. Boys will want to play on a boys team whenever possible. The wins wouldn't mean anything anyways if they are intentionally stacking the deck. Also there is not all that much prestige for winning high school level sports (with the exception of American football)..there is just no real incentive for schools to do what you are suggesting. Students, athletes, parents teachers, coaches, colleges..no one would allow it.
I agree, that argument was pretty hyperbolic, i also somehow more and more get the feeling that i simply don't understand how sports work in america at all. All those school sport teams with strange rules and laws, sport scholarships and stuff like that don't really make a lot of sense to me.
Show nested quote +You also absolutely don't seem to get the difference between competing in a higher weight class, and competing in a lower one. The one is accepting a disadvantage to compete in a more prestigous league, the other is taking an unfair advantage to grab easy wins. Thus, one is acceptable, the other is not. The boys aren't dropping into a "lower" league to grab easy wins. They are joining the only league that is available to them because they want to play because for one reason or another the school cannot fund a boys team. And the girls team is not strictly a "lower" league, it is more like a parallel league. In practice the results for the girls are worse than boys but that does not make it a lower league, if a girl came along who was stronger and faster than the boys and the fastest swimmer in the entire country she would still swim on the girls team...if it was a lower league then fast girls would move up into the boys team.
I think that the comparision between a female league, and a league for a lower weight class is pretty good. In both cases, you have a direct disadvantage. Sure, there could be some very good boxer that can still beat people one class higher. But he has to be far better than them to do so. And from what i read in this thread, apparently average competing male swimmers get times similar to the top females. Sure, there might be a girl that is just that incredibly extraordinary good that she could beat the best boys, but she would have to be an outstanding talent to be able to do that even in a mediocre competition. It is not a lower league as there is no ascendence, that is right. But it still makes sense to split the competition, just like it makes sense to split the competition into weight classes for some sports. This way, both can have a fair competition with people who have a similar handicap.
And to be honest, female sports does usually not grant the same rewards as male ones, simply because it is usually far less popular among the viewers, and thus does rewards both less fame and less money.
Show nested quote +Not to mention that absurdly warped logic you are sporting of "You acknowledge that males and females have bodily differences which are advantageous for males and certain sports, and by accepting that fact and having different leagues, you promote the idea that they are exactly the same." I don't even know how to react to that. It just makes no sense, so i don't even see how i would argue with that, since there is simply no sense in it, at all. Yeah you are right, now that I am reading that it is not clear at all what I was trying to say. Basically I was responding to the guy who accused people of pretending that biological gender differences do not exist, which no one argued btw. He argues to keep boys and girls sports separate because of their biological differences which make boys inherently better at physical sports than girls. He doesn't want boys on girls teams because it is unfair to girls because they might get outclassed. But there are no lower leagues or special teams for boys who are weak, short, scrawny etc In my view where I see everyone as individuals I see some of the under performing individuals allowed to play in a special team and receive equal rewards and funding as the top performing individuals (who in practice would be mostly but not entirely male) just because they are female while other under performing individuals who are not female have no opportunity to play their best and be rewarded based on their own skill level. So my questions were why is it so important that girls have their own separate chance to compete and earn titles and trophies while plenty of other groups of people for one reason or another cannot? And how can he support something like title ix which he described as imperfect..it is not imperfect it is bad and it hurts many individual athletes who just want to play the sports that are offered.
I don't know what that title ix does or how it works, so i won't comment on that part. However, from what i read, you both seem to agree that it does really work well, you just choose to use different words for that. Also, a lot of this paragraph seems to refer to strange american systems i don't really understand, so i will not talk about most of it. I find that in most cases, if there is something which would be both impossible to change for the person and important for the result of the competition, there is a seperate league for it. For example, you can only change your mass in a good way(muscles, not fat) to some degree, so there are different weight classes in many sports. You can not suddenly stop to be female, and it obviously has a large effect on the results through physiology (I am pretty sure that breasts alone are pretty annoying in many sports) so there is a female league. If you are physically or mentally handicapped, there are basically dozens of different leagues regarding what exactly your problem is. This is especially true for individual sports, in team sports it is different, but we are not talking about those anyways.
Show nested quote +
Also, you seem to have that strange notion that there is not competition between people in individual sports. I have no idea where you got that idea, but it is simply not true. You don't just race to improve your own time. You race to beat other people. You want to win that race, not improve your own time by 0.08 seconds. Of course, you could handle that by throwing everyone into a bin, and then sort the results afterwards. Or you could be sensible and just arrange it so that the people who are actually competing with each other are racing each other, and have no need to sort stuff out afterwards. I have the feeling that you never actually competed in such a sport, and thus have absolutely no idea what you are talking about.
Having a couple boys in a race does not have to change anything. They will be racing vs the boys and it should encourage them to move faster just as if they were racing a girl. All of the athletes have their times recorded after a race so it is not a big deal to "sort" them out by gender since you are talking about a few boys in a pool full of girls.
It does change a lot. As you can see in that picture posted above, those boys actually take medals for female championships. Now that is not only absurdly idiotic, since they obviously are not female, and thus should not be able to win a medal in female swimming. Now, it would not be a problem if they would actually do it like you suggested, and sort the times afterwards, and have winners in female and male sports. This would basically only mean that you have a seperate competition for the males, which just happens to be at the same time in the same place as the one for the girls. It would probably also collide with the actual boys competition that is some place else at some different time, and where i still don't understand why they could not simply send them there, but one could probably deal with that. However, having them take medals for female sports is a big problem because of the advantage that they have. It IS a female competition after all, specifically designed for female sports.
Show nested quote +
Another thing: Why don't you just use quotes like everyone else? It makes it much easier to follow what is your statement, and what is the one you are replying to when compared to that bolding stuff you use
It is all the same to me but since people seem to like it this way then I'll start using the quotes. /shrug
Thanks. Most people use bolds for the synopsis of their posts, so i was totally confused reading yours before i realized what you were doing.
Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 04:31 Simberto wrote:On November 22 2011 04:09 Krikkitone wrote:
The problem is that having a female team to allow for female access to sports, is equivalent to having a weakling male team for weakling male access to sports.
Instead of having weight classes or gender classes, sport compettions should be in ability classes. (similar to Chess). Weight and Gender can be what constitutes the initial placement. After that, every time you win you move up in "ability rating". and may find yourself competing with higher levels
School sports teams are then open to All ability levels (still able to get kicked off the team for slacking or bad behavior, and probably separate girls boys locker rooms) Oh, it is not like that in the states? Sorry, i was just assuming that a system like that is already in place. Basically every competative sport here has many different leagues, starting from very small regional ones which usually also have multiple layers, and when you win a lot, you can move up into higher leagues like statewide, or country-wides. Those where it makes sense are still divided in male and female and/or weight classes, though, so that might not have been what you meant. This is basically what I like but I see little difference in most sports to segregate by gender as long as everyone can compete at a level most suited to them but more importantly that people can play any sport that is offered and not be locked out due to gender.
Yes, this again seems to be a case of me simply not understanding how stuff works in America. Being completely locked out from performing a sport you want to perform is simply not something that happens here at all. If you are not good enough, you might not get to compete in team sports a lot if you join a team that is better than you, but many clubs have a second or third team for such a thing, and if you behave like a total asshole you might get kicked out of a club (though i have never seen that happen in my time in sports clubs), but i am pretty sure that i could find a club for pretty much every sport i can imagine. Of course, you have to pay a membership fee in those, but usually these are not very high unless you want to do something very special.
The point why seperation of genders is a good idea in many sports is because it gives a goal. If it were not there, no women could ever be champion in most sports, simply because of biology. This way, you have a best male and a best female sportsmen. Even though the male probably has a better result then the female, this still does not diminish her accomplishment of being the best female at something.
|
On November 22 2011 04:31 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 04:09 Krikkitone wrote:
The problem is that having a female team to allow for female access to sports, is equivalent to having a weakling male team for weakling male access to sports.
Instead of having weight classes or gender classes, sport compettions should be in ability classes. (similar to Chess). Weight and Gender can be what constitutes the initial placement. After that, every time you win you move up in "ability rating". and may find yourself competing with higher levels
School sports teams are then open to All ability levels (still able to get kicked off the team for slacking or bad behavior, and probably separate girls boys locker rooms) Oh, it is not like that in the states? Sorry, i was just assuming that a system like that is already in place. Basically every competative sport here has many different leagues, starting from very small regional ones which usually also have multiple layers, and when you win a lot, you can move up into higher leagues like statewide, or country-wides. Those where it makes sense are still divided in male and female and/or weight classes, though, so that might not have been what you meant.
No, not for school sports (which I personally think are a bad idea) In those you compete by grade/gender groupings. weight for something like wrestling. The German system definitely sounds preferable.
|
On November 22 2011 08:42 domovoi wrote:
Guys have a humongous advantage over girls. For example, the qualifying time to make the girls' State-wide competition in Washington is something like 28 seconds for 50 meter freestyle. It's 26 seconds for boys. On a typical boy's team, 28 seconds is usually the average time for the worst swimmer. In other words, the average high school boy who knows little about swimming could easily become one of the top swimmers on a girls team given enough instruction on his form and some weight lifting.
There is really no good reason to allow boys to compete in girls events, where they are likely to dominate. The whole point of segregating the sexes is to give girls a chance to compete in events; that is equality, not assuming away physical differences between girls and boys. If the high school doesn't offer a boys swim team, then they can go swim with their club swim team.
You misinterpreted me, broceratops. I was just making fun of the guy saying that it's shameful to be beaten by a girl in the pool. I'm 23 and in fantastic shape (Summited Mt. Rainier without a single day of practice or preparation beyond putting my pack together) and my girlfriend's little sister (17 years old) is a full minute faster than me in any stroke imaginable, doing a 500. I could probably take her in fisticuffs, but she's seriously buff and could definitely deal some damage. Most TL-ers would be scared of her. To put things in perspective, she qualified for her first olympic trials at THIRTEEN in the 100m butterfly. That's REAL olympics, swimming with 26 year olds. her 100 fly, at age 13, was 3 seconds faster than michegan state's cut for the open men's bracket.
I don't care about competition, I think it's fucked up and sad to even think that we need to consider this in the first place. I don't care if boys compete with girls, or vice versa. I would just do it as a personal growth scenario. The best form of competitive team aspects I ever had was the marching band in high school. We were some of the best in the state. But it was all about you and your peers doing something you felt proud of. When we were working our way up from one of the worst to one of the best, we had lots of middle-of-the-road ratings, but we NEVER gave a crap what the judges thought. We were proud of our work, and that's what our director stressed we focus on. We pushed ourselves to the limit for ourselves and nobody else, and even when that resulted in a less-than-perfect review by the judges, when we were on the way home, we were just as proud of ourselves as if we'd come in first.
Long-winded rant aside, I think a fair solution would be to just have the boy swim with the girls in training and then just shuttle him over to another school's team to swim in competition. That, or he could do a club-swim (which I hate for the above reasons, but it's an alternative)
I just hate that we care about what place people finish in. I'd be more impressed if we did it timestamps style, like drag racing, where a lowly honda civic can beat a twin turbo dodge viper because his times are more consistent, not faster. I know that's not ideal (stifles pursuits for faster times) but it'd be better than the way it is now, because the money and the focus we have on professional and college sports is outright PATHETIC. And below that, we have kids who basically ruin their entire lives and social/educational development in the pursuit of a possibility that may never occur.
The only "real" sport I approve of is golf and certain racing circuits (World rally, touring cars, etc.)
|
On November 21 2011 09:09 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 08:42 Ronald_McD wrote:
They're swimming with girls, not as girls. As fits quite well. If you join a Polo game with someone riding on your back, then you joined it as a horse. Edit: Not that there is anything wrong with it, but if you read the title of Video and click play, then you are 100% gay.
no homo but I would go gay for him.
|
On November 22 2011 08:11 cLutZ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 08:07 SafeAsCheese wrote:On November 22 2011 08:05 CeriseCherries wrote:
holy shit lol. Best idea ever... -.-
this is so silly... i mean stop saying its fair to do so. guys and girls are physiologically different and thus shouldn't compete in equal arenas, without any trace of sexism. and when you let the guys compete, there's going to be that girl in 2nd who should have been 1st, forever only able to be 2nd because a guy who shouldn't even have swam took 1st, and thats just heartbrekaing Did you read the thread? The boys are joining the girl teams because the schools don't want to fund a boys team. blame the shitty state governments and their poor funding of the US education system. Or, more appropriately, blame Title IX. More males want to participate in sports than females, but we have to have balance regardless.
Ding ding ding. Such a stupid system. Rutgers University had to cut the mens swim and diving teams because there's no girls equivalent for football, etc. so they have to keep it "equal."
fucking retarded.
|
On November 22 2011 10:47 Honeybadger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 08:42 domovoi wrote:
Guys have a humongous advantage over girls. For example, the qualifying time to make the girls' State-wide competition in Washington is something like 28 seconds for 50 meter freestyle. It's 26 seconds for boys. On a typical boy's team, 28 seconds is usually the average time for the worst swimmer. In other words, the average high school boy who knows little about swimming could easily become one of the top swimmers on a girls team given enough instruction on his form and some weight lifting.
There is really no good reason to allow boys to compete in girls events, where they are likely to dominate. The whole point of segregating the sexes is to give girls a chance to compete in events; that is equality, not assuming away physical differences between girls and boys. If the high school doesn't offer a boys swim team, then they can go swim with their club swim team. You misinterpreted me, broceratops. I was just making fun of the guy saying that it's shameful to be beaten by a girl in the pool. I'm 23 and in fantastic shape (Summited Mt. Rainier without a single day of practice or preparation beyond putting my pack together) and my girlfriend's little sister (17 years old) is a full minute faster than me in any stroke imaginable, doing a 500. I could probably take her in fisticuffs, but she's seriously buff and could definitely deal some damage. Most TL-ers would be scared of her. To put things in perspective, she qualified for her first olympic trials at THIRTEEN in the 100m butterfly. That's REAL olympics, swimming with 26 year olds. her 100 fly, at age 13, was 3 seconds faster than michegan state's cut for the open men's bracket. I don't care about competition, I think it's fucked up and sad to even think that we need to consider this in the first place. I don't care if boys compete with girls, or vice versa. I would just do it as a personal growth scenario. The best form of competitive team aspects I ever had was the marching band in high school. We were some of the best in the state. But it was all about you and your peers doing something you felt proud of. When we were working our way up from one of the worst to one of the best, we had lots of middle-of-the-road ratings, but we NEVER gave a crap what the judges thought. We were proud of our work, and that's what our director stressed we focus on. We pushed ourselves to the limit for ourselves and nobody else, and even when that resulted in a less-than-perfect review by the judges, when we were on the way home, we were just as proud of ourselves as if we'd come in first. Long-winded rant aside, I think a fair solution would be to just have the boy swim with the girls in training and then just shuttle him over to another school's team to swim in competition. That, or he could do a club-swim (which I hate for the above reasons, but it's an alternative) I just hate that we care about what place people finish in. I'd be more impressed if we did it timestamps style, like drag racing, where a lowly honda civic can beat a twin turbo dodge viper because his times are more consistent, not faster. I know that's not ideal (stifles pursuits for faster times) but it'd be better than the way it is now, because the money and the focus we have on professional and college sports is outright PATHETIC. And below that, we have kids who basically ruin their entire lives and social/educational development in the pursuit of a possibility that may never occur. The only "real" sport I approve of is golf and certain racing circuits (World rally, touring cars, etc.)
tl;dr - sports should be about feeling good about yourself and not winning? There's no reason they can't be about both imo.
|
I don't understand why the meet doesn't allow for male and female events, even if there were no male teams. Or even open events, but with male and female rankings. The meet organizers didn't do a very good job.
EDIT:
On November 22 2011 10:47 Honeybadger wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 08:42 domovoi wrote:
Guys have a humongous advantage over girls. For example, the qualifying time to make the girls' State-wide competition in Washington is something like 28 seconds for 50 meter freestyle. It's 26 seconds for boys. On a typical boy's team, 28 seconds is usually the average time for the worst swimmer. In other words, the average high school boy who knows little about swimming could easily become one of the top swimmers on a girls team given enough instruction on his form and some weight lifting.
There is really no good reason to allow boys to compete in girls events, where they are likely to dominate. The whole point of segregating the sexes is to give girls a chance to compete in events; that is equality, not assuming away physical differences between girls and boys. If the high school doesn't offer a boys swim team, then they can go swim with their club swim team. You misinterpreted me, broceratops. I was just making fun of the guy saying that it's shameful to be beaten by a girl in the pool. I'm 23 and in fantastic shape (Summited Mt. Rainier without a single day of practice or preparation beyond putting my pack together) and my girlfriend's little sister (17 years old) is a full minute faster than me in any stroke imaginable, doing a 500. I could probably take her in fisticuffs, but she's seriously buff and could definitely deal some damage. Most TL-ers would be scared of her. To put things in perspective, she qualified for her first olympic trials at THIRTEEN in the 100m butterfly. That's REAL olympics, swimming with 26 year olds. her 100 fly, at age 13, was 3 seconds faster than michegan state's cut for the open men's bracket. I don't care about competition, I think it's fucked up and sad to even think that we need to consider this in the first place. I don't care if boys compete with girls, or vice versa. I would just do it as a personal growth scenario. The best form of competitive team aspects I ever had was the marching band in high school. We were some of the best in the state. But it was all about you and your peers doing something you felt proud of. When we were working our way up from one of the worst to one of the best, we had lots of middle-of-the-road ratings, but we NEVER gave a crap what the judges thought. We were proud of our work, and that's what our director stressed we focus on. We pushed ourselves to the limit for ourselves and nobody else, and even when that resulted in a less-than-perfect review by the judges, when we were on the way home, we were just as proud of ourselves as if we'd come in first. Long-winded rant aside, I think a fair solution would be to just have the boy swim with the girls in training and then just shuttle him over to another school's team to swim in competition. That, or he could do a club-swim (which I hate for the above reasons, but it's an alternative) I just hate that we care about what place people finish in. I'd be more impressed if we did it timestamps style, like drag racing, where a lowly honda civic can beat a twin turbo dodge viper because his times are more consistent, not faster. I know that's not ideal (stifles pursuits for faster times) but it'd be better than the way it is now, because the money and the focus we have on professional and college sports is outright PATHETIC. And below that, we have kids who basically ruin their entire lives and social/educational development in the pursuit of a possibility that may never occur. The only "real" sport I approve of is golf and certain racing circuits (World rally, touring cars, etc.)
I disagree with what you say. If you don't like the sport, or approve of it, then don't do it. Some people genuinely care about said sport. Sure, they may not make it to the Olympics, but it doesn't matter if you're doing what you care about.
Could you explain why you hate club-swimming? I don't really see what you're saying.
Also, I'd like to point out that swimming is a sport in which there are really only two things (we're not counting the pool conditions, sure they might matter a little bit, but at a major competition, it'll be peachy-keen. Same goes for the atmosphere -- swim meets are pretty well mannered in my experience, unlike soccer games), the clock, and you. You advocate for personal growth. Well, swimming does this pretty well. Swimmers are always looking to improve their times: it doesn't matter about the person in the lane next to you, because they can't affect your race. At the end of the day, it's you and the clock.
EDIT:
On November 21 2011 23:43 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 12:06 PenguinWithNuke wrote:As a swimmer, I think that this is ridiculous. There is no way in hell that the competition between boys and girls is at all fair. Boys are naturally faster than girls (think muscle density, strength, testosterone), and will always be faster. Also, look at that guy on the podium. He's just a huge pack of muscle. Now look at the girls. Does that look fair to you? For example, take me, an average swimmer: I can swim faster for a particular event, the 100 breastroke, than a girl (who is the state champion for girls in backstroke events). I'm merely average, as I don't have any championships under my belt, and I am not even close to the all-American time. It's not fair to allow males to compete with females. On November 20 2011 13:10 Fenrax wrote:
lol
There is a reason why this is only practiced in Massachusetts: Common sense. Also these boys are a bunch of sissys. "Competing" with girls in a sport that requires muscle power? Probably even proud when they won. I don't understand what you're saying. Are you insulting the boys? If you are, stop shitting out your mouth. No male takes pride in beating females in strength-based sports. I am questioning their decision to abuse that hole in the rules. I am just a white guy with the nicest parents possible but I am sure they'd have something not so nice to say to me if I decided to participate in a woman's tournament and steal their Gold medals... Also take a look at the pic on the front page. He looks very proud on the podium.
The proudness of the person on the podium is an irrelevant/unprovable point (IMO, he looks neutral). So let's drop that (my bad for brining it up a bit. Though you share the blame for claiming that the boy was indeed proud).
Where in the article does it say that they are abusing the rules? It seems more like the people being forced into a disagreeable situation. Think about it this way: this is news, on the internet. It will never go away. If you were the boy (or were in any way responsible for him), would you hang him out to dry, by putting him in a situation where he would be ridiculed for "abusing rules to steal gold medals"? Your argument doesn't quite make sense.
Also, there was no choice in the matter: either the boy didn't swim (unfair to him), or the boy swims in a women's event (unfair to the girls). And the boy didn't steal a gold medal.
And you didn't explain your part about Massachusetts and common sense. If you could, that'd be nice.
|
On November 22 2011 14:30 PenguinWithNuke wrote:
I don't understand why the meet doesn't allow for male and female events, even if there were no male teams. Or even open events, but with male and female rankings. The meet organizers didn't do a very good job.
^ this
The YMCA system does this and does it well. Teams are male/female and train together, and this is not a problem because everyone trains differently in swimming. When it comes to events, you usually run heats separated into women's and men's. Once you hit around freshman year in high school - the difference in results is staggering except for a few talented girls.
|
yo, this is individual sport, just send the boy sat boy's competition and girls at girl's competition.
|
Can't really be bothered to read the whole thread but I'll throw my two cents in, in starcraft terms.
Boy = Diamond (average time: 26 seconds)
Girl = Gold (average time: 28.5 seconds)
[probably not accurate times, used for example purposes anyways]
It's ok if a Silver leaguer wants to try to play in a tournament full of Diamond players, it's their choice to try to fight up in a level.
It's not ok if a Diamond leaguer wants to play in a Gold and under tournament against mostly Gold and some Silver players, since the Diamond player is almost guaranteed to win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
