Boys swimming as girls - Page 3

Jonoman92

United States9105 Posts

November 20 2011 04:20 GMT

#41

On November 20 2011 13:18 Lebzetu wrote:
Well it's not like it really matters in that sport, right? Male genetic attributes cant really help you when it comes to swimming.

Lol. Go google swimming records for men and compare them to those same records for women. They are definitely not the same.

Maxd11

United States680 Posts

November 20 2011 04:20 GMT

#42

This is really a strange situation and I think that what is being done is the right thing for fairness. That said the boys shouldn't be able to go to a state competition against girls and if the scoring is done by teams the boys times should not be averaged in.
PS as far as the girls competing is boys wrestling goes I really don't see how a girl can possibly lose. The boy has to lie down on his face at the start of the match to lose as quickly as possible if he doesn't want to get arrested.

Neb1000

United States183 Posts

November 20 2011 04:20 GMT

#43

You all are assuming that they are better than all the girls, and in swimming skill matters more than strength, so if they are unskilled they will still be bad no matter how much stronger they are. And about the bikini thing, it causes more drag to wear a bikini, so none of them wear one, that is why in the Olympics all the guys wear the full body wet suit looking things.

DanceSC

United States751 Posts

November 20 2011 04:21 GMT

#44

"That means, among other things, that if a school has a girls swim team but no boys swim team (due to insufficient funding/interest), then they have to let boys swim on the girls team. They compete with the girls in intramural competition up to the state level."
If there is any dispute I think the blame should go on the school for not offering a separate team for males. I am not trying to sound sexist, and the same goes for females. If they are interested in a sport (say wrestling) and there is not enough interest or funding, then they join the boys team. I do not think it should be called 'girls wrestling as guys' just as the title says 'guys swimming as girls'. Just because the girl wrestles on a guy team does not make her a guy, just like a guy having no option but to swim with the girls team make him a girl. If there is a disbute about fairness in the sport, then blame the school for not offering more.

peekn

United States1152 Posts

November 20 2011 04:21 GMT

#45

On November 20 2011 13:18 ffadicted wrote:
So much hypocrisy in this thread. I don't know how people can take a stand where girls can play in guys teams, but guys can't play in girls teams. Either pick no shared teams, or both shared and stand behind that point.

I myself think it's fine, if there's no guys teams they should definitely be able to practice and compete with the girl's team, doesn't make sense why they would lose the right to compete in the sport they love just because of their sex.

Ok hypothetical time:

You are a girl and competing in the 100m at a track meet, for some reason they let a boy compete in your race, mind you this is the race that wins the meet. You get beat by the boy and get second place. He now stands above you on the podium.

Now how is that any fair? You should be the one wearing the gold (or whatever it is). That isn't fair to the other competitors and shouldn't be allowed.

TruthIsCold

51 Posts

November 20 2011 04:23 GMT

#46

If the schools can't afford two separate teams, then clearly they shouldn't classify their only team as a "girls" team.

Because then people will nonsensically argue that the boys are somehow receiving an advantage.

If this only school team was a boys team, and they let girls on the team, we wouldn't even have a thread here. It's all in the definition, which is irrelevant any way you look at it.

AnachronisticAnarchy

United States2957 Posts

November 20 2011 04:23 GMT

#47

This is just stupid. Sexual equality is all fine, but sometimes girls or guys are just naturally better at certain things. This is one of them. Guys, generally speaking, are better at this.
$50 says some dumb@$$ politician did this for political points.

Djzapz

Canada10681 Posts

November 20 2011 04:23 GMT

#48

Dear first world problem batman.

Girls swimming team + guys = Swimming team.
If the guys have an advantage, please consider Flash and Jaedong had an advantage against the girls (all other players) in their respective teams. That's fine because it's a "team".

I mean what's the alternative to a mixed team if the school can't fund separate teams... Sorry guys you're SOL. Sigh, crazy day.

feanor1

United States1899 Posts

November 20 2011 04:24 GMT

#49

On November 20 2011 13:05 Bonkarooni wrote:

Show nested quote +

On November 20 2011 12:57 qrs wrote:

Norwood High School's Anthony Rodriguez and Evelyn Metta during practice. Six boys compete on Norwood's girls team.

(photo and caption from the New York Times. Click the photo to read the article.)

The New York Times ran a pair of articles this weekend about high school girls swim teams in Massachusetts. By state law, Massachusetts public high schools have to provide equal access to sports for both sexes. That means, among other things, that if a school has a girls swim team but no boys swim team (due to insufficient funding/interest), then they have to let boys swim on the girls team. They compete with the girls in intramural competition up to the state level.

There have been news stories about various similar situations before, usually going the opposite way. Once in a while you hear about a girl who makes a football team (usually as kicker); once in a longer while, she actually gets to play. There are a number of girls who join boys wrestling teams; they sometimes make the news when they make it to the State finals. A couple of times they've even won (usually in the lowest weight class). There have also been stories about guys joining girls gymnastics teams.

This seems different, though. If a girl wants to join a boys' team, she's essentially 'fighting up' a weight class: more power to her. If a boy joins a girls gymnastics team: fine, they're largely competing on intangibles like artistry, where he doesn't have an edge. Swimming, though, is a sport where strength is definitely an advantage. There's a reason why swim teams are segregated in the first place. If it's fair to allow boys to swim on the girls swim team in cases like this, why isn't it fair in other cases (e.g. where there are swim teams for both)? Conversely, if it isn't fair in other cases, why is it fair here?

As I see it, there's just no logic in allowing boys to swim as girls. That's how I put it in the title of the thread, and I know that might be a bit provocative, but I think it's true. It's called a "girls'" swim team, and they're letting certain boys join it. It's not as if the word "girls" is just a meaningless name, it has clear relevance. Most boys can't compete in these events. Can't, as in not allowed. The only boys who can compete 'as girls' are the ones who happen to reside within a school district that has a swim team for the girls and none for the boys. State law mandates this in the name of "equal opportunity", but really it's anything but.
+ Show Spoiler [more pictures of the Norwood Girls Swi…] +

(photos and captions from the New York Times)
[image loading]

Rodriguez, center, is among roughly two dozen boys who compete on girls teams in Massachusetts because their schools do not have boys swimming programs.

[image loading]

Norwood Coach Kim Goodwin, left, said she was a vocal opponent of boys' competing with girls before she had boys on her team.

Follow-up article about the results

Despite your sexism, you may of had an argument here if the main purpose of high school sports was to win/lose. Denying these young man a chance to do what they love and grow as a person seems more unfair then the slight edge they get from being men in a swimming competition/denying them a chance at a college scholarship, which may be the only way they can pay for college.

Its intramural swimming, no one there has a realistic shot a scholarship. I'm assuming that there is a separate Varsity level of swimming in Massachusetts.
Not that level of competition, and on that note, intramural sports are hardly about winning so I don't see a huge problem with this

Golem72

Canada127 Posts

November 20 2011 04:25 GMT

#50

Somehow I'd still like to see a guy win a girls competition and go off boasting and gloating about it. Like completely bonkers into how little effort they actually put into winning.

Ps. LOL!

qrs

United States3637 Posts

November 20 2011 04:26 GMT

#51

On November 20 2011 13:20 Neb1000 wrote:
You all are assuming that they are better than all the girls, and in swimming skill matters more than strength, so if they are unskilled they will still be bad no matter how much stronger they are. And about the bikini thing, it causes more drag to wear a bikini, so none of them wear one, that is why in the Olympics all the guys wear the full body wet suit looking things.

Actually, if you read the follow-up article, a girl ended up winning the state championships. So, yeah, it's not all about strength. The guy who came second was a boy, though. .07 seconds behind. And remember, the girl who won was the best girl in the state. The guy who came second was not the best guy in the state. He was just the best guy who happened to go to a school with no boys swim team.

The thing is, it's not about skill vs. strength. Guys are just as capable of being skilled as girls, but girls on average are not genetically capable of being as strong as guys. That means that when you put it all together, guys have an advantage--and you can bear that out just by looking at the record times for girls and boys. They're not the same, you know. That's why it's not fair to allow some men into a competition for women.

And to everyone saying, "well, at 16 boys may be stronger, but at 14, girls have the advantage", well, sure, but who do you think wins high school competitions? The 9th-graders?

Pawsom

United States928 Posts

November 20 2011 04:26 GMT

#52

If theres boys and girls on the team, why even call it a girls swim team? Why not just have a swim team?

qrs

United States3637 Posts

November 20 2011 04:29 GMT

#53

On November 20 2011 13:23 TruthIsCold wrote:
If the schools can't afford two separate teams, then clearly they shouldn't classify their only team as a "girls" team.

Because then people will nonsensically argue that the boys are somehow receiving an advantage.

If this only school team was a boys team, and they let girls on the team, we wouldn't even have a thread here. It's all in the definition, which is irrelevant any way you look at it.

You're totally wrong about that. If the only school team was a boys team, then when they competed against other schools, they'd be competing against boys, rather than against girls, which is the case here.

If they did do that, then the ones who would be complaining would be the girls, of course, and with right.

The sensible thing to do here would be to revise the system so that schools could send individual swimmers to compete in regional and state meets, regardless of whether the school officially had a "girls team" or a "boys team". If that were how it worked, then you'd be right about the whole thing being irrelevant. That's currently not how it works, though.

Zirith

Canada403 Posts

November 20 2011 04:31 GMT

#54

Well, most swimming teams have men and women training together regularly anyway. I really don't see a problem with this. It does seem unfair that the men have to compete against women but if there is literally no other option then they need to get their tournament experience somewhere. Just remember that the boys do not want to compete against girls, it is probably just as uncomfortable for both sides. That being said, those boys are pretty lucky that they actually get to swim for their school.

metbull

United States404 Posts

November 20 2011 04:34 GMT

#55

why am I not seeing any articles about girls competing on boys football teams?

ffadicted

United States3545 Posts

November 20 2011 04:35 GMT

#56

On November 20 2011 13:21 peekn wrote:

Show nested quote +

He was better than her, how is that not fair if it was a mixed competition anyway? It's not like the guy chose to swim in the girl's meet, he didn't have a choice in the matter, it's a mixed meet anyway at this point. And I would say that at high school level, the advantage that a guy would have over a girl if they've both practiced to the same skill point otherwise is being highly overblown.

qrs

United States3637 Posts

November 20 2011 04:36 GMT

#57

On November 20 2011 13:14 Alay wrote:

Show nested quote +

I don't like your "tough shit, don't swim" outlook. If that was a reasonable conclusion in this scenario, then you're only hurting someones potential to do something that could very well be incredibly important to them--and it's not an ideology that sits well if taken away from something like swimming and put into other aspects ("Though shit, you don't get an education.. I didn't have one growin up on the farm!")

Either the school needs to get together with each other and form a boys swim team, or they need to add classifications for sorting. Weight limits are a good starting point--I'm fairly certain that in equal weight (assuming we're talking about fit people here, not fat-weighted) both genders have relative strength equality. If not sufficient, I'm sure some other form of classification would work out to keep the sport unisexed.

Regardless, these boys want to swim, just like those girls from the previous thread want to wrestle. They should be allowed to, and if necessary be placed on opposite-sex teams due to lack of better arrangements. I'm more apt for a unisex athletic world though.

Further, sex divisions in sports have the problem of thinking too far in a binary. There's a massive range of differences between individuals in each sex. There's some men who are smaller built, have less natural muscle, etc, and there are some women who are built like tanks. Then you have to consider transgendered--do we go by gender, or anatomical sex? If the prior, you end up in situations where a possible unfair advantage could occur (though realistically it's a lot smaller of a possible advantage.) If the later, you end up screwing a lot of people into non-competitive situations and forcing them out of sports.

Why not bring everyone together, and have a more realistic way of sorting them out.

I think you're right, and so is everyone else who's said, "just telling them they can't swim isn't fair to them"--and I think that's a problem that people should try to solve. I just don't think that this is the solution.

The genders don't have relative strength equality. Google it if you don't believe me.

feanor1

United States1899 Posts

November 20 2011 04:38 GMT

#58

On November 20 2011 13:34 metbull wrote:
why am I not seeing any articles about girls competing on boys football teams?

Generally they are kickers, and they have no innate genetic advantage over the competition

dogabutila

United States1437 Posts

November 20 2011 04:39 GMT

#59

Holy shit, people who are all like, zomg biology boys are stronger then girls are so fucking retarded they don't even understand what they are talking about.

Girls develop faster then boys, boys end up stronger then girls. But it takes them years and years longer to get there. There isn't much of a difference in highschool. You don't see major differences across the board until college.

docvoc

United States5491 Posts

November 20 2011 04:40 GMT

#60

this is fine unlike the wrestling because there is no brute force, but at this level more technique. i mean why can't they just let him compete on another school's team? i know they do that for us in the TSSAA, we have a lot of students from other schools play our sports here.

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 14 15 16 Next All

Please or register to reply.

Boys swimming as girls - Page 3

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming