|
There have been news stories about various similar situations before, usually going the opposite way.
This quote shows the heart of the problem.
Equality is a two way street. It is just as possible for boys to be disadvantaged as girls, but society as a whole is much more accustomed to the notion of girls receiving opportunities as a means of promoting equality. So when it happens with boys, it makes somewhat of a "splash".
And equality is the crux of the argument here. Equality will always come at some cost to the group that is currently in the position of power. In this case it's the girls.
Is this situation fair to the girls? No, The boys are stronger and will have an advantage. But what would be even less fair is preventing the boys from swimming at all. It's the same situation with girls joining boys' football: It's not quite fair to the boys that they now have to play with a teammate that isn't as strong as they are, but it would be much less fair to the girls to say they can't play at all.
|
On November 20 2011 13:11 DoubleReed wrote:
This is bullshit. If the boys wants to compete, the boys have to wear girl's swimsuits.
There are no rules for swimsuits AFAIK.
Besides, you don't see girls on boys' swim teams wearing speedos.
|
On November 20 2011 13:35 ffadicted wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:21 peekn wrote: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. 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. But the point is that it was officially not a mixed competition--although, yes, de facto it was one. And if you're saying that there shouldn't be separate competitions for girls at all, then that's where I disagree with you.
As for the advantage that a guy has being highly overblown at a high school level, you can armchair-theorize all you like, but swimming in a pool is as objective as you can get, and the winning times prove you wrong.
On November 20 2011 13:34 metbull wrote:
why am I not seeing any articles about girls competing on boys football teams? here you go
|
On November 20 2011 13:36 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:14 Alay wrote:On November 20 2011 11:35 qrs wrote:
^I don't agree. It makes no sense for boys to compete against girls--if it did, they should be allowed to do that whether or not there's a swimming program for them.
As for your "weight limitation" idea, come on. If weight were an important factor in swimming, don't you think that the sport would already have weight limitations, just like combat sports do? The point is that boys are stronger than girls, not that they're heavier. That's why they shouldn't be allowed to compete as 'girls'. If that means that some boys don't get a chance to swim in their school, too bad. My high school didn't have a swimming program either. We lived.
I don't mind girls competing in boys divisions, because that's like 'fighting up' a weight class, but letting boys compete in girls divisions is like 'fighting down' a weight class and that's not fair. 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.
I can't honestly think of a solution other than A) Sort by sex (which has the issues I mentioned) or B) some sort of categorizing system.
Perhaps a detailed system based on the sport would need to be developed, accounting for anatomical sex (affecting muscle patterns used for the sport actively) weight and other features.
I'm not knowledgeable enough on swimming to really know what would or wouldn't work, however in a case like this I think the entire system is flawed and needs to work on developing a realistic response to these issues if our athletics will continue to grow without impede. Otherwise we end up in situations where kids are turned away on the basis of sex to sports, or are put through unneeded shaming, harassment, or drama as a result (as discussed in the wrestling thread, and in the article.) I feel for the kids that really want to swim and compete, and yet are feeling shamed enough to consider not because of the situation of these school teams.
|
|
|
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.
are you serious?
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
On November 20 2011 13:46 VTPerfect wrote:Show nested quote +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. are you serious?
Yes. This is not like in the Wrestling example where the girl came to a boys competion and deliberately searched a bigger challenge. In the Wrestling case the guy just discriminated the girl by not competing against her.
In this swimming thing these boys just highjack a girl's competition. That is absolutely pathetic.
|
On November 20 2011 13:44 Alay wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:36 qrs wrote:On November 20 2011 13:14 Alay wrote:On November 20 2011 11:35 qrs wrote:
^I don't agree. It makes no sense for boys to compete against girls--if it did, they should be allowed to do that whether or not there's a swimming program for them.
As for your "weight limitation" idea, come on. If weight were an important factor in swimming, don't you think that the sport would already have weight limitations, just like combat sports do? The point is that boys are stronger than girls, not that they're heavier. That's why they shouldn't be allowed to compete as 'girls'. If that means that some boys don't get a chance to swim in their school, too bad. My high school didn't have a swimming program either. We lived.
I don't mind girls competing in boys divisions, because that's like 'fighting up' a weight class, but letting boys compete in girls divisions is like 'fighting down' a weight class and that's not fair. 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. I can't honestly think of a solution other than A) Sort by sex (which has the issues I mentioned) or B) some sort of categorizing system. Perhaps a detailed system based on the sport would need to be developed, accounting for anatomical sex (affecting muscle patterns used for the sport actively) weight and other features. I'm not knowledgeable enough on swimming to really know what would or wouldn't work, however in a case like this I think the entire system is flawed and needs to work on developing a realistic response to these issues if our athletics will continue to grow without impede. Otherwise we end up in situations where kids are turned away on the basis of sex to sports, or are put through unneeded shaming, harassment, or drama as a result (as discussed in the wrestling thread, and in the article.) I feel for the kids that really want to swim and compete, and yet are feeling shamed enough to consider not because of the situation of these school teams. A couple of people in this thread (as well as in the article) have suggested solutions, including letting boys swim on other school's teams (see CoolSea's post on the first page), or letting the boys swim on the girls team for practice and all that, but to compete in regional and state competitions with boys, rather than with girls.
I do agree with you that the system is flawed.
|
On November 20 2011 13:42 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:35 ffadicted wrote:On November 20 2011 13:21 peekn wrote: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. 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. But the point is that it was officially not a mixed competition--although, yes, de facto it was one. And if you're saying that there shouldn't be separate competitions for girls at all, then that's where I disagree with you. As for the advantage that a guy has being highly overblown at a high school level, you can armchair-theorize all you like, but swimming in a pool is as objective as you can get, and the winning times prove you wrong. Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:34 metbull wrote:
why am I not seeing any articles about girls competing on boys football teams? here you go
Okay don't mean to be picky but you also made a reference to boys playing on girls gymnastics teams. This is a different situation because the two are distinguished. Guys compete on 6 events where as girls compete on 4, the events are focused on the sex (balance for girls such as the beam and grace / form through the floor; upper body strength for guys through the rings and pommel where as the floor displays specific routines not ones that are self created or aligned to music). It is common that schools do not offer mens gymnastics and male gymnasts practice with the female teams using the same floor / vault, but they do not compete together. The difference is you used that analogy with guys competing on girls swim teams, not just practice.
|
Why don't boys have a swimming team wtf? Guys in Mass don't swim as much as girls??
|
Best solution, eliminate sports from schools. (extra curricular activities can be extra curricular)
|
I think this is the same as the girl's wrestling thing. You have gender separation for a reason. The guys have a biological advantage, they're better on average in both swimming and wrestling. Not fair for the girls at all. And then, you'd have guys dropping out of competitions like wrestling because they'd be looked down on if they went all out. You're denying both sexes their chance to shine, and "gender equality" shouldn't be the argument that ends all.
|
On November 20 2011 13:16 ampson wrote:
Have the school team up with another school to form a joint boy's swim team, problem solved.
I created an account too address some of these awful facts people are given. (Longtime Lurker)
(I am a boy on a BOYS swim team in Massachusetts)
1. Boys do IN FACT have an advantage over girls in this sport, it's natural, and I'm surprised some people are even arguing over it. The kid who got 2nd in that race probably wouldn't of even qualified for the guys version of that meet.
2. These guys can't just join together and form one team, the logistics of that are incredibly difficult.
3. For these guys, its not like they can just quit the sport and forget about it. ITS probably their only one, and they've probably dedicated themselves to it.
4. There are such things as Co-Ed swim teams, but I don't think thats in Division 2 swimming. (Possible Solution)
|
On November 20 2011 13:57 DanceSC wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:42 qrs wrote:On November 20 2011 13:35 ffadicted wrote:On November 20 2011 13:21 peekn wrote: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. 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. But the point is that it was officially not a mixed competition--although, yes, de facto it was one. And if you're saying that there shouldn't be separate competitions for girls at all, then that's where I disagree with you. As for the advantage that a guy has being highly overblown at a high school level, you can armchair-theorize all you like, but swimming in a pool is as objective as you can get, and the winning times prove you wrong. On November 20 2011 13:34 metbull wrote:
why am I not seeing any articles about girls competing on boys football teams? here you go Okay don't mean to be picky but you also made a reference to boys playing on girls gymnastics teams. This is a different situation because the two are distinguished. Guys compete on 6 events where as girls compete on 4, the events are focused on the sex (balance for girls such as the beam and grace / form through the floor; upper body strength for guys through the rings and pommel where as the floor displays specific routines not ones that are self created or aligned to music). It is common that schools do not offer mens gymnastics and male gymnasts practice with the female teams using the same floor / vault, but they do not compete together. The difference is you used that analogy with guys competing on girls swim teams, not just practice. No, I was talking about competition. link
|
I'm surprised there are guys who would even consider doing this.
How could anyone possibly endure the ridicule?
This is an obvious case of the rules being very out of touch with public perception. Sounds like a load of socialist "equal opportunities" bullshit to me.
|
Hong Kong1758 Posts
On November 20 2011 13:10 Neb1000 wrote:
I came here expecting guys dressed as girls swimming.
hahhhahah me too.
|
On November 20 2011 13:12 Fenrax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 13:09 eLe.Long wrote:
So... Girls can join boys teams, but boys can't join girl's teams?
So much for equality, eh? You guys are effing stupid. Of course it goes only one way and not the other when it comes to competition. Girls are at a strict disadvantage in muscle and speed sports against boys and if a girl can compete despite that disadvantage then why not let her participate.
There are tons of muscle lesbians at my gym and on the internet. It can be done, we both have similar biology, the disadvantage takes time to overcome as proven by several USAF studies.
Their studies also show women are at better gender disposition to be good at computer. ;_:
Hence the increase in women in the Navy.
|
I really don't see a problem with this. It's not like the boys choose to swim against girls because they think they have a better chance of winning a shiny gold medale. Their only other option is to either quit swimming or change schools. Both of which sounds as worse options to me.
Unless they are doing some sort of artistic sync swimming, then swimming is a sport where the individual is the only one who can effect their own performance. ie it's not a team game.
A girl placing 1st in a competition with only girls, or 32nd (behind 31 men) in a mixed-gender-competition, doesn't change how well she performed. Unless there is some sort of wierd physics going on when the men participate, that makes the girls swim upstream, against the current, then her time for simming xxx meters wouldn't change.
The only thing changing is the people she is being compared against. If the men hadn't competed in this competition but in a men-only league, she would still be slower then the men, and giving her a shiny gold medale doesn't change this.
Why not just be happy that you beat every other girl (just as if ther were no boys). It might just be that I havn't gotten the same competative spirit as some people, but just because Michael Phelps can swim 100 meters in 48 sec, doesn't change the satiscation I get from swimming the same distance in 90 secs
If I as a boy were completly dominating a "girls" competition, then I wouldn't get any satisfation from winning a gold-medale. Instead I would be comparing my time, against other boys swimming the boys-competition to see where I would rank there.
|
On November 20 2011 14:19 Hansibot wrote:
I really don't see a problem with this. It's not like the boys choose to swim against girls because they think they have a better chance of winning a shiny gold medale. Their only other option is to either quit swimming or change schools. Both of which sounds as worse options to me.
Unless they are doing some sort of artistic sync swimming, then swimming is a sport where the individual is the only one who can effect their own performance. ie it's not a team game.
A girl placing 1st in a competition with only girls, or 32nd (behind 31 men) in a mixed-gender-competition, doesn't change how well she performed. Unless there is some sort of wierd physics going on when the men participate, that makes the girls swim upstream, against the current, then her time for simming xxx meters wouldn't change.
The only thing changing is the people she is being compared against. If the men hadn't competed in this competition but in a men-only league, she would still be slower then the men, and giving her a shiny gold medale doesn't change this.
Why not just be happy that you beat every other girl (just as if ther were no boys). It might just be that I havn't gotten the same competative spirit as some people, but just because Michael Phelps can swim 100 meters in 48 sec, doesn't change the satiscation I get from swimming the same distance in 90 secs
If I as a boy were completly dominating a "girls" competition, then I wouldn't get any satisfation from winning a gold-medale. Instead I would be comparing my time, against other boys swimming the boys-competition to see where I would rank there. By the same token, why not let the boys swim by themselves in the pool and see how their time matches up, according to your argument?
People do care about medals, rational or not. That's why these things are competitions in the first place.
|
I used to swim back in high school, and from my experience, even a mediocre male swimmer would dominate his female counterparts if they are at roughly the same competitive level. There's just no contest. The advantage the male swimmer has over the female one is very significant and should not be ignored.
Yes, it is unfortunate that there is not enough support for a completely independent male swim team, but that does not justify ruining the competition for the female teams. How do you lot think the female swimmers feel about this?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
