|
On November 21 2011 16:36 itkovian wrote:
Well, if a guy want to swim and the only way he can do that is on a girls team then it only seems fair to let him. I feel like when you get to state level competitions you need to put the boys in the mens competition though. Imagining a guy winning a girls state race is absurd
Sometimes reality needs to give idealism a good smack in the head to keep it from straying too far.
I suggest boys take advantage of this ruling to score crazy sports scholarships from the idealistic administrators and politicians who are disconnected with reality and the biological difference between the innies and outies.
|
On November 21 2011 15:27 macil222 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 15:01 Runnin wrote:
If a boy likes to swim and there is a girls swim team and not a boys swim team then he should be allowed to swim with the girls team. So what if he wins a lot? The sport should still provide all of the benefits that you just listed for all of the participants right?
No. There should be, and are, alternative measures for allowing the boy to swim. They have been mentioned. Putting him in the girls competition is unacceptable. The girls in this sectional meet are swimming at a very high level. At this level these girls are swimming for more than just fun - the times they are swimming suggest a competitive passion and dedication that deserves to be properly rewarded with success. Two girls will miss out on the experience of competing in the biggest HS girls swim meet because of this. One lost a sectional championship.
What's next? Do you propose we eliminate age grouping in athletics? Sure, toss the 9 year olds in with the teenagers. As long as they can participate and try their best! There is no solution to height advantage in basketball - every sport has some trait that it favors and it is unavoidable. Luckily we have enough sports where there is always a competitive outlet for any given body type, except that in nearly every sport (gymnastics is the off-the-top-of-my-head exception) men are advantaged over women. By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.
Competition is what drives people to succeed. This places a massive obstacle in the way of women trying to compete in swimming, and if it was widespread would curb their involvement.
edit: butchered the nested quotes, removed them You've suggested alternatives but nothing that guarantees the boys will have the same access to reward and success.
By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.This goes back to why and how I responded to you in the first place? Why is it so important to balance options available to men vs women but not big vs small, weak vs strong, smart vs stupid. You are the one who wanted to point out the biological differences that give men an advantage...so taking that into account it doesn't make sense to expect that females should be (as a gender, not individually) equally rewarded for something that they are not as good at. Give me a skinny nerd football league so I can have a chance to be the best and earn an athletic scholarship to school for the kids who are the best football players (in the league of course).
Seriously, do you actually believe what you write? I have been sitting here literally facepalming at every single one of your posts. First and foremost, many sports actually do have seperate championships for people of different body types. They are called weight classes. So if you weight only 60kg, and want to be a boxer, you still can, and you still have a fair surrounding to compete in. Furthermore, it is always fair to compete in higher weight classes, as that means you are actually accepting a handycap.
In my opinion, in a sport that is based on competition, you should have a fair league to compete in. If you just throw everybody into one bin, that effectively means that you deny the right to compete to a lot of people. In this case, you deny the right to compete in a fair competition to all females. If you allow males into a swimming competition, the males will win it almost every single time . Which is absurdly retarded considering it is a female swimming competition. Furthermore, it actively encourages schools to get rid of their male swimming team, just to be able to fill up their female swimming team with males, who then procede to win the female championships against other males from other schools, who compete for their female swimming team.
Thus, the logical result of this is:
You have no more male swimming teams at schools.
You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers.
You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males.
You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship.
Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results.
If this does not sound retarded to you, i don't know anymore. It does not make any sense at all, AND it effectively removes the female swimming league.
This is a reason why competing up a weight class is no problem, but competing down is. Which is effectively the same as this. If, for example, boxers were allowed to compete in a lower bracket, that takes away that lower bracket from the people who actually fit it, and want to compete in it. If you allow a 60kg boxer to compete with the 120kg guys, that does not become a problem, because 60kg guys will never push the big guys out of their bracket, but the big guys could easily push the smaller guys out of their bracket if they are allowed to.
Note that i am not saying that these boys should not be allowed to swim, or to compete. They should just compete in the male bracket, and train with the females. I still don't see what the problem about that would be.
|
Yes, Simberto, until every woman is complaining men are dominating women's competitions because of idealistic bureacracy and force them to accept the retardness of it all, like the day men were allowed into the kitchen and basically took over it resulting in chefs and restaurants.
|
What confuses me is if there's 6 guys on the girls team why they don't just make an official male swim team.
|
I agree my boys swim team I'n high school had like 6-8 boys each year. We won bi-county all 4 years and wrc 3 years straight. Also for anyone saying that there is not a big difference between girls and boys times I'n high school your crazy. At my school there is Iike a 10 sec difference I'n some events. That's quite large I'n swimming.
|
On November 21 2011 21:43 Hattori_Hanzo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 16:36 itkovian wrote:
Well, if a guy want to swim and the only way he can do that is on a girls team then it only seems fair to let him. I feel like when you get to state level competitions you need to put the boys in the mens competition though. Imagining a guy winning a girls state race is absurd Sometimes reality needs to give idealism a good smack in the head to keep it from straying too far. I suggest boys take advantage of this ruling to score crazy sports scholarships from the idealistic administrators and politicians who are disconnected with reality and the biological difference between the innies and outies.
rofl
Over here innies and outies mean your belly button. Just wanted to throw that out there. 
|
On November 20 2011 13:08 qrs wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
Fenrax
United States5018 Posts
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. 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. 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.
|
On November 21 2011 23:30 Holytornados wrote:Show nested quote +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.
|
United States5162 Posts
On November 21 2011 23:30 Holytornados wrote:Show nested quote +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.
That's where the concept of competing 'up' vs 'down' comes in. As someone already pointed out, competing up a weight class is fine because you are putting an extra burden on yourself. Competing down a weight class is making things easier on yourself and thus isn't allowed.
The same thing works here. A girl competing in a boys event makes things more difficult for her, while boys competing in girls events makes things easier for them.
|
On November 21 2011 22:42 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 15:27 macil222 wrote:On November 21 2011 15:01 Runnin wrote:
If a boy likes to swim and there is a girls swim team and not a boys swim team then he should be allowed to swim with the girls team. So what if he wins a lot? The sport should still provide all of the benefits that you just listed for all of the participants right?
No. There should be, and are, alternative measures for allowing the boy to swim. They have been mentioned. Putting him in the girls competition is unacceptable. The girls in this sectional meet are swimming at a very high level. At this level these girls are swimming for more than just fun - the times they are swimming suggest a competitive passion and dedication that deserves to be properly rewarded with success. Two girls will miss out on the experience of competing in the biggest HS girls swim meet because of this. One lost a sectional championship.
What's next? Do you propose we eliminate age grouping in athletics? Sure, toss the 9 year olds in with the teenagers. As long as they can participate and try their best! There is no solution to height advantage in basketball - every sport has some trait that it favors and it is unavoidable. Luckily we have enough sports where there is always a competitive outlet for any given body type, except that in nearly every sport (gymnastics is the off-the-top-of-my-head exception) men are advantaged over women. By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.
Competition is what drives people to succeed. This places a massive obstacle in the way of women trying to compete in swimming, and if it was widespread would curb their involvement.
edit: butchered the nested quotes, removed them You've suggested alternatives but nothing that guarantees the boys will have the same access to reward and success.
By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.This goes back to why and how I responded to you in the first place? Why is it so important to balance options available to men vs women but not big vs small, weak vs strong, smart vs stupid. You are the one who wanted to point out the biological differences that give men an advantage...so taking that into account it doesn't make sense to expect that females should be (as a gender, not individually) equally rewarded for something that they are not as good at. Give me a skinny nerd football league so I can have a chance to be the best and earn an athletic scholarship to school for the kids who are the best football players (in the league of course). Seriously, do you actually believe what you write? I have been sitting here literally facepalming at every single one of your posts. First and foremost, many sports actually do have seperate championships for people of different body types. They are called weight classes. So if you weight only 60kg, and want to be a boxer, you still can, and you still have a fair surrounding to compete in. Furthermore, it is always fair to compete in higher weight classes, as that means you are actually accepting a handycap. In my opinion, in a sport that is based on competition, you should have a fair league to compete in. If you just throw everybody into one bin, that effectively means that you deny the right to compete to a lot of people. In this case, you deny the right to compete in a fair competition to all females. If you allow males into a swimming competition, the males will win it almost every single time . Which is absurdly retarded considering it is a female swimming competition. Furthermore, it actively encourages schools to get rid of their male swimming team, just to be able to fill up their female swimming team with males, who then procede to win the female championships against other males from other schools, who compete for their female swimming team. Thus, the logical result of this is: You have no more male swimming teams at schools. You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers. You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males. You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship. Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results. If this does not sound retarded to you, i don't know anymore. It does not make any sense at all, AND it effectively removes the female swimming league. This is a reason why competing up a weight class is no problem, but competing down is. Which is effectively the same as this. If, for example, boxers were allowed to compete in a lower bracket, that takes away that lower bracket from the people who actually fit it, and want to compete in it. If you allow a 60kg boxer to compete with the 120kg guys, that does not become a problem, because 60kg guys will never push the big guys out of their bracket, but the big guys could easily push the smaller guys out of their bracket if they are allowed to. Note that i am not saying that these boys should not be allowed to swim, or to compete. They should just compete in the male bracket, and train with the females. I still don't see what the problem about that would be.
I've addressed the points you've made already and you are ignoring the larger point.
There are boys who want to swim and they don't have their team so they swim with the girls. People are getting butt hurt over that because it is supposedly unfair to girls. Other people responded by pointing out it is matter of equality and equal access. The person I responded to initially was talking some nonsense about people pretending males and females are biologically the same (even though no one was trying to argue that) so I carried on his logic to ask why he should care if females have their own protected classes in sports to begin with...since rewarding top female athletes the same as top male athletes is just another way of pretending that there is equality where there isn't.
So it is not that I think there should not be boys and girls sports, I was showing why I think his reasoning is flawed.
As I've said before, boys winning a swimming competition with girls means absolutely nothing because there are no opponents. Starcraft has opponents, football has opponents, chess has opponents, baseball has opponents, running, swimming, cycling, golfing etc do not. So if you really care about the poor girls losing their imaginary first place then you can solve the problem simply by recording top male and top female times separately. Why is this a big deal? Now he said that the best times are recorded during competition and not during practice..fine...then they should be even faster when they know they have to beat a potentially faster boy. No problem there.
But really these girls just have to get over it, just like the boys who don't want to wrestle girls have to forfeit a match if they can't deal with it and you know if a girl swam on a boys team and got first place no one would be making a big stink about the poor boy who isn't going to get to compete in the boys championship competitions.
Thus, the logical result of this is:
You have no more male swimming teams at schools.
You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers.
You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males.
You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship.
Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results.
And that is simply not true. The boys are swimming on the girls team because of 2 possible reasons. 1) there are not enough boy swimmers to make their own team or 2) the school can't fund the boys team because boys sports such as football, baseball and basketball already eats up funding and they have to follow stupid law of equally funding boys and girls sports teams even if the interest level and cost per participant in various sports is not the same. The aim obviously being to "balance" out each gender but I don't care about genders I care about individuals and if an individual wants to play a sport that is offered at a school then they should allowed to, it is that simple.
|
It's not anymore wrong than male wrestling teams that have a girl on them lots of guys aren't willing to wrestle a girl so they will refuse to wrestle imo everything should be kept segregated both men and womens sports if their is no team for that gender at that particular school then the other gender can compete as long as they aren't taking a position away from someone of the proper gender.
|
On November 22 2011 02:57 macil222 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 22:42 Simberto wrote:On November 21 2011 15:27 macil222 wrote:On November 21 2011 15:01 Runnin wrote:
If a boy likes to swim and there is a girls swim team and not a boys swim team then he should be allowed to swim with the girls team. So what if he wins a lot? The sport should still provide all of the benefits that you just listed for all of the participants right?
No. There should be, and are, alternative measures for allowing the boy to swim. They have been mentioned. Putting him in the girls competition is unacceptable. The girls in this sectional meet are swimming at a very high level. At this level these girls are swimming for more than just fun - the times they are swimming suggest a competitive passion and dedication that deserves to be properly rewarded with success. Two girls will miss out on the experience of competing in the biggest HS girls swim meet because of this. One lost a sectional championship.
What's next? Do you propose we eliminate age grouping in athletics? Sure, toss the 9 year olds in with the teenagers. As long as they can participate and try their best! There is no solution to height advantage in basketball - every sport has some trait that it favors and it is unavoidable. Luckily we have enough sports where there is always a competitive outlet for any given body type, except that in nearly every sport (gymnastics is the off-the-top-of-my-head exception) men are advantaged over women. By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.
Competition is what drives people to succeed. This places a massive obstacle in the way of women trying to compete in swimming, and if it was widespread would curb their involvement.
edit: butchered the nested quotes, removed them You've suggested alternatives but nothing that guarantees the boys will have the same access to reward and success.
By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.This goes back to why and how I responded to you in the first place? Why is it so important to balance options available to men vs women but not big vs small, weak vs strong, smart vs stupid. You are the one who wanted to point out the biological differences that give men an advantage...so taking that into account it doesn't make sense to expect that females should be (as a gender, not individually) equally rewarded for something that they are not as good at. Give me a skinny nerd football league so I can have a chance to be the best and earn an athletic scholarship to school for the kids who are the best football players (in the league of course). Seriously, do you actually believe what you write? I have been sitting here literally facepalming at every single one of your posts. First and foremost, many sports actually do have seperate championships for people of different body types. They are called weight classes. So if you weight only 60kg, and want to be a boxer, you still can, and you still have a fair surrounding to compete in. Furthermore, it is always fair to compete in higher weight classes, as that means you are actually accepting a handycap. In my opinion, in a sport that is based on competition, you should have a fair league to compete in. If you just throw everybody into one bin, that effectively means that you deny the right to compete to a lot of people. In this case, you deny the right to compete in a fair competition to all females. If you allow males into a swimming competition, the males will win it almost every single time . Which is absurdly retarded considering it is a female swimming competition. Furthermore, it actively encourages schools to get rid of their male swimming team, just to be able to fill up their female swimming team with males, who then procede to win the female championships against other males from other schools, who compete for their female swimming team. Thus, the logical result of this is: You have no more male swimming teams at schools. You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers. You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males. You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship. Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results. If this does not sound retarded to you, i don't know anymore. It does not make any sense at all, AND it effectively removes the female swimming league. This is a reason why competing up a weight class is no problem, but competing down is. Which is effectively the same as this. If, for example, boxers were allowed to compete in a lower bracket, that takes away that lower bracket from the people who actually fit it, and want to compete in it. If you allow a 60kg boxer to compete with the 120kg guys, that does not become a problem, because 60kg guys will never push the big guys out of their bracket, but the big guys could easily push the smaller guys out of their bracket if they are allowed to. Note that i am not saying that these boys should not be allowed to swim, or to compete. They should just compete in the male bracket, and train with the females. I still don't see what the problem about that would be. I've addressed the points you've made already and you are ignoring the larger point. There are boys who want to swim and they don't have their team so they swim with the girls. People are getting butt hurt over that because it is supposedly unfair to girls. Other people responded by pointing out it is matter of equality and equal access. The person I responded to initially was talking some nonsense about people pretending males and females are biologically the same (even though no one was trying to argue that) so I carried on his logic to ask why he should care if females have their own protected classes in sports to begin with...since rewarding top female athletes the same as top male athletes is just another way of pretending that there is equality where there isn't. So it is not that I think there should not be boys and girls sports, I was showing why I think his reasoning is flawed. As I've said before, boys winning a swimming competition with girls means absolutely nothing because there are no opponents. Starcraft has opponents, football has opponents, chess has opponents, baseball has opponents, running, swimming, cycling, golfing etc do not. So if you really care about the poor girls losing their imaginary first place then you can solve the problem simply by recording top male and top female times separately. Why is this a big deal? Now he said that the best times are recorded during competition and not during practice..fine...then they should be even faster when they know they have to beat a potentially faster boy. No problem there. But really these girls just have to get over it, just like the boys who don't want to wrestle girls have to forfeit a match if they can't deal with it and you know if a girl swam on a boys team and got first place no one would be making a big stink about the poor boy who isn't going to get to compete in the boys championship competitions. Thus, the logical result of this is:
You have no more male swimming teams at schools.
You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers.
You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males.
You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship.
Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results.And that is simply not true. The boys are swimming on the girls team because of 2 possible reasons. 1) there are not enough boy swimmers to make their own team or 2) the school can't fund the boys team because boys sports such as football, baseball and basketball already eats up funding and they have to follow stupid law of equally funding boys and girls sports teams even if the interest level and cost per participant in various sports is not the same. The aim obviously being to "balance" out each gender but I don't care about genders I care about individuals and if an individual wants to play a sport that is offered at a school then they should allowed to, it is that simple.
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?
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.
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.
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.
On an unrelated note, i take an instant disliking to anyone using the word "butthurt".
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.
|
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)
|
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.
|
I see no problem in guy's joining a girl's swim team as girls occasionally join men teams.
|
On November 22 2011 04:47 Blardy wrote:
I see no problem in guy's joining a girl's swim team as girls occasionally join men teams.
The real problem is that the difference in speed a top level female swimmer can do vs a average male swimmer is none.
For example view the diffrence in times for the michigan state meet the diffrence in time is noticible in every event and thats of swimmers of equal skill from each sex having to hit those times. Now imagine your a girl who worked really really hard to get your 500yd Free down below 5:20 and then a guy shows up at your meet and swims a time below 5:00 with the same technique JUST BECAUSE HE'S BIGGER THEN YOU it's not fair.
Michigan State cuts
|
How is this thread still growing? I thought this would stop back when I posted on page 6. But alas, this is once again near the top of the general forum... I've been trying to understand the arguments which are pro mixing. I'm still confused. I've heard about funding and also how it doesn't really matter since swimming is an individual sport.
About funding, I'm not sure why that's a reason. Music departments can't afford new music instruments; art departments can't afford new brushes; computer departments can't afford better software; science departments can afford chemicals... I can keep going. If the budget does not allow for another swim team, some choices have to be made. Do some fund raising or wtvr but it's no reason to enter a co-ed team into a non-co-ed competition.
As for the whole individual thing, it's not. If you're competing, it's not entirely individual. Unless each swimmer was awarded by improvement, how can anyone possibly make the argument that no one has any advantage? Additionally, if the gender didn't matter, why didn't the school enter the co-ed team into a male swimming competition?
|
My girlfriend's little sister made the cut for olympic trials. She's one of the fastest sprinters for her age (17) currently alive. I've gotten an inside look at the world of competition swimming, and it disgusts me. Personally, I swim for my own personal gain (I'm currently the fastest lifeguard on staff, with the longest apnea distance (125 surface yards without breathing,) and have no prior swimming experience outside of scuba diving) and teach triathlon swimming to adults.
Swimming is a horrible sport to take seriously. Rotator cuff damage from butterfly? What the christ? You wind up with an awful "footballer" mentality (a-la Ryan Lochte, the ultradouche of the swimming world) and we're pushing kids into a sport that some can genuinely not afford to compete in (those "race suits" are upwards of $500, most teams won't pay for them, and they only last 2-3 meets. Not only that, many teams won't pay to fly their athletes around to the dozen or more meets that aren't local. The financial stress is literally, single handedly keeping my girlfriend's family in extreme paycheck-to-paycheck poverty with all the flights, competition suits, and 40-mile each way drive to her daily practice.)
Seriously, fuck organized sports. Berkeley is giving her a full ride scholarship for her ENTIRE education, she doesn't have great grades, a crap SAT score, no extracirricular outside of swimming, has no idea what she wants to major in, and basically every school in the nation wanted to give her a full ride. She went with berkeley because their locker room has heated floors, and whined when the contract she signed said that she had to stay at Berkeley, even if the coach left. "Why?" she said, "The coach was who recruited me..."
... You want kids that dumb being able to say they graduated from Berkeley? We need to stop this idiocracy, and make sports about self-improvement, and not asinine competition for extreme profits.
|
On November 22 2011 03:54 Simberto wrote:Show nested quote +On November 22 2011 02:57 macil222 wrote:On November 21 2011 22:42 Simberto wrote:On November 21 2011 15:27 macil222 wrote:On November 21 2011 15:01 Runnin wrote:
If a boy likes to swim and there is a girls swim team and not a boys swim team then he should be allowed to swim with the girls team. So what if he wins a lot? The sport should still provide all of the benefits that you just listed for all of the participants right?
No. There should be, and are, alternative measures for allowing the boy to swim. They have been mentioned. Putting him in the girls competition is unacceptable. The girls in this sectional meet are swimming at a very high level. At this level these girls are swimming for more than just fun - the times they are swimming suggest a competitive passion and dedication that deserves to be properly rewarded with success. Two girls will miss out on the experience of competing in the biggest HS girls swim meet because of this. One lost a sectional championship.
What's next? Do you propose we eliminate age grouping in athletics? Sure, toss the 9 year olds in with the teenagers. As long as they can participate and try their best! There is no solution to height advantage in basketball - every sport has some trait that it favors and it is unavoidable. Luckily we have enough sports where there is always a competitive outlet for any given body type, except that in nearly every sport (gymnastics is the off-the-top-of-my-head exception) men are advantaged over women. By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.
Competition is what drives people to succeed. This places a massive obstacle in the way of women trying to compete in swimming, and if it was widespread would curb their involvement.
edit: butchered the nested quotes, removed them You've suggested alternatives but nothing that guarantees the boys will have the same access to reward and success.
By separating sports by gender, we allow for women to have the same options that men do, to be able to find an athletic endeavor that suits them.This goes back to why and how I responded to you in the first place? Why is it so important to balance options available to men vs women but not big vs small, weak vs strong, smart vs stupid. You are the one who wanted to point out the biological differences that give men an advantage...so taking that into account it doesn't make sense to expect that females should be (as a gender, not individually) equally rewarded for something that they are not as good at. Give me a skinny nerd football league so I can have a chance to be the best and earn an athletic scholarship to school for the kids who are the best football players (in the league of course). Seriously, do you actually believe what you write? I have been sitting here literally facepalming at every single one of your posts. First and foremost, many sports actually do have seperate championships for people of different body types. They are called weight classes. So if you weight only 60kg, and want to be a boxer, you still can, and you still have a fair surrounding to compete in. Furthermore, it is always fair to compete in higher weight classes, as that means you are actually accepting a handycap. In my opinion, in a sport that is based on competition, you should have a fair league to compete in. If you just throw everybody into one bin, that effectively means that you deny the right to compete to a lot of people. In this case, you deny the right to compete in a fair competition to all females. If you allow males into a swimming competition, the males will win it almost every single time . Which is absurdly retarded considering it is a female swimming competition. Furthermore, it actively encourages schools to get rid of their male swimming team, just to be able to fill up their female swimming team with males, who then procede to win the female championships against other males from other schools, who compete for their female swimming team. Thus, the logical result of this is: You have no more male swimming teams at schools. You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers. You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males. You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship. Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results. If this does not sound retarded to you, i don't know anymore. It does not make any sense at all, AND it effectively removes the female swimming league. This is a reason why competing up a weight class is no problem, but competing down is. Which is effectively the same as this. If, for example, boxers were allowed to compete in a lower bracket, that takes away that lower bracket from the people who actually fit it, and want to compete in it. If you allow a 60kg boxer to compete with the 120kg guys, that does not become a problem, because 60kg guys will never push the big guys out of their bracket, but the big guys could easily push the smaller guys out of their bracket if they are allowed to. Note that i am not saying that these boys should not be allowed to swim, or to compete. They should just compete in the male bracket, and train with the females. I still don't see what the problem about that would be. I've addressed the points you've made already and you are ignoring the larger point. There are boys who want to swim and they don't have their team so they swim with the girls. People are getting butt hurt over that because it is supposedly unfair to girls. Other people responded by pointing out it is matter of equality and equal access. The person I responded to initially was talking some nonsense about people pretending males and females are biologically the same (even though no one was trying to argue that) so I carried on his logic to ask why he should care if females have their own protected classes in sports to begin with...since rewarding top female athletes the same as top male athletes is just another way of pretending that there is equality where there isn't. So it is not that I think there should not be boys and girls sports, I was showing why I think his reasoning is flawed. As I've said before, boys winning a swimming competition with girls means absolutely nothing because there are no opponents. Starcraft has opponents, football has opponents, chess has opponents, baseball has opponents, running, swimming, cycling, golfing etc do not. So if you really care about the poor girls losing their imaginary first place then you can solve the problem simply by recording top male and top female times separately. Why is this a big deal? Now he said that the best times are recorded during competition and not during practice..fine...then they should be even faster when they know they have to beat a potentially faster boy. No problem there. But really these girls just have to get over it, just like the boys who don't want to wrestle girls have to forfeit a match if they can't deal with it and you know if a girl swam on a boys team and got first place no one would be making a big stink about the poor boy who isn't going to get to compete in the boys championship competitions. Thus, the logical result of this is:
You have no more male swimming teams at schools.
You have female swimming teams filled with the male swimmers.
You have male swimmers winning the female competitions against other males.
You don't even have a male competition anymore, since schools are forced to disband their male teams to have their males compete in the female championship.
Females do not have a championship anymore, because which sane female team would ever take a female in it, when males produce far better results.And that is simply not true. The boys are swimming on the girls team because of 2 possible reasons. 1) there are not enough boy swimmers to make their own team or 2) the school can't fund the boys team because boys sports such as football, baseball and basketball already eats up funding and they have to follow stupid law of equally funding boys and girls sports teams even if the interest level and cost per participant in various sports is not the same. The aim obviously being to "balance" out each gender but I don't care about genders I care about individuals and if an individual wants to play a sport that is offered at a school then they should allowed to, it is that simple. 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? 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. 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. 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. On an unrelated note, i take an instant disliking to anyone using the word "butthurt". 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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.
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.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
