From "So You Want to ‘Save Women’s Sports’?/More than 20 states are considering bills to ban transgender kids from girls’ sports. If only people really cared about female athletes" (NYT).Let me put it on Twitter too cause this needs the attention pic.twitter.com/t0DWKL2YHR
— Sedona Prince (@sedonaprince_) March 19, 2021
March 24, 2021
"Watching the recent surge of women’s sports enthusiasts clamoring to save female athletes from the transgender rights movement, it’s hard not to feel a little wistful."
"So this is what it’s like to matter.... But all this new passion has made me wonder, what if all these people claiming to be fighting for the future of women’s sports would really fight for the future of women’s sports? What if they suddenly said, 'We demand women’s sports get equal resources, equal media coverage, and equal pay'?... Consider last week: As the N.C.A.A. basketball tournaments began, female players demanded to know why the weight room in the men’s bubble had state of the art lifting equipment, whereas they got a stingy rack of dumbbells...."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
247 comments:
1 – 200 of 247 Newer› Newest»If I understand the argument correctly, it's ok for men to compete in women's sports as long as the women get better weightlifting equipment?
The men competing in women's sports are gonna love that.
You get equal pay when you get equal numbers of paying spectators.
I can both want to "save women's sports" from being JV men's sports at the same time as realizing that women's sports don't have the same audience as men's sports and will be funded and paid accordingly.
I hear a very tiny violin playing. I'm through caring about protecting women against policies and 'politeness' that they've voted for over 30 years. Let dudes invade their spaces. Who friggin' cares. Definitely not me anymore.
Usual NYT drivel. Caring about women's sports, by disallowing male competitors, is just not the same as insisting that professional women be paid as much as professional men.
The market can decide such questions.
How much is the market willing to pay to watch a male athlete be shown stronger than a female athlete?
Title IX not enough apparently.
A couple of 300lb barbells to roll around would be a nice gesture.
Ladies, you'll get the weights you want when you can add the 30lb of lean muscle mass most men genetically have the ability to do in 8 months.
Hey, here's an idea, go trans. Pump testosterone and get jacked. Invade the dude's gym. Come on, fight your battles for yourselves. You've been invading male spaces for 40 years, why stop at what gym to use.
1st world problem.
Not mine.
They are conflating two different issues. Real women stand no chance in competition with transgender "women," for obvious biological reasons. And since there are college scholarships for women on the line in girl's high school athletics, that is a real problem.
The issue of women's sports vs. men's sports is a totally different issue. Men's sports have much higher ratings in the media, much higher ticket sales and other revenue at both the college and professional levels, and just plain more commercial potential than women's sports do. Those are the facts. At the college level, the men's sports pay for themselves. If the women's and men's teams got exactly the same funding, the men's sports revenues would be supporting the women's sports. Compare the NBA vs. the WNBA. The men get paid a lot more, because there is a lot more people interested in watching men play basketball than watching women play basketball. It's fine that both men and women are able to play the game at the professional level, but don't expect the salaries to be equal unless the revenues coming in are equal.
It would be interesting to compare support of women's sports around the world.
"We demand women’s sports get equal resources, equal media coverage, and equal pay'?."
This is how you get less "women's sports."
It's just a standard left right dichotomy in 2021 United States:
For conservatives, supporting something means you personally can donate your time, money, and effort, but otherwise standing aside, not interfering, and letting it bloom
For leftists, supporting something only means subsidizing it with government money (and control)
I hear a very tiny violin playing. I'm through caring about protecting women against policies and 'politeness' that they've voted for over 30 years. Let dudes invade their spaces. Who friggin' cares. Definitely not me anymore.
I really only care about the HS level, because we're talking about teenagers and because HS sports shouldn't be a business the way professional sports are, or even college sports have become.
I wonder if a possible solution might be to divide sports into weight categories (maybe something similar to what they do in boxing) instead of men and women’s sports. Just a thought.
Title IX destroyed the men's minor sports in colleges. Wrestling and Crew were on their own. It's not easy to feel sorry for these programs when the voters made up of women mostly created this problem.
Pul-eeze. Imagine a LeBron James tranny against a typical girl. It IS happening. It happened in Connecticut. SO much for WOMENS rights. Letting MEN win over women. That's the ticket!!!
The NYT chooses to build a straw man here rather than address the issue of whether women's sports will remain women's sports. There is never going to be equality between men's and women's sports because the commercial value favors the men's, as most of us prefer to watch men's sports. But in the Olympic Games there are separate but equal events and the medals are the same.
Conservative opposition is based not just on the idea that men shouldn't be competing against women, it's based on an understanding that this is merely a tactic to normalize transgenderism. No one on the left really cares if a man is playing women's basketball, or breaking some woman's face in the octagon. What they want is to convince society to accept that calling a man a woman somehow makes him so, biology be damned.
AND, when women draw the crowds that MEN do in sports...they will be compensated. UNTIL then...work harder...draw a crowd instead of kneeling and pushing them away.
I trust NOTHING from the NYT.
I wonder if a possible solution might be to divide sports into weight categories (maybe something similar to what they do in boxing) instead of men and women’s sports. Just a thought.
No. Men and women are built differently. A 120 pound man has vastly more muscle and bone density than a 120 pound woman.
She's not conflating the trans issue, she's leveraging it.
Her message was short, focused on a specific improvement that can be made to the facility now, devastating to the argument of those opposed to that improvement, in short, brilliant.
She can't do much about the trans issue, but she'll probably get real weight room out of this.
Good job Sedona Prince.
Who the fuck lifts weights in the middle of competition?
Come to think of it, I might have a years edibility left in college sports due to a football injury. I'm still in great shape at 69. Wonder if I could compete in college women's softball?
"equal media coverage, and equal pay?"
Is there a first amendment argument for enforcing coerced media speech in sports? I thought School sports participants can't be paid, but can pay be conditioned on absolute, not relative, performance? Would the trans men not be paid more? I do think that, within a sport in schools, like basketball or baseball, women and men should have equal access to equipment and facilities, I don't know how to account for the fact that the public will pay for men's sports and not women's.
Women want to be considered equal to men but when they are unable to successfully compete with them, want their own protected organization, too?
Sounds about right.
It's okay. I don't care about men's sports either.
She's won me over. Combine all boys/girls sports and men/ladies sports. Combine the weight rooms, combine everything, just keep the locker rooms separate. You want equality, you got it lady. Think of the money that could be saved and spent on housing illegals.
I googled "how much money does the top lpga player make." According to the lpga site a Nelly Korda has won $420,802 so far this year after playing 3 tournaments. I then googled about her endorsement deals. She has a "multi-million dollar Clothing contract with J.Lindeberg" and a "sponsorship deal with a South Korean conglomerate, Hanwha." She can kiss that money good bye when the lpga is invaded by men who say they really, really, really feel like a woman.
I work out pretty religiously, and womens' behavior in gyms aggravates me no end.
- They usually consistently 'use' equipment while doing anything but using it to exercise
- They take 2-3 times as long to complete sets as men do
- While the titschloker is complaining about lack of weights, women usually take all the light weights in a gym
- Aerobic equipment is predominantly used by women who will universally dominate it for up to an hour or more so unless you've got a gym with copious aerobic machines, they're all taken, and if you have a gym with lots of aerobic equipment, the ladies will tell their friends and once again there's nothing left when you're done lifting weights
I could go on, but I'm a big fan of yoga and Orange Theory etc. It keeps the non-serious women away from the serious people (mostly men) that are their with a purpose.
We need more low and slow sports!
I think they are right. Let the transgenders run, jump, leap, kick, throw, push, lift, pull, and tackle to their hearts' content. No doubt the revenues will cascade in and those weight rooms will get better. What women and girls' sports have needed was to be butched up even more.
So long, Serena. We knew you weren't really that good. And all you little girls that dream of gymnastics glory? You ain't seen nothin' yet. Lindsey Vonn and Mikaela Schiffrin look out!
well, the GOOD NEWS IS: once trans people are DOMINATING women's sports;
NO ONE (and i mean NO ONE) will be interested in women's sports
Think the NCAA gives women's teams short shift now? Wait 'til they're full of Trans people
Think the pro world doesn't pay women enough now? Wait 'til the chix have dicks
Seriously, how many WNBA ticket holders want to be near penises ?
Let the delusional men play women's basketball, play "Yakety Sax" (Benny Hill) in the background and they'd get better ratings than the late night comedians.
combine everything, just keep the locker rooms separate.
Nope, combine everything.
"She's not conflating the trans issue, she's leveraging it.
Her message was short, focused on a specific improvement that can be made to the facility now, devastating to the argument of those opposed to that improvement, in short, brilliant.
She can't do much about the trans issue, but she'll probably get real weight room out of this.
Good job Sedona Prince."
This is valid. It's less a poke in the eye to you and me and more the NCAA, which as the governing body, is responsible for the facilities and resources. I don't understand why the weight room area annot be open to both men and women.
hawkeyedjb said...
If I understand the argument correctly, it's ok for men to compete in women's sports as long as the women get better weightlifting equipment?
I think it's "it's ok for men to compete in women's sports unless the women get better weightlifting equipment."
You're also not allowed to care about your daughter's sporting events unless you meet a bunch of other requirements too.
"If only people cared about real female athletes."
Fixed.
Oh, so because I'm not interested in watching professional women's sports, I can't argue that they should be allowed to have a sport? Well then.
BTW, I'm also not interested in reading the NYT, I think they get far more coverage than they deserve, and I get excited when I hear about resource cuts in their staff.
@Mr. Wibble
"Nope, combine everything."
Spot on. They vote for it, they should get it.
I'm wondering when we are going to see sports banned. Shouldn't we be seeing this pretty soon now?
I mean sports are about achievement. The fans of the sports celebrate differences in achievement and effort.
So when is this going to become the next target? I mean it's all so unfair! It's evil!
Sports is a side effect of the evolutionary responsibility thrust upon the female of the specie to pick a fit male to pass on bankable genetic material. It’s not man’s fault. We had no say. 😇
Typical NYT misdirection. Most people who care about men competing in women's sports fall into 2 categories: girls who face the unfairness of competing against men and the parents of girls who face the unfairness of competing against men (there is a much larger group that viscerally opposes unfairness, but they're not really "involved").
But the NYT is happy to lie and confuse because they have their own agendas that all other agendas must be sublimated to.
Why do women have two holes?
So they can piss and moan at the same time.
@macmacconnell--
You are exactly right. During the championship series, when one wants all of one's energy to be directed to winning, one doesn't lift weights.
Peaking is a concept serious athletes--amateur and professional--understand. I am preparing for a 50-mile race at the end of May. I am doing serious strength exercises now for my posterior chain; but as the race approaches, and I work toward peak mileage, I will taper off the weights. In the three weeks before the race, I will not do any weights.
Probably, whoever assigned space at the "bubble" figured NO ONE would be using the weight room, so it didn't matter.
Sports are male beauty pageants.
Jupiter,
That is your contribution to the conversation? Why do you have a hole in your face at all? Obviously, nothing of value comes out of it.
Consider last week: As the N.C.A.A. basketball tournaments began, female players demanded to know why the weight room in the men’s bubble had state of the art lifting equipment, whereas they got a stingy rack of dumbbells.
Wait until they find out men have urinals, and bonus, with the changes coming, all restrooms may soon have urinals. Isn't equality great!
The faster we get to bottom of this slippery slope the better.
"So You Want to ‘Save Women’s Sports’?
I don't care about women's sports. I want to halt and reverse the progressive trend of normalizing mental illness.
Women's collegiate sports should get an equal amount of the proceeds from ticket sales and TV money that the men receive from their ticket sales and TV money.
Put that way, the unequal special treatment that women's athletics receives sounds pretty good.
As far as press coverage goes, it's all about the quality of play and putting butts in the seats.
The quality of play will always lag behind the men so that is a tough row to how.
As for facilities, I have connections with a large D1 school whose women have won a national championship.
I got a tour of their practice facilities and it would equal an NBA's team.
Spectacular...courts, restaurant/cafe, weight room, locker room, etc. It's nicer than the men's team's because it's newer.
But the school saw the need and quickly raised the money. People will support a winner.
There is (currently) only a tiny number of men competing in women's sports; it's not like it's a big problem. Yes, the men dominate when they are allowed to compete, but it isn't happening very often. But nature and the market abhor a vacuum, so inevitably some enterprising men will figure out that it's a lot easier to win and make money when competing against women. I'm pretty sure the LPGA would disappear overnight if men were allowed to compete, so it would be a self-cancelling effort. Even those who fervently pretend that "Trans women are women" would know that this isn't women's golf anymore.
'We demand women’s sports get equal resources, equal media coverage, and equal pay'?..
It's interesting they use the word "demand" here without recognizing the issue is customer demand. Are they going to demand customers pay equal attention to women's sports as they do men's?
When are they going to "demand" women perform at the same level as men? Isn't that step one with the others following? Why was that step omitted?
Probably, whoever assigned space at the "bubble" figured NO ONE would be using the weight room, so it didn't matter.
Maybe, but then why do the men have such an extensive weight training facility set up there? And why didn't the NCAA say that instead of blaming it on a space problem.
Why don’t educated women understand basic economics?
Clyde said...
The issue of women's sports vs. men's sports is a totally different issue. Men's sports have much higher ratings in the media, much higher ticket sales and other revenue at both the college and professional levels, and just plain more commercial potential than women's sports do. Those are the facts.
While true this omits the core issue: men are better. People are willing to pay to see the best. They aren't willing to pay as much to see women just as they aren't willing to pay as much to see minor league baseball - or the guys playing basketball at the Y.
If I understand the argument correctly, it's ok for men to compete in women's sports as long as the women get better weightlifting equipment?
I thought the argument was that girls playing sports in public schools should get the same pay as professional male athletes.
Article: Women’s sports get attention when there’s an egregious slight against us (authorette is a professional athlete?), such as when the world champion women’s national soccer team sued for pay equal to the men’s team, which failed to qualify for the World Cup.
"FC Dallas under-15 boys squad beat the U.S. Women's National Team [5 to 2] in a scrimmage"
How much should those boys get paid?
Mr Wibble said...
I wonder if a possible solution might be to divide sports into weight categories (maybe something similar to what they do in boxing) instead of men and women’s sports. Just a thought.
No. Men and women are built differently. A 120 pound man has vastly more muscle and bone density than a 120 pound woman.
3/24/21, 9:06 AM
Well it wouldn’t have to be specifically a weight class but rather something that takes into account bone density, etc. I’m no scientist but maybe they can figure out the exact combinations of features that would make such categories fair.
Understand you are only talking a team that consists of of 15 athletes out of the entire university. Does it really help the thousands of other students to worry about if theses 15 athletes have the same weight room as the men's team? Do these basketball players care about if the women's volleyball team or softball team have the same resources as the women's basketball team? Do they care do demand if the intermural athletes on campus has the same training and medical staff they have available? Same tutoring opportunities? No. They only selfishly want to compare the women's BB team to the men's BB team which along with the men's football team pays for the for the non-revenue sports which includes all women's programs at 99%. They should be thankful to be able to share in what they get as opposed to only getting resources based on what they bring in themselves.
Equality in opportunity is different than equality in outcome. This is at the heart of most of the disagreements between modern progressive thinking and conservative thinking.
I think it's fairly self evident to most sane, reasonable people that insisting that biological men be allowed to compete in women's sports reduces opportunities for women.
There are a few ideas being conflated here though. There's obviously some differences in terms of the market for professional athletes (meaning people getting paid) versus amatures school sport athletes. In school, I think most people would agree that women and girls should have access to all the resources they need.
But in the world of professional sports, where money and the market take over, you can't and shouldn't try to mandate equal resources. If you try to mandate equal outcomes, you'd just end up wasted resources and with resentment. For example, if you were to try to mandate that all WNBA players get paid the same as NBA players given the finite pool of money available, you'd have to essentially cut way back on the saleries of the NBA players. I don't imagine that would go over well with the NBA players. There'd obviously be an enormous amount of resentment towards the women.
And you can't mandate what the fans want to watch... I mean, technically I suppose you could force everyone to watch womens basketball at gunpoint I suppose. But you can't mandate excitement, being entertained, and fun. That's the heart of the whole "equality in outcome" problem, it requires human feelings. Feelings can't be mandated.
As a freshman a PSU in 1969, I would play basketball in the evening and weekends in the big gym (Rec Hall). It had 3 or 4 courts sideways. Always full. So we decided to invade the girls gym. Empty. Every now then a girl or two would show up. They then started to complain about us taking over their gym. So we had to have a girl play with us in order to use the girls gym. Good way to meet chicks.
Capitalism - people will pay for what they want. There is less of a market for women's sports. It's simple.
"Why do women have two holes?"
Quick! Somebody redesign the 1949 Buick!
Women's pole vault. Just sayin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=URz-RYEOaig&t=4s
Lucid: what do you expect. Only pussies and queer baits work out in gyms. Real men build their own in the basement and focus on bodyweight calisthenic.
Since I am a millennial whisperer, the latest fad after parcorps training is the knees over toes routine. It all costs next to nothing and the travel time is 30-seconds.
The stories you tell about women indicate you are the asshole.
We men demand equal attention to our breasts. We demand equal resources in medical research, exposure in media and advertising, while also being able to call the cops or human resources if you look at them or touch them.
Some men have more impressive breasts than some women, so why the second class appreciation? Our breasts are real and they are spectacular!
Genderphobia. This does not affect all individuals in the the transgender spectrum equally. Trans/homosexual females are not affected. Integration of females and trans/neo-females (i.e. males) harms the former in occupations and circumstances where physiological (e.g. muscle structure, lung capacity, bone density) differences matter. Simulation through medical corruption only partially reconciles these differences. Unfortunately for individuals (e.g. trans/neogenders) with acute genderphobia, the medical trials demonstrate that gender conversion therapy forces a porgressive condition. The liberals are conducting a massive social experiment that only harms females and trans/homosexual females. Once you go Pro-Choice, adopt politically congruent policies ("="), it's a progressive path and grade.
Tranny's need a league of their own.
I don't understand why the weight room area cannot be open to both men and women.
The biggest problem is that the men are in Indianapolis and the woman are in San Antonio.
What stops a man from simply walking into a women's sport and claiming to be a woman and immediately dominating that sport? A dozen such men could dominate all women sports in a month, and we would never see another female champion in any sport, and then women would simply give up doing them at all. Sound like a good goal to you?
It will be kind of hilarious if it takes genetic men playing in women's sports to get people to watch women's sports (and give them nice weight rooms)
realizing that women's sports don't have the same audience as men's sports
Yes, both men and women prefer men's sports. Probably because of the extra athletic range normalized with the physiological differences between the sexes. Perhaps feminists (a la masculinists) who don't care about women's rights, as much as their own, believe that placing males on women's teams will force equity, if only an illusion, between the sexes, and they can claim a sociopolitical goal.
No, you're right. I don't care about women's sports. Never mind!
It will be kind of hilarious if it takes genetic men playing in women's sports to get people to watch women's sports
I had the same humorous interpretation of of this situation. It takes us back to the early progressive days, when women would be injected with male hormones, and mentally conditioned, to simulate masculine attributes, and, ironically, reinforce gender bigotry. One step forward, two steps backward.
The reason we have women's sports is for the benefit of biological women so they can compete fairly. That's the very reason it exists. Without the requirement for them to be actual women there will no longer be women's sports with women in it. It will just end up being trans sports. You can't prevent that from happening, so it will.
I must admit that I prefer to watch women's volleyball.
Ah, you want equity of equipment rooms and not the equality of the playing field, the pay of a team drawing 60,000 fans when yours draws 4,000.
It will be kind of hilarious if it takes genetic men playing in women's sports to get people to watch women's sports
Just imagine a successful league of over-60 over 250 lb men attracting an audience as professional gymnastic performers.
@Fernandinande You mention an interesting incident with the suit be the Women's national soccer team over equal pay. You don't mention a couple of the points that led to the suit being dismissed, though. Let us review!
First off, the women were paid more per game than the men. The men played many more games. And the men had a different contract -- the men chose a high risk / high reward pay, which paid little per game but much if they hit incentives (such as deep runs in tournament play). They didn't hit those incentives, and their pay suffered for it.
The women's team was offered the exact same contract, and DECLINED it. They chose a low risk / lower reward pay scale, with few incentives but with great benefits. Then they made a great run, winning it all. After that was done, after they had already hit all the reward points, THEN they brought suit, saying it wasn't fair, and they would have been paid more if they had accepted the contract that was offered to them but that they themselves rejected.
Here's a writeup:
US Womens National Soccer Team loses pay dispute in court
So yeah, the women were paid more per game, were paid on a contract that they designed, then after they did better than evidently they thought they could, wanted to (after it was all done, post-season) force a payment based on a rejected contract. It was dismissed.
'We demand women’s sports get equal resources, equal media coverage, and equal pay'?..
Democracy (i.e. market with male and female consumers) votes otherwise. Of course, as is the custom in Democrat politics, they can override democratic processes. Can they abort the baby, cannibalize her profitable parts, sequester her carbon pollutants, and have her, too?
It’s little wander lesser men want to muscle in women sports. It’s the only way they can shine. If anything, it should tell you how unserious women take women sports. If other women don’t stop it. Who’s going to? Let’s cut to the chase.
Quick! Somebody redesign the 1949 Buick!
With speed holes.
She has a perfectly valid point, and she makes it very well.
Good job.
So yeah, the women were paid more per game, were paid on a contract that they designed, then after they did better than evidently they thought they could, wanted to (after it was all done, post-season) force a payment based on a rejected contract. It was dismissed.
Yes, abort her baby, and have her, too. But this wasn't a baby. This was a legal contract, and diverse greenbacks. This was not a Progressive Church/Synagogue/Mosque, clinic, chamber, office, or even Democrat think tank. They were green to believe that they could abort the baby, and have her, too.
I want my daughter to continue playing basketball and softball and succeeding in this competition against other girls. I enjoy watching her compete even though the level of play and athleticism is sometimes higher in my son's games, despite his being a few years younger. As pure spectacle, the NBA is more impressive than WNBA. If I'm just watching sports for the spectacle, I'd choose the NBA. If my daughter were playing in the WNBA, I'd watch the WNBA. These are all things I feel and they don't feel, to me anyway, to be in conflict with one another. Why does this NYT reporter presume these to be in conflict?
I will no longer watch sports until there are 57 separate competitions for the 57 different genders. Anyone who disagrees with me is a gender fascist and probably a cis white male (but I repeat myself).
The personal is not political. A lot people totally comfortable with the reality that more people want to watch men compete than women in most athletic feats, also want to preserve an arena in which girls or women can compete against one another because as a society we value the benefits of this sort of competition for our youth of both sexes. This is not an inherently political argument.
why not have a trans-league?
if you switch to a woman - fine , but your biology is still physically superior as a male.
But Biden and Kamala & the woke army of "you're all phobes" is in charge.
"So this is what it’s like to matter.... But all this new passion has made me wonder, what if all these people claiming to be fighting for the future of women’s sports would really fight for the future of women’s sports? What if they suddenly said, 'We demand women’s sports get equal resources, equal media coverage, and equal pay'?.
A simple explanation for the truly stupid:
Women are not as good athletes as men.
If you allow men to play "women's" sports, you will wipe out the ability of women to play competitive sports, because the women just can't compete.
If you demand people treat women's sports as just like men's, we're going to laugh at you. Because they're not as good, and that means they're not as interesting.
Which means people aren't going to watch as much, and therefore the female athletes are not worth as much money, TV attention, etc.
Reality, you should try it some time
Income from Men's football and basketball teams support most other college sports, both men's and women's. That includes women's college basketball in which only the top dozen or so schools have teams that are self supporting. Fact of life because the paying fans aren't there. Bitching about it isn't going to matter, except to the men who played non self supporting sports (wrestling, volleyball, lacrosse, softball, etc) and had them canceled by Title 9 requirements, i.e., there wasn't enough money from the men's major sports to support both women's and men's lesser revenue teams so the men's were canceled and the women's were expanded.
I think it's unfair for the NYTs to tie Sedona Price's commentary to the trans issue. They are separate.
But what I didn't like about her commentary is..."If you aren't upset about this, you're part of the problem."
No. I am neither upset about it nor part of the problem. I am uninvolved with your situation.
Now, your coaches and schools and ADs are the ones that had a chance to do anything about it.
Bring in equal numbers of fans/tv sets. Until then work harder.
Quick! Somebody redesign the 1949 Buick!
With a fourth hole accessory. Why stop at three: the front hole, the top hole, the back... black hole... whore h/t NAACP, too.
Kay said...
I wonder if a possible solution might be to divide sports into weight categories (maybe something similar to what they do in boxing) instead of men and women’s sports. Just a thought.
15 year old boys playing club soccer beat women's teams that expect to perform well / win at the World Cup.
Pos puberty, males are better athletes than females.
Pound for pound, inch for inch, men are better than women at sports.
The reason why we have "girl's" and "women's" sports is because otherwise the females just can compete.
Get over it
And the same reason why they have to be protected from real competition, is why they're not going to get the same attention, and therefore the same support, as men's sports at any level where customer interstate's matters.
And shouldn't
why not have a trans-league?
Yes, a transgender league, trans/homosexuals excluded, the fourth hole.
Blogger gilbar said...
Seriously, how many WNBA ticket holders want to be near penises ?
3/24/21, 9:13 AM"
Heh,
Seriously, how many WNBA players want to be near penises ?
wendybar said...
AND, when women draw the crowds that MEN do in sports...they will be compensated. UNTIL then...work harder...draw a crowd instead of kneeling and pushing them away.
Ding, ding, ding! I'd never in my life rooted against an American team in an international competition, until the most recent Women's World Cup.
You push your left wing BS, I actively, aggressively, WANT you to be destroyed. I will never willingly give a penny, a click, a page view, or anything else to US Women's Soccer
I have no problem with the NCAA providing better weight rooms for their semi-pro female basketball players, but then I want evidence that the women are actually using the facilities they demand. Seems fair, doesn’t it?
I always thought the answer to the two hole question had something to do with a comparison to a bowling ball.
Oh look, Howard's ovulating again. Someone forgot to dilate last night I see.
males are better athletes than females
Male's physiology affords them a greater athletic range, which both men and women find compelling. There may also be a visible difference in passion attributable to "toxic" masculinity. Perhaps we can adopt progressive experiments from yesteryear to force equity between the sexes.
"The biggest problem is that the men are in Indianapolis and the woman are in San Antonio."
Oh yeah, I forgot about that. But then why does she have video of both? Odd.
For some reason, I thought the whole shebang (hebang?) with both was happening in Indianapolis.
"males are better athletes than females"
True to a point, however, I doubt I could best Babe Didrikson at a lot of sports. That may not be due to athleticism, but skill.
In many schools with revenue generating sports, the men's football and basketball teams got their own weight room, while men's baseball, soccer, and others shared a weight room. That should explain it all.
The other part of the problem is that women’s sports aren’t really women’s sports. They are men’s sports at which women are competing. Of course men do better.
Seen’t there standards for testosterone in international women’s sports? Limits above which the athlete is presumed to be engaged in doping?
That standard, perhaps rightly, was challenged by Progressive activists. They could focus on sex, first, and weight ("outcome") classes, second.
"There may also be a visible difference in passion attributable to "toxic" masculinity."
Many men have an innate compulsion to beat the crap out of someone for no apparent reason. You can either give the hormone blockers or let them play sports. 10 years after the hormone blockers, the Chinese will be in San Francisco Bay.
MayBee said...what I didn't like about her commentary is..."If you aren't upset about this, you're part of the problem."
No. I am neither upset about it nor part of the problem. I am uninvolved with your situation.
I can overlook it. It's a big deal in her world and she's understandably frustrated. If she's not so measured as we would like, well, she's young and venting.
I think it's unfair for the NYTs to tie Sedona Price's commentary to the trans issue. They are separate.
I hadn't noticed that, and you're right. It makes what disgusts me about the New York Times even worse--there's nobody they won't screw with to push their own petty agendas.
These days, the Times is nothing but a hate-click bucket shop.
There it is - no matter what you do for women, it is never enough.
And we put them in positions of power. Madness.
Aren’t there standards for testosterone limits in international women’s sports? Limits above which the athlete is presumed to be engaged in doping? Enforce that for all women’s sports at the high school and collegiate levels. Problem solved, I suspect.
The Super Special Olympics.
This is a really stupid equity argument that ignores the lack of demand for professional female sport, which will never be anywhere near the demand for male sports. That is due to not being as skilled as males.
These activist women merely reinforce the old patriarchy idea that Daddy should give them the Porche, because they are girls and deserve it for free, rather earning it themselves.
Title IX already gives female college athletes their slice of the pie.
If there were an actual market interest for watching female sports, the money would be there, but there isn't, nor will it ever be there, simply due to performance.
Was there really a big difference between the '49 and '50 Buick? I don't know. But my grandmother's car of choice was a Buick, even though my grandparents were good friends with their town's Studebaker Dealership owner.
True to a point, however, I doubt I could best Babe Didrikson at a lot of sports. That may not be due to athleticism, but skill.
Maybe, but hundreds of millions of men could, therein lies the problem for women competing against men.
Btw, why do women have their own category in chess? Billiards? Darts (although a woman recently won a huge title)?
"The Super Special Olympics."
Kind of like the movie 'The Ringer'
The blurb: "A young guy's only option to erase a really bad debt is to rig the Special Olympics by posing as a contestant."
Not sure they could make this one today...
Meh. Of course it's ridiculous on the NCAA's part to have one stack of 5 lb weights for women to lift. No actual workout room. That's just beyond stupid. But, we're talking the NCAA, right? They are notoriously stupid when it comes to most things.
Still, women's sports are simply not a draw. Whatever monies they have to spend on this tournament, I'm sure it's a fraction of what they have to spend on the men's. But someone should have made sure the actual athletes were taken care of before they booked luxury hotel rooms and made reservations at only the best restaurants in town for NCAA employees.
Women's basketball is simply not watched. And it is the most watched of all women's sports (aside from women's soccer every 2 years or so, for a few weeks.) You cannot make people watch something that does not interest them. The question is: why do women's sports not interest the public at large?
Well done NYT! Thanks to you, I no longer care about this topic. If females competing in these sports don’t mind being displaced by males, why should I object. In fact, I’m quickly reaching the point where I no longer care about male sports either due to the left’s need to inject politics into every aspect of daily life. Each day I find myself more and more willing to let them all drown in the morass of stupidity they willingly stepped in.
Kay said...
Well it wouldn’t have to be specifically a weight class but rather something that takes into account bone density, etc. I’m no scientist but maybe they can figure out the exact combinations of features that would make such categories fair.
We have.
If you have Y chromosomes, you go in one group. If you don't, you go into a different one.
IOW: Male and female
"Last Wednesday, the Senate Judiciary Committee held hearings on the Equality Act. Three of the highest-profile individuals who could speak on the girls’ sports issue — Chelsea Mitchell, Alanna Smith and Selina Soule, three Connecticut high school athletes who sued after biological boys were allowed to compete in girls’ track and field events — were blocked from testifying by Democrats even though Republicans had invited them to share their testimony, according to the Washington Examiner.
Texas GOP Sen. Ted Cruz called the decision “striking and revealing.”
“They didn’t want the American people to hear, to hear about the unfairness to little girls having girls’ sports destroyed because of the radical policies of today’s Democrats,” Cruz said."
So much for being the party of women!!!
Serena Williams is currently the top female tennis player in the world, she has multiple, lucrative endorsement deals, has won over $92,000,000 playing tennis and is worth $200,000,000. A quick google didn't reveal the revenue that women's tennis brings in, but its got to be in the billions. At one time I would have said that anything that threatens that kind of cash flow would be killed immediately. But the NFL is busy committing suicide and in denial about why, so who knows.
“I lost four state championships because our state policy ignores the biological reality and physical advantages of males over females in sport,” Mitchell said, according to CNS. “The Connecticut Interscholastic Athletic Conference’s policy inflicted unfair competition on me and my fellow female athletes.”
“I was forced to compete against biological male students every year of my high school sports experience. It was demoralizing. I rarely got to compete in fair races and lost awards and opportunities for recognition at a time when it was most crucial for college recruitment.”
Smith, a high school junior, said that while she has “set records” in high school, “[w]hen I was a freshman in high school everything changed.”
“I knew I’d be racing against a male who identified as a female at the State Open. I knew I had no chance of winning despite the hours of training and knowing my personal bests in each event,” she said.
“I was defeated before stepping onto the track. I knew it wasn’t fair to me or to any of the other girls competing at the State Open. I knew I had biologically-advantaged competition running against me.”
"The question is: why do women's sports not interest the public at large?"
This is not difficult to answer.
People want to see the best. They want to see people do things that they cannot do.
I can (and did) keep up with a woman who played soccer on the US women's Olympic team (a co-ed league).
I want to see golfers drive a ball straight and 340 yards. Not straight and 260 yards. All of my golf buddies can do that, even after a few beers.
I'm not a hockey fan, but watching women's hockey is like watching grass grow...painfully slow.
Same with soccer (a game I know well, having played, ref'd, and coached for decades). Brutally slow, and even the ball skills are lacking.
Liberals with logic skills are more rare than unicorns.
I remember hearing that the overall funding for women's sports and men's sports is the same it is just that the overwhelming bulk of funding for men's sports goes to football and basketball, while for women's sports it is more equitably split among the various sports. If people want better equipment for the women's basketball team they should do what the men do and snatch the funding away from things like women's badminton, La Crosse, field hockey, swimming etc.
Btw? Real female athletes don't much fear Trans-women talking over their games. Bring It!
Then they're idiots.
There are a reasons why the lady's basketball (aka the 28.5) is smaller than the men's ball.
the Wost part about Trolls, is: They are SO F*CKING stupid, that you want to reply
If you are unsatisfied with the gender you were born with, YOU are the problem.
It's really simple: Women's sports at schools are illegal. Title IX bans them. Let's read the law:
No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.
Are men being refused a chance to participate in women's sports programs on the basis of sex at schools getting Federal funding? Then Title IX is being violated.
The 'slow' and less-skilled part is not an opinion.
Those things are fact.
I have a friend with a son who played Olympic Development soccer...kind of an advanced league for very skilled high school players.
Any one of those teams would have defeated the U.S. women's national team. It wouldn't be close. The speed, strength, and stamina of high school boys at that level is astonishing.
The next time you watch a women's soccer game, take note of how many times the ball goes out of play.
It happens a lot, because the ball skills are not there to keep control and possession of the ball with teammates.
When women get into trouble on defense they usual kick the ball out of bounds or kick it as far as they can up the field.
This happens very rarely in the men's game at the top levels.
If you don't know the sport well then you won't pick up on it.
Consider this free education.
no athletes in college who cannot do the student work, are not there to complete a degree, and without their athletic skills would not be playing at the college level?
Actually, I do think that should be the situation. I freely admit that that isn't always the case at some schools, and I think that is wrong.
Why not form a sports league at that level, pre-pro
Like baseball's minor leagues? Great idea. I've seen it proposed before. The fact is, lots of kids playing college sports are being exploited. The colleges are making money off of them and if they don't make the majors then they are screwed.
“ The reason we have women's sports is for the benefit of biological women so they can compete fairly. That's the very reason it exists. Without the requirement for them to be actual women there will no longer be women's sports with women in it. It will just end up being trans sports. You can't prevent that from happening, so it will.”
I don’t really care about college or professional athletics. In most colleges and university only a fraction of the kids playing a sport in HS get to play on a school team. Heck in skiing, nationally highly ranked HS athletes aren’t making D1 teams. This is true for both sexes, but maybe a little bit worse for the women. And in most professional sports, most D1 athletes don’t make the cut either. It is in MS and esp HS that female sports are most important.
My kid went to a prep school that had mandatory athletics grades 6-12. Everyone played something, unless they selected essentially PE class (very unpopular), had a documented medical excuse, or were playing some sport at a higher level than the school played. That latter included a nationally highly ranked ski racer and an aspiring Olympic figure skater. But everyone else played something. They just ran enough teams that everyone could play a sport they wanted to play. They just had to play. The results were startling. There was almost no obesity in the school. Almost none. Maybe 1%. The kids all glowed with good health. The social scene for the school was at the gym after practice while waiting to be picked up by parents, or just hanging out there then. For a lot of kids in the country, the boys stay active throughout high school, but not really the girls. The social scene for the girls wasn’t who was prettiest, or had the richest parents (there were some billionaire parents there), but whether the girls played volleyball versus field hockey (fall), or soccer versus lacrosse (spring). Or the loners who did something else (kid with the locker below them freshman year was the state golf champion for two years). As the kids in their class turn 30, they are all still very physically active - my kid has probably skied or hiked with 20 or so of them over the last decade, out of a class of 100. And, in HS, my kid was one of the less athletic, less well coordinated, in the class. Still a spaz, but skiis or hikes almost every weekend. And, as I suggested above, the benefit of the mandatory athletics fell even more on the girls, than the boys. I think that the advantages of middle and high school athletics should be extended to more girls, not fewer.
The gender pay gap in athletics is startling. The top WNBA salary is about $ 125,000 and $ 40 million in the NBA.
There is also a gender pay gap in every other industry. This pay gap can be summarized as follows:
Men get paid $ 25.00 per hour and work fifty hours per week.
Women get paid $ 25.00 per hour and work thirty-five hours per week.
The better question is...why are those who fought for decades for women's sports now defending the presence of men in women's sports?
I saw a brief interview with a former woman NFL coach and she was asked if she was in favor of trans athletes competing against women and she would not answer yes or no. She just blabbed about how we have to find a solution. The interviewer asked several times if she would just answer yes or no and she would not- she just continued to blab meaningless phrase and be smug with her canned BS answer.
Some turtles are faster than others.
But slow is slow. The fastest woman on earth would lose to hundreds of high school boys in a race. It's not her fault.
But it's human nature to compare things to other things. And some of us want to see feats of athleticism that astound us, not something we can see done better at any high school boy's game in our town.
When my sons were in high school, their basketball team won a state championship, so they were admittedly better than most. But your Lynx would have been blown off the court had they ever played.
Again, it would not be their fault.
I wholeheartedly support women's athletics and root for the women of my preferred college when they play, but unless this whole trans issue is derailed, you will soon be watching more and more biological men.
And biological women will suffer for it.
Here's a solution: no gender segregated teams. 1 basketball team per school, 1 tennis team, etc. Any one can play on any team if they tryout and are good enough. Transgender disappears as a problem.
All stupid distraction.
Don't look now another 3 Trillion headed out the door to cronies and lobbyists.
Can't wit for the IRS SWAT teams to start rolling.
And "boys" who are shot up with hormones pre-puberty
This is just evil and will be judged to be right up their with Mengele's experiments.
The rest of what you said is delusional.
I’m pretty certain Serena Williams can beat Woody Allen at tennis or any other sport. And to be fair, I’m thinking of young, 70’s Woody, in his physical prime. So the statement that men are better than women at sports is obviously not absolute. Woody versus Serena does not seem like a fair match to me.
PB said...
Here's a solution: no gender segregated teams. 1 basketball team per school, 1 tennis team, etc. Any one can play on any team if they tryout and are good enough. Transgender disappears as a problem.
In response the left will claim there is obvious discrimination if the team is disproportionately male. There's always another step to take when reality is not a consideration.
And "boys" who are shot up with hormones pre-puberty are likely not going to outcompete the naturally biological female athletes, due to the effects of the female hormones kicking in
The controls change. Does the structure and capacity change, too? Separately, there is a religious/ethical/legal question of forcing medical corruption at that age.
And "boys" who are shot up with hormones pre-puberty are likely not going to outcompete the naturally biological female athletes, due to the effects of the female hormones kicking in
This is some "cut the ball off the boys so they can sing higher notes in a medieval boys' choir" shit right there.
Who in the last 300 years think that this sort of 'pre-maiming to achieve a certain result' is a good idea?
The radical left? Never mind...
So the statement that men are better than women at sports is obviously not absolute.
There are short men, and tall women. The comparison is between the average male and average female of similar skill.
Kay said...
I’m pretty certain Serena Williams can beat Woody Allen at tennis or any other sport. And to be fair, I’m thinking of young, 70’s Woody, in his physical prime. So the statement that men are better than women at sports is obviously not absolute. Woody versus Serena does not seem like a fair match to me.
The William's sisters took on the @203 ranked male tennis player. He beat each of them, playing one after the other, with 6-2 results. And he wasn't trying hard.
In short distance running, in any given year, there's 400+ high school boys who can beat the top female time.
If you want to have "women's sports" or "girl's sports', you must exclude biological males. Period.
The only reason to argue the other side is because you're a politically deluded fool. At best.
I'm old, fat, and utterly out of shape. I'm still stronger, can lift more, can do more, than the vast majority of females.
OTOH, they can bear babies, and I can't. Nature / genetics / evolution / God / take your choice made trade offs.
Grow up, and deal with it. Not be sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming "I can't hear you!"
SOooooo.. The Army has changed it's unisex fitness standards. Who here hasn't heard the reason . BTW "nothing is really obvious, it requires supporting argument".
No Shouting Thomas? I'm surprised.
A major problem with the gormless sheep who drift from one elite-sponsored story to another is their complete inability to see broader trends, much less extrapolate from them. Professional sports and video entertainment are service industries- in theory. Their whole purpose should be turning people into fans, and turning fans into super fans. But over the past year, we've seen massive crashes in audience for NFL games and Grammy performances alike. The Oscars are so woke they couldn't even fill all their Best Picture slots, and just about no one actually cares about them anymore.
The point is, professional sports and Hollywood are at a nadir of cultural respect. Tennis is a rare sport that enjoyed some parity between viewership for the men's and women's circuits. This is why the women can demand equal pay despite having far less athletic talent than men: without them, the sport loses half of its revenue. But put the trans in, and people are going to tune out in large numbers. Including and especially actual women. Insist that trans are just as sexy as women, and Hollywood loses revenue at a time where they really can't afford to lose more.
By the way, beating Woody Allen at athletic competition isn't hard. I could do it. Williams could probably beat Bobby Riggs, if the mafia was busy fixing the match first. She might even be able to beat Jimmy Connors if she did the time warp. But as the beneficiary of great racial muscle development and decades of athletic advancements. Put up against any man remotely qualified for the modern circuit, and she'll get DESTROYED. It won't even be close. A match against a Djokovic or Nadal might qualify as sadism.
Who in the last 300 years think that this sort of 'pre-maiming to achieve a certain result' is a good idea?
The radical left? Never mind...
Social progress. Social justice. They're Pro-Choice, an ancient, weird, ostensibly "secular" religion. Can they abort the baby, cannibalize her profitable parts, sequester her carbon pollutants, and have her, too? The magic eight ball indicates "yes", selectively, opportunistically, when politically congruent ("="), if they can force or convience society to take a knee.
I’m pretty certain Serena Williams can beat Woody Allen at tennis or any other sport. And to be fair, I’m thinking of young, 70’s Woody, in his physical prime.
Serena Williams won't be playing Woody Allen in his prime, she'll be playing a guy who wasn't quite good enough to make it to the top of the men's tennis rankings.
"There are short men, and tall women. The comparison is between the average male and average female of similar skill."
A 5'3" Muggsy Bogues, when he was playing, would beat any woman on earth 1-on-1 regardless of her height.
"Demand", not equity, pays for all of those luxuries. There is little audience for women's sports. Even women prefer to watch men's sports.
"The William's sisters took on the @203 ranked male tennis player. He beat each of them, playing one after the other, with 6-2 results. And he wasn't trying hard."
Here's my uncle Rico response : )
Back in the day I was a tennis bum. Took no lessons, just loved to play and taught myself the game. For a while there I was playing 4 or 5 hours a day...even went in with a friend and bought our own stringing machine.
It took me about three years, but I got to be pretty decent, and became friends with a couple of guys who played D1 for a large west coast university.
They hit the ball really hard but I eventually adapted to the speed, and became a good guy for them to practice with when they needed a warm body.
I couldn't beat them, but I could take some games and lose a respectable 6-3 6-2.
When I would play their friends on the ladies team (D1 as well), it would take a few games to adjust to the speed difference. Everything was slower. Ball speed, foot speed...everything.
And I was just a self-taught youngster going to college and working a night job.
We've already killed women's amateur sports by letting 'transgender' athletes compete. Now let's wreck all professional sports by legislating equal 'pay'.
It is who what garners the most eyeballs, ladies and 'ladies'....
Equity is an equally proportional share of the box. Equal 'pay' is not.
Just identify as a man when working out and problem solved. Dare the NCAA to throw women identifying as men for the purposes of weight training out of the segregated facilities. And why segregated facilities? Except for muscles not normally exercised in a public gym setting, all bodies have the same muscles and bone structure with the same axes of movement.
Same old shit, isn’t it? Neo-feminist twats who can’t distinguish between equality of opportunity and equality of results whinging about how it’s never enough - sponsored by NYT
So the neo-feminists have decided to sit this one out, just as they sit out persecution of women by “the Religion of Peace” and Tara Reid, et al, while they focus on killing babies, free birth control and Donald Trump.
That’s okay. When it comes to real social justice, instead of make believe social justice, Christians and conservatives will do the heavy lifting for them without the looting, arson and vandalism. Real social justice is equal opportunity for biological girls and women to compete with each other in sports. Make believe social justice is precipitated by ignoring biology and that women’s athletics are poorly attended and are financed mostly by taxes and men’s sports. Men’s sports, OTOH, are mostly funded by, well, proceeds from men’s sports.
And, as I suggested above, the benefit of the mandatory athletics fell even more on the girls, than the boys. I think that the advantages of middle and high school athletics should be extended to more girls, not fewer.
Strongly agree with Bruce here about the value in youth and in particular girls' sports. Team sports especially. Seen it firsthand with my daughter and her friends, those who play team sports vs. those who don't. The fact that public schools may not open for in-person learning but almost certainly won't have fall sports is the leading reason I'm considering private school.
Perhaps mandated attendance as part of sensitivity training workshops.
A bit of a captive market enables price gouging...err..equity.
Insulting your potential allies doesn't seem like the best move when it comes to saving women's sports.
Strongly agree with Bruce here about the value in youth and in particular girls' sports. Team sports especially.
I agree. My granddaughters play sports. One plays soccer, the younger one swims. Neither are college scholarship material but it is a healthy lifestyle. Fortunately, swim meets continued in Arizona so the young GD was brought over from CA for meets by her parents. Her brother might be good enough for a college scholarship but his sports are football and baseball and both were blocked by Governor Hair Gel until this month.
Joe Smith said...
I have a friend with a son who played Olympic Development soccer...kind of an advanced league for very skilled high school players.
Any one of those teams would have defeated the U.S. women's national team. It wouldn't be close. The speed, strength, and stamina of high school boys at that level is astonishing.
I think that actually happened to them in Australia. They played a club team of 15 year-old boys and lost.
"Like baseball's minor leagues?"
Pro-Baseball is slowly reducing their minor league teams. When I played in the late 70's there weren't many college teams that taught at the professional level. The minors were for teaching and creating a place for kids who could do college. Now, Most of the competitive schools in D1 are well coached and, following the way of basketball and football there are certain degrees that are manageable for most athletes. Sports Management is one. In the money programs athletes on scholarship are given tutors on day one.
"I think that actually happened to them in Australia. They played a club team of 15 year-old boys and lost."
It happened more than once. It happened in my area but wasn't publicized.
They really have no choice but to practice against boys' teams if they want a challenge.
I guess she is right. I really am not interested in saving womens' sports since I have no interest in paying to watch them perform. When I watch sports' highlights, I fast forward through all WNBA and womens' hockey stories. Life is short and I feel no desire to waste time on second rate athletics. Of course, I also feel that way about mens' college football, baseball and soccer (mens and womens). But, I do watch womens' gymnastics and skiing/snowboarding events. And, I do enjoy seeing women run the American Ninja Warrior courses. Oh yeah, Weili Zhang is fighting in April and I am seriously thinking about getting the PPV for that, which would be the 2nd time I have ever specifically paid for an MMA event - the 1st time being Ronda Rousie's fight with the Lioness.
Some think Serena Williams takes performance enhancing drugs. Look at her body when she's playing. Then look at her just before she had her child. She would of had to quit the drugs before getting pregnant. She's back playing and looking like she used to. BTW. Woman athletes, historically peak in their teens. Men in the early twenties. Serena still dominates. Serena is 39.
To the (few) people above who are saying that the writer has a good point about the weight rooms, no - hers is a terrible argument. As mentioned by someone else above, they are is two completely different locations by virtue of where their tournaments are being held, so it is an apples to oranges comparison. It’s not as if the NCAA went out and set up a SOTA facility in Indianapolis, it’s just what whatever happened to be available at that location. You can’t expect that all facilities within the tournament system are going to have exactly equivalent equipment. And there is no competitive disadvantage; the other women at that facility have access to the exact same equipment. Also - why pick the weight room to make comparisons? What about locker rooms, shower and toilet facilities, dining areas, b-ball courts? Probably because she couldn’t complain about a disadvantage regarding those.
And someone else mentioned that no one is going to be performing their heavy duty weight workout regime during the tournament week, so neither facility - SOTA or otherwise - were thinking that access to the weight room was a key consideration for any of the teams - men or women.
No, this is simply a case of someone trying to find any bogus argument to make that supports their gripe about how mistreated they are.
Yeah! And what about short people. Should there not be NCAA play for basketball, track and field, etc for people 5 ft or less in height? Equal funding, of course.
When do fat old bald porn stars get equal pay?
Any woman who can play in the NBA will be paid commensurately. More probably.
Did y'all see, that they changed the gender of the current Administration?
https://getoutspoken.com/exclusive/to-downplay-biden-white-house-directs-all-agencies-to-refer-to-biden-harris-administration-in-official-communications
Serena still dominates. Serena is 39.
She doesn't dominate Naomi Osaka.
Did y'all seem that they changed the gender of the current Administration?
The Biden-Harris Administration
People who demand everything or nothing usually get nothing.
"When do fat old bald porn stars get equal pay?"
Ron Jeremy would like a word : )
Has Ron gone bald?
Ron Winkleheimer said...
I’m pretty certain Serena Williams can beat Woody Allen at tennis or any other sport. And to be fair, I’m thinking of young, 70’s Woody, in his physical prime.
Serena Williams won't be playing Woody Allen in his prime, she'll be playing a guy who wasn't quite good enough to make it to the top of the men's tennis rankings.
3/24/21, 1:11 PM
It doesn’t matter that Woody and Serena won’t be playing. My point is that “men are better than women at sports is not an absolute truth. There are some women who are better athletes than some men, otherwise any man would be able to beat any woman every single time.
So we know there are men who are worse athletes than Serena and some who are better. Is it hard to imagine that there may be some men in the middle? Why not just have men and and women of similar abilities play against each other?
Maybe it wouldn’t work. Maybe it’s bad idea. But if you’re saying it’s a bad idea because men are always better athletes than women, well, that’s not a very convincing argument because it’s not true.
"Has Ron gone bald?"
He won't be doing any shampoo commercials unless the product is named 'Pearl Necklace' IYKWIMAITYD.
"Why not just have men and and women of similar abilities play against each other?"
This is what we did when I played co-ed soccer in an over-30 league (women over-27).
It was a pretty good mix of talent. Minimum of 5 woman on a side I believe.
A lot of the guys were like me who had desk jobs but loved the game.
Many of the women had played in college.
And some of the guys had played professionally in all parts of the world.
It was competitive but not serious. Nobody was after blood...no slide tackling as everyone had a real job to go back to on Monday.
It was fun...
"'We demand women’s sports get equal resources, equal media coverage, and equal pay'?"
To be paid for by . . .?
"female players demanded to know why the weight room in the men’s bubble had state of the art lifting equipment, whereas they got a stingy rack of dumbbells"
They got rewarded according to comparable worth.
We demand equal media coverage: listen to that.
Played with a recent top D1 female player once. She was very good, could hold her own with middle-aged, DIII-ish men (her man stayed on the perimeter of course--we were gentlemen). Which reinforced my interest in preserving women's sports for women.
Women's soccer teams play teen boys' teams matched with the boys having a slight edge so that the women learn, but not so old that the women get discouraged.
"Why not just have men and and women of similar abilities play against each other?"
Because that doesn't work at almost every level.
In HS the best girl basketball player (all-conference, 1000 point scorer, etc.) wouldn't have made the 8th grade boys team. Likewise most of my buddies that didn't make varsity basketball would dominate the girls' team if they had just basic basketball experience. If your goal is competition it would be a mockery to subject the best female athletes to play with boys/men. That's why there are female only divisions, but not male only divisions. The female I mentioned above not only played Jr. High football but was the leading tackler! But by the time she got to HS she stopped physically developing....the boys didn't
It's not all about muscle mass, either. Anyone who has watched much of the PGA and LPGA tours knows that men are better putters, too.
Kay said...
Why not just have men and and women of similar abilities play against each other?
They do. It’s called co-ed intramural sports.
Oh - did you mean play sports where someone is willing to pay $$ to watch? Those sports events/team are the top 0.1% of the sports participants field (and it also helps to be in a popular spectator sports... don’t see a lot of revenue coming in from watching swimming with the possible exception of the Olympics). So, literally naturally, those top 0.1% are going to be men. Not ‘fair’? Argue with Mother Nature (ask her why she’s biased against women in physical activities). And it’s not that all men that are able to be at the top; my neighborhood tennis group has a lot of guys with talent, but nobody is going to pay $$ to watch them compete against each other.
Now, if you are suggesting opening up sports across the board so that both men and women compete for the same roles, I say that’s great (but remember, there’s no crying in baseball - or other professional sports). What will be the outcome of that? Men will still dominate 99.99% of the sports roles, and ‘womens-only’ sports will have completely gone by the wayside. Is that the outcome you want?
Whiskeybum said...
Is that the outcome you want?
3/24/21, 3:11 PM
I don’t “want” any particular outcome. I have really no interests in sports, so whatever you guys decide is honestly fine by me. Just making some comments on a blog.
But yeah, you make some very valid points and I don’t have the answers.
"The female I mentioned above not only played Jr. High football but was the leading tackler!"
When a transgender girl beats out a regular girl for a spot on the girl's team, it's apparently a bad thing. But when a regular girl beats out a boy for a spot on the boy's team, it's "You go, Grrrl!"
Seems unequal.
But if you’re saying it’s a bad idea because men are always better athletes than women, well, that’s not a very convincing argument because it’s not true.
It's very close to being true, if one uses ordinary, expected meanings for "always better".
If one uses nonsense meanings, indeed it's false, but so then would be such claims as "football players who don't work out are always inferior to those who do".
Bollocks! You can care about the issue of women being forced to compete against biological men and not give a rat's ass about their sport in general.
Let's take this out of the Trans Realm in order to show that there's no hypocrisy here. Imagine that the women's Olympic soccer teams were expected to clean both theirs and also the men's soccer teams' locker rooms while at the Olympic facilities. I would join in the massive outcry---but objecting to that stupid and unfair rule would not obligate me to also watch women's soccer or believe that women players should always be paid exactly the same as male players.
"Imagine that the women's Olympic soccer teams were expected to clean both theirs and also the men's soccer teams' locker rooms while at the Olympic facilities."
You'll love this...the most Japanese thing ever : )
RigelDog said... Bollocks! You can care about the issue of women being forced to compete against biological men and not give a rat's ass about their sport in general. Let's take this out of the Trans Realm in order to show that there's no hypocrisy here. Imagine that the women's Olympic soccer teams were expected to clean both theirs and also the men's soccer teams' locker rooms while at the Olympic facilities. I would join in the massive outcry---but objecting to that stupid and unfair rule would not obligate me to also watch women's soccer or believe that women players should always be paid exactly the same as male players. 3/24/21, 3:32 PM
I don’t disagree with your first paragraph. But it’s not my style to get worked up about an issue that doesn’t really concern me.
If I heard about the unfair example in the second paragraph, I’d maybe feel bad for these women, but realistically, I’d probably would mind my own business and say nothing. But that’s just me. Not everyone is like that, no.
You'll love this...the most Japanese thing ever : )
Also after the Winter Olympics in Korea, the Japanese picked up the litter in the spectator stands. Extraordinary people in many respects.
"Also after the Winter Olympics in Korea, the Japanese picked up the litter in the spectator stands. Extraordinary people in many respects."
They do this wherever they are.
Everyone hauls away the trash after a Japanese baseball game (Go Swallows!).
Next time you're in Tokyo, make sure to see a game if you're a baseball fan : )
I don’t really care about college or professional athletics. In most colleges and university only a fraction of the kids playing a sport in HS get to play on a school team. Heck in skiing, nationally highly ranked HS athletes aren’t making D1 teams. This is true for both sexes, but maybe a little bit worse for the women. And in most professional sports, most D1 athletes don’t make the cut either. It is in MS and esp HS that female sports are most important.
I agree with this too, which is why I've been a little bewildered by the reaction to Kristen Noem's veto and revision on the women's sports rights bill. To hear her tell it, she wants the law focused on high school sports, which the state controls without the complications that will arise if the state enacts laws contrary to NCAA rules.
But people seem furious with her over it. Is she wrong that such a law will prevent SD colleges from participating in NCAA conference athletics? That doesn't sound like bullshit.
The pro womens Soccer team law suit was covered at the top of the thread.
What I remember, someone did a little arithmetic, and found the womens pay was a higher percentage of gross take than the men's league. So the women were higher paid.
I did not follow the events at all, so this is the first I had heard about the women rejecting a contract with lower base pay and big bonuses for advancing deep into the championship play offs.
This is where the male/female pay differential lives. Men betting on the come, and women taking the bird in the hand. I refuse to fault a person making safe conservative choices. I sought and got hired for management level position. My experience was on the light side, and I could have flamed out, but I succeeded. Had to move the family with kids in elementary school. Risk was substantial.
I mean, I'm sure she's an untrustworthy, slippery liar who will find ways to disappoint all but her most devoted supporters, as is the case for all politicians and those foolish enough to believe in them, but I don't get why this move is that betrayal.
Post a Comment