This is a column by Maria Cramer in the NYT.
In the late 19th century, female educators in American high schools and colleges began forming teams for girls and women to play sports like softball and basketball... Rules were modified so that women would “adhere to stricter social norms... to make sure there wasn’t too much contact and too much exertion.... There was a real concern that they would hurt their [reproductive] organs.”...
Critics “raised the question whether a woman would become masculine.... Would women defeat men and the male sense of superiority?”... “Women’s sport exists as a category because the dominance of men athletes was threatened by women competing"....
Since Title IX was passed, women have been competitive with men at the elite level in fields like rock climbing, surfing and endurance sports, like ultra running and biking. Their achievements have led some to ask, Should we start integrating more professional sports?... “If a greater opportunity to participate has led to greater performance, why won’t we allow females to participate with males to further explore the ceilings of performance?”
I think the reason we don't want to "explore the ceilings" is that we expect the ceiling to be very low.
ADDED:
Posts
61 comments:
I say explore it. Break down the barriers so we can watch with stunning speed how quickly they get put back up again. Let the girls get skull fractures on the pitch. Let them wear down physically at a rate 20x what their male counterpart who weighs less than they do will. Let them compound physical defeat and inability with mental defeat and physical impossibility.
GI Jane is a female fantasy, both in the military and the athletic sense. Bring it girls. Bring Ben Gay.
serious question:
can somebody name a sport, where women would have a chance of competing ?
swimming?
track?
basketball?
golf?
soccer?
chess?
jeopardy?
maybe The Price is Right? maybe not?
Im against all mixing of men/women in sports, except in Hockey/basketball/boxing/wrestling/and Rugby.
Two middle-aged dudes defeat two of the best professional female tennis players.
Tiger Woods and his young son just came in second in a tournament a few weeks back where a PGA pro and his LPGA daughter hardly made a showing.
I voted to let them try it, but the results are foreordained. Maybe some sport that requires exceptional endurance over athletic prowess, cross continent foot races, for example.
“Women’s sport exists as a category because the dominance of men athletes was threatened by women competing"
Huh? Men's dominance in performance was never threatened. Men's dominance in the interest of male sports fans was never threatened. Men's dominance in simple interest in athletic competition was never threatened, except by the creation of women's sports that imposed equality of participation upon very unequally motivated populations.
“If a greater opportunity to participate has led to greater performance, why won’t we allow females to participate with males to further explore the ceilings of performance?”
In pickup basketball games around town, females have always been allowed to participate with males. You show up, you get next, you get on the court. Level of games varies, no superior ability required. But rarely does a female show up. Over many years, two really explored their "ceilings of performance" with the rest of us. Outside of some very structured female-only settings in high school and college, and a few adult rec leagues here and there, female interest in the most accessible form of competitive sports is nil.
My daughter was the captain of her high school swim team. Some of the girls could beat some of the boys but the best girls wouldn't be even close the best boys' times.
I suppose it is the same for track and cross country.
It would be humiliating for a high school boy to be beaten by a girl. They have enough problems as it is. That would cut participation by boys in those sports.
Women are better at ultra long distance swimming, and at some gymnastics events. Any others?
Sure. Time to shake up all sports and see which survive. Let steroids back in, too. I don't care. My only qualm is if people who obsess about sports find something new to obsess about, they will ruin that, too.
Start with chess
If and when women decide to take women’s sports back from male interlopers, sanity will he restored. But it’s women who need to do the taking, not men. So, what’s it going to be, ladies?
"Women are better at ultra long distance swimming, and at some gymnastics events."
Simone Biles is 4'8" tall.
The second-best reason to actually start enforcing Title IX as written, barring the exclusion of persons of either sex from any program at schools (and thus allowing men to join "women's" sports teams), is that it'd finally stop these idiots from saying obviously stupid things.
The best reason, of course, is the rule of law, which means not letting the executive branch unilaterally rewrite the laws it doesn't like. Title IX does not require quota-enforced equality between the sexes, it bans discrimination based on sex.
The premise is false. Mens sports were never ( and are not now ) threatened by females.
Title I destroyed many men's minor sports as it absorbed funding that would have been available. The irony of the trannies taking over some women's sports is amusing.
@Althouse.
"Simone Biles is 4'8" tall."
And a quitter. And a horrible teammate. And a prima donna. And 4'8" tall.
P.S. I ranked them in accordance to importance.
Even the choice of musical instruments self-sorts by size and sex. Women tend to choose smaller instruments like violin, flute, and clarinet, while men tend to choose guitars, bass, drums, etc. Smaller bodies = better fit.
There have been recent non-racial analyses of why so many people of African descent do well in running -- leg length. Leg length! Usain Bolt won in the Olympics because he had to take 1-2 fewer steps in a sprint.
Basketball is dominated by tall people. Hmm? Could it relate to height?
Anything physical follows physical performance requirements. So, until women start to grow to the same size and shape as men...Men's competitive edges are not gonna go away...
How do we know women are better at some gymnastic events? There is very little overlap (based on my years of somewhat paying attention during the Olympics) and they don't compete with the men in any of them. Men do the high bar and women do the version with two, one high and one low. Women do the balance beam, men don't. Men do the rings, women don't. They both do the floor exercises, I guess, but not against each other.
Dave Begley said...
It would be humiliating for a high school boy to be beaten by a girl. They have enough problems as it is. That would cut participation by boys in those sports.
Yes, but unlike you the author of the article sees that as a feature, not a bug.
Women tend to make very good stunt pilots, too.
As far as I can tell, the women participating in women's sports are definitely not getting more masculine. . . .por ejemplo.
If women play football and basketball with men, who will pay for the massive injuries suffered at the hands of bigger, stronger and faster men?
Maybe there will be another female place kicker like the Vanderbilt young women who boomed a 30-yard kickoff and won all sorts of acclaim for her ground breaking effort.
Isn't it better to fantasize that the White male patriarchy is suppressing athletic women than to put that theory to the test?
No more gender. Let everyone compete for the all sports. If women can not make the team so be it. That is how I voted but it sure would hurt women in sports.
Biology is a thing. I guess until the pharmaceuticals company can pump everyone with hormones and junk to make us all same. It seems like that is the end goal with the push on trans.
It's a bad idea because quotas would inevitably follow.
I rejects the premise. "Fields like rock climbing, surfing and endurance sports, like ultra running and biking" aren't sports. They're athletic events. Sport implies defense - you're going against another person.
Cycling does have a form of defense in events like the Tour de France, but frankly women aren't genuinely competitive there.
'Start with chess'
Exactly...
I am a huge proponent of women playing any sport they wish to play.
But I'm sick of the bullshit.
Integrate ALL sports at all levels.
You can either compete or you can't.
Let the progs choke on their own tears when the closest women get to a playing field is as a cheerleader.
Women aren't better than men at gymnastics. They have different events.
Is there some rule that women cannot compete in men's sports? All we need is a Jacqueline Robinson to break the gender barrier!
exhelodrvr1 said...
"Women are better at ultra long distance swimming, and at some gymnastics events. Any others?"
Brazilian waterslide goose tossing.
What is we piloted a program where the women with penises competed in the men's division and see how it works?
"Two middle-aged dudes defeat two of the best professional female tennis players."
Lol. Way to buy the lede. I won't spoil it but everyone should click that link. Thanks for that.
Women will never be able to beat men at the highest levels in much of any sport. Women's basketball has no dunking because they can't. A 5 ft 9in male won a dunking contest a few years ago (sorry can't remember name) and plenty of women are that tall. Women in basic training get serious injuries far more than men. Male punch power is way more than women. Marathon running comes close to equality. Otherwise not much.
"can somebody name a sport, where women would have a chance of competing ?"
Figure skating and gymnastics come to mind. I'm waiting for the wave of FTM trans gymnasts and figure skaters.
BTW, remember that movie Blades or Glory with Will Ferrell? That scenario will happen in a noncomedic way.
"Should we explore this particular ceiling?" Maybe we should be talking basements.
I'm a woman old enough to remember the positive effect Title Nine had on girls sports in high schools. However, I agree with what others have said let males and females compete together and see how long before its 'we need to go back to separate categories'. I'm a really good swimmer, but I have never been close to as fast or strong as a comparable male swimmer.
Blogger ccscientist said...
... Marathon running comes close to equality. Otherwise not much.
Are you kidding? Marathon times are not close at all. 2:01 male to 2:14 female. This is an eternity.
The winning and elite competition aspect of sports is the very tip of the iceberg. What's important is widespread active participation of all sexes, genders and ages. The great cuck fan majority is only focused on the pinnacle of sport because they as worthless fat coddled couch patties who crave entertainment as a substitute for actual physical action.
Many commenters seem to not value simple participation in a sport as a vehicle to learn life skills that are hard to teach in a classroom. The most obvious example based on my and my kids experience is teamwork.
Not everyone enjoys sports, and that is their prerogative. Co-curricular sports teams should not be compulsory. However, if someone wants to participate I would like to see as few barriers as possible to them. There will be some barriers, of course.
Would combining genders reduce both men & women participating in sports? I think the answer is yes. The only way I see to support that position is if one didn't see any value to sports in the first place.
If you want an "open" category for all, fine. That would largely be men. But there would IMO have to be a woman-only (biological) category as well.
Here and there, girls compete on high school football teams because they are the best person the school has for the position. Rare. Make no mistake that if a men's team coach thought a particular woman athlete would make the difference between winning and losing, they would sign them in New York minute.
If you want to see why XXs should compete only on a limited basis against XYs watch this
video. This is the first ever 4x400 meter mixed relay. The Poles ran males in the first two laps and built a big lead. Everyone else ran man, woman, woman, man (XY, XX, XX, XY). The Poles had a pretty good lead going into the last lap. The male American took the baton and passed the woman within a hundred yards - just blew by her - and went on to win by a substantial margin while the woman held on valiantly to finish 5 or 6. These are the top runners in the world and it's pretty easy to see what a difference XY chromosomes make even at that level.
gilbar said...
serious question:
can somebody name a sport, where women would have a chance of competing?
Cross-country endurance mountain biking. Let’s say—St Louis to the Pacific coast and you have to stop and give birth to at least one live human baby somewhere along the way. Personally, I would not put my money on the transgenders.
So I’m a traditionalist.
Our son, who could not make the starting team in HS football. Goes up against his cousin, a 4 year starter for division I Volleyball, an outside hitter. Call it a draw. Our son has never had any coaching in volley ball.
The debate is just silly. Men are stronger and faster. Believe the science (or is that no longer a thing?)
What sports could women compete?
How about free climbing? My guess, women are too smart to take such a meaningless risk.
Regarding: "women being better at gymnastics than men"
As Freeman Hunt said: "Women aren't better than men at gymnastics. They have different events."
That's true. But what if some men gymnasts tried some of the women's routines?
Here's a link to a YouTube video where two female Olympic champions watch some no-name men gymnasts perform women's routines. See their reactions.
And now imagine those women gymnasts trying rings or pommel horse routines.
men's team coach thought a particular woman athlete would make the difference between winning and losing, they would sign them in New York minute.
That's the same thing with hiring women into the work force. If a company could reduce its salary expense by 17% and get the same performance, only women would be hired.
Since Title IX was passed, women have been competitive with men at the elite level in fields like rock climbing, surfing and endurance sports, like ultra running and biking.
No. They have not.
Period.
Full stop.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24584647/
Results: The top 19 race times ever were significantly (P < .0001) lower for women (371 ± 11 min) than for men (424 ± 9 min). Race times of the annual 3 fastest women and men did not differ between genders and remained stable across years. The age of the annual 3 fastest swimmers increased from 28 ± 4 y (1983) to 38 ± 6 y (2013; r² = .06, P = .03) in women and from 23 ± 4 y (1984) to 42 ± 8 y (2013; r² = .19, P < .0001 )in men.
So, they looked at races between 1983 and 2013. Out of 31 races, if you look at the top 19 times with women were better.
If you look at the top 93 times (top 3 from each of 31 years), there's no difference in male / female performance
Given women's average higher body fat, and therefore better buoyancy, that makes some sense to me.
it's surprising, but I'm willing to believe it
Since Title IX was passed, women have been competitive with men at the elite level in fields like rock climbing, surfing and endurance sports, like ultra running and biking
I think the word "like" here is doing a lot of work. Basically "in some sports which in total get maybe 1% of the participation, and 1% of the fan observation, women can compete with men." In everything else, they can't.
If people want to destroy women's sports to advance trans ideology, I'm ok with that, since the politicians doing so got elected on women's votes.
If women don't want women's sports destroyed, I invite them to vote for conservative Republicans, because moderate Republicans aren't going to be willing to fight the "social consensus" for them
I can't pick any of these choices. Some sports are more amenable to including males and females than others. Extreme endurance running (ie. 50 marathons in 50 days -- people actually do that -- I think a world title is held by a woman), surfing, and skateboarding are all sports where a critical mass of women and men are able to compete relatively well with each other. They're also sports that do not provide a big advantage based on upper body strength, where men have an unambiguous, sex-based superiority.
As late as 1978, female students in New York State were not allowed to officially compete in Cross Country races, only track, because distance training was considered harmful for their biological development.
Many female athletes do stop menstruating and growing breast tissue when they're involved in extremely rigorous training (or if they're starving themselves through anorexia, or both). But there is no evidence that they permanently lose their fertility, and obese women also often experience fertility issues.
Just to muddy the waters some more.
From the post
American high schools and colleges began forming teams for girls and women to play sports like softball and basketball... Rules were modified so that women would “adhere to stricter social norms... to make sure there wasn’t too much contact and too much exertion....
Iowa was/is a leader in women sports. At least rural IA. Iowa is famous for its 6 girl, half court basketball. 3 on the offense side of court, and 3 on the defense side. So the girls didn't have to run the full length. But it got girls involved in competition. Lots of girls. In the rural towns. City schools never bothered and didn't start girls basketball until the 1970's. Softball was also a small town sport for women. This was well before the social scientists in DC thought up title IX. Amazing what the people will do when left alone.
Sailing is mixed outside of the Olympics, and even then I think women can compete as part of a men's team. When I sailed competitively women would do well in classes of boats where being smaller was an advantage. In one of the classes I raced women would win the North American Championship about 1/4 of the time. As the boats got bigger, women lost their advantage. It wasn't an issue of wits and strategy, it was the difference in size and strength.
Women also compete reasonably well in ultra-endurance events. Lael Wilcox can hold her own in ultra long distance cycling.
As for gymnastics, the difference in power is amazing. My daughter's gymnastics coach showed off his vaulting skills, and it was almost frightening to see. I thought he was going to vault out of the building. Not many men are willing to try the high beam though. Both men and women have floor routines, but the women seem to have some artistic element whereas the men don't.
Men and women are equal, so they don't need separate sports teams. Yes, let's try this out. Wrestling is a great example. It goes by weight class anyway. Girls do participate with boys at the high school level. No one wants to state publicly that 99% of female athletes couldn't make the male teams. The examples given, e.g. surfing, encompass almost no actual NCAA sanctioned sports.
I believe that trans females should be allowed to compete in women's sports, but only after they have transitioned, as in their male genitalia has been removed. If they want in on sports, they have to fully commit.
The legacy of any feminist policy is destruction. Without fail. That include the feminists.
One more cat won't fix it.
iowan2 said...
"Iowa was/is a leader in women sports."
When I was growing up in Iowa, the most popular spectator sports were 1) Girls' basketball, and 2) Boys' wrestling. As you noted, only the girls from the smaller schools played basketball, so it was not a thing at my mid-sized high school. The great Denise Long, who scored over 100 points multiple times, attended a high school with 34 students in the senior class.
So, they looked at races between 1983 and 2013. Out of 31 races, if you look at the top 19 times with women were better.
If you look at the top 93 times (top 3 from each of 31 years), there's no difference in male / female performance
Sorry, that would be "top 186 times (top 3 male / female from each of 31 years), "
Which is a very interesting result. Because what it says is that "the very top women" are better than "the very top men"
But the "top women" and "top men" are equal.
Now, I'd like to know why they did their cutoff at 19, rather than 20, or 10, or 15, or whatever
I'd also be curious to so "top 1 man top 1 woman" from each year, at top 5, and see if that changes anything
But, when all is said and done: if a woman has the best time ever recorded, you can make a good case for "men and women can compete"
If women could compete against men in sports we wouldn’t need to lessen the requirements for women in the military, police, and fire fighters.
The real issue is that sports should not be part of college curriculums and a way to get a free education. That is the reason people got behind women’s sports in the first place. Because they wanted girls to have the same advantages as boys. No one but lesbians really want to watch women’s sports if they aren’t related to any of the players.
surfing, and skateboarding are all sports where a critical mass of women and men are able to compete relatively well with each other.
Sorry. I watch these sports. They are not competitive ... even something that doesn't require a lot of strength like skateboard street. Put a guy and a girl on the half pipe and measure the amplitude.
And surfing? No. Not even close. The men ride longer waves, make sharper moves and get back out to the next wave faster.
It's basic biology.
can somebody name a sport, where women would have a chance of competing ?
I would think shooting, archery, or darts. They seem to have a level playing field for everyone who has good eyesight and a steady hand. I could be wrong about that, but I know that 98% of humanity could probably outshoot me.
Quora says females outcompete males in dressage. I assume they are talking about the riders rather than the horses.
Crew and sailing provide opportunities for mixed sex teams competing against each other.
In individual events, mixed competition doesn't seem to work out. Men are usually stronger. Women are usually more graceful, or have a different kind of gracefulness from men, to the point where it's hard to compare and grade men and women on the same scale in sports like gymnastics or figure skating.
"Greg The Class Traitor said...
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/24584647/
Results: The top 19 race times ever were significantly (P < .0001) lower for women (371 ± 11 min) than for men (424 ± 9 min). Race times of the annual 3 fastest women and men did not differ between genders and remained stable across years."
The cited stats applied to ultra-long distance swimming - 46 or more kilometers. But in general, if swimming merged its events women would never win trophies. You can look at swim times for all competitive swimming in various years for men and then for women at this site:
https://www.usms.org/comp/meets/toptimes.php
With a few exceptions, the top women are the same speed as the 10th or 15th or lower men. (Due to Covid the statistics are not complete for 2020-2022.)
If swimming events are merged women will not win. Some people now inhabit a universe where this fact cannot be acknowledged. But why should we surrender reality and language to their theories?
This website is pretty interesting. It compares male high school athletes vs female olympians. Look at the ages that the boys beat the women.
So, good luck with mixing.
I should add that the same website also has world records of females against boys with their ages. 14 and 15 year old boys beat the female world record in most events. 16-18 year old boys beat the women's records in almost all the rest of the events. It's only in the marathon that a women beats an 18 year boy.
The fourth and fifth choices in the poll are equivalent.
Gilbar: Olympic dressage and 10m air rifle are the only two Olympic sports where women outperform men.
https://www.espn.com/shooting/story/_/id/31828521/10m-air-rifle-sport-tokyo-olympics-where-women-outgun-men
That said, I was outrun on 10k races by women all through college. The view was fine, but as i recall, they kept disappearing in the distance.
Post a Comment