• We are looking for you!
    Always wanted to join our Supporting Team? We are looking for enthusiastic moderators!
    Take a look at our recruitement page for more information and how you can apply:
    Apply

Women's sports

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
Nice virtue signaling, but tell me where I am wrong? In every sport where there is both a men's and women's categories, any man at the top of his game, will beat any women at the top of hers. This is not misogyny, this is cold hard facts. Uncomfortable for those who've built their beliefs on feel good platitudes, but facts none the less.

But please, tell me more about how reality isn't true, and just a learned ingrained hateful attitude.
 
Last edited:

Ebeondi Asi

Well-Known Member
No need ... you demonstrate it with nearly every line you type in this thread. It is OK really. Just accept it.
 

Sharmon the Impaler

Well-Known Member
Nice virtue signaling, but tell me where I am wrong? In every sport where there is both a men's and women's categories, any man at the top of his game, will beat any women at the top of hers. This is not misogyny, this is cold hard facts. Uncomfortable for those who've built their beliefs on fell good platitudes, but facts none the less.

But please, tell me more about how reality isn't true, and just a learned ingrained hateful attitude.
This is not the point some are trying to make. It is not a question of who can beat whom. Both are internationally recognized world champions putting in the same effort and time to reach this goal. "I don't enjoy watching women's sports as much as men's sports." is a valid and personal opinion. "15 year old boys can beat a team of female Olympic champions so they are not champions." is where the line is crossed.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
This is not the point some are trying to make.
I know. You're all trying to score points based on some political reading into what I said.
"I don't enjoy watching women's sports as much as men's sports."
Is exactly what I said. You just don't like my reason that men's sport is more exciting to watch because they're competing to be the best of the best.
"15 year old boys can beat a team of female Olympic champions so they are not champions." is where the line is crossed.
I didn't say this. Show me where I did. Don't make it up, quote my actual words. You can't.

Of course they're champions, the women's champions. Not the world champions, but champions in their own category. Champions with a footnote. The best with an asterisk.
a caveat is the literary equivalent of a footnote that either clarifies a passage or statement or puts it into context.
My statement about the women's Olympic team was not that they weren't champions, but that their level of playing skill is that of a junior high soccer team. Great for them, but don't tell me I'm supposed to care. I don't. They're not nearly as good as the men, aren't playing nearly at that level of skill and therefore are not nearly as exciting to watch. It's the same reason we don't pack the stadiums for the local Minor league men's team. It's second rate play and we don't care as much.

This is quite literally why we have the women's category. It's no different than the various categories of men's sport. The champions of the AAA league, didn't win the World Series. They're not the best and we don't care.

(content removed by the moderation)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sharmon the Impaler

Well-Known Member
I know. You're all trying to score points based on some political reading into what I said.

Is exactly what I said. You just don't like my reason that men's sport is more exciting to watch because they're competing to be the best of the best.

I didn't say this. Show me where I did. Don't make it up, quote my actual words. You can't.

Of course they're champions, the women's champions. Not the world champions, but champions in their own category. Champions with a footnote. The best with an asterisk.
Here is your quote

"Then there's women's sport. They're the best of the women. That's why the Australian women's Olympic soccer team can get beat 7-0 against a team of 15 year old boys. It's why a man ranked about 450 nationally, can transition and dominate women's swimming. No matter what sport, the best of the women can never place among the men, never mind be the best in the world."

. I have three sisters and 13 nieces and a daughter I don't give a crap about your politics. Again you are saying (twice now) that they are not world champions but only women champions when they are simply world champions because an Olympic gold medal is a gold medal not a participation certificate.

But they can't beat a well conditioned and athletic man you say which makes what you said as right in your misogynistic outlook. This is why they have categories in sports, each champion in each category is a world champion.

Here is from Oxfords :

"
cham·pi·on
/ˈCHampēən/


noun
noun: champion; plural noun: champions

1.
a person who has defeated or surpassed all rivals in a competition, especially in sports.
"a champion hurdler"
"

Women do not have male rivals hint hint.
 

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
(content removed by the moderation)

How do you get a value judgement from the fact that most people prefer to watch and follow men's sports simply because it's better sport? When world champion women put up a game no better than high schoolers, I pay attention and care about as much.

It's not misogyny that had world class women lose 7-0 to 15 year old boys. At 15, the boys were simply better than the world class women.

That's why women's sports will never be as popular as men's. Even at a world class level it's athleticism at a men's high school level. It doesn't make either the women or high school boys bad people, it just makes them both not very exciting to watch.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Sharmon the Impaler

Well-Known Member
Aren't you clever switching to ad hominem attacks , obtuse , drug habit , childhood injury as your retort ? What's next , you going to call me a poopy head ?
Those partaking in it almost certainly feel passionate about it as well as a large portion of their fans.
Calling something that involves over half the human population as sub par and varsity boys level at best is insulting to most but not you I guess. You will win this one because I don't care about reasoning the bloody obvious to everyone but you. Have a wonderful night
 

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
How do you get a value judgement from the fact that most people prefer to watch and follow men's sports simply because it's better sport?
But that's not what you're saying. You're saying that women's sports champions aren't real "champions" because they're women. That's the equivalent of saying that Super Bowl winners aren't champions because they're not playing baseball. The question I asked has to do with the entertainment value to individuals of various women's sports compared to men. Just because I don't watch or care much about the WNBA, I certainly don't consider the league winner as less of a champion because of that. I suppose you think college football championships aren't real, either, because they're not beating the professionals in their sport. But you don't think that because they're both composed of males. Honestly, the head in the sand mentality that must exist in you to have these archaic opinions is just astounding.

Now, for those not mired in the 19th Century, could we get back on topic?
 

The Lady Redneck

Well-Known Member
Was that 7 - 0 defeat of 1 team of 15 yr old boys against one team of women the norm?
Just wondering as at 15 year of age I was captain of both the girls Basketball team and Hockey team at school (Field not ice hockey) We were more than capable of holding our own against the boys Basketball team and beat them quite often. They did not stand a chance against us in Hockey. Unfortunately we only ever got to play against the boys team from our own school in practice Matches. But against other schools we did as well against the girls teams as our boys did against the boys teams from other schools. So it stands to reason if we had been able to take on the boys teams from other schools we could have won against them as well. The girls did not play Soccer, Rugby or Cricket. but we also played Rounders which is much like Baseball. And we could take the boys team out no problem in that. So a one match result to me does not seem a very convincing argument.

But if I do watch any type of sport it is not to see who is the biggest/strongest/toughest. It is to see which competitor brings the most skill and expertise to the field or arena. I do believe that between sexes there is a difference. That in any event (Team or otherwise) where each person is at the top of his sport for fitness and experience and where physical stature and strength are key attributes, men will win out if playing against women, who are usualy smaller and lighter. That does not mean the woman is not playing as well as the man or is any less a champion in her own right.

But to get back on topic. Which do I prefer to watch, whether men or women. To me there is not nearly the same measure of intelligence or expertise involved by either a bunch of men or women who chase, kick, throw and run with a ball around a field to make what they are doing anything other than boring to watch. If it is a canine related sport, It is the dogs I watch more than the handlers. With horses. I prefer watching men show jumping, but women doing dressage events.
 

Sharmon the Impaler

Well-Known Member
I like women's track and boxing. Women box pretty damn hard too sometimes. A boxer came up from Mexico for a championship title fight in our city last year and went home in a body bag.
 
Last edited:

RazorbackPirate

Well-Known Member
But that's not what you're saying.
It's literally what I said.
They're not nearly as good as the men, aren't playing nearly at that level of skill and therefore are not nearly as exciting to watch. It's the same reason we don't pack the stadiums for the local Minor league men's team. It's second rate play and we don't care as much.

It's no different than the various categories of men's sport. The champions of the AAA league, didn't win the World Series. They're not the best and we don't care.
For the same reason Minor League and amateur sports will never be as popular a Major League and professional sports, women's sports will never be as popular. The sports play is not at the same level and not as interesting to watch, i.e. less entertainment value.

When it comes to world records, when men break them, they are achieving something no human on record has ever done. Unfortunately, there is no women's record that can be broken that has not been previously broken by multiple men decades ago. It doesn't lessen the achievement for the woman who holds the record, but it's definitely not as exciting to follow, i.e. less entertainment value.

This is not a men vs. women issue. It's a quality of play issue. Anyone care to address that point, or you all just going to keep projecting your gender BS onto my statements?
 

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
It's a quality of play issue.
Well, it is for us. You, however, keep injecting your gender bias into it by completely dismissing the accomplishments of women athletes. Why do you feel like you have to do that? Is your male ego so fragile that you have to pretend that only things men accomplish are real? Now you've made your position clear that you don't feel like women's sports are even worth considering, so why don't you leave this conversation to the adults? Thanks in advance for that.
 

Graviton

Well-Known Member
But that's not what you're saying. You're saying that women's sports champions aren't real "champions" because they're women.

That's not what he said.
Of course they're champions, the women's champions. Not the world champions, but champions in their own category. Champions with a footnote. The best with an asterisk.

My statement about the women's Olympic team was not that they weren't champions, but that their level of playing skill is that of a junior high soccer team.

You guys are piling on for no good reason other than to make yourselves feel better somehow. Respond to what he said, not how you feel. Especially the guy who started this stupid thread throwing accusations of "gender bias" around. That's just hilarious.
 

Johnny B. Goode

Well-Known Member
That's not what he said.


You guys are piling on for no good reason other than to make yourselves feel better somehow. Respond to what he said, not how you feel. Especially the guy who started this stupid thread throwing accusations of "gender bias" around. That's just hilarious.
If you can't tell the difference between entertainment value and the validity of an accomplishment, that's your problem, not mine. And I think it's hilarious that @RazorbackPirate used the example of the US women's national soccer team, who could probably beat many male teams.

Bobby Fischer was an amazing chess player, but there was never any entertainment value in watching him play. And I like chess. It is incredible the power of weightlifters, both male and female, but I'd rather watch the grass grow. You get it? Entertainment value has nothing at all to do with the core value of an accomplishment.

And now that I think about it, usually when a record has an asterisk by it, it's because the person accomplished it with some sort of advantage. Like Roger Maris having more games in the season than Babe Ruth had. With his biases, it would make more sense to put the asterisk by the men's records. "His time is only the record because he had the unfair advantage of being a man."

I'm really surprised that you agree with him, by the way.
 
Top