Feminists Try to 'Abolish' Men/Women Differences

Edevus · June 27, 2011, 8:31am

[quote]alexus wrote:
do you think a male who is genetically unsuitable for a sport would surpass the performance of a female athlete who was genetically suitable for her sport if they trained equally hard?[/quote]

Depends. Tennis and football (soccer) has shown that amateur men can defeat professional women. Kim Clijsters, one of the best tennis players ever, admited she had troubles winning POINTS against her former boyfriend, Lleyton Hewitt. Both have been number #1 though.
Serena and Venus Williams, when they were younger, played some friendly match (one set each) against a German guy who was like #600. He totally trashed both…and it seems he even smoked between games.

Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, best Spanish female tennis player ever, got trashed by some random guy (number #800 in the world or something like that) 6-0, 6-1. It’s also reported that many professional tennis players play sparring games against local young guys (17-19) to train for tournaments and they lose way too often for their professional ranking.

I’d love to know how it’s possible that recently turned adults in the tennis academies can make the ball spin and stuff and then I go watch professional women playing tennis and all the hits over a 90 minutes match are PLAIN.

Iron_Dwarf · June 27, 2011, 12:34pm

[quote]tom63 wrote:

If feminists somehow abolished men they would bring them back after they realized they need someone to blame for their problems. [/quote]

LOL!!!

DJHT · June 27, 2011, 1:24pm

[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:

[quote]tom63 wrote:

If feminists somehow abolished men they would bring them back after they realized they need someone to blame for their problems. [/quote]

LOL!!!
[/quote]

And mow the grass.

buckeye_girl · June 27, 2011, 1:59pm

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]alexus wrote:
do you think a male who is genetically unsuitable for a sport would surpass the performance of a female athlete who was genetically suitable for her sport if they trained equally hard?[/quote]

Depends. Tennis and football (soccer) has shown that amateur men can defeat professional women. Kim Clijsters, one of the best tennis players ever, admited she had troubles winning POINTS against her former boyfriend, Lleyton Hewitt. Both have been number #1 though.
Serena and Venus Williams, when they were younger, played some friendly match (one set each) against a German guy who was like #600. He totally trashed both…and it seems he even smoked between games.

Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, best Spanish female tennis player ever, got trashed by some random guy (number #800 in the world or something like that) 6-0, 6-1. It’s also reported that many professional tennis players play sparring games against local young guys (17-19) to train for tournaments and they lose way too often for their professional ranking.

I’d love to know how it’s possible that recently turned adults in the tennis academies can make the ball spin and stuff and then I go watch professional women playing tennis and all the hits over a 90 minutes match are PLAIN.
[/quote]

I’m not trying to argue one way or another about the abilities of male and female athletes but if we’re going to talk about them playing tennis against one another, it just seems wrong to not mention that Billie Jean King beat Bobby Riggs.

Riggs was a 55 year old retired pro when he challenged King, who was ranked #1 in the world. I realize this doesn’t illustrate your point, but he also played against Margaret Court (another top ranked female) that year and won.

Edevus · June 27, 2011, 3:19pm

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]alexus wrote:
do you think a male who is genetically unsuitable for a sport would surpass the performance of a female athlete who was genetically suitable for her sport if they trained equally hard?[/quote]

Depends. Tennis and football (soccer) has shown that amateur men can defeat professional women. Kim Clijsters, one of the best tennis players ever, admited she had troubles winning POINTS against her former boyfriend, Lleyton Hewitt. Both have been number #1 though.
Serena and Venus Williams, when they were younger, played some friendly match (one set each) against a German guy who was like #600. He totally trashed both…and it seems he even smoked between games.

Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, best Spanish female tennis player ever, got trashed by some random guy (number #800 in the world or something like that) 6-0, 6-1. It’s also reported that many professional tennis players play sparring games against local young guys (17-19) to train for tournaments and they lose way too often for their professional ranking.

I’d love to know how it’s possible that recently turned adults in the tennis academies can make the ball spin and stuff and then I go watch professional women playing tennis and all the hits over a 90 minutes match are PLAIN.
[/quote]

I’m not trying to argue one way or another about the abilities of male and female athletes but if we’re going to talk about them playing tennis against one another, it just seems wrong to not mention that Billie Jean King beat Bobby Riggs.

Riggs was a 55 year old retired pro when he challenged King, who was ranked #1 in the world. I realize this doesn’t illustrate your point, but he also played against Margaret Court (another top ranked female) that year and won.[/quote]

I’m aware of that, but he was 55 and retired for a while already. Billie Jean was very clever with her gameplay though. I wonder what would have happened if Riggs would have played Billie Jean first.

We could also bring up other “sports”, although it’s true that men are, in general, more competitive, so there’s more men competing and you’ll get a much stronger elite this way.
I said “sports” because I was thinking about chess or darts, where competitions are still gender-dependent and just Judit Polgar is going against this. But she’s a very exceptional case, since she was educated to compete against men since she was very young. She’s a very, very interesting person.

I’m not trying to sound chauvinist here, just saying that men seem to be more prepared, nature-wise (vs nurture) for competitions, be it physical or mental.

About the IQ thing, I found this :

"
Some people are trying to explain it by genes on the x-chromosome, of which women have 2 and men have one. If one x-chromosome gives you a disposition towards a very high iq, a female can still have another “normal” or “low” iq one to balance it out, wherease a male doesn’t. Having 2 such chromosomes in a female is rare (having one is rare, so the combination is really really rare).

On the other hand, if an x-chromosome gives you a disposition towards retardation, a man doesn’t have a 2nd one to balance it out, whereas a woman has a good chance of having a better 2nd one."

Not sure how that works, so I have no idea if that even makes sense.

Stronghold · June 27, 2011, 3:27pm

RE Riggs vs. King:
That’s not really a fair comparison. Even his prime, Riggs wasn’t able to play hard-nosed, physical tennis and relied much more on strategy and finesse. At the time of the “Battle of the Sexes” matches, he was thirty years past his prime. He managed to defeat Court, who was unprepared for his highly tactical playing style, but King was prepared for him after watching what he had done to beat Court.

There is also speculation that Riggs threw the match with king in order to collect large pay-offs on bets he had made against himself. Riggs was a master hustler and gambler and made more money betting on his tennis matches than he ever did playing them.

anon71262119 · June 27, 2011, 3:40pm

[quote]tom63 wrote:

[quote]wsk wrote:
…
Here’s an uncomfortable fact for gender benders: there are thirty times as many men as women with an IQ of 170+.[/quote]

If feminists somehow abolished men they would bring them back after they realized they need someone to blame for their problems .[/quote]

Back into the fray, against my better judgment…

My concern with women’s issues has nothing to do with hating men, or an assertion that men and women are the same, or that the idea that a gender neutral world is possible, or even desirable. I do see that women are more vulnerable, in all sorts of ways. This vulnerability is more evident in cultures where women continue to be seen as inferior, and yes, that sometimes happens here in the western world. If you want proof, go read some of the threads in SAMA.

We have passed anti-discrimination laws and policies in this country that have been pretty effective in eliminating most of the sex-related discrimination in the schools, and much of it in the workplace. Some of those policies even now favor women in ways that are not always fair, so the pendulum swings. You can say the same thing about affirmative action, but that’s another topic. The women’s movement, similar to the success of the labor movement, has resulted in laws and policies that now make unions generally unnecessary, IMO. That doesn’t mean that women are not still vulnerable, or that women who are concerned with that are, to quote Rush Limbaugh “femi-nazis”. It might make it simpler to think in these terms, letting the people on the fringes inform your opinions, but it won’t make it accurate.

In general terms, men and women are different and that’s a good thing. In an ideal world, they complement each other. These people espousing gender neutral parenting are kooks. They don’t represent the average feminist. I love men, but I’ll continue to be concerned about the treatment of women, particularly in developing countries and in the Middle East. If you don’t see something wrong with the abortion of 163 million little girls, over the past three decades, then you have a bigger problem than these kooks in the original article.

Stronghold · June 27, 2011, 3:59pm

Men vs. Women in athletics. the first column is (obviously the event), second is Intermediate boy’s (age 15-16) world records, third is Women’s open world records. Where differing conditions exist in the events, I’ve made a note.

100m- 10.54 - 10.49 (wind aided, fastest non-wind aided time is 10.61, clocked the next day)
200m- 21.10 - 21.34
400m- 45.99 - 47.60
800m- 1:50.51 - 1:53.28
1,500m- 3:54.02 - 3:50.46
3,000m- 8:27 - 8:06.11
400m Hrdles 51.56 - 52.34
Steeplechase- 6:02.84 - 8:58.81
4x100 Relay- 40.90 - 41.37
4x400m Relay- 3:13.40 - 3:15.17
4x800m Relay- 7:41.30 - 7:50.17
High Jump- 2.15m - 2.09m
Pole Vault- 5.12m - 5.06m
Long Jump- 7.35m - 7.52m
Triple Jump- 15.08m - 15.5
Shot Put- 19.24m (12 lb shot) - 22.63m (4 kilo shot)
Discus- 58.8m (1.6 kilo disc) - 76.8m (1 kilo disc)
Javelin- 63.60m (800g javelin) - 72.27 (600g javelin)

Without question, the 15-16 year old boys dominate the open women’s world records, despite having had an average of 10-15 fewer years to train for the sport. I don’t even know why this is even an argument. Male physiology is tailored more to the demands of high physical activities such as sports. That’s not to say that women can’t be good at them, but just that there really should be no argument as to which sex is best “built” for sport. The mere fact that female athletes take MALE hormones in order to get a leg up on their female competitors should be enough.

DJHT · June 27, 2011, 4:09pm

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:

[quote]tom63 wrote:

[quote]wsk wrote:
…
Here’s an uncomfortable fact for gender benders: there are thirty times as many men as women with an IQ of 170+.[/quote]

If feminists somehow abolished men they would bring them back after they realized they need someone to blame for their problems .[/quote]

Back into the fray, against my better judgment…

My concern with women’s issues has nothing to do with hating men, or an assertion that men and women are the same, or that the idea that a gender neutral world is possible, or even desirable. I do see that women are more vulnerable, in all sorts of ways. This vulnerability is more evident in cultures where women continue to be seen as inferior, and yes, that sometimes happens here in the western world. If you want proof, go read some of the threads in SAMA.

We have passed anti-discrimination laws and policies in this country that have been pretty effective in eliminating most of the sex-related discrimination in the schools, and much of it in the workplace. Some of those policies even now favor women in ways that are not always fair, so the pendulum swings. You can say the same thing about affirmative action, but that’s another topic. The women’s movement, similar to the success of the labor movement, has resulted in laws and policies that now make unions generally unnecessary, IMO. That doesn’t mean that women are not still vulnerable, or that women who are concerned with that are, to quote Rush Limbaugh “femi-nazis”. It might make it simpler to think in these terms, letting the people on the fringes inform your opinions, but it won’t make it accurate.

In general terms, men and women are different and that’s a good thing. In an ideal world, they complement each other. These people espousing gender neutral parenting are kooks. They don’t represent the average feminist. I love men, but I’ll continue to be concerned about the treatment of women, particularly in developing countries and in the Middle East. If you don’t see something wrong with the abortion of 163 million little girls, over the past three decades, then you have a bigger problem than these kooks in the original article.
[/quote]

Awesome post PP

Edevus · June 27, 2011, 4:10pm

Since we’re on the topic, I’m following the World Cup of football (soccer…) and the skill level of these ladies is improving year by year at a very fast pace. Until not so much ago, just USA and Germany seemed to know what they were doing, but now some other teams are showing some skills as well.

I’d like to see USA play against a 2nd B Spanish team (the lower level of game that still has professional players).

anon71262119 · June 27, 2011, 5:24pm

[quote]DJHT wrote:

[quote]Powerpuff wrote:

[quote]tom63 wrote:

[quote]wsk wrote:
…
Here’s an uncomfortable fact for gender benders: there are thirty times as many men as women with an IQ of 170+.[/quote]

If feminists somehow abolished men they would bring them back after they realized they need someone to blame for their problems .[/quote]

Back into the fray, against my better judgment…

[/quote]

Awesome post PP[/quote]

Thank you.

buckeye_girl · June 27, 2011, 5:47pm

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]buckeye girl wrote:

[quote]Edevus wrote:

[quote]alexus wrote:
do you think a male who is genetically unsuitable for a sport would surpass the performance of a female athlete who was genetically suitable for her sport if they trained equally hard?[/quote]

Depends. Tennis and football (soccer) has shown that amateur men can defeat professional women. Kim Clijsters, one of the best tennis players ever, admited she had troubles winning POINTS against her former boyfriend, Lleyton Hewitt. Both have been number #1 though.
Serena and Venus Williams, when they were younger, played some friendly match (one set each) against a German guy who was like #600. He totally trashed both…and it seems he even smoked between games.

Arantxa Sanchez Vicario, best Spanish female tennis player ever, got trashed by some random guy (number #800 in the world or something like that) 6-0, 6-1. It’s also reported that many professional tennis players play sparring games against local young guys (17-19) to train for tournaments and they lose way too often for their professional ranking.

I’d love to know how it’s possible that recently turned adults in the tennis academies can make the ball spin and stuff and then I go watch professional women playing tennis and all the hits over a 90 minutes match are PLAIN.
[/quote]

I’m not trying to argue one way or another about the abilities of male and female athletes but if we’re going to talk about them playing tennis against one another, it just seems wrong to not mention that Billie Jean King beat Bobby Riggs.

Riggs was a 55 year old retired pro when he challenged King, who was ranked #1 in the world. I realize this doesn’t illustrate your point, but he also played against Margaret Court (another top ranked female) that year and won.[/quote]

I’m aware of that, but he was 55 and retired for a while already. Billie Jean was very clever with her gameplay though. I wonder what would have happened if Riggs would have played Billie Jean first.[/quote]

He was indeed past his prime. And that is why I made it a point to mention that he was 55 when it happened and she was one of the best female players at the time. He wasn’t an amateur, but he certainly wasn’t on her level (in the sense that he wasn’t one of the top ranked men in 1973).

My point in bringing this up was that this seems to be a major event in sports history (“Billie Jean won it for female athletes everywhere” sort of thing). But the guy she beat really wasn’t that good. And I think that says something about the abilities of male and female athletes in a given sport.

I’m not trying to take anything away from the win. I think its fucking awesome that she won, but I think the whole picture here is important. And it seems that we are in agreement on that.

Edevus · June 27, 2011, 5:51pm