Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch
Given that I already preface my very few posts about sports with the disclaimer that I don't follow any of them, this is curiously antagonistic. We both vouch for your greater knowledge of sports, and the last organized league I played in was a shitty city rec softball league at my old firm -- but this seems like we're both just guessing about the psychological effects on 13 year old aspiring female athletes, and I do not concede your greater insight into that.
|
Of course not. And where would we find examples of athletes who weren't allowed to play sports in certain leagues and what it meant to their followers when they were? I guess the question will remain a mystery for all time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch
I suspect that some male-on-female competitions will always smack of gimmickry.
|
Wise words. Of course, we're not talking about those cases, are we?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Atticus Grinch
So I'm willing to let each sport decide whether to let women compete in the men's division. I just don't think it's a one-size-fits-all solution, because the impact on the women's division will be more or less dire depending on the nature of the sport. It makes no sense that Olympic shooting is not all open events, but it does make sense to me that biathlon is, and it doesn't seem like a must-be-corrected form of sexism for there to be a difference.
|
? I don't know why you think this paragraph fits in with this discussion. We agree that it makes no sense for women to compete in certain sports if they can't. Hell, that seems to be a problem that takes care of itself, doesn't it? But in the sports where they actually can compete*, I don't understand why letting them would not serve as an inspiration.
TM
*And this is the key word in this discussion, no?
Threaded Mode