Replies (73)
Like male and female body.
Why keep using this language? It's way too broad. Just make it about the body traits that matter for each sport, like weight classes in boxing.
Imagine female center in basketball dunking.
you’ve got a good point there. as long as there is precision and accuracy in body type categories. weight classes mean little when a male boxer has most of the bulk in his shoulders and arms
If gender wasn't a category, there would be no women in sports.
There's no way weight-only classification system is just towards women as testosterone decides a lot in terms of aggression, stamina and drive. Just look at how Emane is beating up those poor girls even though the weight class is the same.
I didn't say it would be weight only. We can measure all that these days.
I disagree. Sports always occurs under a framework of rules that are agreed upon by the participants. If someone is participating technically according to the rules, but not by the spirit of the rules, its fair to clarify the rules to exclude behavior, ability, or other qualities that are not agreeable to the other participants.
Pathwork. Today's rules are too subjective. We can measure most of the traits that can put people at a disadvantage with one another.
i am not sure how you would want to do that. it sounds like the reinvention of the wheel. ;-)
Yep, it would force each international body to restructure their dumb rules. Today's patchwork can only go so far...
You just want to wrassle with some strapped ladies.
but then men will triumph in most of disciplines force-based. I agree with you that a 70kg man athlete is equivalent to a 70kg woman athlete and is fair to make them fight, but how many men can work to reach that category? How many women? You will end, statistically, with 90% of top athletes 70kg as men.
Maybe 50kg category could have a different target and you would see something like 60% women and 40% men, who knows.
The point of sports is to establish rules and then play by them
women's hips are wider, shoulders are narrower, even with same weight the man has more muscle mass versus fat... defining equality would be an extremely arbitrary thing compared to similar morphology and weight
all sports rules are arbitrary.
great idea, why using common sense when there is *clearly* a way to measure the impact of every body measure like:
- weight
- muscle mass
- arms' length (which is important in boxing for instance)
- hormones levels
- density of the skin...
Who is more likely to win in a boxing match, someone who is 2kg heavier or someone whose arms are 5cm longer?
You think the solution is making 10k categories? lmao
yep, and they are all completely arbitrary. We can make them up as we go. My only point is that now we have the technology to measure almost everything that defines an athtlete. We can do much better in defining fair competitions.
Pip the WoT guy
great idea, why using common sense when there is *clearly* a way to measure the impact of every body measure like:
- weight
- muscle mass
- arms' length (which is important in boxing for instance)
- hormones levels
- density of the skin...
Who is more likely to win in a boxing match, someone who is 2kg heavier or someone whose arms are 5cm longer?
You think the solution is making 10k categories? lmao
View quoted note →
but arent the most relevant differences determined by the hormon levels (besides other genetic factors)?
or in other words. performing identical training sessions, will have significant different results for men and women.
so i am still not understanding how your groups would be "better" rearranged. it just sounds super complicated and even more unpredictable as constant adjustments would be needed over the years.
Gender is a linguistic term for parts of speech, people and animals are of a sex, either female or male, which coincidentally is also a body type.
The word "gender" being conflated with the biological term "sex" is part of the stupid tranny psy-op. Gender, when applied to parts of speech or societal roles is vague and arbitrary, biological sex is and always has been pretty damn clear.
Male and femaie *are* body types. If you find a fossilized pelvic bone, 90° is a male, and 120° is a female - regardless of size or long composted muscles. There are a million more fundamental differences. So yes, wrassling is separated by weight class, but also by male/female.
That's naive, Vitor.
Gender based sports is the primary filtering for body-structure. The male musculature is very different than female musculature.
Adding a mixed category can make sense in some sports but not in all.
fortunately mostly they are made by people who play the sports, and not people who don't play the sports
yeah it's just retarded
just bofy fat ratio should be enough to eliminate any thought of setting males against females, at all
then there's muscle twitch ratio, hormone levels, bone lengths, motor and vision processing systems, even the size of the throat is substantially different and has an impact in some sports, eg rugby
most of them are for historical consistency. These entities haven't changed for centuries.
Yep, but this primary filtering is failing now because people are trying to match the historical way of doing with the new understandings of gender.
It's not a useful separator anymore.
Sure, but they are way too broad. It's like saying all male boxers should fight in the same category. It doesn't make any sense these days.
The musculature is radically different between men and women. That is not trivial.
Female-only sports is necessary and will npt go away. Women cannot compete physically with men.
Gender is not an understanding.
We are either born XY or XX.
However, we might need a "cyborg" or "body modification" category in the distant future.
yeah, neither have the rules of elliptic curves, if you cared to read what they are
Many of the "new" sports like skate, shooting, surfing, etc don't have super strong biases by male/female. It's more about your eye sight, your state of mind, your steadyness, etc.
As we move forward, we will see more sports that are not based on the boring Strength/Stamina/Speed metrics.
SEX, not gender.
We have men's and women's categories in shooting because men also beat women at those. Any sport that is physical will always be like that.
The only reason why we don't have male champions in things like artistic gymnastics is because of old fashioned ideas of sort of movements are manly and which are "more suited to the female nature".
Skeet shooting used to be mixed in the Olympics. Then a woman named Zhang Shan won it in the 1992 Barcelona Olympics. After her win the International Shooting Union barred female athletes from competing against male athletes. The following Olympics split male and female skeet shooting, but there weren't enough women, so they didn't have any female skeet shooting, so Zhang Khan, the former Olympic champion, wasn't able to compete at all in 1996. The subsequent 2000 Olympics did see the women's skeet shooting.
Oh dear
What, there’s fossilised pelvic bones competing in the Olympic?!?
I am aware of that story (I'm a member of an olympic shooting club), and for every one outlier you will find 10,000 cases in the normal distribution. Segregating by sex is the way that those 10,000 have a chance to at least compete.
This is proof that inteligence and wisdom are two very different things.
There still is a pretty big difference between say a 120lb man and a 120lb woman... there would have to be intense and very studied criteria to make it fair.
What types of categories, though? Take gymnastics: do you go with weight or BMI? But how do you handle that men typically have more upper body strength? Take running? Is it weight, height, etc?
Even if it something as simple as BMI or some single number formula how many groupings do you have?
Let’s say there are 2-3 groups. Who’s watching those events? I assume everyone would watch the “top” group since they’d be more elite.
Bottom levels prob wouldn’t be watched.
You could argue men’s sports are watched more but at least some folks like to watch women’s sports. If you just have groupings based on some single number of “eliteness” then who watches the lower levels where there is no gender differences?
As in, some women’s sports might have lower level of “elites” (compared to men) but people will watch women’s gymnastics and running, etc. But who’s going to watch “Level 3” athletes that are, by definition, the least elite?
Sports are dumb. If you want to compete then compete against yourself.
sports are Not for fair assessment - they are to make more money :-) whatever gets more audience shall prevail ..
btw - most competitive sports don't make you healthy ..
progressives love to shift goalposts and texas sharpshoot
imagine needing to deal with such people in the field of cryptography and mathematics, i'm sure you have experienced it
True, but ultimately its up to the players which game they want to play. Much like whether we use fiat and bitcoin, or twitter and nostr
I think the intention behind it is good but I don’t see this succeeding. How accurate can body types be measured? Which variables are taken into account and which are not? And why? How easy is it to get false measurements or even game results? Besides, if the idea is to have better defined categories, where should we draw the line? Should we also measure intelligence, sport iq, anxiety, trauma, will power, etc all of which have an impact on performance? The more variables are introduced the more complicated it gets. And while historical categories are flawed, at least they’re simple and more in line with nature.
Or you forget about the mental gymnastics and just don't let men compete with women. Problem solved.
That's up to the international body administering each sport and the athletes themselves. We have the tech to measure everything that matters for each sport, it's just a matter of getting it done.
For instance, we could have a swimming competition that is based on the wingspan of the athlete. Or a score that takes several factors into account.
Because the female and male bodies works differently and always will be like this. Tecnology and measures don't change that.
And olympics is already boring as it is.
And there's no genre for humans, that's bullshit. It's sex.
Skeletal structure? Muscle Mass? Stamina? It all breaks down the same way as far as I know: Cromosome count.
Sports is dumb. It's and just fake and all entertainment to keep the sheep distracted from researching the truth.
But if you want me to think about it then my option is it should up to the sports industry/companies to decide how they want to run it. After all it's their business and no one has any right to tell them how to run their business.
Government needs to stay out of the sports industry and let them run it however the sports industry wants.
If they want to mix genders then it's their business to do that. If their viewers/supporters are not happy about it the they then should raise their voices and let the sports industry know. If the sports industry doesn't listen than don't view their events or spend your money at their events.
Frankly I don't watch sports but I don't like the government trying to tell us that they want to ban the sports industry from mixing genders.
Government stay out of it.
Women are not small men.
The differences are everywhere and statistically noticeable.
He's trolling right?
Women would always win the sports focused on gracefulness or synchronisation, and men would win everything else. It would effectively resegregrate sports to sex-specific competitions.
There is simply no way to do this. Even if you control for weight and muscle mass men are far stronger. There is some overlap in the distributions but the peaks for various types of strength are multiple standard deviations apart.
We use the language "male and female" because it is useful and descriptive. Pretending they are arbitrary categories is intentional stupidity.
It might be interesting to make some sport with a really complicated set of rules that levels the playing field, but I doubt many athletes would want to play it.
Sports may develop complex rules but they usually have easy to understand objectives. Jump far, jump high, arrive first etc.
💯
Bad take
Tf are you talking about?
An entirely idiotic hot take intended to salvage the destruction of sport for half of the human race. You're young enough to be able to look back at this time in history and identify your own youthful idiocy in attempting to enforce the erasure of the dignity and respect of half of our species. For social media likes no less. Worse than knowing nothing, you are perfectly fine with knowing nothing.
then there would just be a bunch of men in every category
Yeah, this is the oneness/multiplicity debate. Is there a single category or as many categories as instantiations? You need a standard to have anything in between.
Or just turn all these complicated metrics into a score number that puts people in separate brackets.
The sport needs to have as many categories it needs to call the competition between any 2 players fair. Today, the gender-based one is just way too broad.
it's gender based, depends on a sport it can also be age and weight based.
no need to change.
bs.
you can't have 200 categories and all participants winning in their own one.
just keep sport to people who understands more
What makes you think this generates 200 categories? Each sport can group into as many or as few categories they see fit.
Keine Ahnung, Androgenresistenz suxx.
Vielleicht Testosteronklassen zusätzlich zu Gewicht beim Boxen einführen? 😂
Nee, ist alles Quark irgendwie.
Vitor hat das neulich vorgeschlagen. Wurde nicht besonders positiv aufgefasst. 🥸
Ich glaube, es gibt da keine gute Lösung. Die Menschen gar nicht starten zu lassen, wäre blöd. Sie bei den Männern, welche alles aus ihrem Testosteronspiegel herausholen können, wäre physiologisch unfair. Bei den Frauen starten ist auch unfair.
Eine Aufteilung in weitere Kleingruppen reduzierte den Wettbewerb, weil es weniger startende Sportler gäbe. Das wiederum reduziert die Attraktivität des Sports, reduziert die Menge an Sponsoren, und das Gefühl von Stolz bzw. "etwas erreicht" zu haben.
Vitor Pamplona
Sport categories should never be gender-based (men's and women's). It should be body-structure-based. Every sport should have an Open section for everyone and categories for separate body types. Gender is irrelevant in sports. Gender is only used today because of historical misunderstandings of what makes competition fair to the players. We know better. We should just get rid of gender-based categories and replace them with more specific and accurate body-type categories.
View quoted note →
That doesn't solve the problem at the Olympics. The Algerian boxer was born with female parts and raised as a woman. But he/she has XY chromosomes. (Probably those estrogenic chemicals in the environment Alex Jones goes on about.) So if you define "woman" as XX chromosomes, then the parents in Algeria legit did not "know what a woman is". If you define "woman" as "female parts", then he/she is a woman.
By low tech standards, she is a woman. It requires some high tech DNS analysis to see that he is genetically a male - but is dealing with developmental problems.
In this case it wasn't clear. She was born with female parts, "clearly" a girl at birth, raised as a girl, and only DNA testing revealed that he was genetically a guy with developmental issues. Unlike the transgender people, this guy/gal was not trying to deceive anyone (afaik - who knows). It was probably shocking to discover as an adult that he is not a girl after all.
Agree. This is precisely why we should get out of the clusterfuck of opinions to define what's a man and what's a woman and just use the underlying traits that are most important for each sport and build fairer categories from the ground up. It's a long shot, but it's worth considering.
Ok, I was not aware that he or she is actually a hermaphrodite and not a man pretending to be a woman. This is obviously a special case but in my opinion here the easy and clear indicator should have been the gene test. You would assume with all the money they spend on the olympics they should be able to afford that. 😉
what makes you think that doing so is a good idea?
I think dividing by gender, age, and weight is good for the most of sports.
