[mulveling]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong To those who want to play the gender card, and you know who you are: If you have your prejudices then there's nothing that will change it really, and I have to feel bad for you that your minds are so closed, and feel worse for the women who live with you, unless of course, they are also shackled by the same beliefs. Men and women are different. Duh. Stereotype compared to stereotype, each has advantages over the other at a given skill. But that's what you seem to be missing here. Stereotype to stereotype. All compared to all. In the human race it just doesn't work. There are too many individuals outside the stereotypes. So despite what you may have been raised to think, or what experience has somehow taught you, it's wrong. You cannot lump all women into a group and say "They can't do.." this, that, or the other and compete successfully against men. There are just too many individuals outside your box of criteria. Can you imagine trying to stereotype all men, by say, for example, race? Yeah, that's insane. Well, it's just as insulting to any female who has half a brain to think. And before my last paragraph causes anyone to rise to anger, I'm just trying to point out the absurdity of stereotyping. Accord women the same respect you _should_ accord your fellow man. To say that no woman has accomplished this or the other is a valid statement only on the surface. You have to take into account how many have tried, and that number, compared to the men, is very small. As for tennis, are memories that short?

It's not a prejudice that at any given percentile, men are superior to women, in almost any sport involving strength - which is really the majority of them. It is fact. Being an outlier can only get you so far before the realities of genetics, biology, and physics kick in. Anyone at the elite level, male or female, is an outlier. Both will have world class training and technique. The male outliers are working with the added advantages of strength, lower body fat, and greater levels of athletic enhancing hormones - too much for any female elite to overcome.

Bobby Riggs took his line of thinking way to far. He was quite past his prime at 55, and probably not even training enough to be a top player within that age group. Billy Jean much closer to prime in her late 20's. It is true, in many sports the elite women in their prime are on about even footing with the best men in the late 40's and 50's age groups. However, matching them against elite men in their prime is hopeless. Being familiar with swimming, this holds true - there's just no way an elite woman can compete with the elite men in their prime at any of the events.

Let's be realistic here. And let's not confuse a person's abilities with the rights & respect owed to them - they're two different things.

 

[daycart1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulveling Bobby Riggs took his line of thinking way to far. He was quite past his prime at 55, and probably not even training enough to be a top player within that age group. Billy Jean much closer to prime in her late 20's. It is true, in many sports the elite women in their prime are on about even footing with the best men in the 40's and 50's age groups..

I think that memories ARE too short regarding the Riggs/King match (I'm not referring to Plainsong

). The way it happened was that Riggs first destroyed Margaret Court, a highly ranked former Wimbledon champion--but it wasn't tennis.....it was handicap tennis. Riggs had one serve only and defended the doubles court.
In the big match with King, King also took this huge handicap. Without it, she would have lost, though not as badly as Court did.


Back on topic (sort of). A very interesting parallel with Wie is Judit Polgar in chess. Traditionally women's tournaments are separate and much weaker. But Polgar's father trianed her and her two sisters from a very early age. Szusa Polgar went on to win the Women's championship, but Judit insisted on playing only in men's tournaments, starting younger than Wie. She has been phenomenally successful and has for years now been one of the highest ranked players in the world.

 

[plainsong]

Why do I say it's impossible to really reach those people with deep rooted prejudices? Just read below. Not trying to have a go, you think what you think, and if it works for you and the women around you somehow accept it, then that is your business.

The stats your bring up, the differences that have to be overcome, don't prove anything really. The only conclusion you can draw is that it hasn't happened. The conclusion says nothing about the future.

Given the negative feedback, it's not surprising that a woman who potentially could cross over wouldn't. It's nearly impossible to get paid for playing sports anyway, and usually your competitors are your friends, so we can list that under good work environment. Compound that with the fact that most athletes just want to play. They don't want to get politcal, just let them show up with game. It's no wonder few try. I wouldn't want armchair coaches sitting in an internet forum judging me.

Ps - Ruffian would have pwned Foolish Pleasure. She was another league of horse.

Quote:

Originally Posted by mulveling It's not a prejudice that at any given percentile, men are superior to women, in almost any sport involving strength - which is really the majority of them. It is fact. Being an outlier can only get you so far before the realities of genetics, biology, and physics kick in. Anyone at the elite level, male or female, is an outlier. Both will have world class training and technique. The male outliers are working with the added advantages of strength, lower body fat, and greater levels of athletic enhancing hormones - too much for any female elite to overcome. Bobby Riggs took his line of thinking way to far. He was quite past his prime at 55, and probably not even training enough to be a top player within that age group. Billy Jean much closer to prime in her late 20's. It is true, in many sports the elite women in their prime are on about even footing with the best men in the 40's and 50's age groups. However, matching them against elite men in their prime is hopeless. Being familiar with swimming, this holds true - there's just no way an elite woman can compete with the elite men in their prime at any of the events. Let's be realistic here. And let's not confuse a person's abilities with the rights & respect owed to them - they're two different things.

 

[Genetic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by plainsong I'm not sure why it makes people so angry....

Me angry?

OK my personal final note on all of this nonsense:

One can only be amazed so see a girl who has the potential to be one day a Queen among her fellow players willing so hard to become a valet....


Amicalement