Feminism, Eqaulity and the Olympics

page: 4
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by justamomma

I was thinking little maid outfits with g strings.


This right here is most definately an area where we women will outshine the men
Never will a man look hot or get more attention than women while wearing a little maids outfit w/ a g string.


[edit on 16-8-2008 by justamomma]


Amen to that! Err... that reminds me of something I needed to do *cough*...

On Topic: I guess you could debate equality of men and women all day long, but at the end of the day, if you didn't divide competitions by gender, then they would divide themselves. In other words, if they changed gymnastics to be genderless, then it would simply be womens gymnastics, as they are better at gymnastics, and none of the men would qualify. Sports like track and field would be ALL men. In fact, if you think about it, there would be few competitions that would have men & women participants. The reason it is separated by gender is to give men a chance at gymnastics, and women a chance at track and field. Do you not believe they should have that chance? To me it seems you are supporting equality by saying they should not have an equal chance. This doesn't make much sense to me.




posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by TruthParadox
On Topic: I guess you could debate equality of men and women all day long, but at the end of the day, if you didn't divide competitions by gender, then they would divide themselves. In other words, if they changed gymnastics to be genderless, then it would simply be womens gymnastics, as they are better at gymnastics, and none of the men would qualify. Sports like track and field would be ALL men. In fact, if you think about it, there would be few competitions that would have men & women participants. The reason it is separated by gender is to give men a chance at gymnastics, and women a chance at track and field. Do you not believe they should have that chance? To me it seems you are supporting equality by saying they should not have an equal chance. This doesn't make much sense to me.


That's the point though it would be based on ability and ability alone, which is what the olympics are about. The person who bought up gymnastics saying men coudln't do some things, well quite simply that's fine by me. That means again that you abolish gender roles and go only on who can do it the best, which is that case would be women.

That's real equality, based only on ability.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 09:04 AM
link   
From what I have heard on this thread, woman since their (XX) genes do not grant them the muscle are to be denied the pleasure of most competitive sports? I love to run but because I am female I was denied the chance of competing, My brother-in-law lost a leg so he could not compete either. I would rather see categorizes as they have in horse shows with a best of show class where the division winners then compete against each other. Thats where you pit that heavy weight boxer against the fly weight.

I certainly agree that for careers such as firefighter, police and military, test should be gender neutral.
(sarcasm) However all police officers should be tested to determine their ability to pose as prostitutes as part of the test requirements....(/sarcasm) What about having to continue passing the same test every year? If someone becomes a desk jockey does he still have to pass the same test as a rookie? Is any weight given to his knowledge and experience?

Is the idea of sports to strive to be the best you can or to sit on a bench and watch super athletes?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 09:30 AM
link   
This is why the world is doomed...

This is supposed to be.... It doesn't matter. No one will listen.

This is where we fall.....



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 09:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
What are you trying to say exactly? That because women aren't as physically strong as men that we aren't "equal" and perhaps shouldn't have equal rights?


Wha!? I physically cringed when I read this


This is why I don't have time for feminists, because they often put words in your mouth.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 09:42 AM
link   
Again, proof we never fully evolved from apes.

I am to understand that a lot of people don't know what equality means on a political note. It means equal rights; not equal physical strength, not equal capabilities, and not equal bodily functions.

And by all means, when it comes to the mind, we are all equal. You are only what you make yourself: weak, strong, etc.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by ParaFreaky
I am to understand that a lot of people don't know what equality means on a political note. It means equal rights; not equal physical strength, not equal capabilities, and not equal bodily functions.


Equality means equal rights yes, you are applying it only in a political sense though and i'm applying it in a very wide sense, which includes sport. Basically i'm saying treat everyone as absolutely equal and make decisions based only upon their merit. Is it so bad asking for absolute equality?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 

I didn't really mean what you said. I meant that reply to a lot of others I've read. Most women don't ask to be equal in sports. They want to be able to become whatever they want to become. Now, if there were a large scale of sudden requests that sports not be separated, THEN, it should be considered.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
Without taking away from anything you point out or coming across as to deny or condone the attitude toward women,

I feel feminists fail to aknowledge that men had inherited their attitude from insane religious dogma .


Actually, they don't... or, rather, the academic feminist papers don't. There's a whole big bunch of academic papers railing against "the hegonomy" which bring religion into it.

I just didn't want to get into the details, ya'know?


As much as I believe that the feminist movement (for what little I a mere man can comprehend of it) should take credit for giving impetus to the ending of religious insanity. I feel that some feminist can become extremist, and seem to unjustifiably tar all men with the same brush that painted caves and cathedrals.


You do know that men are also feminists, right?

Anyway, I do agree with the last point. Extremists of any stripe are very tiresome, whether they wrap themselves in academic papers or a nationalistic flag. And some of the feminists do go too far.

Alas, they're the ones getting the press. Those of us who worked for equality are often ignored in the finger pointing at the extremists.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by crimvelvet
And when someone asked why I did not go for my masters degree I told him I could earn more money with a sexchange operation. My research and publications were stolen and had a man's name attached....so yes my heartfelt thanks


Ouch! Cringe! Ouch!!!

I had the same thing happen with projects and research. However, I'm in a position now (finally) where they can't do that.

It's not too late for that dream, though. I'm currently working on a PhD having finished my second Masters' two years ago.

I saw a news story within the past two years of a scientist who went through a sex change operation. When she (now "he") presented a followup paper to one of her earlier papers at a conference, she was told by a number of people how much better the new paper was than the research by "his sister".



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ImaginaryReality1984
 


I think what you're trying to say is:

All realms of possible equality should be exercised.

Women should have to compete against men AND women in the olympics, and not just against other women.


But that creates an unfair advantage for women.

The strongest man in the world is always going to be stronger than the strongest woman in the world.

Its not sexist, or biased. Its anatomy and science.

BH gives great examples.

I think what you're trying to say is that its unfair for women NOT to have to compete against men in the olympics...?


Or that women should have to register for selective service?



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 04:56 PM
link   
Is the author of this particular theme really as stupid as he sounds? I suspect that he is another loser, that has been outclassed by females because they got more education and training than he did, but in his mind it is all their fault.

Hate to tell you, but nobody says women are equal physically to men.

Equality does not mean in physical ability. It means equality in opportunity, equality in the ability to gain an education, equal pay for equal work, etc.

Only some kind of a backwood yahoo, with a less than 3rd grade remedial education could have formulated this topic.



posted on Aug, 17 2008 @ 06:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
If women want to be equal then why exactly do we have womens categories? Surely the very existence of a womens category means that women aren't equal physically to men. Now whilst i have met many very logical women who agree to this obvious point of biology, i have also met extreme neo-feminists who think that men and women are exacty equal in every possible way. A woman in their view can lift as much weight as a man and other such nonsense.


Fantastic idea! While we're at it, what's the big deal with all the different weight classes in boxing and wrestling? Surely the little bantamweight fellow is a fair match for the massive super heavyweight.

Just because women deserve to be treated fairly does not mean they are physically equal to their male counterparts. They are naturally going to be smaller and less able to build up muscle mass. I suppose a small number of Olympic events could withstand gender integration without shutting females out (in fact, you may not know this but there are already dual-gender events like mixed doubles tennis and badminton). But to get rid of the separate categories for more physically-intensive sports would just be idiotic.

I'd assume you realize that already and only created this thread as a back door way to bash women as genetically inferior, or at the very least you just wanted to point out that the sexes are not and shouldn't be considered equal. I don't think anyone sane would dispute that point, but consider that being female could actually serve as an advantage in a few categories. The Chinese cheated in the team gymnastics event by using underage little girls. Danica Patrick's small stature gives her an edge in Indy racing. Female divers and synchronized swimmers are obviously more graceful than males.

Oh, and quick question you've inspired - what events can transsexuals compete in? Do they get to pick whether they want to compete against men or women? Can they play women's hoops this year and then play for the men's team in 2012 after they've trained a little harder?



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by OldMedic
Is the author of this particular theme really as stupid as he sounds? I suspect that he is another loser, that has been outclassed by females because they got more education and training than he did, but in his mind it is all their fault.


Nice assmption, but i'm afraid you're very far from the mark



Originally posted by OldMedic
Hate to tell you, but nobody says women are equal physically to men.


Really? I guess those extreme feminists are non-existant, ok thread closed nice work.


Originally posted by OldMedic
Equality does not mean in physical ability. It means equality in opportunity, equality in the ability to gain an education, equal pay for equal work, etc.

Only some kind of a backwood yahoo, with a less than 3rd grade remedial education could have formulated this topic.


I live in the UK, i'm far from backward if you want to get into that then message me on U2U and we can. Equality if you actually listen to the extreme feminists is the idea that men and women are equal in every possible way. I will bring up again some simple facts which proves men and women have their strengths and weaknesses. Maybe if you had read the entire thread you would have seen me praise women compared ot men with some things.

Women tend to be better at multi-tasking, thats just a fact. This means they're often better at managment jobs. Men tend to have more spatially flexible brains and so tend to be better at jobs that involve that.

Before attacking someones character why not properly have a go at their arguement. Remember the slogan of the website, deny ignorance. How ignorant was it to attack someone you know nothing about?

EDIT


If you want to figure out my problem then here it is. It's the way tha equality laws are abused that bothers me. I understand it's the minority of women who do it, but when pushed they do play te equality card a little to often and very unfairly. That is the basis of the thread i suppose.



[edit on 18-8-2008 by ImaginaryReality1984]



posted on Aug, 18 2008 @ 02:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by AntiCensorship
Fantastic idea! While we're at it, what's the big deal with all the different weight classes in boxing and wrestling? Surely the little bantamweight fellow is a fair match for the massive super heavyweight.


Ahh well her eyou miss the point rather nicely. You could stilll have weight classes, just have them as joint classes. Flyweight would be male and female flyweight, isn't that true equality? It's putting the two sexes on the level field and letting them have at it. However there is a more important point about the military, police service, fire service etc. Some feminists are resonable and recognise this point and a few of them have mentioned it in this thread.


Originally posted by AntiCensorship
Just because women deserve to be treated fairly does not mean they are physically equal to their male counterparts. They are naturally going to be smaller and less able to build up muscle mass. I suppose a small number of Olympic events could withstand gender integration without shutting females out (in fact, you may not know this but there are already dual-gender events like mixed doubles tennis and badminton). But to get rid of the separate categories for more physically-intensive sports would just be idiotic.


I was fully aware of the mixed events and that proves my point, that if they are truly wanting to be equal then they can be. Obviously in thigns like power lifting this probably will never happen.


Originally posted by AntiCensorship
I'd assume you realize that already and only created this thread as a back door way to bash women as genetically inferior, or at the very least you just wanted to point out that the sexes are not and shouldn't be considered equal. I don't think anyone sane would dispute that point, but consider that being female could actually serve as an advantage in a few categories. The Chinese cheated in the team gymnastics event by using underage little girls. Danica Patrick's small stature gives her an edge in Indy racing. Female divers and synchronized swimmers are obviously more graceful than males.


I love how you, like so many others takes a swing at my motives. Ok lets make it clear, i have no issue with women at all, my only problem is the abuse of the equality laws. I agree women are suited better for some events and in my example they would actually beat men in those events, so i think that means i'm arguing for absolute equality. Again this would be based solely on performance, i don't see how that's such a bad thing. It rocognises ability without dual standards.


Originally posted by AntiCensorship
Oh, and quick question you've inspired - what events can transsexuals compete in? Do they get to pick whether they want to compete against men or women? Can they play women's hoops this year and then play for the men's team in 2012 after they've trained a little harder?


Transexuals, i take it you mean post op? They would be placed in their category. If they're now men, then male category, if female then female category. It doesn't matter much considering they're on the same hormones as their counterparts. So your point is mostly mute



posted on Aug, 21 2008 @ 10:48 AM
link   
Nice thread, one thing i would like to add...

Slightly off topic, but hits home the point...



EVERY country that had representitives at the game of Both sexes, had them walk along with the men...

EXECPT for CHINA...

China had all the women IN FRONT OF THE MEN, Packed FAR TIGHTER together...

The onl country to have a 'Sex-based' arangement...

Why... Whats worse, i was watching with several other people, and they didn't notice it until i told them...

That was bad in my eyes... Having a difrent Dress up for the women, and then segerating them... even the Islamic Countries under Sharia LAW didn't do this...

However, even with the 1% of the people that noticed this, they were IMIDEATLY DRAWN to the next event...

The Chiniese Soilders Goose-Steping across the stage... Also, something that the people i was watching with didn't seem to notice/Care... And something that you can't find on youtube for who knows what reasons...




Anyway





top topics
 
2
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join