Sexism at it's most extreme

Robroy36

big_joe_joyce wrote: »

how can you say women are every bit as good at sports , would serena williams beat nadal or federer in a game of tennis , would the arsenals womens team beat the mens team

Probally because she is a woman, so she has a vested intrest. Also, women base their judgement and opinions on emotion/feelings rather than objective fact, as we see here. This is also why you rarely see women in charge of large corporations.

JustAThought

It was very funny ; but made you think!!
Yiu've got to laugh at the logical progressions ; my guess is that it was a debating project for a school. Very funny.

The disabled bit was implying that it was unfair in the disabled athletes not to receive the big prize pots that women or men can get; as the disabled male athletes times were often ( allegedly) as good as the women's - despite them missing limbs ; and getting very low cash prizes in comparison with the same results !

Funny stuff.!

Obese gymnastics!!! WhaHaha

Jimoslimos

I watch sports based on their entertainment factor and competitiveness, not by the gender of the participants.

Men's tennis is 'better' at the moment because the top players are playing to a consistently high standard, unlike the women's game. However 15 years ago it could be argued that women's game was far more entertaining and competitive than the Sampras dominated era.

I'd rank a women's medal in boxing rather lowly in the list of Olympic achievements (sorry Katie) because participant numbers are low, but I'd rate a women's 5000m track medal as far superior to a men's one in BMX/sailing/<insert niche sport here> for the same reason.

NegativeCreep

I agree with everything he says. Apart from the whole "women should compete with the disabled" thing. Women and men should compete together in everything and the best person will win.

Me_Grapes

titan18 wrote: »

http://www.tennistweets.com/blog/24/2009-wimbledon-facts-and-figures.php

2009 Wimbledon

* Wimbledon Men’s Singles Final: Roger Federer’s victory over Andy Roddick was watched by a peak audience of 11.2m (6.25pm) viewers on BBC One.

* Ladies’ Singles Final between Serena and Venus Williams was watched by a peak audience of 4.2m (with the match averaging 3.4m)

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2012/0630/1224319039408.html



Quite big differences there

How many rap songs has Snoop Doggy Dogg made about Novak Djokovic though?

Solair

big_joe_joyce wrote: »

how can you say women are every bit as good at sports , would serena williams beat nadal or federer in a game of tennis , would the arsenals womens team beat the mens team

Coz they're competing against other women. It's a bit stupid to just assume men and women have the same muscle power, they don't, that's just how it is.


That doesn't mean they're any worse at sport FFS!

Although in sports where it's not all about raw muscle power, I'd say you could mix it and see what happens.

Would be interesting to see how a mixed soccer team did at seriously high level. Most of that's about skill and speed, not power.

Just means you're not comparing like with like.

Anyway, still prefer watching the women's tennis and I'm a bloke.

I just think a lot of this sexism stuff is a pile of manure tho.

Me_Grapes

big_joe_joyce wrote: »

would the arsenals womens team beat the mens team

Probably would.....

ahnowbrowncow

There's only one way to decide this, have a war. Men vs Women.

Good news: We solve the argument of which gender is better.

Bad news: No more heterosexual sex

Da Shins Kelly

Jimoslimos wrote: »

Men's tennis is 'better' at the moment because the top players are playing to a consistently high standard, unlike the women's game. However 15 years ago it could be argued that women's game was far more entertaining and competitive than the Sampras dominated era.

It's a golden era for men's tennis at the moment since Roger Federer pretty much set a new standard. Women's tennis isn't quite as good right now, but it has had its moments and the matches are often quite close and can be very exciting to watch.

Solair

Yeah, mens tennis went through a very grey period though where it was all just boring power serves. At least it's a bit more interesting now.

Women's tennis was always far tighter matches and far more rallying and had more colourful characters.

I do think though that a lot of this stuff is perpetuated by some women themselves too. There's still a bit of a culture out there where some women make out that they can't do sports coz they're female, rather than they're just an individual who is useless at sport and there's also still a tendency for the sporty chick to get mocked by her peers.

That kinda stuff is also a large part of why women's sports are not up there with mens sports.

Also, if women's magazines and other female-orientated publications iconified female sports figures the way mainstream male-oriented sports publications do for male sport stars, then there would be a hell of a lot more sponsorship and spend on women's sports.

As it stands, women's publications tend to be fixated on hair, makeup, fashion and clothes. You can't really blame men on that one.

Paddy Cow

jonnyfingers wrote: »

Thread title is misleading. The fact that the fastest and strongest men are faster and stronger than their female counterparts does not equal sexism at its most extreme.

The thread title isn't misleading. No one would argue that he is incorrect in saying that men are physically stronger than women, have more stamina and will have faster times etc than women. What is sexist is suggesting that women shouldn't be proud of their sporting achievements or that women's sports are pointless, since they will never be better than men. As another poster pointed out, would he have the same problem with weight categories in boxing? Surely less well built men should have to compete with bigger men for them to matter?

Sport is about competition, pushing yourself to your limits and seeing what you can achieve with hard work and discipline. For this guys video to be completely fair, there would have to be no classification whatsoever in sports and only the very elite would be allowed to shine. This would lead to the same few being the top at everything and it would be very boring.

ahnowbrowncow

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

It's a golden era for men's tennis at the moment since Roger Federer pretty much set a new standard. Women's tennis isn't quite as good right now, but it has had its moments and the matches are often quite close and can be very exciting to watch.

Exciting to watch? It's so much slower and the screams from them are annoying.

Solair wrote: »

Yeah, mens tennis went through a very grey period though where it was all just boring power serves. At least it's a bit more interesting now.

Women's tennis was always far tighter matches and far more rallying and had more colourful characters.

Tighter? You must be forgetting the golden set at wimbledon.
All Sharapova or Serena Williams do is power serve, it's boring tbh

Da Shins Kelly

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Exciting to watch? It's so much slower and the screams from them are annoying.

And if you read what I wrote, I said that currently women's tennis is not as good. There was nothing too exciting about men's tennis when Sampras was dominating either. Both the women's and the men's game go through down periods and periods of flourish though. Women's tennis was great in the days of Steffi Graff and Monica Seles and Martina Navratilova, and the rivalry between Martina Hingis and Venus Williams is one of the greatest in the sport. Right now the men have the more exciting players.

Paddy Cow

titan18 wrote: »

Whilst the thing about having women compete in the Paralympics was harsh, there is a point about women receiving equal money to men in sport. Even taking away the performance gaps that exist, there's a difference in the amount of people actually interested. How many people actually watch male events, such as 100m (considering it's one of the bigger events in the athletics program), mens Wimbledon final etc in comparison to the women's version. The pay should be appropriate to not only the performance level of the athletes (although much like weight classes, it's hard to make a huge difference in pay through this) but also on the amount they affect viewership (either TV or the amount people are paying to get in to the event)

Despite the obvious differences in physical strength and stamina, both men and women have to put in equal amounts of training and dedication to be at the top of their game. If they are putting in equal effort, then they deserve equal pay.

Very few women recieve equal pay to men in sports. With the exception of the Olympics and tennis, I don't know of any other competitions where women get the same coverage as men. I don't follow football or rugby but I could name the top players because they are always in the news. I couldn't name one female player. Women also don't have the same opportunities once their sporting career is over. Loads of the top men players go into commentating etc.

Women know that pound for pound, they (with a few exceptions) can't compete with men. I personally don't see why this should discourage them from competing with each other and being proud of themselves.

Historically Ireland doesn't do very well at the Olympics. Does this mean that we shouldn't enter? Should Sonia O'Sullivan, Michelle Smith and Katie Taylor have accepted they will never be as good as their male counterparts and given up after sports day at school?

His video is ridiculous.

enfant terrible

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Exciting to watch? It's so much slower and the screams from them are annoying.



Tighter? You must be forgetting the golden set at wimbledon.
All Sharapova or Serena Williams do is power serve, it's boring tbh

Yes most of the women tennis players would lose to the best male college players and probably the best high school players.

The main difference is the movement and spin the male players put on the ball.

WILLIAMS SISTERS DISCOVER MEN ARE BETTER PLAYERS

http://tt.tennis-warehouse.com/showthread.php?t=21533

ahnowbrowncow

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

And if you read what I wrote, I said that currently women's tennis is not as good. There was nothing too exciting about men's tennis when Sampras was dominating either. Both the women's and the men's game go through down periods and periods of flourish though. Women's tennis was great in the days of Steffi Graff and Monica Seles and Martina Navratilova, and the rivalry between Martina Hingis and Venus Williams is one of the greatest in the sport. Right now the men have the more exciting players.

Women's tennis is so much slower than men's tennis, irregardless of era. So no, Steffi Graff wouldn't even make it exciting to watch IMO.

Paddy Cow wrote: »

Despite the obvious differences in physical strength and stamina, both men and women have to put in equal amounts of training and dedication to be at the top of their game. If they are putting in equal effort, then they deserve equal pay.

Very few women recieve equal pay to men in sports. With the exception of the Olympics and tennis, I don't know of any other competitions where women get the same coverage as men. I don't follow football or rugby but I could name the top players because they are always in the news. I couldn't name one female player. Women also don't have the same opportunities once their sporting career is over. Loads of the top men players go into commentating etc.

Women know that pound for pound, they (with a few exceptions) can't compete with men. I personally don't see why this should discourage them from competing with each other and being proud of themselves.

Historically Ireland doesn't do very well at the Olympics. Does this mean that we shouldn't enter? Should Sonia O'Sullivan, Michelle Smith and Katie Taylor have accepted they will never be as good as their male counterparts and given up after sports day at school?

His video is ridiculous.

No I don't think they deserve equal pay just because of equal effort, you don't pay someone based on effort it's based on results.
Lots of the lower ranked people put the same effort in but just aren't as talented so don't get near the top, should they all get paid the same?

Da Shins Kelly

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Women's tennis is so much slower than men's tennis, irregardless of era. So no, Steffi Graff wouldn't even make it exciting to watch IMO.

Well, it's more exciting to watch a sustained rally between two women than it is to watch Sampras serve aces to win every match.

LiamMc

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Well, it's more exciting to watch a sustained rally between two women than it is to watch Sampras serve aces to win every match.

Out of date post.

What was the gender of the trees used for the wooden rackets of Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe?

Da Shins Kelly

LiamMc wrote: »

Out of date post.

What was the gender of the trees used for the wooden rackets of Bjorn Borg, Jimmy Connors and John McEnroe?

Why don't you read the rest of the conversation? We're talking about the ebb and flow in the competitiveness of men's and women's tennis.

ahnowbrowncow

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Well, it's more exciting to watch a sustained rally between two women than it is to watch Sampras serve aces to win every match.

But neither happen anymore so........

Da Shins Kelly

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

But neither happen anymore so........

Exactly, the quality of competition has shifted. But the point remains, that there will be slow times and times of excitement in both sides of the sport.

ahnowbrowncow

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

Exactly, the quality of competition has shifted. But the point remains, that there will be slow times and times of excitement in both sides of the sport.

So we agree, men's tennis is, has been and always will be better

I'm only messing with you, I have little knowledge of the earlier tennis years and admit that men's and women's tennis can be equally entertaining.

Probably my biggest annoyance with the female game is that it's over so quickly, there are no exciting comebacks from 2 sets down.
If men are fit to play best of 5 surely the female counterparts are just as able to.

dsmythy

In some countries if a girl is caught learning they throw acid in her face and/or shoot her in the head. This video is downright unextreme.

Paddy Cow

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

No I don't think they deserve equal pay just because of equal effort, you don't pay someone based on effort it's based on results.

Exactly. If you had two CEO's and one was a woman and one was a man, I wouldn't expect them to get paid the same in the name of equality but in how much dividends they got for their shareholders. Sports doesn't work like that. Players get paid based on how much revenue is earned from people willing to support them, be it by buying tickets to see their matches or tuning in on tv. As I said, the only two competitions where I have noticed that women seem to get as much coverage as men are the Olympics and tennis, so it stand to reason that they would earn roughly the same amount of money since both sexes put in the same amount of effort to be in the elite.

ahnowbrowncow wrote: »

Lots of the lower ranked people put the same effort in but just aren't as talented so don't get near the top, should they all get paid the same?

Again I agree. As I have said, I couldn't name one female football or rugby player, so I wouldn't expect them to be earning the same as top male players. Equally, I don't know any of the lower league players so obviously they are not going to earn the same as their male counterparts at the top.

I still think my point stands. The guy in the video says that women earn the same as men in sports and while they do in a small section, overall it's not true. Even if the elite women are still not as good as their male counterparts physically, what does it matter? They enjoy what they do and people like seeing them compete. That for me is a result

MonkstownHoop

can't we all just get along?