I wouldn't mind wrestling a girl. Wrestling is not violence, it's a sport. If she wants to play, then she can't complain where I put my hands, and I wouldn't go easy on her either.
can someone who's less neanderthal that I explain to me how it's ok to do the things said in this forum (put my hands where I want, grabbed her wherever I wanted, inflicted pain to win) b/c they're "not violent and by the rules"?
It depends on whether you consider wrestling a sport. If it's a sport, and those actions are within the rules of the sport, then it's ok to perform those actions, assuming that both participants are involved voluntarily and understand the rules. barfo
Turn the time machine back a few decades, replace "women as a gender" with "negroes as a race", and it reads just as well. barfo
If one doesn't comprehend well, I'd agree. It makes a lovely sound bite. Why do women have a different physical fitness test from men to be in the military? Or different weight limits? Different grooming standards? Did african-americans have those things in 1945? I'll save you the trip of taking another excursion outside of your knowledge base and say "no, no they didn't". Why are there Title IX provisions for women's sports? Why can't we just say "if you're not good enough to make the team, try cheerleading or home economics or something you CAN do as well as a man?" Because our society recognizes and celebrates those differences.
Because our society was (and is) very sexist, and didn't allow women to play in sports equal in # to that of men? Because, god forbid, we allow women to have the same opportunities to play sports as men? holy shit. I was just being a bit of a knob when I said what i said, but seriously...stop digging yourself a hole here.
You know what else? Those weren't the things you cited. You cited different bathrooms and segregation. Why would we want to say that? Is there something wrong with women playing sports? barfo
what hole am I digging? You state that men and women are equal, and then state that women should have additional opportunities to play sports? If men and woman are equal, what's stopping the school from having one baseball team, and the 25 best players play? Or one basketball team, and the best 12 players play. And one volleyball team, and the best 12 players play? And one golf team, where the best 8 players play? Because men and women are different, even though they're equally valued. I'm not sure if I'm wasting time on a prank to get me going, or if you actually believe there's logic and merit in your opinion.
I cited bathrooms (no one clamoring for that to be removed), sports, and military roles. I've addressed two of those three. Which ones were you addressing, again? nope. But protections (subsidies) are in place to ensure that women can have equal opportunities to compete on teams/in sports because they can't play well enough to be on men's teams. I don't have much of a problem with Title IX. I do have a problem with people thinking that women are the same as men. Title IX just shows how far our country has gone towards making it clear that they aren't.
in fact, you're proving my point for me, barfo. Desegregation of professional baseball, for instance, didn't say that the Negroes could keep their league. It said that their skin color could not be used as a discriminator for them getting a job in the majors. Women, by and large, don't need to use their gender as a discriminator to be dismissed from most sports. Their difference in athleticism does so. So to ensure that girls are given the same chance to compete at a high level there is legislated discrimination to ensure that there are sports that only girls can play. Which is great, but it just underscores how men are not the same as women.
EQUAL opportunities. In some schools, I bet they do have that. Not sure what your point is. it's not like she was tricked into wrestling, under the guise that it was "cheerleading" or some other female dominant sport. I'm not sure if you're accurately stating with Title IX is about either. It sounds like you're saying that it's not equal funding and opportunity for women sports, but instead "women must play on male teams". Plus, Title IX does not prove that women are viewed as equals (by many).
I think we're talking across each other, Julius. They don't, b/c it's illegal. (Edit: more correctly, if the school has any "direct or indirect federal funding", it's illegal) The point is that women's differences in athleticism are noted and celebrated, and legislation enacted to ensure that just b/c they can't compete at a guy's level doesn't mean they shouldn't have opportunities to compete with other girls/women. And if there are differences, you can't be the same. I'm saying exactly the opposite. That there has to be a "woman's team" and a "men's team" (or women's sport and men's sport) b/c of Title IX protecting the differences b/w men and women. If we were all the same there would be one basketball team at the University of Washington and if the women didn't make the team, tough. (there are no restrictions or legislation protecting races, sexuality, disability, etc). There isn't a "men's" basketball team, a women's basketball team, a hispanic basketball team, a black basketball team, a homosexual basketball team, and an Alaskan/Pacific Islander basketball team. There are a men's team, and a women's team, b/c they're different. EDIT: and the have protection to keep it that way. It's not as if women are clamoring for equality in basketball, saying that the only reason men are getting their trophies are b/c women aren't playing. It's not a national cry to ensure women play with the men on one standard of play, and if they can't compete, too bad...some of the more vocal and public women of the feminist movement have pushed for, voted for, upheld judicially and maintain watch over the protections of Title IX. They celebrate that, while equally as valuable as men and equally worthy of athletic pursuits, they aren't the same as men. I just don't get why you guys are trying to state differently.
If your point is merely that women and men aren't identical, you don't need to prove it to me. Or, really, anyone, I'd think. Did someone claim that men and women are identical? barfo
When I stated that: you likened it to racial segregation so I've been attempting to point out that it's not close to a good analogy. That women are different and protected (and celebrated!) as such, which was not the case with the racial segregation laws. Julius responded to the same quote of my with a sarcastic , doubled for effect. If you're just playing a semantic game, fine. But women and men are different, and those differences (outside of the extreme contributors to this thread) are generally seen as a good thing and protected.
Well, your choice of illustrations (segregation, laws) was rather poor, since those things were also true of classes that we no longer discriminate against (as much as we did). And women aren't always "celebrated!", as there are plenty of forms of discrimination that are harmful rather than helpful. If you want to say women have vaginas and are on average physically smaller, then I think you have a case. But I don't quite see how any of this relates to a girl who chooses to wrestle boys. barfo
