Many sports have two divisions: Open and Womens. This even includes ones like Chess and various e-sports. The NFL, NBA, and MLB all allow women, or at least have no rule banning them (In the former two cases, ever, in the latter, any more, the 1952 ban was rescinded in the 90’s.)
So to answer your question: Everyone can already compete in one division.
They may technically allow them, but do you think most women, even very skilled ones, would want to face the abuse they would get from players, coaches and fans if they decided to do it?
Just because it is allowed doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be a major hardship. And I think the vast majority of women in sports are smart enough to understand that is what they would face.
Replace women with black people and your argument sounds exactly like the enlightened individuals arguing that baseball shouldn’t be integrated even if there were black men out there good enough to play ball with white men.
Jackie Robinson absolutely understood that he would face unyielding discrimination. So did the flood of black ballplayers that followed him in the years to come. Hardship didn’t deter any of them.
I didn’t say anything about ‘shouldn’t.’ I’m explaining why it generally doesn’t happen. If a woman things she can handle all of that discrimination and feels she’s athletically capable, I’m not going to be the one to tell her not to.
Plenty of women in shooting sports. Turns out shooting is one of those sports where men don’t seem to have a significant biological advantage. None of them complain about abuse.
So you’re saying all male athletes except in shooting sports have a biological advantage over all female athletes? The worst NBA player is still better than the best WNBA player?
I don’t follow NBA but I do casually watch some hockey (including women’s hockey) and I’d be surprised if even the very best women’s hockey players could beat a team made up of lower ranked NHL players. The men will have better puck handling, higher speed, more weight, and they shoot more often opening up more plays.
My anecdotal sports experience, for what that’s worth: when I was 14-15 playing soccer, women’s university teams would play against us for training. The women were taller than us on average, ran a bit faster, used more vocal communication, and were much more physically aggressive. The men had better endurance, ball-handling, and positioning. We never lost, and no one seemed surprised by this.
It’s not just the obvious height and weight advantages at play, and I’m not sure how much socialization matters but I’d wager less than our biology in sports and other extreme athletic endeavours.
So basically you have no idea. And I really don’t think it makes sense that every single women’s college soccer player in the country would not be able to beat your team. That’s not how athletics works. Just because women are on average less strong than men doesn’t make it a universal truth. It’s an average.
Britney Griner is probably on par with a second-stringer in the NBA. She’s one of the few that there were mutterings she might be the first woman in the NBA, but instead she set a single game record and tied a career record in her first game in the WNBA.
The Williams sisters in tennis used to claim they could beat any man outside the top 200 when they were near the top of women’s tennis, so they were challenged by the 203rd ranked male player and just destroyed. He claimed at one point that he was playing closer to someone ranked 500th to keep the game fun. They later amended their claim to being able to beat any man outside the top 350.
I never said those were your words. I’m telling you how it comes across, and I’m letting you you’re wrong about the reason “why it generally doesn’t happen”.
At least in baseball, a sport where intelligence, reaction time, skill, and experience matter a lot more than raw strength, the barriers for little girls who dream of playing in the Majors are a lot more than just the discrimination they might face if they make it that far. It’s the deeply rooted cultural barriers that prevent women from even getting a shot, and in a sport where even 1st round draft picks spend years in the minors getting their reps in, lack of experience is a death sentence no matter how much raw talent you have.
At every level of play, girls are heavily encouraged to switch to softball or outright denied the opportunity to play. They’re excluded from youth travel ball teams because “the boys will be bigger in a few years and need the reps”. A lot of high school teams won’t let them try out because Title IX considers a softball team equivalent. It took a lawsuit for Litttle League to allow girls to play baseball. Young women playing baseball at smaller colleges are often lured away with softball scholarships at big universities (not that there’s anything wrong with pursuing better educational opportunities).
Every woman playing college or minor league baseball says the same thing; they faced far more discrimination as kids just trying to play than they ever have in the locker room once they got the chance.
I think I’ve already pretty thoroughly answered the question of why women haven’t played baseball at the major league level since Toni Stone, Mamie Johnson, and Connie Morgan played in the Negro Leagues in the early 50s; women have been systematically shut out of baseball for decades, and while those barriers are slowly being torn down, their effects will continue to be felt for a long time. We’re only just now beginning to see women play at the collegiate and minor league level, so I would imagine we’re still a few decades away from women playing at the Major League level.
The NBA and NFL are entirely different stories. Those are sports where brute strength is absolutely required and being huge helps a lot. It’s definitely not some fear of discrimination that’s keeping women out of those sports though.
Edit: Because I’ve seen your other responses, and I can tell you’ve been waiting for me to say something about how men are stronger than women so you can have your gotcha moment, I’ll also say that trans women are women, not men. That male testosterone advantage doesn’t exist for someone who has to suppress theirs for at least a year before competing to a level below what many cis women naturally have. Trans women have competed alongside cis women for decades and it’s never been a problem. Republicans just needed a new boogie man.
women have been systematically shut out of baseball for decades,
That’s what I said.
The NBA and NFL are entirely different stories. Those are sports where brute strength is absolutely required and being huge helps a lot.
So, again, there is not a single woman who is more skilled than the least skilled player in either the NFL or the NBA? Not a single WNBA player better than the worst NBA player?
I can tell you’ve been waiting for me to say something about how men are stronger than women so you can have your gotcha moment,
Isn’t that literally what you said about the NBA and the NFL?
Right, but no women? Not one since the introduction of the rule? I’ve know many female athletes and all of them would and could handle the abuse if they wanted to compete with male athletes.
You say that as if it’s true for all trans women. It isn’t. I agree with you however that the IOC’s solution introduced in 2003 works fine. The only reason it’s coming up now is because of politics.
Ok so we limmit the testosterone do we limmit the muscle growth from when the testosterone wasnt limmitted? Do we limmit the bone structure? Do we limmit the brain chemistry? How far do we go trying to define what is a woman and by doing that are we not excluding people?
We if we have people who are men in all but name competing in womens sports that wont kill female athletes? There are undenyable differences when it comes to sport and i doubt trans athletes are getting surgery to change their bone structure are they? Either eliminate all female athletes and let trans athletes compete as women or dont u cant have both its called doublethink.
Agreed honestly, the division of any thing by gender seems out of date these days. Go based on skill, age, or weight/height, something… just leave gender out of it.
Oh thank you. I needed a laugh, there is always someone that has to go full triggered keyboard warrior in these threads. Bunch of comments, all of them intentionally ignorant, purposefully bad faith and I suspect you just LOVE feeling like the only smart person in the world.
Well, you are being a downvoted for a reason. And that is most people are bored of these little edgelord takes. But good on you for keeping sticking to your guns in the face of context, reason and public mockery, you sure are “brave” for being the only person with “the truth”, pity not everything brave is also smart.
Removed by mod
Many sports have two divisions: Open and Womens. This even includes ones like Chess and various e-sports. The NFL, NBA, and MLB all allow women, or at least have no rule banning them (In the former two cases, ever, in the latter, any more, the 1952 ban was rescinded in the 90’s.)
So to answer your question: Everyone can already compete in one division.
They may technically allow them, but do you think most women, even very skilled ones, would want to face the abuse they would get from players, coaches and fans if they decided to do it?
Just because it is allowed doesn’t mean it wouldn’t be a major hardship. And I think the vast majority of women in sports are smart enough to understand that is what they would face.
Replace women with black people and your argument sounds exactly like the enlightened individuals arguing that baseball shouldn’t be integrated even if there were black men out there good enough to play ball with white men.
Jackie Robinson absolutely understood that he would face unyielding discrimination. So did the flood of black ballplayers that followed him in the years to come. Hardship didn’t deter any of them.
I didn’t say anything about ‘shouldn’t.’ I’m explaining why it generally doesn’t happen. If a woman things she can handle all of that discrimination and feels she’s athletically capable, I’m not going to be the one to tell her not to.
Plenty of women in shooting sports. Turns out shooting is one of those sports where men don’t seem to have a significant biological advantage. None of them complain about abuse.
So you’re saying all male athletes except in shooting sports have a biological advantage over all female athletes? The worst NBA player is still better than the best WNBA player?
I don’t follow NBA but I do casually watch some hockey (including women’s hockey) and I’d be surprised if even the very best women’s hockey players could beat a team made up of lower ranked NHL players. The men will have better puck handling, higher speed, more weight, and they shoot more often opening up more plays.
My anecdotal sports experience, for what that’s worth: when I was 14-15 playing soccer, women’s university teams would play against us for training. The women were taller than us on average, ran a bit faster, used more vocal communication, and were much more physically aggressive. The men had better endurance, ball-handling, and positioning. We never lost, and no one seemed surprised by this.
It’s not just the obvious height and weight advantages at play, and I’m not sure how much socialization matters but I’d wager less than our biology in sports and other extreme athletic endeavours.
So basically you have no idea. And I really don’t think it makes sense that every single women’s college soccer player in the country would not be able to beat your team. That’s not how athletics works. Just because women are on average less strong than men doesn’t make it a universal truth. It’s an average.
Britney Griner is probably on par with a second-stringer in the NBA. She’s one of the few that there were mutterings she might be the first woman in the NBA, but instead she set a single game record and tied a career record in her first game in the WNBA.
The Williams sisters in tennis used to claim they could beat any man outside the top 200 when they were near the top of women’s tennis, so they were challenged by the 203rd ranked male player and just destroyed. He claimed at one point that he was playing closer to someone ranked 500th to keep the game fun. They later amended their claim to being able to beat any man outside the top 350.
I never said those were your words. I’m telling you how it comes across, and I’m letting you you’re wrong about the reason “why it generally doesn’t happen”.
At least in baseball, a sport where intelligence, reaction time, skill, and experience matter a lot more than raw strength, the barriers for little girls who dream of playing in the Majors are a lot more than just the discrimination they might face if they make it that far. It’s the deeply rooted cultural barriers that prevent women from even getting a shot, and in a sport where even 1st round draft picks spend years in the minors getting their reps in, lack of experience is a death sentence no matter how much raw talent you have.
At every level of play, girls are heavily encouraged to switch to softball or outright denied the opportunity to play. They’re excluded from youth travel ball teams because “the boys will be bigger in a few years and need the reps”. A lot of high school teams won’t let them try out because Title IX considers a softball team equivalent. It took a lawsuit for Litttle League to allow girls to play baseball. Young women playing baseball at smaller colleges are often lured away with softball scholarships at big universities (not that there’s anything wrong with pursuing better educational opportunities).
Every woman playing college or minor league baseball says the same thing; they faced far more discrimination as kids just trying to play than they ever have in the locker room once they got the chance.
Okay, so what is your explanation for why there aren’t women playing major league baseball or in the NBA or the NFL?
I think I’ve already pretty thoroughly answered the question of why women haven’t played baseball at the major league level since Toni Stone, Mamie Johnson, and Connie Morgan played in the Negro Leagues in the early 50s; women have been systematically shut out of baseball for decades, and while those barriers are slowly being torn down, their effects will continue to be felt for a long time. We’re only just now beginning to see women play at the collegiate and minor league level, so I would imagine we’re still a few decades away from women playing at the Major League level.
The NBA and NFL are entirely different stories. Those are sports where brute strength is absolutely required and being huge helps a lot. It’s definitely not some fear of discrimination that’s keeping women out of those sports though.
Edit: Because I’ve seen your other responses, and I can tell you’ve been waiting for me to say something about how men are stronger than women so you can have your gotcha moment, I’ll also say that trans women are women, not men. That male testosterone advantage doesn’t exist for someone who has to suppress theirs for at least a year before competing to a level below what many cis women naturally have. Trans women have competed alongside cis women for decades and it’s never been a problem. Republicans just needed a new boogie man.
That’s what I said.
So, again, there is not a single woman who is more skilled than the least skilled player in either the NFL or the NBA? Not a single WNBA player better than the worst NBA player?
Isn’t that literally what you said about the NBA and the NFL?
Right, but no women? Not one since the introduction of the rule? I’ve know many female athletes and all of them would and could handle the abuse if they wanted to compete with male athletes.
At the same time, can you make an evidentiary argument that there is not one WNBA player that is more skilled than the worst NBA player?
deleted by creator
And having competitors with insane testosterone counts won’t end “female” sports?
deleted by creator
Who has insane testosterone counts? Most trans women have <1nmol/L. The boundary at the olympic level is 10nmol/L
You say that as if it’s true for all trans women. It isn’t. I agree with you however that the IOC’s solution introduced in 2003 works fine. The only reason it’s coming up now is because of politics.
I explicitly said “most” and I stand by that. It is absolutely true for most trans women that their T levels are far below average cis women.
Ok so we limmit the testosterone do we limmit the muscle growth from when the testosterone wasnt limmitted? Do we limmit the bone structure? Do we limmit the brain chemistry? How far do we go trying to define what is a woman and by doing that are we not excluding people?
We if we have people who are men in all but name competing in womens sports that wont kill female athletes? There are undenyable differences when it comes to sport and i doubt trans athletes are getting surgery to change their bone structure are they? Either eliminate all female athletes and let trans athletes compete as women or dont u cant have both its called doublethink.
Removed by mod
Ding ding ding
Really wow i never though of this is suprising nobody has complained about this in womens leagues yet?
Agreed honestly, the division of any thing by gender seems out of date these days. Go based on skill, age, or weight/height, something… just leave gender out of it.
Removed by mod
Oh thank you. I needed a laugh, there is always someone that has to go full triggered keyboard warrior in these threads. Bunch of comments, all of them intentionally ignorant, purposefully bad faith and I suspect you just LOVE feeling like the only smart person in the world.
Well, you are being a downvoted for a reason. And that is most people are bored of these little edgelord takes. But good on you for keeping sticking to your guns in the face of context, reason and public mockery, you sure are “brave” for being the only person with “the truth”, pity not everything brave is also smart.
😂
Wow u got downvotes as well so i guess we are both brave. How about u address any of my points instead of just being distrespectfull.