South Dakota Transgender Bill...

[carpedm9587]

There are enough kickers in the college ranks who have both accuracy and length beyond 60 yards that her skillset just isn't good enough. having said that her story is still an amazing one and she has come a long way.

Good points...

[lilpixieofterror]

Or the same could be achieved by basing the class on strength rather than sex. There are many ways to measure strength - which is the actual issue. That would also sort men into such classes, evening the playing field in much the same way it is done for boxing.

Which will likely give you men in one corner and women in another. Even at that, people were already sorted going professional. Professional players are professionals for a reason.

No - I didn't suggest anything of the kind. You are misreading my posts.

So what are you suggesting?

[carpedm9587]

Which will likely give you men in one corner and women in another. Even at that, people were already sorted going professional. Professional players are professionals for a reason.

I suspect it will give us several "levels" of golfing (as it does boxing) with men only occupying the top tiers and a combination of men and women occupying lower tiers. But we won't know, of course, until we try it.

So what are you suggesting?

I'm suggesting exactly what I said: a continual barrage of "you aren't as strong/fast as men" has at least the potential to create what it predicts. We have no way of knowing, at this point, just how much the gap between men and women could be narrowed if that messaging changed and there were more opportunities for women and men to compete on an equal footing - with no fixed boundaries based on sex. Intuitively, it seems reasonable to believe at least some degree of narrowing would occur, based on our experience with "negative messaging" in other venues.

[lilpixieofterror]

I suspect it will give us several "levels" of golfing (as it does boxing) with men only occupying the top tiers and a combination of men and women occupying lower tiers. But we won't know, of course, until we try it.

I'm suggesting exactly what I said: a continual barrage of "you aren't as strong/fast as men" has at least the potential to create what it predicts. We have no way of knowing, at this point, just how much the gap between men and women could be narrowed if that messaging changed and there were more opportunities for women and men to compete on an equal footing - with no fixed boundaries based on sex. Intuitively, it seems reasonable to believe at least some degree of narrowing would occur, based on our experience with "negative messaging" in other venues.

[carpedm9587]

Treating different sports as though they are all the same is silliness to the nth degree.

Again with a superlative. I didn't say sports were all the same. I provided one possibility with golf and used boxing as an analogy. Since the issue is distance - which is related to strength, I find the approach to have some potential.

Which is why I recommended a strength-based distinction rather than a weight-based one.

Show me 10 women athletes that have equal records to the men.

Why do I need to do that?

Since I have not made this claim, I see no reason to defend it.

[lilpixieofterror]

Again with a superlative. I didn't say sports were all the same. I provided one possibility with golf and used boxing as an analogy. Since the issue is distance - which is related to strength, I find the approach to have some potential.

Which is why I recommended a strength-based distinction rather than a weight-based one.

And how do you measure it? Leg? Lifting? Pulling? Running? Good luck with your set up since almost everyone is going to differ on these measurements.

Why do I need to do that?

For your hypothesis to have some merit, you should have some evidence. Do you?

Since I have not made this claim, I see no reason to defend it.

[carpedm9587]

Based on the rather obvious reality that how far someone can hit a ball is going to be related to their strength. Do you think it is otherwise? If so - what do you think it is related to?

Sports developed the way they are today for a reason.

"It's always been that way" is seldom a useful rationalization. It usually causes us to stop questioning.

Even at that, men still enjoy strength advantages, even at the around the same weight because males have more muscle mass. This is again, a biological fact.

Which is why I recommended a strength-based classification, not a weight-based classification (specifically for golfing).

And how do you measure it? Leg? Lifting? Pulling? Running? Good luck with your set up since almost everyone is going to differ on these measurements.

Since the issue at hand is "how far can they hit a ball," I would think the classification would be related to that - unless someone has a better idea.

For your hypothesis to have some merit, you should have some evidence. Do you?

Since this has nothing to do with my hypothesis, the evidence you are asking for is inapplicable. The hypothesis is: "if we eliminate the negative messaging, we will likely see a narrowing between the abilities of men and women." To test the hypothesis, we would need a means of having a group that is not subject to this messaging, and we would need to measure their performance against a control group that does receive that messaging. The latter group is all around us. The former group is more difficult to create - which is probably why I know of no studies that have attempted to quantify this. So I cannot definitively say "it would happen," and you cannot definitively say, "it would not happen." The best we can say is, "I think it sounds reasonable - but we have no hard evidence for or against the proposition."

We do have some soft evidence. In general, we know that negative messaging negatively impacts outcomes in many areas. Not always mind you. Sometimes, and for some people, it can be a challenge to excel (e.g., boot camp). But if you take a child and expose them to primarily negative messaging, you generally get negative outcomes. I suspect that is the issue here.

[seer]

Where they set the standards is irrelevant to me, as long as the standards are the same for everyone. In many instances, the standards more or less set themselves. If I am looking for the best available, and I have 20 openings - then my "standard" will be the capability of the 20th-best person I interview/test.

No, like in the military, we have specific physical requirements for reasons. So these are not irrelevant questions.

We seem to agree. I suspect that many sports could be arranged in weight classes: boxing, weight lifting, football, etc. Essentially any sport that is based on strength. More skill-based sports would seem to me to require no sorting. I have never understood why we have to have a woman's golf circuit and a men's golf circuit. I have to wonder if tennis needs to be organized by sex. Many things are the way they are for no other reason than they've always been that way.

Women generally can not compete with men. What, are you going to give the lady tennis player 10 points over the man to start? Make a 125lb male boxer fight a 200lb female boxer? That would be a logistical mess, and unnecessary.

And I would dearly love to have someone study the degree to which our culture and norms contribute to this "women cannot be as strong or fast as men." I'm not sure how that would be done - but I cannot imagine that the impact is zero. I'm sure biology would lead to some degree of difference - but I wonder how much that gap would narrow if we didn't continually pound home the "women are weaker and slower than men" theme.

No Carp, if you look at the weight and strength and size and aggression of our closest primates you see the same differences. It is biology that is generally defining culture not the other way around.

[carpedm9587]

No, like in the military, we have specific physical requirements for reasons. So these are not irrelevant questions.

The military is a different animal. I was referring to standards for sport teams. I agree that the military has to have a minimum bar - as they do now - and that it should not be adjusted. The same is true for any profession where success in that profession mandates a certain skill set.

Women generally can not compete with men.

Horse hockey - even "generally." Your statement is FAR too broad. There are many venues in which women can compete with men.

What, are you going to give the lady tennis player 10 points over the man to start?

No - I would try to find ways to segment competing populations by something other than sexual apparatus. We have a model for this in the boxing world (although that world still segments by sex as well).

Make a 125lb male boxer fight a 200lb female boxer?

I doubt that would be necessary.

That would be a logistical mess, and unnecessary.

Agreed.

No Carp, if you look at the weight and strength and size and aggression of our closest primates you see the same differences. It is biology that is generally defining culture not the other way around.

I did not suggest that culture was "defining" biology I was suggesting that culture is "affecting" biology. I think it would be worthwhile to seek to minimize that effect and treat all people based on their potential rather than their sex.

[seer]

Horse hockey - even "generally." Your statement is FAR too broad. There are many venues in which women can compete with men.

OK, we were speaking of sports, which sports can women generally or often beat men?

No - I would try to find ways to segment competing populations by something other than sexual apparatus. We have a model for this in the boxing world (although that world still segments by sex as well).

What actually would that look like? How would you line up, for instance, a professional female weightlifter with a male. What would that look like?

I doubt that would be necessary.

Then what are you taking about?

I did not suggest that culture was "defining" biology I was suggesting that culture is "affecting" biology. I think it would be worthwhile to seek to minimize that effect and treat all people based on their potential rather than their sex.

I mean you do know that men and women are different - right? I simply don't see a problem - no minimization is necessary.

[carpedm9587]

OK, we were speaking of sports, which sports can women generally or often beat men?

Why on earth is that an issue?

What actually would that look like? How would you line up, for instance, a professional female weightlifter with a male. What would that look like?

It would look like a woman competing with a man.

Then what are you taking about?

I mean you do know that men and women are different - right? I simply don't see a problem - no minimization is necessary.

OK - I'm going to disconnect from this discussion. It's bordering on the ridiculous. What I have gleaned is that Seer and Pix would like to see competition continue to be based on the genitalia the people happen to possess - and I would like to see competition based on the capabilities of the individual, as far as that is possible to do. I'm not a big believer in locking people into boxes when it is on the basis of a meaningless distinction.

Last word to the two of you.

[seer]

It would look like a woman competing with a man.

I don't know what that means, women don't go into the NBA or NFL because they are not good enough. There is no rule I know of that prevents them from trying out.

OK - I'm going to disconnect from this discussion. It's bordering on the ridiculous. What I have gleaned is that Seer and Pix would like to see competition continue to be based on the genitalia the people happen to possess - and I would like to see competition based on the capabilities of the individual, as far as that is possible to do. I'm not a big believer in locking people into boxes when it is on the basis of a meaningless distinction.

Here is an example. Both women and men can run in the Boston Marathon. And yes some women can beat some men - but a woman will never win it, the top female runners are not even close to the top males. And never will be - it is genetics. I just don't get this whole egalitarian line of reasoning, or why it is needed.

[lilpixieofterror]

Based on the rather obvious reality that how far someone can hit a ball is going to be related to their strength. Do you think it is otherwise? If so - what do you think it is related to?

"It's always been that way" is seldom a useful rationalization. It usually causes us to stop questioning.

Which is why I recommended a strength-based classification, not a weight-based classification (specifically for golfing).

Since the issue at hand is "how far can they hit a ball," I would think the classification would be related to that - unless someone has a better idea.

How much do you know about golf? Anything at all?

Since this has nothing to do with my hypothesis, the evidence you are asking for is inapplicable. The hypothesis is: "if we eliminate the negative messaging, we will likely see a narrowing between the abilities of men and women." To test the hypothesis, we would need a means of having a group that is not subject to this messaging, and we would need to measure their performance against a control group that does receive that messaging. The latter group is all around us. The former group is more difficult to create - which is probably why I know of no studies that have attempted to quantify this. So I cannot definitively say "it would happen," and you cannot definitively say, "it would not happen." The best we can say is, "I think it sounds reasonable - but we have no hard evidence for or against the proposition."

We do have some soft evidence. In general, we know that negative messaging negatively impacts outcomes in many areas. Not always mind you. Sometimes, and for some people, it can be a challenge to excel (e.g., boot camp). But if you take a child and expose them to primarily negative messaging, you generally get negative outcomes. I suspect that is the issue here.

[rogue06]

Anyone who has ever played golf cannot help but notice the often huge difference between where the men's tees are placed and where the women's tees are placed. If I could play from the women's tees I think it would be highly likely I could finally break 90.

[lilpixieofterror]

Why on earth is that an issue?



It would look like a woman competing with a man.



OK - I'm going to disconnect from this discussion. It's bordering on the ridiculous. What I have gleaned is that Seer and Pix would like to see competition continue to be based on the genitalia the people happen to possess - and I would like to see competition based on the capabilities of the individual, as far as that is possible to do. I'm not a big believer in locking people into boxes when it is on the basis of a meaningless distinction.

Last word to the two of you.