this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
62 points (68.0% liked)

Ask Lemmy

26968 readers
765 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Please don't post about US Politics. If you need to do this, try !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world


Rules: (interactive)


1) Be nice and; have funDoxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them


2) All posts must end with a '?'This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?


3) No spamPlease do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.


4) NSFW is okay, within reasonJust remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either !asklemmyafterdark@lemmy.world or !asklemmynsfw@lemmynsfw.com. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].


5) This is not a support community.
It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email info@lemmy.world. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.


Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Tech Support

No Stupid Questions

You Should Know

Reddit

Jokes

Ask Ouija


Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

No more men's and women's league, no more "gender eligibility" requirements, a common dresscode, same standards and rules for all.

Edit: since it looks like people missing the word let: the suggestion isn't to force desegregation. It's to allow it or even make it the default. Someone else made a good suggestion: segregate by attributes specific to the sport. In boxing it's weight class, in basketball it could be height, in biking it could even be doped and non doped. Sex and gender need not be the very first thing to segregate by.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] dariusj18@lemmy.world 5 points 2 months ago (3 children)

Firstly, most sports have an open league and a women's league. Women can play in the "men's" leagues if they are able. Secondly there is an olympic.sport where men and women compete against each other, dressage.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] lvxferre@mander.xyz 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (2 children)

I think that by default sports should have a single league for everyone, unless data shows that some physical attribute has an undue impact on performance. Then leagues should be split by that attribute.

That attribute should not be immediately assumed to be sex. Often I feel like sex is being used as a proxy for something else, partially correlated; such as weight or height.

a common dresscode, same standards and rules for all

Yes.

[–] flamingo_pinyata@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 months ago

Well said. I often think that discrimination in general is actually based on errors in what's known as feature selection in ML.
Humans observe the world, notice certain patterns (such as between weight and sex), but then unconsciously perform dimensionality reduction to simplify their mental model of the world. Our software is unfortunately buggy.

There's also the question of training dataset. If you always see people of certain sex in specific roles, you might conclude that's the way it's supposed to be.
There's a commonly shared but apocryphal story about models recognizing cloudy skies instead of tanks because of the data they were trained on. https://gwern.net/tank

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] reddig33@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago

I would love to see more co-ed team sports at the jr high and high school level. Could be interesting if the teams were required to have a certain percentage of male and female on the court/field, with transgender counting as either. People take school sports way too seriously.

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

"Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face"

--Mike Tyson

Can you imagine Mike Tyson fighting Ronda Rousey? No, I think it's a pretty solid idea to keep most sports segregated.

[–] atro_city@fedia.io 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

They wouldn't be in the same weight class -_-

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.world 1 points 2 months ago

It doesn't matter. A man in her weight class would be considerably stronger and faster. That's just the reality of biology.

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 4 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think you are asking what women's sports are for? It's a reasonable question. I think of it like age grouping, it puts competitors together into groups where they are competitive.

For school sports, sure. Mixed teams and less focus on winning, more on playing.

But if you are trying to determine who is best in a particular category? So like Ironman triathlon, everyone runs together, they start pro men then pro women then age groups, technically if my time was fastest I win, but if my time is fastest among women my age, that is also a win. A pro woman would win if she beat all the female participants, and in the off chance all the top men ran off a cliff or got sick halfway through, the top man would also win in his class even if he didn't beat top woman.

Personally I love the way gymnastics handles it. Men compete in events no woman could beat them in (rings! Oh my God!) and women compete different feats of athleticism and precision geared to their bodies, the strength to weight ratio not pure power.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

Could you explain more about the gymnastics thing? Because I've often wondered why women can't compete in things like the parallel bars or the rings.

Like isn't there anyone who wants to do it even if they wouldn't be competitive with a man?

[–] RBWells@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Women do sometimes train rings just for strength, and the single bar for fun, but no, this really is one of those events where simply having a male body gives a ridiculous advantage, it's designed to show off what a top level male-bodied body can do with training.

Floor exercise, and vault, are the overlap events and the competitors do a lot of the same skills, but the men do lead the way here on tricks - it's funny though. The first double backflip, in my lifetime it went from being considered impossible to being something coaches train 8-9 year old girls to do! So I don't know how much of the limitation is physical but I do know that the center of balance in a super fit woman is different from the center of balance in a super fit man, and that rings and Pommel horse are designed to exploit this difference.

[–] sem@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

I know that women can stand up from a wall squat without pushing off the wall first, are there other athletic pursuits that are more geared towards women's abilities?

Also thanks for your in depth explanation, that makes a lot of sense why mostly men would practice for those disciplines.

[–] Grimy@lemmy.world 3 points 2 months ago (2 children)

A heavyweight boxer isn't the same for both sexes. If you mean coupling heavyweight against featherweight of the other gender or something similar to compensate, it could work but would probably be seen as unfair, it would be hard to draw the line on where it's equivalent.

I do think it would be interesting to have mixed team sports where a certain number of each gender needs to be on each side, but it would probably end up with positions always being relegated to the same sex.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] circledsquare@fedia.io 3 points 2 months ago

I think all the money should be taken out of all sport and spent on things that benefit everybody, not just athletes and sports fans. People can play sport as a hobby, like children do. That would remove the gender conundrum.

[–] lemmyknow@lemmy.today 2 points 2 months ago

Shouldn't sports have categories based on abilities? I see people be like "trans women are stronger than cis women cause, idk, testosterone or something" and I just think, y'know, if that's a problem, why aren't categories based on strength or abilities or whatever?

[–] shinigamiookamiryuu@lemm.ee 2 points 2 months ago

It's their choice, but I'm just saying now, for most sports it would hurt.

Would make more sense with, say, ping pong, extreme ironing, or nascar than something like football, wrestling, or hockey.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

I feel like some function of actual measurements of say hormone levels over a given training period and lifetime would be a better classification systen over pure sex class system.

Most of the time it would result in the same divisions tbh, but outliers would be better accommodated and we get the added bonus of further breaking down gender roles.

[–] ComradeR@lemmy.ml 0 points 2 months ago

Paralympic rugby has mixed teams with men and women.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›