Austin Improv

York99 wrote:

deroosisonfire wrote:

kaci_beeler wrote: But it's not really "truth", it's still just a widely-accepted theory.

have you been hanging out with ID supporters?

I have no idea what this means.

Intelligent Design.

York99 wrote:This is about accepting limitations. We all have limitations.

I will never win at pole vaulting. That shit looks scary.

I will never win at pole dancing.

Aw, come on now, Shando. There's hope. Don't give up.

Jastroch wrote:

shando wrote:I don't think anyone is denying that. Although that doesn't really tell you much about sports, as sports are socially constructed events that were created by people to play to certain of these traits. In some sports, size and strength aren't part of the equation, or aren't nearly so as in say the NFL. Badmitton, anyone? So in those areas, differences between the sexes don't count for nearly as much.

So, at least we can agree that there are some sports, i.e. football, where the seperation makes sense. What other sports does it make sense to seperate men and women.

I'll name basketball.

So far, Badmitton is a contender for a coed sport. Any others? I'll say Frizbee Golf.

You can find examples, of course. On the whole, however, sports that require athleticism are dominated by men. This is fact. If you say that it this cannot be contributed to physiology, then you are being sexist.

York99 wrote:

Jastroch wrote:

shando wrote:I don't think anyone is denying that. Although that doesn't really tell you much about sports, as sports are socially constructed events that were created by people to play to certain of these traits. In some sports, size and strength aren't part of the equation, or aren't nearly so as in say the NFL. Badmitton, anyone? So in those areas, differences between the sexes don't count for nearly as much.

So, at least we can agree that there are some sports, i.e. football, where the seperation makes sense. What other sports does it make sense to seperate men and women.

I'll name basketball.

So far, Badmitton is a contender for a coed sport. Any others? I'll say Frizbee Golf.

You can find examples, of course. On the whole, however, sports that require athleticism are dominated by men. This is fact. If you say that it this cannot be contributed to physiology, then you are being sexist.

All of this is predicated that we're talking about the extreme professional ends of a given sport. But you know what, it makes sense there to segregate out the non-professionals from the professionals as well, not just along gender lines. I'm not climbing into the ring with Tyson any time soon, nor am I suiting up for the Chiefs. I'd get killed just as surely as a woman would.

And lets pit the U.S. Women Soccer team against the all-male AIC All-stars in any sport you want and I'm going to take the women every time, even if we all might be taller and 'stronger.'

shando wrote:

York99 wrote:

Jastroch wrote: So, at least we can agree that there are some sports, i.e. football, where the seperation makes sense. What other sports does it make sense to seperate men and women.

I'll name basketball.

So far, Badmitton is a contender for a coed sport. Any others? I'll say Frizbee Golf.

You can find examples, of course. On the whole, however, sports that require athleticism are dominated by men. This is fact. If you say that it this cannot be contributed to physiology, then you are being sexist.

All of this is predicated that we're talking about the extreme professional ends of a given sport. But you know what, it makes sense there to segregate out the non-professionals from the professionals as well, not just along gender lines. I'm not climbing into the ring with Tyson any time soon, nor am I suiting up for the Chiefs. I'd get killed just as surely as a woman would.

And lets pit the U.S. Women Soccer team against the all-male AIC All-stars in any sport you want and I'm going to take the women every time, even if we all might be taller and 'stronger.'

The point is that each side has comparable access to training. Of course you must seperate by skill level. That's only fair. That same argument could put any capable woman in the world against ten toddlers and she can beat them in nearly any sport. But put the top female boxer against Tyson, and she will lose. Put the top female football players against the Chiefs, and the women will lose. Put them against the Raiders, and still the women will lose... though they will score on an end-around with a nice fake to Andrews in the slot.

shando wrote: Man, I'm having fun being an ass today!

Today?

Jastroch wrote: So, at least we can agree that there are some sports, i.e. football, where the seperation makes sense. What other sports does it make sense to seperate men and women.

I think the issue is that, since sports like football and basketball employ genetic freaks on the male end of the spectrum, it's highly unlikely that even female genetic freaks will ever be able to compete with, say, a Center that goes 7'2" and 310 lbs with a quick first step, an outside shot, and the ability to dunk violently at will.

Nor are we likely to ever see a woman who can play, say, defensive line in the NFL, because I don't know any women who are 6'3", 260 with giant hands and the ability to get upfield, who can run a 4.2 40. Now, certain positions, maybe.

Perhaps a woman plays point guard at some point on an NBA team, quick and small with a good outside shot and excellent decision-making skillz. Or a kicker in the NFL, where her strong leg and accuracy will help her acclaimate.

It'll happen, but I think it's going to be a while.

Man, this thread has crazy eyes. Why would any woman want to be a lineman and end up braindamaged with small testicles? Athletic freaks are the shit, but all I care about is whether people can do stuff that really matters, like running the country, making tofu dogs, pole dancing, shooting an M16, and kicking it onstage. I think the men will keep up with the women on those things for a while longer.

Christoph wrote:Man, this thread has crazy eyes. Why would any woman want to be a lineman and end up braindamaged with small testicles? Athletic freaks are the shit, but all I care about is whether people can do stuff that really matters, like running the country, making tofu dogs, pole dancing, shooting an M16, and kicking it onstage. I think the men will keep up with the women on those things for a while longer.

Well said, my love, well said.

interesting article in the ny times

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/02/17/nyreg ... ted=1&_r=1

“A boy who goes out on the mat against a girl doesn’t win,â€

Justin York obviously has issues.

The best time I've ever had playing an extreme contact sport against boys of greater physical strength than me and still kicking their asses was Jugging. I used to jug when I was in high school. We played a very loose version where everything was fair game - heads, chests, even groins to some extent (though people didn't usually go for that unless they were desperate).
It's similar to some other contact sports but the rules are less confining, so there's more room for creative problem solving. People would leave the field gushing blood and smiling. It was the best outdoor game I have ever played and I got so much aggression out. Even though people could pick me up and throw me, I was usually very agile in slipping out of grips and so I usually won. I'm a very weak asthmatic but I could outsmart and beat football-playing 200+ pound guys.

Take that Justin! I'll kick your ass in jugging any day (except for today because I'm at home dying from lung complications from my cold).

I have issues you couldn't even imagine. One is that I'm attracted to amazon chicks.

Tall archers with one breast?