USWNT in the past frequently lost to U-15 boy club teams.
I barely pay attention to soccer in general, let alone women's soccer, but I know the men flop like bitches. I've got no idea if that carries over, but something tells me the answer is "probably."
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
There was an article in US Today last week (or WSJ?) basically saying that the women had a culture of preventing flops, and that being aggressive and not flailing around like a little bitch was the norm.
I was reading The Sports Gene a couple of weeks ago.
Basically, along strict gender/sex identity, TPR's dream of a professional female athlete competing with men is never going to happen.
But sex isn't binary. There are lots of women who have greatly elevated testosterone, small testes, etc. So it's possible one of those "women" could possibly compete. But they're not typical women (generally cannot procreate, etc)
TPR's dream of a professional female athlete competing with men is never going to happen.
What now? I don't give a crap about sports, you know that.
Besides I've never tried to argue otherwise. I've said that there are many women that could outperform the average male, but professional athletes aren't average. On the extremes of performance men will always have better strength, power, and agility while women will always have better balance, flexibility, and control.
The end of your post got weird, though. Are they giving birth on the field during the game? Because otherwise I can't see how that would be relevant.
Edited By TPRJones on 1435621381
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
On the extremes of performance men will always have better strength, power, and agility while women will always have better balance, flexibility, and control.
If that were true, I'd see the female ballet dancers, figure skaters, divers, and gymnasts outdoing the men at the Olympics. Once you take away brute strength from a physical contest, the playing field gets a lot more even. I still don't know if it's equal, because bigger muscles provide a better foundation for better balance. Bigger muscles provide more strength to control the rest of your body. I'm not sure about how the center of gravity would figure in, because I seem to remember a physics class in high school making a point how women had a different one than men.
Edited By Malcolm on 1435628779
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
Agility matters a lot for most of what you listed, and there the top men can outdo the top women. I'd say the only olympic sports that should see women at the top would be certain gymnastics events that focus almost entirely on flexibility and balance: the floor show, the balance beam, that sort of thing. And I'd argue they do surpass there, although they never go head-to-head across genders so it's hard to be sure.
I'd say the one area where there may be some parity between the sexes is endurance. It's hard to see because most endurance competitions also include other aspects like strength or agility. The only competitions I can think of that are basically pure endurance with cross-gender competition are some of the competitions on Big Brother, and the split in male and female victories there is pretty well balanced overall.
Edited By TPRJones on 1435630363
"ATTENTION: Customers browsing porn must hold magazines with both hands at all times!"
I'd say the only olympic sports that should see women at the top would be certain gymnastics events that focus almost entirely on flexibility and balance: the floor show, the balance beam, that sort of thing.
For certain? Floor routine is still about strength. How high can you jump determines how many twists/whatever you can get in and other things.
Is there even a men's balance beam thing?
No, they have the rings, which women don't because they don't have the upper body strength. If men had the beam, I'd say that might be close to even, but you still run into the strength problem from above, and that matters on the landing.
balance, flexibility, and control
Aside from the middle one, that's all governed by muscles. Flexibility is partially determined by muscles, but limited by how far your ligaments can go before they tear. I'd think evolution would give stronger ones to men, though I'm not sure.
If women could go head-to-head with men in any professional/Olympic sport, there wouldn't be a "women's" category for all of them. Tennis has had a few intersex matches. I can think of one glaring exception in all of history. She would get killed in track and basketball today. She might do ok in golf. In fact, the only sports where they can hang are ones where the physical requirements are capped in their neighbourhood. Golf, bowling, darts, billiards, curling, etc.
Edited By Malcolm on 1435631686
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
GORDON wrote:Is there even a men's balance beam thing?
I think the horse is supposed to be the men's balance beam. But it's all upper body strength. Well, I shouldn't say all. It's a lot of upper body strength.
"... and then I was forced to walk the Trail of Tears." - Elizabeth Warren
I was talking to an English friend of mine (an Xbox friend) about soccer today and we discussed professional soccer players, and specifically how tough the woman with the broken nose was.
She told me that it was unfair that players for the women's league made as much money in a season as the players in the men's league made in a single game.
I told her, "There is no men's league. If a woman played average in the top league with the men she would be incredible famous and would be one of the highest paid players." It's not about winning, it's about attracting an audience, and a decent female player would sell out stadiums and open up a huge market for merchandise.
She didn't have a rebuttal.
TPRJones wrote:Balance is only partly muscular, it's mostly about .... well, a sense of balance.
I will have to look for some studies to support these positions.
Unless you have some medical malady preventing you from keeping your ear fluid level, a normal "sense" of balance will do just fine. Learning to stand upright in odd, contorted postures can be taught. The issue is whether or not you've got the muscle to maintain verticality for the duration and how well you stay put when someone tries to push you. If you want to talk about balance as in "3 point dismount," then it helps to have more muscle, especially in the legs and core, if you come down a little off center. Using your arms to stick it is a natural instinct, and there's also technique.
Edited By Malcolm on 1435637877
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."
GORDON wrote:Is there even a men's balance beam thing?
I think the horse is supposed to be the men's balance beam. But it's all upper body strength. Well, I shouldn't say all. It's a lot of upper body strength.
Women have that, too. Difference is rings and balance beam. They both have uneven bars, also, as well as parallel bars.
Edited By Malcolm on 1435637951
Diogenes of Sinope: "It is not that I am mad, it is only that my head is different from yours."
Arnold Judas Rimmer, BSC, SSC: "Better dead than smeg."