Here's an irritating story making the rounds in the sports section. Not because she beat the boys. Good for her. Not because she didn't get a trophy. I'm irritated because boys wouldn't be allowed to opt into the girl's sporting events (whether by explicit rule or by social stigma), but girls are allowed to take a boy's spot whenever they choose.
http://archive.is/R54Rm
It would be different if there were no girls tournament, but there is.
http://highschoolsports.masslive.com/girlsgolf/
They should either open up every team to every gender or restrict girls to playing on the girls team / girls tournament.
[–][deleted] 42 points43 points44 points (14 children) | Copy Link
[–]McFeely_Smackup 24 points25 points26 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 25 points26 points27 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]rocelot7 2 points3 points4 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]KDulius 6 points7 points8 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]rocelot7 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (4 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[+]Lord_Redav1 points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
Allowing women wouldn't prevent men from getting faster.
[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Newbosterone 1 point2 points3 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]DirtAndGrass 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Newbosterone 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]BaconCatBug 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]ISOanexplanation 10 points11 points12 points (2 children) | Copy Link
[–]hucktard 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]Chaskar 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bakedpotato486 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]goalposthead 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]turn20left 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]TicTacToeTitTattoo1 points [recovered] (16 children) | Copy Link
A lot of sports and competitions are set up this way. There's an open tournament and then there's a women's tournament. The general public perception is that the open tournament is the men's competition because the leaderboards are often exclusively men.
This is in part because the wider statistical trait distribution in men leads to any ranked list to become male heavy in the outliers, and in part because it's more flattering to be #1 in the gender limited competition than to be #87 in the open one.
[–]andejoh[S] 0 points1 point2 points (15 children) | Copy Link
[+]TicTacToeTitTattoo1 points [recovered] (14 children) | Copy Link
In the case of independent competition (such as golf) or one-on-one competition (such as chess or martial arts sparring), it's easy enough to calculate scores and rankings in both gender exclusive and gender inclusive terms.
What you run into, as mentioned previously, is that the top of the "gender inclusive" ranking tends to look a lot like the men's gender exclusive ranking. So no one bothers.
[–]andejoh[S] 0 points1 point2 points (13 children) | Copy Link
[+]TicTacToeTitTattoo1 points [recovered] (12 children) | Copy Link
If they give out trophies for the top six scores, most of they time they're going to be giving out trophies to six boys.
That, instead, they give out trophies to the top three girls and the top three players (most years, equivalent to the top three boys) just means that (almost) every year three boys are denied.
Why are you getting upset that on much rarer occasions a girl is enough of a statistical outlier to place in the open rankings?
[–]andejoh[S] 1 point2 points3 points (3 children) | Copy Link
[+]TicTacToeTitTattoo1 points [recovered] (2 children) | Copy Link
You've ignored that the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place women's trophies should, in an open ranking, go to the 4th, 5th, and 6th place men. You've skipped past that every year three boys are denied an opportunity for the sole reason of being boys to be outraged that this year one additional boy was denied an opportunity because a girl was better than him in the open ranking and pushed him into 4th place.
It mainly that you've accepted a larger and more common injustice that makes it odd to object to the smaller/rarer one.
[–]andejoh[S] 0 points1 point2 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points (7 children) | Copy Link
[+]TicTacToeTitTattoo1 points [recovered] (6 children) | Copy Link
Maintaining "separate but equal" does not fix the "at most three boys get awards, at least three girls do" situation. It only eliminates the rare occasions when a girl might earn a trophy.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (5 children) | Copy Link
[+]TicTacToeTitTattoo1 points [recovered] (4 children) | Copy Link
wewlad, good thing no one has claimed that, then
"separate them" does not resolve the "boy denied a trophy for being a boy" issue, so, if that is the reason for the outrage, this should not be an acceptable solution.
Would tend to have the effect of discouraging (or eliminating) girls sports. Since girls' sports can make just as much money for the competitive organizations as boys' sports, they're probably not going to get on board with that.
So, the closest you're going to get to "equal in gender combined competitions" is... the existing situation.
[–]bufedad 0 points1 point2 points (3 children) | Copy Link