• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Boys Swimming on Girls Teams Find Success, Then Draw Jeers

Should sports be segregated by gender?

  • I feel there's no need to seperate genders, let them play co-ed

    Votes: 4 7.8%

  • Boys should play with boys, and girls with girls

    Votes: 20 39.2%

  • It depends on the sport

    Votes: 22 43.1%

  • other

    Votes: 5 9.8%
  • Total voters
    51
apdst said:
"But...but...but...this is different!", that's why we can't allow this to happen. It's all about political correctness and there's no way that males can been perceived to be dominate over females. Now, if they were smart, they woud have recruited some black boys and that would shut everyone's pie hole, is a New York second--pin intended.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows blacks can't swim, even the boys. ;)
 
misterman said:
As far as I know, this has never been held to require them to compete together though, only that they have the same facilities, etc. Basically it comes down to having to spend as much on girls as boys. (Separate but equal, in other words. Some of you will have heard that term before).
Click to expand...


If the school does not offer a equal sport, specifically for the other gender, then you must allow both sexes to compete in the same sport, or cancel the sport. That's the way Title IX has always been enforced.
 
jambalaya said:
We shouldn't be denying girls the chance to compete who would otherwise have been on the girls team.
Click to expand...

with this I agree. If there were girls who did not make the team because there was a limit to the number of swimmers and these boys took spots on the roster that would've gone to girls then the boys should have been told "sorry". but if everyone who tried out made the squad they should just STFU and let them swim. This is one of those cases where the unintended consequences come back to bite people in the ass. they pass these kinds of laws to keep girls from being "discriminated" against and they never consider the possibility that some day a boy is going to use the same law against them.
 
misterman said:
The strongest woman may be stronger than the weakest man though. So let the compete and see. You're not afraid being beaten by a girl, are you?
Click to expand...

Define being, "beaten by a girl". ;)

Seriously, though, it appears that the girls are getting their butts kicked by the boys and suddenly the hand wringers don't dig that. Must be someone that's afraid of being beaten by a man.
 
jambalaya said:
This is one time when adhering to the letter of the law is just stupid. Girls shouldn't have to compete with boys in this case. As someone else said, have boys from a couple of schools combine to make up a team so they can least participate. We shouldn't be denying girls the chance to compete who would otherwise have been on the girls team.
Click to expand...

It's a tough question. Tracking girls into different competition is basically admitting they can't compete (much) with boys. But since we routinely create other groups with similar abilities to allow them to compete on the same level, I don't have a problem with it. Then again, can you imagine having different leagues or teams based on race? That wouldn't go over well.
 
apdst said:
"But...but...but...this is different!", that's why we can't allow this to happen. It's all about political correctness and there's no way that males can been perceived to be dominate over females. Now, if they were smart, they woud have recruited some black boys and that would shut everyone's pie hole, is a New York second--pin intended.
Click to expand...

I've never heard anyone argue that a girl should be allowed or able to hold recognition or record in any of those categories- that's why girls have a category for them and boys have a category for them. In the beginning all sports were boys-only. Girls wanted to participate so they gave us girls-teams and categories. It didn't interfere with the guys - it didn't interfere with the girls.

The training together isn't the issue - it's the competition . . .there IS a boy's category: why aren't they allowed to just train with the girls (thus saving the school money) and then compete with the boys?

Or: go to another school's team if this is out of the question as was suggested by one of the girls on the team.
 
Last edited:
and the male athlete sings after the swim meet: "Billy Jean King got my balls, for I lost., she still the one."

I voted for keeping the sexes seperate at least through the high school and college level.

As far as in pro sports, if you open it up on one side to both sexes, then you should do the same for the other (NBA/WNBA , LPGA/PGA). Realisticly, I would keep the sexes seperate.
 
apdst said:
Define being, "beaten by a girl". ;)

Seriously, though, it appears that the girls are getting their butts kicked by the boys and suddenly the hand wringers don't dig that. Must be someone that's afraid of being beaten by a man.
Click to expand...

Yeah, the father of the girl literally chided the boys for beating (only) girls. I'm not sure what to make of it all. He might feel differently if his girl was winning against boys.
 
I think it should be a case by case basis, but that would be too hard b/c people would have diferent opinions.

Let's take wrestling as an example;

If there is a female on the team and nobody has a problem with it, fine. If a boy doesn't want to wrestle a girl, should he be forced to wrestle her or ridiculed b/c he doesn't want to? What if there were an all girls wrestling team, and a boy decides to join. A boy that is better, bigger, and stronger. Is it fair to the opposing all girl team to have to wrestle a boy they know they can't beat?

See, I believe that's why we as a nation started out with boy/girl only teams-to avoid all this confusion and controversy.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
I've never heard anyone argue that a girl should be allowed or able to hold recognition or record in any of those categories- that's why girls have a category for them and boys have a category for them. In the beginning all sports were boys-only. Girls wanted to participate so they gave us girls-teams and categories. It didn't interfere with the guys - it didn't interfere with the girls.

The training together isn't the issue - it's the competition . . .there IS a boy's category: why aren't they allowed to just train with the girls (thus saving the school money) and then compete with the boys?

Or: go to another school's team if this is out of the question as was suggested by one of the girls on the team.
Click to expand...

The article clearly points out that there is no category for the boys.

You can bet your boots that if the tables were turned, it would suddenly be taboo to complain about the girls being on the boys team.
 
misterman said:
It's a tough question. Tracking girls into different competition is basically admitting they can't compete (much) with boys. But since we routinely create other groups with similar abilities to allow them to compete on the same level, I don't have a problem with it. Then again, can you imagine having different leagues or teams based on race? That wouldn't go over well.
Click to expand...

there's no shame in a woman not being able to compete physically with a man. i'd rather have the brains than the brawn anyway!
 
misterman said:
Yeah, the father of the girl literally chided the boys for beating (only) girls. I'm not sure what to make of it all. He might feel differently if his girl was winning against boys.
Click to expand...

Damn right he would!
 
liblady said:
there's no shame in a woman not being able to compete physically with a man. i'd rather have the brains than the brawn anyway!
Click to expand...

I'm not even going to touch that one. :rofl
 
difficult question. I would say that I wouldn't mind letting some of the best WNBA players into the NBA. God knows there's tons of scrubs who can't play in the league.
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
The article clearly points out that there is no category for the boys.

You can bet your boots that if the tables were turned, it would suddenly be taboo to complain about the girls being on the boys team.
Click to expand...

I re-read the article and it doesn't clearly state that - it's a bit muddled - but I think you're right.

Apparently this has been going on since 1980 - now - good heavens - please give the boys their own category already :shrug: Maybe MORE boys would show interest in the sport if they wouldn't be on a girl's team to participate? This seems senseless that they've ignored this for so long.

liblady said:
there's no shame in a woman not being able to compete physically with a man. i'd rather have the brains than the brawn anyway!
Click to expand...

Well yeah - I can't compete with the men either and If I ever joined a sport I wouldn't want to try because it would make me feel like my efforts were wasted.
 
liblady said:
there's no shame in a woman not being able to compete physically with a man. i'd rather have the brains than the brawn anyway!
Click to expand...

Sure, except for the fact that not long ago, women were also considered to be intellectually inferior to men as well, and not allowed to compete in the brain category either. So be careful what you wish for.
 
misterman said:
Sure, except for the fact that not long ago, women were also considered to be intellectually inferior to men as well, and not allowed to compete in the brain category either. So be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...

Considered - but it wasn't a natural fact. Just like saying "all blacks are stupid" - when they've proven quite the opposite.

But we're not talking about stereotypes and prejudices. . . we're talking about the recognition of physical attributes - which are different. It's a natural fact and only the more extreme 'femme nazi' types try to argue and prove otherwise.

Every personal-competition sport has gender-categories . . . they just need to catch up with the times.
 
StillBallin75 said:
difficult question. I would say that I wouldn't mind letting some of the best WNBA players into the NBA. God knows there's tons of scrubs who can't play in the league.
Click to expand...

when I was in jr high, there was a "girl" who played on our varsity basketball team. she was scary as hell. found out later that she was like that "female" runner who they couldn't tell if she was a she or a he.



typically there are very few females who can compete on an even level with males in most physical sports. but your average male can easily compete with females in most of these same sports.

I just don't see why it is such a big freaking deal to admit that men are generally bigger and stronger than women.
 
OscarB63 said:
when I was in jr high, there was a "girl" who played on our varsity basketball team. she was scary as hell. found out later that she was like that "female" runner who they couldn't tell if she was a she or a he.



typically there are very few females who can compete on an even level with males in most physical sports. but your average male can easily compete with females in most of these same sports.

I just don't see why it is such a big freaking deal to admit that men are generally bigger and stronger than women.
Click to expand...

The bolded: it's not a big deal - that's why most competition sports like this have teams for the genders. I think you're presuming that we're all big bad 'femminists' and want every woman to be treated like every man - that's never been the case.

I've never heard anyone decry that the gendered teams are 'wrong' and should be ended and blended. :shrug:
 
OscarB63 said:
when I was in jr high, there was a "girl" who played on our varsity basketball team. she was scary as hell. found out later that she was like that "female" runner who they couldn't tell if she was a she or a he.



typically there are very few females who can compete on an even level with males in most physical sports. but your average male can easily compete with females in most of these same sports.

I just don't see why it is such a big freaking deal to admit that men are generally bigger and stronger than women.
Click to expand...

To me it's not, but if the best woman can play better and harder than the "average man," why not let her play with the big boys? A player like Candace Parker can probably hold her own against many NBA bench-warmers.

I don't know why a guy would want to swim on a girls' team though.
 
herenow1 said:
I think it should be a case by case basis, but that would be too hard b/c people would have diferent opinions.

Let's take wrestling as an example;

If there is a female on the team and nobody has a problem with it, fine. If a boy doesn't want to wrestle a girl, should he be forced to wrestle her or ridiculed b/c he doesn't want to? What if there were an all girls wrestling team, and a boy decides to join. A boy that is better, bigger, and stronger. Is it fair to the opposing all girl team to have to wrestle a boy they know they can't beat?

See, I believe that's why we as a nation started out with boy/girl only teams-to avoid all this confusion and controversy.
Click to expand...

Its all about money, and civil rights legislation.

Schools make the determination if they can afford to offer two teams for one sport. That's your case-by-case basis. Since they recieve federal funds, they have to abide by federal rules governing that money. Obviously, if you want your state/school to be unique, give the finger to federal money. But good luck finding someone not addicted to the teet.

Civil Rights legislation doesn't have the ability to inject common sense, because the point of the legislation was to remove the individual's opinion on specific matters for the sake of certain identifying qualities.
 
misterman said:
Sure, except for the fact that not long ago, women were also considered to be intellectually inferior to men as well, and not allowed to compete in the brain category either. So be careful what you wish for.
Click to expand...

i think you missed my point. males are inherently better at some things than are females, and females are inherently better at some things than are males. we should stop making such a big deal of it. no, boys and girls do not need to compete against each other, it's really kinda stupid. for example, who wants to watch a woman play a men's golf tournament and get the crap kicked out of her? what's her point?
 
liblady said:
i think you missed my point. males are inherently better at some things than are females, and females are inherently better at some things than are males. we should stop making such a big deal of it. no, boys and girls do not need to compete against each other, it's really kinda stupid. for example, who wants to watch a woman play a men's golf tournament and get the crap kicked out of her? what's her point?
Click to expand...

In the article it points out that the boys have been competing with the girls since 1980 - and no one noticed because they weren't winning records for all this time until now.

Maybe gender isn't the way to go for categories at all anymore, then - maybe they should rely on qualifying times . . . and blend all the categories based on that. The 'slow' racers - the 'medium' racers and the 'faster' racers since - apparently - not all boys are physically stronger and not all girls are physically weaker. . . improve your ability and go into the next category.

This has sort of made me reconsider how we determine who's in and who's out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom