“I understand why terrorists attack the West.”

Having been in a long-time resident of a region of brown people that the West sees as subhuman, I don’t condone terrorist actions, but I sure do understand why some of them do it. Some people just see an action, read or hear the words, without context and judge a person based on that, but they forget that humans are the sum of their experiences.
Just like a small-town bumpkin in Australia might hate brown people for how they brought up, a refugee hating the West might’ve lived in constant fear of being bombed by a drone, seen the consequences thereof, and been pointed at a generic Westerner as the source of evil.

People that I’ve talked to who have lived outside of Western countries understand what I mean, but many Westerners think I’m saying terrorism is justifiable or even good.

Deganawida!

El oh el

Man, Mozilla used to be nice but they have just turned so shit. I hope the core firefox people quit and make a new browser so that I can donate directly to the new browser instead of some middle man (or woman right now) who siphons off the money (aka Mozilla).

Where was he even streaming from? I thought he was banned from Twitch…

Read my edit. Also, not every sport is about strength. Additionally, the are other ways to split than just by sex and gender.

Again, like many others missed, the proposal isn’t “NO MORE SEGREGATION!”. It’s to let people compete against each other regardless of sex. I’d prefer it as a default, but it doesn’t preclude voluntary segregation.

Until we stop caring about only letting/finding/supporting/producing the best of the best, its an incredibly bad idea to ignore the many sport specific disadvantage biology plays in competition

And with this too, I disagree. If you’ve done sports, you’ll know the feeling of thinking you’re the best and then meeting a stronger opponent. For some, it will be demoralising, but for others it’s a stimulus. It also lets you learn more about the sport, what is possible, and in certain sports also develop techniques and tactics against opponents with greater values in different attributes.

Evolution happens faster under pressure and competing against better opponents is the best pressure there is. That’s how you get the best of the best. You get out of your safe zone.

Also, again for you too, the suggestion is not “no more segregation ever”! You can read my edit.

First of all, heavy weight men =/= heavy weight women at the moment. The kg’s aren’t the same (men start at 90kg and women 80kg or something?). Second, Mike Tyson beat the shit out of fellow men. Are you going to set the bar for being a man at Mike Tyson? Every guy he beat was actually a woman?

I can’t find how much Mike Tyson weighed for every of his fights. This says 99kgs. The heaviest woman I could find (why doesn’t a DB exist to sort by kgs?) is Danielle Perkins at 88kg. That’s 10kg of difference. No way they’re even in the same class unless you leave it open ended. The weight classes would probably have to be redistributed and a new one added. Once a woman gets as heavy as Mike, she could compete against him.

No, you don’t. You haven’t seen it yet. Nor do you know how 100 or 1000 such matches would end.

It’s also fine if you don’t want to see it. No one is going to force you too.

What a nonstupid answer. I congratulate you on being so articulate.

OK, I’ll just add an edit to the description, but for you too: the suggestion isn’t to force desegregation. It’s to allow it. Someone else made a better 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.

Finally, the option to compete together should still be the default, IMO. Some people probably would like to join a mixed team, but simply can’t because it isn’t allowed. For example if basketball were segregated by height, some shorter players would maybe like to play in the mixed team regardless (maybe they hit a skill ceiling in their league, maybe they don’t like the idea of segregation, etc.).

Does that answer your question?

No, it doesn’t answer if it’ll be the same for all sports. As others have pointed out archery, shooting, curling, and other sports have men an women competing either separate or together and women can compete at the same level.

As for football, yes, there’s a good chance there’ll be stark differences, but as I pointed out in another comment, not every sport is about raw strength. And, competing against stronger opponents can also raise your ceiling. How far is of course yet to be seen because we don’t have mixed leagues.

And again, the suggestion isn’t “NO MORE SEGREGATION EVER” it’s “should we let them compete against each other”. That means there’ll be a mixed and segregated league. Maybe even, as somebody else suggested, the segregations wouldn’t always be immediately by sex or gender, but by attributes that make sense in that sport e.g weight, muscle mass, height, skill, and so on.

Yes, that’s a sport where segregation makes sense. But the suggestion isn’t to force desegregation, it’s to to let all genders compete against each other.

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

Ah, the typical “it’s always worked this way”. Well, there’s no need to elaborate then. Why ever change? Everything is perfect as it is.

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.

Yes, precisely what I mean. I wasn’t suggesting that all sports be forced to be exclusively mixed, yet somehow that’s what people understood the question as.

Would you have a link to that? It sounds like an interesting concept.

Why? You think women are incapable of posing such questions?

That is your assumption. You cannot know that across all sports. It would most certainly be true for sports limited or focused on physical strength, but beyond that, there’s no way to know for certain.

If you’ve played any sport, you’ll know that brute strength isn’t the sole determining factor for success. Technique is very important too. Tactics cannot be ignored either. In football for example, just play “try to get the ball” in a square where one chases the ball. You might be the fastest player on the team but never catch the ball even against players who don’t move.

Also, competing against stronger opponents is how people learn and “level up”. You learn how to deal with different, faster, slower, more technical, stronger, even more intelligent opponents. Again, if you’ve ever played sports (or just games), you’ll know what it feels like to think you’re the best, then get decimated by an opponent, but in doing so realize what you were doing wrong - especially when competing against that opponent multiple times. Women and men might have a higher ceiling than they think, but unless they compete against each other continuously, they won’t know.

Thank you for the response!

I definitely agree that role models are important and that starting early is the key in chess. I can’t remember the names, but it was tested by a researcher on his own daughters: he trained them in chess very early on they all became grand masters. In fact, the list of known chess grandmasters has 42 women on it.

Women are mentally capable of playing chess at the highest level if given the opportunity to do so.

So yes, giving them a space to compete against each other can serve as a “safe” space, it doesn’t mean that it should be the only place they compete, nor that they are incapable of holding their own against other genders.

The question isn’t either “should all sports force no segratation”, but “should all sports let everybody compete together”.