[The Godfather]

Watching the LPGA tour, this occurred to me:

Golf
Volleyball
Swimming
Chess
Bowling
Horseshoe
Baseball

Need not be separate. This segregation is as dumb as telling Danica Patrick to drive on a girls track.

[Waragainstsleep]

Are they actually separated in Chess?
Not sure about swimming, are the differences between times big? If not then may as well be mixed.

I would add Darts and Horse-based events from racing to show jumping to polo. Some of those might be mixed already.
Why are there no female F1 drivers? (or are there?)

I would have thought downhill skiing would be fair to mix as well.

[Shaddim]

You're saying Danica is a good driver?

[lpkmckenna]

Swimming and baseball, yes, because strength is an issue. Golf, I have no idea whether it matters.

Anytime strength or speed is involved, you need to segregate.

Bowling is a game, not a sport. /ducks

[besson3c]

What about marathon running?

[nonhuman]

Wasn't there a woman who tried to play in the PGA a few years ago? As I recall they were game, but she didn't make the cut.

[Patrick]

I don't know… I'd think that in swimming, women would have a better breast stroke… and in bowling, men would have bigger balls.

Originally Posted by besson3c 

What about marathon running?

There are plenty of marathons where men and women run together, but their times are usually ranked separately.

[Captain Obvious]

You have no idea what you are talking about.

All you have to do is look at the times and records of elite athletes by gender in each respective sport to see how uncompetitive it would be to group them all together.

There was just an article in Slate today discussing why there is so few dunks in the women's NCAA basketball tournament. That extra 9 inches of vertical men at that level can achieve on average gives them a huge advantage at being able to accomplish the feat. Apply that one fact on hops to any sports where it can come into play (volleyball, swimming, soccer, etc.,) and you have an uneven playing field by sex.

If you're question had limited the conversation to games like chess then you'd have a legitimate point but as its written your thesis is asinine.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

Volleyball.

Not even close. With net play, height is king. Also speed and strength. Sorry, women.

[andi*pandi]

There are tall women.

I'd be interested to see a comparison of women and men same height and if they can dunk, spike, etc. Could be just as controversial as that age old adage that white men can't jump?

Also: Billie jean king beat Connors at tennis.

[ghporter]

Jimmy Connors was nowhere near as good (or as young) as he thought he was, but Billie Jean King really dominated him on the court. Tennis is one sport that the biomechanical advantage men have through upper body strength and leverage are mitigated by technique and quickness.

But golf and volleyball? Both favor men whose physical structure gives them power. I haven't been able to find any details, but do the LPGA players tee off from the same spot in the box that PGA players do? Are there other rule differences? I'll bet there are because, even with today's super clubs, women are at a disadvantage in driving because men have greater upper body strength (and typically proportionally greater trunk strength) so they can put more power behind any club.

If pro bowling allows throwing balls of different weights, it might be possible to make mixed men's and women's bowling fair. But swimming? I don't think it could ever be fair to have mixed competitive swimming events. Not only are men's arms and shoulders significantly stronger in proportion to their size, men and women have anatomical differences in shoulder and elbow joints that give men another substantial advantage. I just don't see most of those sports being fair with mixed competitors.

What about darts?

[P]

Originally Posted by nonhuman 

Wasn't there a woman who tried to play in the PGA a few years ago? As I recall they were game, but she didn't make the cut.

Yes, Anika Sörenstam did, and you're right, she did not make the cut. I am not a fan of golf, but I understand that the difference is in the length of the drives.

Swimming is quite a big difference between male and female times, because upper body strength plays such a big part. Volleyball (and for that matter basketball) seem like possibilities for a tall woman, and both are team sports, so maybe one could have mixed teams?

Tennis is less equal today than it was, because of the way the game has changed. Today, men's tennis is heavily focused on serve and volley game for many players, and height has a real influence on how well you can ace your serves. Honestly, women's tennis is probably closer to the way the game was intended to be played - men's tennis need to have the net raised by a few inches.

Chess and darts I think are combined already, at least in most cases, and so are the various riding disciplines.

[is not]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Why are there no female F1 drivers? (or are there?)

Yes, Felipe Massa

Well, Marussia has one Spanish lady as 3rd driver.

[Waragainstsleep]

Its not just a matter of whether strength or physical characteristics are a factor in playing the sport or not.

My understanding is that if you compare male sprinters to female, their times are quicker, therefore having them compete together would be unfair. This is only the case if its the only option. There is no reason why a woman shouldn't be allowed to run with the men as long as she understands that statistically she is likely to lose out and isn't going to complain about it. If she can beat them, I don't see the problem. Same goes for swimming obvisouly, cycling too. This also applies to golf. She actually has a better chance in golf since technique probably makes a bigger difference than physique. Moreso than it does in running anyway. I think the same would aply to baseball. If a woman can get picked for a men's team, there is no issue. It should be up to the coach.

Basketball is probably a trickier one to answer. Does injury often occur as a result of contact in basketball? Its not supposed to right? Again, I'd say that the "if she can get picked" rule is fair.
We played mixed basketball at school. The only differences were that if you (accidentally) fouled/groped a girl when you were trying to block her from running or passing, you got sent off for a bit for 'ungentlemanly conduct'. If one of the girls scratched you with her nails trying to take the ball off you while dribbling, she got the same for 'unladylike conduct'.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Golf need to be separate. The distance a guy hits the ball is quite an advantage. There was also this:

Wie pulls out of tourney, treated for heat exhaustion - Golf - ESPN

[moonmonkey]

Any activities that are separated are done so because one sex has a physical or mental advantage.

On boxing, weight lifting, chess etc, it would unfair to ask women to complete in a competition they would find it much harder than men to win.

[Captain Obvious]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

There are tall women.

I'd be interested to see a comparison of women and men same height and if they can dunk, spike, etc. Could be just as controversial as that age old adage that white men can't jump?

Also: Billie jean king beat Connors at tennis.

Its more complex than just height. And its not controversial
Vertical Jump and Leg Power Norms for Young Adults : Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise

http://www.evaa.ch/files/academy/gender_differences.pdf

And the reason there's so many african americans that excel in professional sports is in large part due to the legacy of eugenics and the deliberate breeding of some slaves to perpetuate desired physical traits that benefitted their owners. Like we do with race horses today.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by moonmonkey 

Any activities that are separated are done so because one sex has a physical or mental advantage.

On boxing, weight lifting, chess etc, it would unfair to ask women to complete in a competition they would find it much harder than men to win.

What is this mental advantage you think men have over women exactly?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Tyler McAdams 

Golf need to be separate. The distance a guy hits the ball is quite an advantage. There was also this:

Wie pulls out of tourney, treated for heat exhaustion - Golf - ESPN

So you think Men can't get heat exhaustion?

If you read my post immediately prior to yours, I pointed out why such an advantage should not exclude women from playing golf against the men. They know they might be at a disadvantage, but if they can qualify for a tournament, where is the harm. Its not a contact sport.

And do you really think there are no women at all who can drive as far some of the pro men? Golfers are not exactly the most ripped athletes you will ever see, that how they can still play into their 50s and beyond.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Captain Obvious 

And the reason there's so many african americans that excel in professional sports is in large part due to the legacy of eugenics and the deliberate breeding of some slaves to perpetuate desired physical traits that benefitted their owners. Like we do with race horses today.

What about the african non-americans?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

What is this mental advantage you think men have over women exactly?

I could see there being some confusion about chess. AFAIK, there's only one woman who's ever had world champion type ratings, and that was relatively recently.

While the disparity in numbers can partially be attributed to cultural issues, if whatever makes someone a fantastic chess player was anywhere near as common in women as it is in men, I think the Soviets would have found that out and exploited it. They didn't **** around when it came to chess, and could have erased a lot of any existing prejudices if it served their purpose.

Of course, I could be totally wrong.

[ghporter]

Certain tribal/ethnic groups in Africa have traditions of running...a LONG way...just about every day. Their "eugenics" is cultural, not forced on them from outside, and we see a whole lot of marathon winners from these groups.

On the other hand, Europeans had only a few centuries of manipulation of the reproduction of Africans kidnapped for the Europeans's benefit, so it is not likely that anything substantial in the way of athletic prowess came of that. I believe that it is really more of a cultural thing, and that this has been going on for only about 80 years or so in the US, and far less (if at all) elsewhere. For example, I do not see a lot of domestic English footballers whose forbears came there as slaves... In the US, one of the few options for success for black men has been in athletics, and this has been available to them only since about 1950.

This is not to say that active (if unintentional) selective breeding isn't happening with humans. We seem to have been breeding ourselves for larger female breasts and smaller jaws for both sexes for the last couple of centuries,,,

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Unfortunate we're breeding for plastic surgans not large breasts.

[ghporter]

Don't underestimate how many of those nice ones you're seeing are natural... There is a good chance that "enhanced" women have other indicators for enhancements.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by subego 

I could see there being some confusion about chess. AFAIK, there's only one woman who's ever had world champion type ratings, and that was relatively recently.

There seems to be a lack of boundaries in this discussion between sports where men and women have statistically different abilities, and sports where they are directly forbidden from competing against each other.

If there has already been a female chess player on the circuit, playing against the men, then clearly there is no rule against it and its just a statistical and/or cultural thing that men tend to be better at chess than women.

I am aware the men and women think differently and have different strengths and weaknesses (statistically) as a result but there is no reason a woman should be barred from playing against a man at chess.

Just because one group is statistically better at something than another, doesn't mean the best person of all is a member of that 'better' group.

[subego]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

There seems to be a lack of boundaries in this discussion between sports where men and women have statistically different abilities, and sports where they are directly forbidden from competing against each other.

I was responding to a question about the former.

[P]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

If there has already been a female chess player on the circuit, playing against the men, then clearly there is no rule against it and its just a statistical and/or cultural thing that men tend to be better at chess than women.

The Wikipedia page for Grandmaster shows that there are several female Grandmasters, so I guess it's not so uncommon.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

So you think Men can't get heat exhaustion?

If you read my post immediately prior to yours, I pointed out why such an advantage should not exclude women from playing golf against the men. They know they might be at a disadvantage, but if they can qualify for a tournament, where is the harm. Its not a contact sport.

And do you really think there are no women at all who can drive as far some of the pro men? Golfers are not exactly the most ripped athletes you will ever see, that how they can still play into their 50s and beyond.

Interesting how you interpret what I imply. I'm all for women playing in men's tournaments... it's just not always a good idea and it's just highly realistic that they will not win. Just like a female body builder cannot attain the mass of most top male body builders. You can call that sexist but it more of a fact that body mass is higher as a rule in men.

[The Godfather]

A woman who is a good basketball player has zero chance of getting an athletic scholarship in college, just because they are not allowed in the team. This is not about statistics and averages, but the pursuit of happiness being quashed in an individual basis.

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally Posted by The Godfather 

A woman who is a good basketball player has zero chance of getting an athletic scholarship in college, just because they are not allowed in the team. This is not about statistics and averages, but the pursuit of happiness being quashed in an individual basis.

That's a whole different story than what I'm talking about. If they can play then yes they should not be discriminated against.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by P 

Volleyball (and for that matter basketball) seem like possibilities for a tall woman, and both are team sports, so maybe one could have mixed teams?

Every co-ed volleyball league I've played on (ranging from extremely recreational to extremely competitive with collegiate-level athletes) has a rule that if more than one person hits the ball before it goes over, one of the hits has to be a woman.

My sisters were both record-setting basketball players in high school (both are over 6 feet tall, both are still on the career high score list). I quit after eighth grade, but I could still crush either of them.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Tyler McAdams 

Interesting how you interpret what I imply. I'm all for women playing in men's tournaments... it's just not always a good idea and it's just highly realistic that they will not win. Just like a female body builder cannot attain the mass of most top male body builders. You can call that sexist but it more of a fact that body mass is higher as a rule in men.

Most of these discrepancies and disadvantages are obvious, I just don't see any point in enforcing segragation unless you are risking harm. Playing mixed full contact NFL, rugby or boxing would be irresponsible but if the worst that can happen is you don't win, why ban someone for having a disadvantage?

[Tyre MacAdmin]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

Most of these discrepancies and disadvantages are obvious, I just don't see any point in enforcing segragation unless you are risking harm. Playing mixed full contact NFL, rugby or boxing would be irresponsible but if the worst that can happen is you don't win, why ban someone for having a disadvantage?

Agreed. Really in golf they are not banned per se, but they are playing in a "men's event". That generally means the golf course is at least longer in total distance. Still to your point there are women who hit it on average farther than the men's tour average. In golf you're not playing your fellow players, you're playing the course.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

What if the disadvantage is such that they'd never win?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

What if the disadvantage is such that they'd never win?

If there is no danger, and they can earn their place if thats how its done, where is the harm?

[abbaZaba]

Is this an early April Fool's joke? To the people suggesting tall women could compete with men in basketball: You must not be aware that the first ever dunk in the WNBA came 9 years ago. there have been 6 dunks in WNBA history by 4 different women. 3 of those dunks came in All-Star games, which is just as big a joke as any men's league All-Star games.

Any NCAA Men's basketball team could beat the WNBA All-Stars 100 out of 100 times. There have been 5 total triple-doubles in WNBA history. I mean, before I started writing this post, I didn't expect those stats to be that laughable. Women simply can't compete with men physically and there's no reason to combine leagues in any sport, especially swimming and volleyball.

Maybe bowling, because to me that seems like a technique-heavy sport and I have little knowledge of how ball weight affects strikes or if women even use different ball weights. Perhaps even racquetball and other small court racquet sports because a huge percentage of those sports is technique.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

If there is no danger, and they can earn their place if thats how its done, where is the harm?

Would you participate in a sport knowing no matter how good you were or how hard you tried you'd never win?

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

Would you participate in a sport knowing no matter how good you were or how hard you tried you'd never win?

Personally no, but then I'm a lazy ****.

This would be true of most women too but they don't like being excluded without good reason and I can understand that. Most of the events we are talking about have qualification criteria whether its preliminary rounds, current rankings or season performance so far. Either way someone with no chance of winning would not be able to qualify so why risk being labelled sexist or discriminatory if its a non issue? Just to save the cost of building another changing room?

[moonmonkey]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

What is this mental advantage you think men have over women exactly?

Girls are lovely but they are to busy worrying about how good their makeup is and what they will get for their birthday to play chess.

In Victorian times they opened up men and women's heads, when they opened up mens heads there were intermeshing cogs, expansive iron bridges, and tooting steam trains.

When they opened up women's heads there were flower petals, butterflies and pink fuzzy feather balls.

They are truly wonderful creatures, but I think its unfair to make them compete.

[Rumor]

Pool is one of them that I never understood why there is a separation. We had a few really, really good women players when I was in a pool league. A friend of mine is in two SF leagues and she is a great player. Usually in the top three each season.

[subego]

Guys are threatened by women who can handle a stick.

[Patrick]

Originally Posted by subego 

Guys are threatened by women who can handle a stick.

Actually, some of us like that ability in a woman.

[SSharon]

For those that say we should keep some sports segregated by gender because of the advantage men have due to their strength, why do you stop at mere gender segregation? Why don't we separate the leagues by race since whites aren't as strong and can't run as fast?

Personally, I think we should mix more sports rather than segregate them by any means. Why are we looking at the average capabilities of individuals of a gender? The average woman might not be as strong as a man, but there are plenty that are. If the issue is safety, wouldn't the weaker women naturally end up on the "JV" teams with the weaker men averaging the playing field? Certainly, by adulthood and the olympics (is there a minimum age to compete?) more sports could be mixed.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by ghporter 

Jimmy Connors was nowhere near as good (or as young) as he thought he was, but Billie Jean King really dominated him on the court. Tennis is one sport that the biomechanical advantage men have through upper body strength and leverage are mitigated by technique and quickness.

Not exactly. The Mens' game is now derided as boring because it is now mostly determined by the serve. I imagine a Man v Woman match-up would see a lot of aces and failed returns based on this advantage.

Originally Posted by Rumor 

Pool is one of them that I never understood why there is a separation.

Theoretically, isn't a man's strength an advantage on break? Otherwise, I'd agree.

[BLAZE_MkIV]

Originally Posted by SSharon 

Why are we looking at the average capabilities of individuals of a gender? The average woman might not be as strong as a man, but there are plenty that are.

If you line up the two bell curves they're offset. Average man stronger than average woman, strongest man stronger than strongest woman.

Originally Posted by SSharon 

If the issue is safety, wouldn't the weaker women naturally end up on the "JV" teams with the weaker men averaging the playing field? Certainly, by adulthood and the olympics (is there a minimum age to compete?) more sports could be mixed.

Many years ago in HS there was a scrimmage between the varsity girls team and the boys JV team. The girls were absolutely crushed. No coach interested in winning would put the women / girls on the field. It would be intentionally handicapping yourself. So you'd have to make rules for things like that % of females were on the field at a time, or the coed volleyball rule someone already posted.

Do women really feel that left out not getting to play on the same teams as boys?

[sek929]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Not exactly. The Mens' game is now derided as boring because it is now mostly determined by the serve. I imagine a Man v Woman match-up would see a lot of aces and failed returns based on this advantage.

I enjoy watching women's tennis more because of this, more volleys and interesting matchups.

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by BLAZE_MkIV 

If you line up the two bell curves they're offset. Average man stronger than average woman, strongest man stronger than strongest woman.

Many years ago in HS there was a scrimmage between the varsity girls team and the boys JV team. The girls were absolutely crushed. No coach interested in winning would put the women / girls on the field. It would be intentionally handicapping yourself. So you'd have to make rules for things like that % of females were on the field at a time, or the coed volleyball rule someone already posted.

Do women really feel that left out not getting to play on the same teams as boys?

Interesting, and some good food for thought. So then why are women always fighting so hard for equality? Shouldn't construction companies be allowed to exclude women if the job description relies heavily on strength? I think there is a double standard wherein women want equality in all of the things they are superior to men at or equal to, but not in the things they are inferior at.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by SSharon 

Interesting, and some good food for thought. So then why are women always fighting so hard for equality? Shouldn't construction companies be allowed to exclude women if the job description relies heavily on strength? I think there is a double standard wherein women want equality in all of the things they are superior to men at or equal to, but not in the things they are inferior at.

Examples?

[SSharon]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Examples?

It was more of a general feeling than an observation. But to go along with my post, women have fought hard for workplace equality, but clearly some jobs are better suited for men. At the same time they don't seem to be fighting to be included in the NBA or NFL. I guess the first point goes against what I was saying, so maybe my issue is just the inconsistency.

[The Final Dakar]

Well, it's not like they can compete in the NBA. Strikes me as knowing your limits. And the amount of women who play football competitively precludes any unified calls for equality.