/siberia/ - Off-topic

It's hilarious.
There's one reason.

>>819700
uygha what is vague?
It's funny.
That's a perfectly valid reason. I do not care about your ethics.

There is no difference in strength between cis women and trans women – and, in any case, there are very few of the latter to begin with; if I’m not mistaken, there are only a handful across the entire United States, and none of them compete in major sports.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2026/02/04/trans-athletes-have-no-advantage-over-women-study-claims/
P.S. The differences between individual people – and even races – are far greater than the differences between the sexes. Are we bringing back segregation now, or what?

Why should freaks of nature people like michael phelps and all those tall ass basketball players be allowed to compete when most normal people who take up sports as a hobby would never be able to keep up even if they applied themselves 100%? Sports, especially the ones with less complexity of skill and motion, are brutal regarding biology to the point you could breed humans like pitbulls to optimize performance.

Luckily sports are worthless. They are not productive and the only reason theyre so glorified is because theyre entertainment money-makers. If you strip the celebrity status from an athlete all you have is a dude whos below average in everything except performing in that one specific activity that adds no value to the world

>>819707
well, the segregation already exists. why is male and female sports divided in the first place, if gender differences are negligible?

>>819713
Politics.

>>819717
>Over 10,000 men (including boys <18 yr) ran faster than the three fastest recorded women in that year (2019), illustrating no overlap in the performance of men and women at the top level. These numbers underscore the historical and current rationale for biological sex–based categories in many athletic events because the top adult males almost always outperform the top females in events that rely on muscle power, strength, speed, and/or endurance. In contrast, in sporting events and physical tasks where performance relies more on skill than muscle power and endurance, such as archery, the sex differences among the world’s best is minimal. This variation in the magnitude of the sex difference in performance across sports and physical tasks is a consequence of the difference in the timing and effects of sex steroid hormones during growth and development and their varying effects on the different biological systems that are most utilized during athletic events (e.g., muscle vs central nervous system).
https://www.ovid.com/jnls/acsm-msse/fulltext/10.1249/mss.0000000000003300~the-biological-basis-of-sex-differences-in-athletic?

>>819713
I think sports are stupid. like ostensibly you are testing the skills of people against each other, but if skills are predictable based on things like, age, height, weight, sex, disability, etc, you end up segregating the sports along those lines to make the results "more unpredictable." I think people only like sports if they can't predict who will win in advance. If you pit an 80 year old cis man against 20 a year old cis man, the 20 year old will most likely win. So the question becomes "how can we segregate these people so that gambling on the result will still be hard to predict?"

But once you've done all the "necessary segregation" and you have your sports "league" which is restricted to, for example, cis het males who are 20-25 years old and 200-250 lbs and 6'0-6'3" tall, you are still going to have "predictable" results. There will clearly be a guy with better status, a better win record , etc. People who care about statistics tend to win sports betting more than people who just bet on whoever they're a "fan" of.

So sports "betting" is literally just a way for people who have access to statistics and information to fleece people who don't have information or don't care about information.

And if sports "competition" without betting is highly predictable based on physiological differences between humans like age, height, weight, reach, sex, muscle density blah blah blah blah then why care about it at all? Why go through all this trouble just to have these "perfectly" segregated leagues. If you really only want people who are perfect clones of each other competing to maximize the unpredictability then the result is going to come down to who skipped breakfast or who got less than enough sleep or who got possession of the ball first.

Material factors are infinite and you can't control for all of them. Should sports be a free for all between people of all abilities or should it be perfectly regimented clones with the exact same life "competing" in highly controlled situations where the only real factor is luck?

>>819719
thats dodging the fundamental question
sports tend to be divided so that no one is given an unfair advantage, be it from gender divisions or weight groups.
other factors might give someone an advantage, some people are naturally good at something, like Pelé who dominated football for decades, but that doesn't mean he had an unfair physical advantage, he could kick a ball just like any other footballer at his time, he could run just as much as anyone could, and he was just as strong as them, he just happened to be a really smart and talented athlete.
natural minor differences between individuals do not result in predictable results otherwise sports betting would be an infinite money printer and casinos would never turn a profit.

"women's sports" was created because men were butthurt that women were able to surpass them. Therefor there's two options to solve this:

• repeat the cycle of abuse by creating a seperate LBGTQIA+ leage for every sport
  
• realize the first option is both ridiculous and an obvious inevitability under the current system, abandon the mainstream sports industrial complex and establish non-segregated leagues.

>>819725
how do you explain top male athletes outperforming top female athletes in every sport that involves strength, speed or physical power? is it lack of merit or willpower from women?

>>819732
Men also dominate in basically all of the sports that don't involve physical attributes too

the idea that sports are gendered in the first place is weird to me.
Let the only thing separating them be weight classes.

>>819734
the differences are much smaller. heres archery for example

>>819732
Doesn't matter. Black and tall people perform well at basketball statistically, but very few people are suggesting black or height-ranked leagues of basketball.

People just have physiological advantages in sports sometimes, It'll even out.

>>819738
I mean I feel like a 3% difference at the top level is a pretty big difference still

>>819739
once again theres a difference between a physical advantage and just being good at a sport.
black people dont have any physical advantage at basketball, they just tend to play better because there are more black athletes due to unrelated cultural reasons. in an alternate universe, basketball could very well be a white sport, or mixed.

>>819737
It's just affirmative action because otherwise women would never win anything at sports if it was co-gender

>>819725
Why does that bird look so fuckable 😰

>>819741
It's possible there's sociological factors at play in regards to men and women too, which genderless, weight class leagues would even out potentially.
>>819742
Women's leagues exist to make that untestable, because there's men that are scared of that not being the case.

>>819711
Fails both the Lasche test (being a sportsball reddit retard) and anti-Marxist (denying athletes bring value).

>>819744
I like to think early makeup was an attempt to look pretty in a bird / reptile kinda way.

>>819742
you're presuming a woman could never compete at an elite level because it's never happened. I say make all elite sports leagues co-ed, and let the pieces fall where must.
My main gripe with the WNBA is that it's so ass to watch compared to the NBA, and my theory is that they aren't getting the same level of play as the NBA. They aren't practicing and competing against actual elite teams. It creates a feedback loop pushing the WNBA back 60 years.

>>819699
It's a conspiracy of ugly nerd women still resentful against the hated lady jocks from highschool, which is kinda funny, but stupid.

>>819746
you're continuously dodging around the fact that a real biological difference exists

suppose we abolish gender divisions and let men and women play in the same league, what would this even accomplish? women would instantly lose all visibility because they would be put in an unfair position where they cant possibly compete

>>819751
>you're continuously dodging around the fact that a real biological difference exists
Already said it doesn't matter. Physiological differences exist, like being tall in basketball. Weight classes and perhaps height classes could be reasonable in a given sport, but once that's established chopping it up even finer seems unreasonable.

Maybe if sports were mixed as they used to be, people would want to raise their daughters to be beefier to be better athletes or something. Perhaps over generations women would get naturally beefier as people select for that.

>>819751
If a sport has a GOAT, but it's not co-ed, they're not the GOAT. It's untested, and maybe there was a woman phenom that never got the chance to play.
The fact that baseball doesn't even have it's own woman's league, but an entirely different sport is indicative of not wanting women in the sport.
Add on the fact that most softball leagues are co-ed, and your point becomes moot.

That being said, sports leagues are all reactionary.
The fact that you can get paid for playing a game because of your physical attributes is eugenicist and should be abolished.

>>819751
>women would instantly lose all visibility because they would be put in an unfair position where they cant possibly compete
The only way to test for this would be to let it rip and hazard it being wrong against the dignity of men counting on that being correct.

>>819754
>>819755
>>819756
once again, there are sports where women play separately from men and sometimes even outcompete them, such as archery. in these less physically demanding sports, women could very well play in the same league as men

but why doesnt the same thing happen in football, or basketball, or swimming? womens league in football has existed for decades but they have never reached the same level of performance. is it lack of merit? are female archers putting in more effort than female footballers, or is football a more physically demanding sport where a male will naturally be better at, to an unfair degree?

>>819747
Wtf are you talking about

>>819757
Does the WNBA have the same level of infrastructure and decades of theory that the NBA has? The reason this shit flies in the WNBA is because nobody is there to punish them for doing it. It's the "meta" to just lob shots at the basket and play drop coverage. The strategies simply wouldn't work in the NBA and every teams coaching staff is either unable to put in the work to make a real elite league, or they're incapable.
What I'm saying is there needs to be pressure put on athletes to turn them into diamonds. But as it is, women's leagues are token gestures to athletic women.

>>819757
Maybe women didn't have as broad access to nutrition back then, or it's like black people in basketball where it's just a matter of how many men pursued sports vs women, or some other set of factors.

>>819774

terfs always look more like hons than the actual transhumanists do

>>819698
you are asking the wrong questions, so you will get the wrong answers.
let us grant for example that trans women have an unfair physical advantage of the sort that would justify banning them from most sports. okay, fine. so are those behind the bans in the right? is the whole fuss because a real problem emerged?

well, trans women are also being banned from chess competitions, darts, snooker, and a whole range of other sports where the physical element (and even - in the latter case if we were to be very un-PC - mental element) is irrelevant, so obviously not. there are also many prominent cases of anti-trans activists freaking out because trans women competed in an event (even though they did terribly), or took part in formally non-competitive events. the funniest cases being non-competitive events where you can take part as either a man or a woman, and they're just angry which list the trans woman's name was included on.
"they have an unfair advantage" cannot explain these cases. therefore the underlying impulse must originate elsewhere. as a result it is a waste of time to debate the specifics of each case within a bad-faith framing, even if the person asking the question is themselves asking in good faith. (as i am assuming you are.)

>>819724
>sports tend to be divided so that no one is given an unfair advantage
it's impossible to do this. in an even matchup 2 equally skilled guys with similar body types with equal amounts of training and hard work and good choices will still have 1 of them with some unfair advantage over the other. the trick is just to make it hard for the audience to notice. it's a trick.

>>819781
Yeah exactly, why do you think they're so mad

>>819700
How is he blue?!

>>819801
But cis women can have multiple orgasms.

>>819803
I see the error in my ways, sorry.