Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
RED

Who is the moderator of this site?

Recommended Posts

Honest answer...yes. I am assuming men have danced since the beginning of time. Ballet is dance. I do not mean to be argumentative, but seriously, are there not more folks out there that do not believe that women should not engage in fighting or battle? I am shocked at how liberal this crowd is and it does make me question my perspective. Which is another reason my posts should not have been deleted!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So you believe no women in battle...no fighting.. I guess if they can not fight they should be submissive to any attacker?

 

Dude..Im as conservative as they come and in no way can fathom your way of thinking. Perhaps you have lost a match or two to women wrestlers?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It is very simple. I don't think girls should fight. To me, wrestling has always been about fighting. If you think girls should fight, God bless, but I don't understand for the life of me how you cannot understand another taking the position that girls shouldn't fight. Very simple stuff. If you believe otherwise, so be it.

 

----

 

not even mud wrestling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how individuals of ambiguous gender would factor into this discussion? In nearly 2 percent of the human population, what looks like a man is actually a genetic female, and vice versa. Often times the affected individual doesn't even know for quite some time. I guess this could significantly affect whether you turn down the doll aisle or the gun isle at Walmart.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intersex

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am sure that Red and others are right when they say that the number of women participants relative to Olympic slots is far lower than it is for men. But-- good or bad-- it's just not a factor in how the IOC does business. Go to any marathon-- there'll be a lot more male runners than female. Way more men play basketball. More me run track. But in all these sports, there are roughly equal number of Olympic medals for men and women. The number disparity may be more stark in wrestling, but the principle is applied across the board.

 

By the same token, my guess is that there are more women than men in gymnastics, but men are awarded the same number of medals (in fact, I think, one more).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am sure that Red and others are right when they say that the number of women participants relative to Olympic slots is far lower than it is for men. But-- good or bad-- it's just not a factor in how the IOC does business. Go to any marathon-- there'll be a lot more male runners than female. Way more men play basketball. More me run track. But in all these sports, there are roughly equal number of Olympic medals for men and women. The number disparity may be more stark in wrestling, but the principle is applied across the board.

 

By the same token, my guess is that there are more women than men in gymnastics, but men are awarded the same number of medals (in fact, I think, one more).

There are probably also many more women figure skaters in the world than men, but comparable numbers of medals. It's not the statistical analysis that I object to in this case. I agree it's unfair for men's wrestling to be reduced almost to the point of destruction because the IOC doesn't like an unequal number of medals, or too many medals. Those are all valid points. What's ridiculous is the idea that one group of people (such as RED in this case) can tell another group of people (women), what activities they should and shouldn't engage in because it's not "natural". Not that long ago in America, there were many people that felt that allowing black people to drink from the same water fountains as white wasn't "natural" either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting how Olympic boxing weight classes have fared over time. Wrestling has not been so fortunate. A few selections from wiki:

 

1904 - 7 wt classes

1924 - 8

1968 - 11

2004 - 11

2012 - 10

 

Women's boxing became an Olympic sport in 2012 with 3 weight classes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. I have nothing against women participating in combat sports like Boxing and wrestling. But personally, I have 0 interest in watching it. I find no entertainment value in it.

 

2. The only potential objection I have to women's combat sports is if it forces a reduction in the amount of men's weights. That appears to be the case right now. So for that reason, and that reason alone, I would prefer there be no women's wrestling. If it could be done independently, without negatively affecting mens wrestling, I would have no issue with it. This does not make me a misogynist. I f'n love women.

 

3. I feel the same way about Men's squash as I do about women's wrestling. I find no entertainment value in it. The only issue I have with it is the impact it might have on men's wrestling.

 

I have not done a scientific analysis on the matter, but I suspect my position on this issue is the most common one in the fan base. People need to be smart enough to understand that this position on the issue is not an anti-woman stance. It is a position that is anti-anything-that negatively-impacts-men's-wrestling position.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I couldn't care less one way or the other regarding women's wrestling. I think that it's great that they have an opportunity, but I don't watch it because the level of competition is so poor.

If inclusion of women's wrestling is needed to somehow "save" real wrestling, than so be it. We'll all pretend we're blown away by how great these female wrestlers are, and the PC drum will beat on.

That said, I'm not sure how some of the venom that has been thrown at RED can be justified. I'm a relatively young, socially moderate to liberal guy, but this idea that there is simply no gender lines in any area is insane. Thousands (millions?) of years of societal norms and roles can't be washed away by one generation of (often illogically) PC liberalism.

I like to watch sports at the highest level, because I like to see exactly the limit of what a particular sport my be. Whether it's cycling, swimming, tennis, whatever, the truly elite on the planet are fascinating to me. Watching women's wrestling doesn't approach what the sport's elite level truly is, and to pretend that it does is disingenuous.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I couldn't care less one way or the other regarding women's wrestling. I think that it's great that they have an opportunity, but I don't watch it because the level of competition is so poor.

If inclusion of women's wrestling is needed to somehow "save" real wrestling, than so be it. We'll all pretend we're blown away by how great these female wrestlers are, and the PC drum will beat on.

That said, I'm not sure how some of the venom that has been thrown at RED can be justified. I'm a relatively young, socially moderate to liberal guy, but this idea that there is simply no gender lines in any area is insane. Thousands (millions?) of years of societal norms and roles can't be washed away by one generation of (often illogically) PC liberalism.

I like to watch sports at the highest level, because I like to see exactly the limit of what a particular sport my be. Whether it's cycling, swimming, tennis, whatever, the truly elite on the planet are fascinating to me. Watching women's wrestling doesn't approach what the sport's elite level truly is, and to pretend that it does is disingenuous.

 

Well said. But you will get bashed now by the White Knights.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Saying that you don't like watching women's wrestling because you don't consider it entertaining is not the problem. What has angered many of the people here are the comments that women should not even be wrestling, and that the sport shouldn't exist. It has nothing to do with being "liberal PC". It's very arrogant to tell people what activities they should or should not engage in. As for whether you watch, that's a separate issue. 99 percent of the world would never watch men's wrestling either.

 

As for disparaging the quality of women's wrestling, I would only caution that you could make the same remarks about almost any women's sport. It's disingenuous to call something vastly inferior simply because it doesn't have the same speed and power as the men's version. Women's basketball is slower and less dynamic than men's. And as a result, most people don't watch it. And that's cool. But you don't hear many folks complaining about how the women who play are not at an elite level, compared to other women (which is the only comparison that should matter anyway). The fact that an elite high school boy could beat an Olympic champ woman at the same weight is irrelevant. Boys that are elite high school track and field athletes could also win the women's Olympics, and in many cases set World records, while barely winning a state medal. There are differences between men and women. Let's not let the incompetence of FILA and the IOC cause finger pointing in the wrong direction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am sure that Red and others are right when they say that the number of women participants relative to Olympic slots is far lower than it is for men. But-- good or bad-- it's just not a factor in how the IOC does business. Go to any marathon-- there'll be a lot more male runners than female. Way more men play basketball. More me run track. But in all these sports, there are roughly equal number of Olympic medals for men and women. The number disparity may be more stark in wrestling, but the principle is applied across the board.

 

By the same token, my guess is that there are more women than men in gymnastics, but men are awarded the same number of medals (in fact, I think, one more).

There are probably also many more women figure skaters in the world than men, but comparable numbers of medals. It's not the statistical analysis that I object to in this case. I agree it's unfair for men's wrestling to be reduced almost to the point of destruction because the IOC doesn't like an unequal number of medals, or too many medals. Those are all valid points. What's ridiculous is the idea that one group of people (such as RED in this case) can tell another group of people (women), what activities they should and shouldn't engage in because it's not "natural". Not that long ago in America, there were many people that felt that allowing black people to drink from the same water fountains as white wasn't "natural" either.

 

I am somewhat confused by your logic. I do not think women should wrestle; therefore, I am arrogant? So all people that don't think women should wrestle are arrogant? I really don't get it. I really don't think arrogance enters into the equation, but then again, you are also entitled to your opinion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The logic is simply that you shouldn't be in the business of telling 50 percent of the population what they can and can't participate in as far as athletic activities. It says that you think you know better than they do what they should be doing. Hence the arrogance. Very similar to the situation in Major League Baseball back in the era of Jackie Robinson when many thought that blacks should not be allowed to play because it was innatural. Or that the races should not mix in schools. Or that women should not be allowed to vote. Fortunately these views are diminishing over time

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wait, do you not have "opinions" as to what people should and should not do? If you believe there is something people shouldn't do, would that opinion make you arrogant? I don't think women should wrestle; I am not telling them not to. I just don't think they should. Let's take hunting as an example. There are people in this world that are against hunting. Does that make them arrogant?

 

Seriously, you make no sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait, do you not have "opinions" as to what people should and should not do? If you believe there is something people shouldn't do, would that opinion make you arrogant? I don't think women should wrestle; I am not telling them not to. I just don't think they should. Let's take hunting as an example. There are people in this world that are against hunting. Does that make them arrogant?

 

Seriously, you make no sense.

Actually I think I make a lot of sense. But we can agree to disagree. I generally only have opinions regarding people's personal choices if it negatively impacts me or society. But if no laws are broken and things don't affect me or others in any way (which they clearly don't by participating in sports they enjoy), then I don't have opinions regarding what they choose to do. As for your hunting example......there are current populations of Native Americans, especially in Alaska, that depend on subsistence hunting to live. So yes, it would be ridiculous to tell them they can't hunt. And most people that are "against" hunting, whatever that means, have no problem eating processed meat that comes from animals kept in small cages....but that's another issue entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Saying that you don't like watching women's wrestling because you don't consider it entertaining is not the problem. What has angered many of the people here are the comments that women should not even be wrestling, and that the sport shouldn't exist. It has nothing to do with being "liberal PC". It's very arrogant to tell people what activities they should or should not engage in. As for whether you watch, that's a separate issue. 99 percent of the world would never watch men's wrestling either.

 

As for disparaging the quality of women's wrestling, I would only caution that you could make the same remarks about almost any women's sport. It's disingenuous to call something vastly inferior simply because it doesn't have the same speed and power as the men's version. Women's basketball is slower and less dynamic than men's. And as a result, most people don't watch it. And that's cool. But you don't hear many folks complaining about how the women who play are not at an elite level, compared to other women (which is the only comparison that should matter anyway). The fact that an elite high school boy could beat an Olympic champ woman at the same weight is irrelevant. Boys that are elite high school track and field athletes could also win the women's Olympics, and in many cases set World records, while barely winning a state medal. There are differences between men and women. Let's not let the incompetence of FILA and the IOC cause finger pointing in the wrong direction.

 

If you think the only difference between mens' and womens' wrestling is the strength and speed of the athletes, you haven't been paying attention. I'm guessing there is a ratio of at least 1k to 1 male to female participation in the sport. To be the best women's wrestler in the world would be roughly the equivalent of being the best male wrestler in a county in PA. The skill disparity is as big a gap as any physical difference.

Women's basketball is awful as well, I'm glad you recognize that. That's why the WNBA has about 10 viewers, mostly women who are "interested" in other women.

Female gymnastics, figure skating, diving...all great. Even golf and tennis can be entertaining. Wrestling? Just stop with the nonsense about how it's somehow a flaw for someone NOT to be supportive of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An amazing thread.

 

If eliminating women's wrestling is the panacea for enhancing "the standing" of men's wrestling on the international stage, how are you going to bring that about? Not in theory, but in practice.

 

It's not enough to say that one thinks women shouldn't wrestle. That offers nothing and would hardly influence decision-makers.

 

WHAT SHOULD BE DONE?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While I don't have an objection to women wrestling or even in the Olympics, I do share the same opinion as angry fish...if it's going to have a negative impact on mens wrestling then I have a problem with it.

 

I'd like to agree with some and say forget the Olympics and just concentrate on the World Championships, go back to as many weights as we want and go from there. The problem is I think we would lose a great deal without the "Olympic Movement".

 

Like most, I just don't see the reason the IOC refuses to add weight classes. Give everybody eight or ten and call it good. I realize it would still leave the medal percentage at 33%, which is obviously a major concern for the IOC. Why can't they add women's greco to help the percentage out? Sure, few would want to watch womens greco but what do I care if it means I get to watch more men have opportunities? Give everyone 8 weight classes in each style and reach the 50% for all I care.

 

Bottom line, it's pretty obvious that the sport of wrestling has lost it's appeal to the IOC and they could really care less about our sport. We don't make money for them and they could care less about the history and it's "place" in the Olympics because of it. I realize more medals / participants means more money spent by the IOC but some quick research (The Olympic Movement generated a total of more than US$4 billion, €2.5 billion in revenue during the Olympic quadrennium from 2001 to 2004.) shows they make BILLIONS...so what's a little more for one of the original Olympic Sports?

 

Going back to the medal count percentage. Are we on the verge (taking for granted we stay in the Olympics) of going to a 4-4-8 medal count down the road? That would put us at 50%?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think the only difference between mens' and womens' wrestling is the strength and speed of the athletes, you haven't been paying attention. I'm guessing there is a ratio of at least 1k to 1 male to female participation in the sport. To be the best women's wrestler in the world would be roughly the equivalent of being the best male wrestler in a county in PA. The skill disparity is as big a gap as any physical difference.

Women's basketball is awful as well, I'm glad you recognize that. That's why the WNBA has about 10 viewers, mostly women who are "interested" in other women.

Female gymnastics, figure skating, diving...all great. Even golf and tennis can be entertaining. Wrestling? Just stop with the nonsense about how it's somehow a flaw for someone NOT to be supportive of it.

But it sounds like you're just mad that a sport with few competitors is having a negative effect on mens wrestling. Most people would agree with you that it's a shame. But that's a separate issue of saying that women should not wrestle (which I don't think was your view, but was definitely the view of RED and perhaps others). Saying women's basketball is terrible (which of course would be highly controversial) doesn't mean it shouldn't be a sport, does it? If you had a daughter that wanted to play basketball, would you tell her she shouldn't play because women's basketball is awful and nobody will watch it on TV? And you do realize that far more people watch women's basketball than men's wrestling, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wrestling is a fringe sport. Basketball is a huge multi billion dollar mainstream industry.

 

I don't understand why basketball is so popular in general but its obvious why womens basketball has more viewers then any type of wrestling.

 

A better comparison IMO would be the UFC viewership vs. womens basketball, since the UFC has become a type of pro league for mens wrestlers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you think the only difference between mens' and womens' wrestling is the strength and speed of the athletes, you haven't been paying attention. I'm guessing there is a ratio of at least 1k to 1 male to female participation in the sport. To be the best women's wrestler in the world would be roughly the equivalent of being the best male wrestler in a county in PA. The skill disparity is as big a gap as any physical difference.

Women's basketball is awful as well, I'm glad you recognize that. That's why the WNBA has about 10 viewers, mostly women who are "interested" in other women.

Female gymnastics, figure skating, diving...all great. Even golf and tennis can be entertaining. Wrestling? Just stop with the nonsense about how it's somehow a flaw for someone NOT to be supportive of it.

But it sounds like you're just mad that a sport with few competitors is having a negative effect on mens wrestling. Most people would agree with you that it's a shame. But that's a separate issue of saying that women should not wrestle (which I don't think was your view, but was definitely the view of RED and perhaps others). Saying women's basketball is terrible (which of course would be highly controversial) doesn't mean it shouldn't be a sport, does it? If you had a daughter that wanted to play basketball, would you tell her she shouldn't play because women's basketball is awful and nobody will watch it on TV? And you do realize that far more people watch women's basketball than men's wrestling, right?

 

I'm not mad about anything, but I am concerned that this could have an adverse effect on real wrestling. My daughter doesn't play basketball, but she is very active (gymnastics) and committed. I enjoy watching her compete, but I would allow her to wrestle (she never wanted to). I think there are many potential issues that can come from it that would have a negative impact on her life.

Re: TV ratings between basketball and wrestling, it's apples and oranges. ESPN carries WNBA programming as filler, and it has horrific ratings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...