Boy Refuses to Wrestle Girl

[Galactus]

While I see what you mean, I would also like to point out that you are a bit unfair. When women want to have their own sports competition, nobody thinks badly about it. There is no call to automatically assume "testosterone-fueled comradeship" as the motivating factor.

Err, you haven't heard those jokes about female footballers?

[kiko]

Err, you haven't heard those jokes about female footballers?

No, not really

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Well, that was just to counter any possible argument stemming from that, really. I wouldn't expect it to happen, if one is focused on the match and the sport, but anything's possible, and I'd be surprised if a co-ed match was the first place it ever happened. (If one is to believe pictures on the internet, it definitely has happened, and isn't limited in such a way. :lol:)

kiko, that's the phrase MC used in his post. I didn't just come up with it for the sake of it.

[kiko]

Well, that was just to counter any possible argument stemming from that, really. I wouldn't expect it to happen, if one is focused on the match and the sport, but anything's possible, and I'd be surprised if a co-ed match was the first place it ever happened. (If one is to believe pictures on the internet, it definitely has happened, and isn't limited in such a way. :lol:)

kiko, that's the phrase MC used in his post. I didn't just come up with it for the sake of it.

No doubt. The thing is, that it discounts the real concerns of teenage boys. Of course, it is easy to make fun of it. But I don't think just telling them to tough it out and get over it is a very sensible way to do it. Especially considered that from the anecdotal evidence in this thread, the female opponents where not exactly on the right end of the Gaussian bell.

[Edda van Heefmstra Ruston]

Okay, what are the real concerns?

[Merentha]

No, its not fair; there should be boys and girls wrestling. In other sports it doesn't matter as much, but the dominant US social mores do say men should not beat up women.

They're not beating up women, they're competing in a sport both voluntarily agreed to enter.

And even if they are the same weight, are they evenly matched? Men on the vast average do have more upper body strength than women. So, putting men and women on the same team in that category may actually be unfair and inequitable to both. Your team mate beat this girl by a large margin.

No, they probably aren't evenly matched. That's what tournaments are for, to show that some people are better than others (at specific things). As for putting them in the same team, everyone is seeded based on win/loss records or seeding rounds within the weight class. If she can compete in her weight class, then the seedings have done their job, and she should be able to compete. She'll have disadvantages against men, sure. But men have disadvantages against men too. If I got thrown into a 140-150lb range, I'd get crushed because I'm 5'11". Doesn't mean I shouldn't compete in my weight class if I've found ways to get around that. Same goes for her.

Its not being anti feminist to acknowledge that men and women are quite different, and, to know what effects those differences are likely to have.

True. But that doesn't mean they have to be separated.

I fence, which, at all but the highest levels, typically has a mixed and a womens' event. This is because the men normally dominate the mixed events, thanks to height and muscle advantages. However, there is no reason to exclude women from competing in these events if they so choose, so they don't. Men, however, typically aren't allowed in the womens' events because of the aforementioned advantages. Does this mean that women can typically fence twice as much at a given tournament? Yes (and since you pay per event, rather than per tournament, that gets balanced out too). Do the women typically struggle at the higher edges of the mixed competitions? Yes. Does anyone bow out of a match because they don't think its fair to fence someone shorter and with less muscle mass? No. If women are at that level of competition, they've earned it. The women know this going in, too. Our best female fencers cleans up at womens' events, but often barely get out of seeding rounds at larger mixed venues. And they know this, because competing against people who have massive advantages and beating them at it is fun.

I don't think the boy acted wrongly here. I think the culture surrounding sports and women is detrimental to women in general and all sexes of athletes, and it should be changed, but I applaud Iowa for allowing women to compete in mixed events.

[Gilgamesh]

Girl gets in the ring with me, I punch her in the face. Nothing personal. Doesn't bother me in the slightest.

[Balefont]

The earlier boys learn to respect women in sports as competitors, the better human beings they will be. As someone said before, a person chooses to be there and is fully aware of the consequences (win, lose, injury, etc.). There is always a winner and it shouldn't matter if the winner is a boy or a girl. This whole, "Dude, you got beat by a girl" bullshit needs to be erased from humankind. The earlier the age, the better.

If a guy ever held back when sparring with me, I'd be pissed.

My daughter is on her way back from the Air Soft arena. There were over 40 kids there today when I dropped her off - she was the only girl. All the boys were soooo jealous of her ghillie suit. I hope she kicked some ass like she usually does. :P I never hear her guy friends scoff about her being a girl kicking their ass.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

They're not beating up women, they're competing in a sport both voluntarily agreed to enter.

No, they probably aren't evenly matched. That's what tournaments are for, to show that some people are better than others (at specific things). As for putting them in the same team, everyone is seeded based on win/loss records or seeding rounds within the weight class. If she can compete in her weight class, then the seedings have done their job, and she should be able to compete. She'll have disadvantages against men, sure. But men have disadvantages against men too. If I got thrown into a 140-150lb range, I'd get crushed because I'm 5'11". Doesn't mean I shouldn't compete in my weight class if I've found ways to get around that. Same goes for her.

True. But that doesn't mean they have to be separated.

I fence, which, at all but the highest levels, typically has a mixed and a womens' event. This is because the men normally dominate the mixed events, thanks to height and muscle advantages. However, there is no reason to exclude women from competing in these events if they so choose, so they don't. Men, however, typically aren't allowed in the womens' events because of the aforementioned advantages. Does this mean that women can typically fence twice as much at a given tournament? Yes (and since you pay per event, rather than per tournament, that gets balanced out too). Do the women typically struggle at the higher edges of the mixed competitions? Yes. Does anyone bow out of a match because they don't think its fair to fence someone shorter and with less muscle mass? No. If women are at that level of competition, they've earned it. The women know this going in, too. Our best female fencers cleans up at womens' events, but often barely get out of seeding rounds at larger mixed venues. And they know this, because competing against people who have massive advantages and beating them at it is fun.

I don't think the boy acted wrongly here. I think the culture surrounding sports and women is detrimental to women in general and all sexes of athletes, and it should be changed, but I applaud Iowa for allowing women to compete in mixed events.

Tournaments are supposed to pit skill against skill, in areas where it is fair to do so. You make my argument for me when you wrote how men are not allowed in womens fencing events due to the mans longer reach, etc. For similar reasons due to a mans heightened strength, men should not be wrestling with women. They may weigh the same, but its in no way a truly equal match.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

tournaments are set up based on seeding based on records, etc. the number one seed cannot simply be reseeded because he had objections to wrestling the number eight seed. that throws the whole thing out of order.

Ah...thank you for that clarification. Its much appreciated.

[Merentha]

Tournaments are supposed to pit skill against skill, in areas where it is fair to do so. You make my argument for me when you wrote how men are not allowed in womens fencing events due to the mans longer reach, etc. For similar reasons due to a mans heightened strength, men should not be wrestling with women. They may weigh the same, but its in no way a truly equal match.

But the women are allowed to fence with men. They just also get a second venue in which to compete. See the difference? Its led to some interesting differences in womens' styles, too.

[TrueMetis]

Tournaments are supposed to pit skill against skill, in areas where it is fair to do so. You make my argument for me when you wrote how men are not allowed in womens fencing events due to the mans longer reach, etc. For similar reasons due to a mans heightened strength, men should not be wrestling with women. They may weigh the same, but its in no way a truly equal match.

By that logic weight classes should only be a few pounds difference, because in a fight a ten pound difference can mean a lot. (Not that wrestling counts as actual fighting mind you)

[Gertrude]

Just skimmed the thread (and am heading out the door after this) but I did want to comment.

I get that it's not fair for either one - the girl who wants to compete but doesn't have a girls' team to join, and the adolescent who doesn't quite know how to deal with this for various reasons. My brothers had a girl on their team and it never bothered them to practice against her, but it was mostly because in my house we grew up wrestling - proper form and all - so they were used to the idea. I was also not allowed to wrestle against the boys in gym class in grade school, but whatever. I didn't really care about wrestling, it was just something to do.

What I really wanted to say is this - I very badly wanted to play little league football when I was young. My dad coached and I practiced with the team. At the time highschools didn't allow girls to play, so that was the rules the little league adhered to as well. My dad fought for me, but they didn't budge. I was heartbroken. I didn't care if I was good or not, I just wanted to compete and to use the skills I had worked hard to learn. I loved the sport and wasn't allowed to be taken seriously in it. So yeah, whatever awkwardness the boys are feeling in this situation is temporary compared to the longer lasting impact of telling a girl she can't play because she pees siting down. I can still call up the feelings and I cried myself to sleep that night. I think everyone here is on the same page more or less, I just wanted to say that.

[Insert Edit]

There are all kinds of levels of athletics. On the world stage, there are basically two women's hockey teams worth a damn, the US and Canada. They routinely blow their other competition out, sometimes the mercy rule is even invoked.

These women have no competition to play against in their own sex.

Are they good enough to play in the NHL? No. If they come out and play at the men's collegiate level, some will fit right in. Come down to the community rec center and skate with the boys in a rec league? They'll embarrass you.

Haley Wickenheiser used to sometimes skate for fun with a media league here in Calgary. Pretty competitive hockey. She was like a woman among girls.

Everything is relative.

[Tempra]

So looking at this whole situation I think this kid is a coward. Oh his FAITH won't let him? BS. He or his parents just don't want him losing to a girl. It's especially galling to me because he did it at State. This was no regular season match where it just goes down as one loss. He was a wrestler who could have won the championship but chose to chicken out of possibly losing to "the lesser sex". I find nothing heroic about his stand.

Why? Seriously, why? The kid showed nothing but class surrounding the whole situation. He did not bitch and moan that a girl was allowed to compete against guys. He didn't cry about how unfair it was that he had to forfeit a match. He merely said that he does not believe it is acceptable for men to engage women in wrestling, and therefore he will forfeit his match. You want to attack this kid and call him a coward? Regardless of whether you believe his religious beliefs are heartfelt, is there any need to attack this kid so harshly? The fact that this kid would do it at State lends credence to the fact that his beliefs are heartfelt. There were probably college recruiters on hand, and he still chose to forfeit instead of possibly winning an IOWA State Championship, likely guaranteeing him a full scholarship to a number of prestigious schools.

The only cowardice I see is that of petty message board warriors attacking a poor kid who chose to stick fast to his beliefs.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

Why? Seriously, why? The kid showed nothing but class surrounding the whole situation. He did not bitch and moan that a girl was allowed to compete against guys. He didn't cry about how unfair it was that he had to forfeit a match. He merely said that he does not believe it is acceptable for men to engage women in wrestling, and therefore he will forfeit his match. You want to attack this kid and call him a coward? Regardless of whether you believe his religious beliefs are heartfelt, is there any need to attack this kid so harshly? The fact that this kid would do it at State lends credence to the fact that his beliefs are heartfelt. There were probably college recruiters on hand, and he still chose to forfeit instead of possibly winning an IOWA State Championship, likely guaranteeing him a full scholarship to a number of prestigious schools.

The only cowardice I see is that of petty message board warriors attacking a poor kid who chose to stick fast to his beliefs.

[/quote/]

I agree with you Tempra, those who assign notions that THEY may hold to this young man are out of place. Additionally, by forfeiting that match, by default, he DID lose to the girl. Peoples deeply held religious faith should not be mocked.

[Guy Kilmore]

The interesting thing to me in this story, is that there were two boys willing to wrestle two girls during this competition. What were the motivating factors for them?

[Jaime L]

For similar reasons due to a mans heightened strength, men should not be wrestling with women.

There is no girl's wrestling. High School sports funding is limited enough as is. If they're passionate about this sport, girls can either wrestle with boys or not at all. Why should that be taken away?

They may weigh the same, but its in no way a truly equal match.

If the girls can't hack it based on upper strength limitations they don't even make the team let alone the tournament. These two girls were obviously good enough to make this tournament so clearly that's not the problem here. People play sports because it's the ultimate meritocracy, and this problem has a meritocratic solution. It's crazy to me whenever people try to limit that.

[Kouran]

I see both sides of the argument here. I was raised in a very competative family. As kids in my family you never expected to win a game unless you were actually better than your opponent. I was also raised to believe no matter what you never hit a girl/woman. If I was in the position of the first kid, I would have forfited as well. It might sound sexist, and maybe it is, but I simply couldnt bring myself to inflict physical punishment on a girl for sport.

I do however applaud the girls for making state, that is in no way a small thing.

[naz]

A few points:

1. As has been said, competing was purely voluntary on the girls' behalf. If they've managed to get over the issues which we deem them too young to handle, then others can. And should.

2. The issues shouldn't change simply because of their adolescence. This is the age in which we're supposed to be teaching them how to deal with these things. If they don't deal with them now, they won't be prepared to deal with them as adults.

3. I find it odd that people are bringing up the point that it's a violent contact sport and the approach changes when there's now a female involved. If you have reservations about inflicting violence upon a girl, then shouldn't you have the same reservations about inflicting violence upon anyone, regardless of gender? What I mean is that, when one chooses to wrestle competitively, one has already made peace with the fact that they're 'inflicting violence' upon another. The 'violence' is not real, it's not hostile, it's consensual, and it's done in a spirit of fair play and sportsmanship. If that's so, why can't the same attitude be taken when wrestling someone of another gender? It's a matter of respecting your opponent; both sides have mutually made a social contract that says, "Hey, the 'violence' I'm going to inflict on you is all in good fun and competition. So bring it, motherfucker."

4. If the above is an acceptable social contract, then why should gender matter? Because there's the other social contract that says women are the 'weaker sex'? Isn't that particular social contract decidedly on the way out? If not, shouldn't it be?