WTF are you on about now? Their own what? Their own Olympic Games for women, just not at the same time?
The real reason female sports were included in the Olympics.
It wasn't about giving them a chance.
The IOC refused to allow women to participate in sports like athletics. This refusal resulted in the formation of a "Women's Olympiad" which went on to become "Women's Olympic Games" with the IOC initially objecting to their use of the word "Olympic" so it change to "Women's World Games". Which then eventually resulted in the IOC wanting to take over and control it, with the founder of the IOC then saying "I do not approve of the participation of women in public competitions. In the Olympic Games, their primary role should be to crown the victors."
I’ve “admitted” nothing. Don’t put words in my mouth.
I'm not putting words in your mouth, just stating the implications of what you are saying.
You are saying the women cannot compete with the top athletes and so there are separate events to allow them to participate.
That is saying it has nothing to do with being fair and instead is to have them participate, i.e. given them participation awards.
A marginal difference, far outweighed by much more significant differences. Cultural differences, opportunity differences, funding differences etc.
Again, if that was the case you would expect it to be dominated by country, not by race (or groups of races).
I noticed how you’ve cut out and ignored my entire argument about why race is a far less significant factor than many other things.
Because your argument is not addressing when that is not the case.
This is really no different than to appealing to the difference between sexes.
It does nothing to negate the differences between race.
It is just a distraction.
Why even bother replying if you won’t address what I say?
If I decided to deflect by presenting an argument about how every pizza should have pineapple on it, would you bother addressing that?
Cyclists who take it seriously enough to compete at the top level don’t ride shit bikes. Equally, riders in equestrian events don’t ride shit horses.
And equally, those cyclists aren't lazy slobs.
A role that is dwarfed by other factors.
Not in all sports.
Again, I have not “admitted” that at all.
Yes, you have.
You stated "The reason is that sports, and certainly sporting competitions used to be thing for men, and we later decided that the other half of the world should be able to have a go too."
That is saying the purpose of it is for participation.
That is not saying it is for fairness. In fact it is implying it has nothing to do with fairness.
Stop inventing arguments for me that I do not make, you dishonest twat.
Stop trying to hide from the implication implications of what you saying you dishonest POS.
I'll remain honest about it.
So why are you talking about race at all, if you want to go all Gattaca, and profile individuals based on their genes?
For the same reason people like cowgirl want to focus on genes/chromosomes for sex.
Certain genes make your race.
Or do you want to suggest there is no genetic component to race, and that instead it is something entirely different?
It’s obviously absurd anyway. We don’t know enough to assess all the factors based on genes.
Just like sex.
But that doesn't stop people saying that if someone has a Y-chromosome they should be excluded from women's sport.
Then they’d have to test each athlete.
Or they can stick to the same suspicion based testing that is used for women's events.
And to what end? Why do this?
Again, if it was about fairness, it would be to make sport fair, to remove genetic advantage. You know the same argument people claim about
Black people and white people.
Which is not simplifying all those differences down to it.
If you would like a comparison, it would be like grouping together all flying things, including most birds and bats.
That isn't simplifying all the differences down to just flying or not.
It is just one way to group.
ie a very marginal difference
No, a significant difference.
that isn’t worth worrying about compared to the absolute clusterfuck that trying to segregate people based on race would be.
And the same can be said about segregating based on sex.
The difference is you are used to that sex based segregation and approve of it, but you don't for race.
I know this might surprise you, but for amateurs, men and women will often compete together. Especially at the casual level.
Yes, you really can.
No, you can't.
As you get higher up in competition, you are more likely to be able to, and that applies for both.
Out of 11000 athletes.
Again, how many were tested?
It’s your argument that it’s nothing to do with being fair.
And yet you say it is for their participation.
Except countries that have only tiny proportions of each other’s majority race probably don’t get to compete together in any sport.
Just like countries with very few good skiers will compete in skiing competitions.
It would fuck things up at local level too, but you I know you don’t care about that either.
No more so than sex based segregation.
There’s no contradiction.
There is plenty.
There are some saying it is about being fair, then try to make it purely about sex rather than any other factor that can contribute to fairness, and use arbitrary standards for what should constitute being "female" with no connection to fairness; and you then have contradictions for those saying it is about women participating, rather than actually about fairness.
It’s just about being sensible about what’s “fair”.
You mean it is about arbitrarily deciding what you think is worth it, and rejecting anything you don't think is worth it, showing you don't actually care about it being fair, and instead really want it to be about a group you want to participate being able to participate and "win".
One of the above is beneficial to society, the other is not.
They are equally beneficial to society.
The difference is one society would condemn as blatant racism while the other society is happy to ignore and pretend isn't blatant sexism.
While at the same time society is quite divided on how trans athletes and intersex and non-binary athletes should compete; with some saying they shouldn't be allowed to compete as women while others say they should.
And that results in society being divided and causing damage to society.
To understand this you would have to not be a total absolutist.
Or a sexist pig. To realise why your argument is BS, you would have to not be a sexist pig and be able to look past society conditioning you into what to accept as acceptable.
Kind of like how you need to look past people trying to say heterosexual marriage is good for society while gay marriage is not, and get past society conditioning people to be homophobic bigots.