What is a woman? plus Last Supper in Paris Olympics discussion.

You own personal invented definitions of things mean nothing.

Can’t even find someone in the manosphere who agrees with you? Nothing from JD Vance?  Andrew Tate?  The Taliban?

You own personal invented definitions of things mean nothing.

Can’t even find someone in the manosphere who agrees with you? Nothing from JD Vance?  Andrew Tate?  The Taliban?

It was hard to define woman even for Illuminati therefore I just shared my own thoughts which may or may not be correct.

Sex (either male or female) is assigned at birth and can’t be changed afterwards? One’s sex may have assigned mistakenly at birth but it doesn’t mean one can change one’s sex after birth. 

LGBTQ+ are the people in different societies who feel their sex do not align with their mind/mental. They might be classified in societies but at least not in sex based gender. Would you agreed with someone who wants to be male rat despite having all the features of human just because he feels himself/herself male rat mentally? I believe no. Similarly, would you operate yourself by someone who claim that he/she is a surgeon? Definitely no, because you have to check his/her credentials. BTW taliban don't represent Islam. They don't even know what real Islam is. Anyway this is my personal views about them.

Apologies.  That comment wasn’t aimed at you or your original question.  It’s just another typically bonkers argument with someone else.  I should stop now, because it’s pointless.

You own personal invented definitions of things mean nothing.

No need to invent definitions.
Again, it is in the meaning of the words, an award for participation.
No where in the meaning of those words is there a requirement that everyone gets it.

Why are you so against honestly calling it what it is?
They certainly aren't awards for being the best. If they were they wouldn't need a separate division to allow them to participate.

Sex (either male or female) is assigned at birth and can’t be changed afterwards?

Tell that to clownfish.

No need to invent definitions.
Again, it is in the meaning of the words, an award for participation.
No where in the meaning of those words is there a requirement that everyone gets it.

Why are you so against honestly calling it what it is?
They certainly aren't awards for being the best. If they were they wouldn't need a separate division to allow them to participate

Still persisting in this absolute drivel I see.  Do I really need to explain that that sometimes two or more words used together have a specific meaning?

In politics there is nothing at all in the  words “left wing” or “right wing” to indicate that they are social and/or  economic positions, but anyone who pays any attention to the subject understands that they are. Many even know where the terms originate from.

Back to sport, there’s nothing in the words “gold medal” that says they are awarded for first place, but everyone understands that by convention they are.

Participation awards or participation trophies are similarly recognized terms in sport, that everyone uses the same way.  They are awards given just for participating, and yes, to everyone who participates.  That’s what the term means, regardless of your wailing that it should mean whatever you want it to.

That’s why you can’t find a single article, debate or published paper on the subject that matches your own personal invented definition.

You are no doubt aware that outside the world of sport the term is often used in a derogatory way.  Usually directed at millennials who are accused of expecting rewards for not achieving anything.  Despite the fact it’s not their bloody fault if their teachers handed them out when they were children.

That’s why you used it, because of the negative connotations. It’s an insult and apparently you don’t care that it’s just complete bollocks.  Now you’ve been reduced to denying that terms are a thing in language.  Hilarious.

Still persisting in this absolute drivel I see.  Do I really need to explain that that sometimes two or more words used together have a specific meaning?

No, you need to explain why an award given to someone who is competing in a separate division to allow them to participate because they couldn't compete in an unrestricted division shouldn't be considered or valued as a participation award.

It is NOT an award for being the best.

You are no doubt aware that outside the world of sport the term is often used in a derogatory way.

Not just outside. Also inside.
Because they weren't the best, they weren't even close, and so to many are not deserving of a medal.
Participating in a participation division, regardless of how well you do, is not achieving anything.

Usually directed at millennials who are accused of expecting rewards for not achieving anything.

No, usually directed at those giving them out as it is claimed to teach a sense of entitlement.

That’s why you used it, because of the negative connotations. It’s an insult and apparently you don’t care that it’s just complete bollocks.  Now you’ve been reduced to denying that terms are a thing in language.  Hilarious.

No, that isn't why I used it.
I used it because it is giving awards to people who are participating in a division made just for their participation.
That is not an insult.
It is being honest.

Again, why are you so opposed to such honesty?
You have already admitted that part of the reason the female only divisions exist, is so they can participate.
i.e. giving awards to people in this division, is giving awards to people who are not able to compete and win in an unrestricted division.

No, you need to explain why an award given to someone who is competing in a separate division to allow them to participate because they couldn't compete in an unrestricted division shouldn't be considered or valued as a participation award.

No, I don’t.  A participation award is a recognized term that has an actual meaning.

It’s no more whatever the fuck you want it to be than general relativity or quantum physics is.

Quote from: JackBlack on October 13, 2024, 01:52:22 PM

No, you need to explain why an award given to someone who is competing in a separate division to allow them to participate because they couldn't compete in an unrestricted division shouldn't be considered or valued as a participation award.

No, I don’t.  A participation award is a recognized term that has an actual meaning.

It’s no more whatever the fuck you want it to be than general relativity or quantum physics is.

It remains an award given to people when they are in a division made for participation.
So even if you don't want to consider it a participation award, why should it be valued differently to one.
They certainly weren't the best.

No one considers it a participation award, because it isn’t one.

If we are to take Jack on his word, we can then draw the line that all awards are participation awards.

No one considers it a participation award, because it isn’t one.

It certainly isn't an award for being the best.
And that is really the idea behind participation awards. Awards given to people who aren't the best (or 2nd or 3rd), but who still participated.

Quote from: Unconvinced on October 13, 2024, 02:25:12 PM

No one considers it a participation award, because it isn’t one.

It certainly isn't an award for being the best.
And that is really the idea behind participation awards. Awards given to people who aren't the best (or 2nd or 3rd), but who still participated.

Awards are given to the best people in the event, as opposed to everyone who competes.

The best in the local sports club or regional area, the best in their age group, the best in the weight class, the best of the people with one leg, the best in the lower divisions, and the best of the woman.

Sport is full of competitions and prizes for those who aren’t no 1 in the whole world.

You might only care about the absolute best out of everyone, but that doesn’t make everything else participation awards.

Awards are given to the best people in the event, as opposed to everyone who competes.

And apparently you think they are so bad, they need their own separate event to allow them to participate, i.e. not an award for being the best.

Why should a gold medal in the participation league be valued more than a 4th place in the real competition which usually would only get a participation award?

Clownfish are sequential hermaphrodites, also, they are not humans.

Quote from: Unconvinced on October 14, 2024, 11:49:11 AM

Awards are given to the best people in the event, as opposed to everyone who competes.

And apparently you think they are so bad, they need their own separate event to allow them to participate, i.e. not an award for being the best.

Why should a gold medal in the participation league be valued more than a 4th place in the real competition which usually would only get a participation award?

No I don’t think women are “so bad” at sport.  I think they have a very significant natural psychological disadvantage in a great many sports compared to men.  A woman beating all the other women at an event is as much an accomplishment as a man  beating all the other men.

Have we not been through this before?  Why are you asking the same question again?

Quote from: JackBlack on October 14, 2024, 12:25:06 PM

Quote from: Unconvinced on October 14, 2024, 11:49:11 AM

Awards are given to the best people in the event, as opposed to everyone who competes.

And apparently you think they are so bad, they need their own separate event to allow them to participate, i.e. not an award for being the best.

Why should a gold medal in the participation league be valued more than a 4th place in the real competition which usually would only get a participation award?

No I don’t think women are “so bad” at sport.  I think they have a very significant natural psychological disadvantage in a great many sports compared to men.  A woman beating all the other women at an event is as much an accomplishment as a man  beating all the other men.

Have we not been through this before?  Why are you asking the same question again?

Yes, we have been through this before. Where you effectively admitted that women are not good enough to compete with men so they need their own separate league for participation.
We have also been through how every body is different, and it isn't a simple binary divide of male/female.
You don't seem to care about a male which doesn't have the body required to beat the best man, but if they were female and otherwise the same suddenly they are worthy of more than a participation award?

Yes, we have been through this before. Where you effectively admitted that women are not good enough to compete with men so they need their own separate league for participation.
We have also been through how every body is different, and it isn't a simple binary divide of male/female.
You don't seem to care about a male which doesn't have the body required to beat the best man, but if they were female and otherwise the same suddenly they are worthy of more than a participation award?

I am such a male. 

Still can’t decide if you want sport to only be about the best, or if you want to give “participation awards” to men who “aren’t good enough”, I see.

Will you ever pick one of these mutually exclusive positions?

Still can’t decide if you want sport to only be about the best, or if you want to give “participation awards” to men who “aren’t good enough”, I see.

Will you ever pick one of these mutually exclusive positions?

My position is quite clear - I am opposed to this sexist BS. The exact option taken to remove it is less important than removing it, as it removes that sex based discrimination.

Someone shouldn't be rewarded just because their sex on average is worse at something. Especially not over someone else who isn't of that sex who isn't good enough to be the best for their sex yet still better than the one you want rewarded.

If you want a participation division, make it open to all who aren't good enough for the main division. Don't exclude people based upon their sex, and don't pretend winning in that division is in any way comparable to winning in the main division.