So, it’s just like boxing divisions, except it’s not like boxing divisions?
It is not identical to it.
No, moron. These are completely different.
No, they aren't.
Both are disqualified for doing something that would increase their performance.
Both are disqualified for being too good.
They are the best women. Durr.
I assume that was directed at Jura?
I expected you to maybe read the whole thing, and not just the parts you liked. The part you say I conveniently skipped over was saying how there are various conflicting studies saying different things meaning that more studies (like the one that you read) are required.
Yet you chose to quote that.
And now appeal to the conclusion.
Have you bothered reading the study, or just skimming through it to find the parts you like?
In conclusion, the results of the present investigation indicate that significant differences in strength and power relative to body mass, lean body mass, and muscle thickness exist between male and female strength and power athletes.
Meaning a male is stronger once you account for lean body mass and muscle thickness.
No, that isn't what it means. That is a very simple view.
First notice how they also appealed to body mass, not simply lean body mass and muscle thickness.
What you seem to be ignoring is that they were looking at (or at least reporting) 6 different items. Once you account for lean body mass, only 2 remain statistically significant.
In other words, the other become insignificant and you do not have a statistically significant difference between males and females once you account for lean body mass.
And due to other stats, this causes a significant issue as they claim in both males and females that 2 of these items are very strongly correlated, yet only one remains significantly difference between the sexes after accounting for lean body mass.
There are also other great quotes you appear to have skimmed past:
"A significant difference in squat and deadlift 1RM adjusted for muscle thickness of vastus lateralis, without a significant difference when adjusted for LBM, may support the idea that man and women used different movement strategies during weight-bearing exercises"
"In addition, significant correlations between the fascicle length of vastus lateralis and the squat and deadlift 1RMs, were found in men only. This difference may be due to different movement strategies between the sexes [38] that may influence the contribution of the different muscle groups to the final performance."
"A limitation of the present investigation is that lifting technique and muscle activation were not assessed and differences between men and women cannot be accounted for lifting strategies. Another limitation may consist in the use of a single muscle thickness to adjust the 1RM of multi-joint exercises. In addition, strength and conditioning programs followed by the participants in the years preceding this study, likely differ in several variables (e.g., number of upper and lower body exercises, training frequency, periodization model, etc.), and may have deeply influenced both performance and muscle morphology."
So it is no where near as clear as you want to make it.
The science is still very much undecided.
But the other things is, men and women DONT have the same body compositions.
Not all men have the same body composition. Not all women have the same body compositions.
You are basically that all men will be assumed to have the body composition of elite male athletes so they should be excluded from events with females.
You want to break people in some "ability" grouping.
HOW DO YOU PRACTICALLY DO THAT?!
I already provided an example of muscle mass.
If that is too hard, use their results.
Im still waiting for your solution in how you will get about 40-60% of the 14 000 Olympic athletes to be women.
Why should they be?
Why must it be 40-60% being women?
What is wrong with 25% or 75% being women?
Again, that is sexism talking.
What an amazing misrepresentation of point of view.
You mean an honest representation, pointing out the blatant sexism and hypocrisy of your view.
Ill address them point by point:
You mean as an almost inchorerent scattering of text where it isn't clear what you are trying to address?
How about you start with the fact that you want to treat all males as a monolithic unit that should be given the exact same treatment regardless of individual ability, while wanting to treat females as separate from males, even though you admit there is overlap; and how this is NOT providing equitable treatment?
Can someone crop one of the bell curves to JUST show the top 1%females against the resulting %of males who now qualify for "professional level"?
You are yet to provide any actual bell curves to do that with.
You can happily make up whatever BS you want. But that BS wont help you.
they will have an "equal" shot at being the best in an amatuer league.
they will have devoted their full time to fitness to bank up muscle and bone mass for their retirement years.
but they will not be paid for it.
Which can be said about plenty of people, not just women.
next up in olympic sports:
Again, it will come down to how many divisions there are.
There are already multiple divisions for boxing. Why not other sports?
You are basically complaining that there is more sport to watch.
No you moron, I’m saying that at the moment the best women playing against other top women is worth watching and is the best of women, add a few fading footballers and 16 year olds after magically finding they are “of the same ability”, who the fuck is going to watch that?
I'm not the moron here.
You are the one who literally said "it's the best of nothing".
You are the one saying you don't want to watch it, just because there are some men.
Just what is your issue with watching it?
What is it that you find so horrible that you can no longer bring yourself to watch it?
Is it the men competing there? The best of their ability bracket?
I guess you hate the Paralympics as well and think no one should watch it, as they aren't necessarily the best men or best women.
Likewise, I guess you hate most boxing divisions, as most aren't the best there either.