Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Should women be allowed to play football with men? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/leicestershire/4081894.stm
Coach kicks off football debate

England is playing host to the Women's Euro 2005 tournament
The law banning women from playing football with men at the highest level should be reviewed, an academic says.
Dr Jean Williams, a UEFA coach, says female players face embedded inequality as contact sports are exempt from equal opportunities legislation.

The De Montfort University lecturer wants sports chiefs to look at the rules which restrict women from playing in the top professional leagues.

FA regulations segregate male and female players from the age of 12.

The problem of deeply embedded inequality is encapsulated by the use of the very term 'women's football'

Dr Jean Williams, De Montfort University

Dr Williams, a UEFA-certified coach and former player, said: "Why shouldn't women be allowed to compete at the highest level?

"I think that goes across all sports and not just football.

"I think we need to look at equal opportunities law to review whether women should be allowed to compete at the highest level."

She will give a keynote speech about women in football at an international conference on Monday, timed to coincide with the current Uefa Women's Football Tournament being held in England.

'Passionate views'

"The problem of deeply embedded inequality is encapsulated by the use of the very term 'women's football'," she said.

"There are formal and informal systems discriminating against women that have been developed over the last century and these must be dismantled if the sport is really to be advanced.

"Football seems to have engaged passionate views about whether women can, may and ought to play for a relatively long time and most people will have an opinion, specialist or not."

She will speaking at The International Football Institute Conference 2005: Women, Football and Europe at the University of Lancashire.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Should men and women play football together at the highest level? Or is this a step too far for sexual equality? Are you a footballer, if so how would it affect your team?

This debate is now closed. Thank you for your comments.

I recently signed for and promptly left a US Co-ed team in a Co-ed league (mixed male and female). The reason I left? I threw in a Gerrard style tackle in midfield and was booed when the player went down. I didn't realise until after the tackle that it was a woman I sent flying. She was unable to continue and I was booed for the rest of the match. Sorry people, but women physically cannot play football at the highest level.
Craig, Liverpool, Living in the USA


Woman can't compete on an equal field where strength is required

James Bateman, High Wycombe
When the Williams sisters were at 1 and 2 in the world, I remember listening to a programme where McEnroe was asked where they would be ranked in the men's table. I was shocked when he said around position 100. Woman can't compete on an equal field where strength is required. However they should compete in things like snooker and darts. (Paula Radcliffe is the one exception.)
James Bateman, High Wycombe


Including women does not work, I've played in mixed sides and the women either get hurt or more usually, the men pull out of tackles and don't play their normal game. Either way it messes the game up.
Jez, Blackpool


Clearly women will fail to match men at the highest level in soccer, just as they cannot match them in tennis. Why do men have to play five sets of tennis while women only play three? Yet the women now earn as much prize money as the men in tennis. Surely the men should be demanding equality, by playing fewer sets or getting more money for playing more tennis.
James Green


Yet another example of Political Correctness gone mad. I take it all sports would include boxing. The only people that would benefit would be the world's lawyers, as they line up to take on the ensuing claims of neglect and blame that any sensible person can see would ensue from allowing both sexes to compete in physical contact sports.
H Morrison, Lincoln


Women are not yet ready for football at the top level. Their skill levels can be quite high but they cannot compete with the men. I notice that most of those saying yes are from North America where soccer is viewed as a kid's/women's game. I don't think many women would survive a Roy Keane tackle.
Mark, Grangemouth


I can see it now. In a few years there will be legislation making it illegal for any football team to have less than 50% women, and what about disabled people?
Clive Webster, St Helens, UK


Why not start with snooker and darts?

What is snooker?

Snooker is similar to pool...but different......

Anyways, I am not in for a Feminism debate...I got my ass handed to my in the last one......

i dont think women should be allowed to play football with men at the highest level.
men are much more stronger and physical and it woudnt be nice for men to go around kicking and tackling women, it just doesnt feel right
i agree with mark

would you like a woman to take a man on at boxing?
no of course not

Originally posted by Deano
i dont think women should be allowed to play football with men at the highest level.
men are much more stronger and physical and it woudnt be nice for men to go around kicking and tackling women, it just doesnt feel right
i agree with mark

would you like a woman to take a man on at boxing?
no of course not

I think they should if they can compete on the level......if they are as good as the other Footballers sure thing, let them play with them....although the first time this happens only female teams would be a double standard...but I guess people could agree to that.....

If a woman can actually compete and play on the level of the men playing the sport, then go for it, she can play for all I care. Just so long as she doesn't start bitching if she gets tackled by a man who's bigger and stronger then her.

That said, women should get no special treatment or special rules, if they want to play with men then they need to be able to keep up and play properly with men, if they can't, then they should keep their ass in the womans league.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think they should if they can compete on the level......if they are as good as the other Footballers sure thing, let them play with them....although the first time this happens only female teams would be a double standard...but I guess people could agree to that.....

it would be very rare for a women to compete at the very high level

Originally posted by BackFire
If a woman can actually compete and play on the level of the men playing the sport, then go for it, she can play for all I care. Just so long as she doesn't start bitching if she gets tackled by a man who's bigger and stronger then her.

That said, women should get no special treatment or special rules, if they want to play with men then they need to be able to keep up and play properly with men, if they can't, then they should keep their ass in the womans league.

i agree but i still think men woudnt wanna go in for a full blown tackle against a women

Always an interesting qustion- why no decent female chess players?

Originally posted by Deano
it would be very rare for a women to compete at the very high level

Possible, I don't know...they should be alowed to though......

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Always an interesting qustion- why no decent female chess players?

Hm, i heard of a rather young female chess player, but you are right non of the really great players (or only few), maybe its the different Idea of competing .....

Originally posted by Bardock42
Possible, I don't know...they should be alowed to though......



Hm, i heard of a rather young female chess player, but you are right non of the really great players (or only few), maybe its the different Idea of competing .....

as this guy said:

Clearly women will fail to match men at the highest level in soccer, just as they cannot match them in tennis. Why do men have to play five sets of tennis while women only play three? Yet the women now earn as much prize money as the men in tennis.

Originally posted by Deano
as this guy said:

Clearly women will fail to match men at the highest level in soccer, just as they cannot match them in tennis. Why do men have to play five sets of tennis while women only play three? Yet the women now earn as much prize money as the men in tennis.

Well yes I guess they won't but that'*S not the point..they should have the right...

AQd they earn as much money because people seem to watch it as much as they wattch male tennis,...its not aboot the effort they bring but just an easy equation....many people watching lots of money.....same amount of people watching same amount of money.....

Not to be generalising, but the fact is that even the very best women football players are shit compared to the best males. It doesn't even measure as worth comparing.

They play a completely different style of football. They only wanna be in with the men so they can say "Look what we did girlfriends! Right on sisters!" Despite the fact that they'll be getting laughed at when they're getting whooped.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not to be generalising, but the fact is that even the very best women football players are shit compared to the best males. It doesn't even measure as worth comparing.

They play a completely different style of football. They only wanna be in with the men so they can say "Look what we did girlfriends! Right on sisters!" Despite the fact that they'll be getting laughed at when they're getting whooped.

-AC

so true

heres the woman defender coming up against ronaldo now! whats gonna happen?
today its gonna be a tough miffield battle for roy keane as he faces georgina big breasts

it just woudnt work, as harsh as im sounding

ive got an idea, why not let women fight men at boxing

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Not to be generalising, but the fact is that even the very best women football players are shit compared to the best males. It doesn't even measure as worth comparing.

They play a completely different style of football. They only wanna be in with the men so they can say "Look what we did girlfriends! Right on sisters!" Despite the fact that they'll be getting laughed at when they're getting whooped.

-AC

well I know, and they shouldn't be allowed to play just to play, they have to be good to play there....and this would probably never happen buit the right should be there.......

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y42/hotspringsturtle/RadicalFemisismorComeuppance.jpg

Actually we have already debated the women football players to death. Jackie Malfoy started the thread in this very section.

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=315297&highlight=Women+football

That stuff is gold. Everyone made an ass of themselves

Originally posted by BackFire
If a woman can actually compete and play on the level of the men playing the sport, then go for it, she can play for all I care. Just so long as she doesn't start bitching if she gets tackled by a man who's bigger and stronger then her.

That said, women should get no special treatment or special rules, if they want to play with men then they need to be able to keep up and play properly with men, if they can't, then they should keep their ass in the womans league.

I pretty much agree with this.. besides.. why cant guys just have something thats just for guys.. same with girls.. ?

I figure if you have the skill, you have the right to play.

Originally posted by Dogbert
That stuff is gold. Everyone made an ass of themselves

you gonna post your opinion?

Backfire posted my opinion in their for me.

Originally posted by Deano
i dont think women should be allowed to play football with men at the highest level.
men are much more stronger and physical and it woudnt be nice for men to go around kicking and tackling women, it just doesnt feel right
i agree with mark

would you like a woman to take a man on at boxing?
no of course not No but they do http://espn.go.com/boxing/s/2003/0206/1504885.html

1999: What was billed as the "first" sanctioned bout between a man
and a woman takes place in Seattle, Wash. Margaret McGregor faces male boxer Loi Chow in a fight scheduled for four two-minute rounds. This event took on international presence, and brought to the surface many troubling issues in the world of women's boxing. After all of the hoopla was over, it was determined that the fight would be considered an "exhibition" and therefore was far from being the "first" of mixed matches that have taken place off and on throughout the history of women's boxing.


Oct. 1999: Muhammad Ali's Daughter, Laila "She-Bee Stingin" Ali, 21, makes her pro debut at the Turning Stone Casino, in Verona, NY. The news coverage leading up to this bout, and the media attention since she has gotten into the sport has surpassed any of the coverage of any one boxer on the scene in the past, and/or in the present. Her most significant fight -- and the sport's most significant fight since Martin-Gogarty -- comes June 8, 2001, when 8,000 fans and hundreds of media trek to upstate New York, for Ali-Frazier IV, a showdown with Jacqui Frazier-Lyde, daughter of longtime Ali archrival Joe Frazier. The two silence many critics with their spirited and entertaining eight-round bout, won by Ali. The fight draws more than 100,000 pay-per-view buys, again surprising the experts.

Originally posted by Deano
so true

heres the woman defender coming up against ronaldo now! whats gonna happen?
today its gonna be a tough miffield battle for roy keane as he faces georgina big breasts

it just woudnt work, as harsh as im sounding

ive got an idea, why not let women fight men at boxing I wouldn't be so sure about that. In the more physical sports they can beat some of the men some of the time but I think some feminist might want to sue if her boobs get in the way. http://www.boston.com/yourlife/health/women/articles/2003/09/28/gender_games?mode=PF

Originally posted by Bardock42
I think they should if they can compete on the level......if they are as good as the other Footballers sure thing, let them play with them....although the first time this happens only female teams would be a double standard...but I guess people could agree to that..... I think it would automatically put the man at a disadvantage.

here is what i think.

if a women can play with men, then let them play. but, with no special rules or anything, the game does not change what so ever. and there is no complaning. if women can do that then sure let them.

fact is that in many sports, this will never happen.

for example, women hockey players are not even remotly close to being able to play with men. they are slower, smaller, and generally less skilled.

even the best female hockey playes probably would not be able to make it into the NHL with a full singing contract, they just wont be good enough.

fact is that in most sports women are at a disadvantage, in golf for instance. they are incapable of hitting the ball as far as men are because men are generally stronger then women.

even thinking about a women football (american) player is just stupid, i think they would die if they got hit hard enough.

see what i mean. but....IF they can play, then let them play, it just wont ever happen.

sorry ladies.

I agree but most contact sports are designed for men to play, not women. The woman is at a physical disadvantage and the man would be at a psychological disadvantage. If women want to play contact sports they should play against other women.

Originally posted by markie
I agree but most contact sports are designed for men to play, not women. The woman is at a physical disadvantage and the man would be at a psychological disadvantage. If women want to play contact sports they should play against other women.

No they shouldnt.

To be perfectly honest, women should play against other women. period. In basketball they have the women's league, in golf they have the LPGA, and yet women still want to compete against the men. If the rules are going to be changed to allow women to compete against men in such contact sports as football, then the men who are smaller physically and/or gay should be allowed to play on the women's league. Men could just as easily say they're being discriminated against by not being allowed to play in women's leagues. I rest my case.

Having said that, I'd also like to state that I am a woman, and not all women are feminists :P

What about F1 racing?
It's not exactly a contact sport, but it's dangerous. Are the men "at a psychological disadvantage because they don't want the women to get hurt"?

That's true, sometimes I think these radical feminists want to erase all differences in men and women. Feminism has become somewhat of a misnomer in my oppinion because it's not very feminine.

Originally posted by markie
That's true, sometimes I think these radical feminists want to erase all differences in men and women. Feminism has become somewhat of a misnomer in my oppinion because it's not very feminine.

Indeed.... it's actually the very opposite of feminine...

Originally posted by markie
I think it would automatically put the man at a disadvantage.

How so?.....

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
What about F1 racing?
It's not exactly a contact sport, but it's dangerous. Are the men "at a psychological disadvantage because they don't want the women to get hurt"?

Again I don't think any of the Teams would care if their Driver is female.....if they are good enough......you want to win in htese sports , so its not aboot discrimination b ut just physical capabilities...

umm..no..they do care if the driver is female. racing drivers take intensive training in the gym...they are as phisically fit as possible.

women have been proven to have a slightly better restistance to G forces (mostly because they are lighter in mass to begin with) but that doesn't make a woman a better pilot than a man.

frankly..this equality thing taken up to this level is ludicrous.
it is a proven fact that men are generally more phisically able than women. it's all about the testosteron flow...women only have small quantities of this hormone.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
Always an interesting qustion- why no decent female chess players?

well every man knows the answer to that but is reluctant to actually voice it. it attracts too many ..negative consequences

Originally posted by Dexx
umm..no..they do care if the driver is female. racing drivers take intensive training in the gym...they are as phisically fit as possible.

women have been proven to have a slightly better restistance to G forces (mostly because they are lighter in mass to begin with) but that doesn't make a woman a better pilot than a man.

frankly..this equality thing taken up to this level is ludicrous.
it is a proven fact that men are generally more phisically able than women. it's all about the testosteron flow...women only have small quantities of this hormone.

Well but do they care because the en are better than the Women or because they have some problem with female racedrivers for being female?...That was my point.....

well heck..if they'd put a female in a car and she beats their main pilot's time..i'm sure they wouldn't keep her out of the team just for being female.
but that's only a hypothesis....it's not happening any time soon

as for socker...the opener of this discussion....women playing against men is just ridiculous.....and all of the feminin enthusiasm would boil down right after the first few broken legs....and i mean open fractures, and the like.

Originally posted by Bardock42
How so?... In a football game the man might not want to tackle a woman or would be reluctant to tackle her as hard as he would tackle a guy because she is a woman. In non contact sports it wouldn't matter that much but it might affect a man psychologically.

Are we only arguing contact sports...
If not...
...how about tennis? If a Williams sister or someone like Sharapova wanted to compete with the men - I realise they wouldn't be top of the game anymore but I'd still imagine they'd do alright for themselves - should they be allowed?
If so...
...hypothetical situation, the world female kickboxing champion wants to compete in men's tournaments... assume she can beat the crap out of some of the guys competing... she shouldn't be allowed to compete because???

Feminism HAS gone too far, and not only in the football category.

Originally posted by Dexx
well heck..if they'd put a female in a car and she beats their main pilot's time..i'm sure they wouldn't keep her out of the team just for being female.
but that's only a hypothesis....it's not happening any time soon

as for socker...the opener of this discussion....women playing against men is just ridiculous.....and all of the feminin enthusiasm would boil down right after the first few broken legs....and i mean open fractures, and the like. I was thinking in a football game she might get hit in the boobs and want to sue for damages.

When a guy gets kicked in the nuts in a football game do you expect him to want to sue for damages?

Originally posted by Dexx

well every man knows the answer to that but is reluctant to actually voice it. it attracts too many ..negative consequences

It is certainly a touchy subject...

Fact is, after 100 years of professional female chess play, in an area where physicality is irrelevant and where psychological ability is an intrinsic part of the top level game...

... the whole world has still failed to produce anything but the tiniest fraction of female Grandmasters compared to male. In fact, the first ever female Grandmaster was only in the last 20 years.

I am sure various attitudes to the kind of things women were expected to do in their spare time has a lot to do with this- can't see the Russians putting the women into intesne chess training as they did the men in the Stalin era- but the situation is virtually the same in the modern day, with fully equal opportunities in western countries.

With the physical element removed, this is an interesting definition of some more concealed but still highly relevant fundamental differences between man and woman.

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It is certainly a touchy subject...

Fact is, after 100 years of professional female chess play, in an area where physicality is irrelevant and where psychological ability is an intrinsic part of the top level game...

... the whole world has still failed to produce anything but the tiniest fraction of female Grandmasters compared to male. In fact, the first ever female Grandmaster was only in the last 20 years.

I am sure various attitudes to the kind of things women were expected to do in their spare time has a lot to do with this- can't see the Russians putting the women into intesne chess training as they did the men in the Stalin era- but the situation is virtually the same in the modern day, with fully equal opportunities in western countries.

With the physical element removed, this is an interesting definition of some more concealed but still highly relevant fundamental differences between man and woman.

ofcourse..it's allright if you leave it at that..however...if one was tempted to further pursue that idea, he would undoubtedly be labeled as a misogynist.
the female masses would explode at the thought of a possible masculine brilliance and spark of intelligence that is supposedly out of reach for them

so yes, given that situation, underlining only the physical superiority of men should keep one safe, as long as he has arguments.
and there are plenty, when people around here seem to be willing to put a woman in the ring with a man, or to expect results in a tennis match between a man and a woman.

xmarksthespot...the male world record at a tennis serve belongs to andy roddick..with 249 kph.
that can dislocate an arm of a fellow player if intercepted wrongly. the physical difference is simply overwhelming against a woman.

Oh I never said that a Williams sister or Sharapova would beat Roddick, Safin, Hewitt etc. but they may be capable of beating men lower down in the rankings and still remain world class, no? If they want to forfeit glory for equality then I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed.

well...have you asked a Williams sister or Sharapova?..maybe they don't.

it should be left as it is

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Oh I never said that a Williams sister or Sharapova would beat Roddick, Safin, Hewitt etc. but they may be capable of beating men lower down in the rankings and still remain world class, no? If they want to forfeit glory for equality then I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed.

whats the point in women playing against men if they can only beat the lower rank players?

Originally posted by silver_tears
I figure if you have the skill, you have the right to play.

Women don't have the skill though.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Women don't have the skill though.

-AC

as harsh as it sounds..its true,especially the physical sports

It's not harsh. It's true.

If you tell me I'm not as good as Eddie Van Halen at playing guitar, it's not harsh. It's true.

-AC

Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Oh I never said that a Williams sister or Sharapova would beat Roddick, Safin, Hewitt etc. but they may be capable of beating men lower down in the rankings and still remain world class, no? If they want to forfeit glory for equality then I don't see why they shouldn't be allowed.
Yes yes, but why can't men compete in female sports then? ....noit eqwual at all now is it? ....wither all compete together or everything is seperated....not fair any other way....

female sports?! ..what female sports.
i can only think of...umm..curling..and gymnastics(a part of them).
but the gymnastics fields restriction to males is logycal..since women are easier and more naturally flexible..so some forms of gymnastycs are only accessible to them...as are some only for men.

What's happened on KMC? Everyone's forgotten how to spell.

-AC

Originally posted by Dexx
female sports?! ..what female sports.
i can only think of...umm..curling..and gymnastics(a part of them).
but the gymnastics fields restriction to males is logycal..since women are easier and more naturally flexible..so some forms of gymnastycs are only accessible to them...as are some only for men.

No, I am not talking aboot only Female Sports..I am saying if Females are allowed to play in the Male leagues..it would be unfair if they would still have seperate Leagues too...that's not equal......thats an advantage towards Women .....so it could either be seperate but equal (not really equal but fair) or just equal all the way (not reall that fair cause females don''t have the same physical level)

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What's happened on KMC? Everyone's forgotten how to spell.

-AC I blame the issing m on my laptop ......

Couldn't be missing could it? Seeing as you just typed it.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Couldn't be missing could it? Seeing as you just typed it.

-AC

That's why I WTFed...although the M is missing....i can still punch that rubber thingy that produces an m once in a while (I'd say aboot 36.3 plus 63.6 ......yes doesn't add up to hundred, sue me... ) ...well you get the point...could of course also be that I plain suck...wither way is fine with me....

If it's a matter of trying to keep it at a good strength level, then let them play football against the national Scrabble finalists.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What's happened on KMC? Everyone's forgotten how to spell.

-AC
it's my second language..gimme a break

Originally posted by Ushgarak
It is certainly a touchy subject...

Fact is, after 100 years of professional female chess play, in an area where physicality is irrelevant and where psychological ability is an intrinsic part of the top level game...

... the whole world has still failed to produce anything but the tiniest fraction of female Grandmasters compared to male. In fact, the first ever female Grandmaster was only in the last 20 years.

I am sure various attitudes to the kind of things women were expected to do in their spare time has a lot to do with this- can't see the Russians putting the women into intesne chess training as they did the men in the Stalin era- but the situation is virtually the same in the modern day, with fully equal opportunities in western countries.

With the physical element removed, this is an interesting definition of some more concealed but still highly relevant fundamental differences between man and woman.


wow that is the most thinly veiled 'chicks are just stupid' comment i have ever read.. perhaps the CHESS thing has a thing or two to do with how girls & boys are treared differently in classrooms... i'm not big on statistics (as they can be skewed to fit whatever argument you happen to be making IMO) but i have read some very interesting studies suggesting that when it comes to math, science, & the like.. girls almost always overlooked in the classroom when compared to how the boys are treated.. the implication from a VERY early age is that these arent subjects that females SHOULD be good at so they arent taught or fostered with the same enthusiasm for girls as it is for boys... so basically from elementary school on an anti - logical (if you will) mindset is taught to be proper for girls.. its crap but is there nonetheless

Originally posted by Bardock42
No, I am not talking aboot only Female Sports..I am saying if Females are allowed to play in the Male leagues..it would be unfair if they would still have seperate Leagues too...that's not equal......thats an advantage towards Women .....so it could either be seperate but equal (not really equal but fair) or just equal all the way (not reall that fair cause females don''t have the same physical level)

I said pretty much the exact same thing in my post on page 2.

As for the chess debate, chess is a war game, war is something men are better at, not because they're more intelligent, but because they have a better mind for strategizing. Down through the centuries war has always been a man thing, not that there are no women who are good at it, just that women were usually at home taking care of the children and the old people, because if all of the women had gone to war as well as the men, you'd have infants and invalids left back home who'd all die from starvation.

Plus men have a mind for war, it's something that has been taught for generations. There have been some truly excellent female warriors such as the Amazon's but when it comes down to all the great battles in history 99 percent of them were masterminded by men. Men fight, women love. It is probably that compassion which keeps women out of war. It is easier for a man to kill another human being in the name of war than it is for a woman. Women have too much compassion, they might stop and question why, and while they're questioning it, get stabbed in the back by their opponent whom they were debating not killing.

My point here is simply that men and women are equal intellectually, just different, they use their minds in different ways. It has even been scientifically proven that men and women use entirely different parts of their brains when thinking about the same exact things.

As for physically, yes, women are weaker than men on the whole. There are some women who are stronger or faster than some men, but not even the very strongest woman can compete against the very strongest man and have even the smallest chance of beating him in a contact sport of any kind. Now sports like racing are entirely different, but most women don't have that urge to be speed demons like men. There are plenty of women who have the ability to race cars, but what they lack is the desire to do so.

So in short, sports where physical strength is not a HUGE factor there should simply be one league for both men and women, like horse racing. You don't see many female jockeys because until now they weren't really allowed to do so, at one point it was actually against the law for a woman to be a jockey in a professional horse race, but her physical strength would not put her at a great disadvantage. However, sports such as football, basketball, and baseball should remain segregated as these games focus largely on the physical prowess of the players, thus putting women at a great disadvantage. If they wish for the leagues to be merged, then so be it, but there should no longer be a women's league either, because then they would have two leagues while men were only allowed to compete in one. Then the men would revolt and the battle of the sexes would start all over again. Personally I think people just need to accept equality and move on, it is the older generations who are keeping this battle alive, not the younger.

This dead horse has been beat to the most rediculous extent, if men and women can't even get along, how can different races get along? How can different religions co-exist? If we are to achieve peace in this world we must learn to accept those around us and get over whatever issues we have with things. Women have achieved equality, they have the right to vote, right to work on any job, and the right to compete in any sport, even if it is in their own league. America no longer needs feminists, equality has been achieved, as it has in many countries in Europe, it's time to drop it and move on. Sure people are going to discriminate against women sometimes because they are prejudice, but they're the last of a dying breed, go back a generation or two from yourself and you'll be surprised how closed-minded the people who came before you really were. And one day your kids and grandkids will look at you and think of you as closed-minded. Step into the future. There's no longer a need for this debate, and feminists need to drop it. It is not essential to anyone's equality that some woman go out on a football field and get splattered all over the grass when she gets hit by some 350 pound quarterback. This is beyond rediculous, it's time feminists move to a country where they're needed and work there to get women the right to vote and the right to work. When the debate turns to sports it has reached the edge of sensibility.

It's simply rediculous to me that debates like this even happen. It's time for feminists to stop before they give a new generation of men a reason to hate women.

Originally posted by obiwills


It's simply rediculous to me that debates like this even happen. It's time for feminists to stop before they give a new generation of men a reason to hate women.


uuuhh.. everything was cool till this... GIVE you a reason to hate women? Hate to inform you but this 'women are seconday citizens' mindset has been going on for centuries.. debates like this at least provide an avenue for dialougue.. which is still extremely lacking in any real means of change is better than nothing at all

Originally posted by bilb
uuuhh.. everything was cool till this... GIVE you a reason to hate women? Hate to inform you but this 'women are seconday citizens' mindset has been going on for centuries.. debates like this at least provide an avenue for dialougue.. which is still extremely lacking in any real means of change is better than nothing at all

Yeah, but he didn't get a chance to hate them centuries ago. It's so unfair.

Originally posted by bilb
uuuhh.. everything was cool till this... GIVE you a reason to hate women? Hate to inform you but this 'women are seconday citizens' mindset has been going on for centuries.. debates like this at least provide an avenue for dialougue.. which is still extremely lacking in any real means of change is better than nothing at all

Just to point out something to you, I AM a woman. I meant simply this, debating feminism in the world of sports does tick more men off, it gives the new generation of men a reason to look down on women, a reason they didn't even have before. I know for a fact that the men of my generation are not nearly as prejudice towards women as their fathers are. And our grandparents?! Don't even get me started on them. I'm merely saying that as time goes on the battle of the sexes is dying, there's no reason to resurrect it with idiotic issues like women playing football against men as physically they simply can't compete.

Let's not overlook the fact that women are shit at football compared to men.

Let's also not overlook the fact that men are physically superior. Biologically.

-AC

well...the war of sexes has died off for quite some time....ofcourse there are the regular taunts and some fixed opinions..but those are genetically established ....
it's impossible to generally hate women...especially by men. not nowadays anyway

ok, my bad.. but thats exactly why i had to change my av & sig.. everyone thought i was a guy for the longest time BUT while i do think its silly for women to want to play football & the like I do think it can be a good thing to discuss the topic.. & i really dont care if it pisses off the guys.. as thats not my main concern in life

(btw nice sig obiwills )

That'S nice...so Guys should care if it pisses women off but the other way aroung not.......double standard...I think its tie for maleinis......big time

And her sig....she has Ewan McGregor half naked as pic.....pretty obvious

Originally posted by bilb
(btw nice sig obiwills )

Thanks And as Bardock said, my sig does make it kinda obvious I'm a girl... unless I were a gay guy, which isn't entirely impossible of course.

I think most people think I'm a guy because of my opinions on things. lol

And to Bardock42, I'm a girl, and I care about pissing off guys. I care about pissing off girls too though, or anyone for that matter. It just isn't nice to go around intentionally pissing people off. lol

i think those feminists should keep thier mouths full of vagina so we dont have to hear thier rants and thats all there is to it.... i spent all day working on that one

Originally posted by obiwills
Thanks And as Bardock said, my sig does make it kinda obvious I'm a girl... unless I were a gay guy, which isn't entirely impossible of course.

I think most people think I'm a guy because of my opinions on things. lol

And to Bardock42, I'm a girl, and I care about pissing off guys. I care about pissing off girls too though, or anyone for that matter. It just isn't nice to go around intentionally pissing people off. lol
Yes exactly...I don't like doubkle standards....e3ither way....

Originally posted by manjaro
i think those feminists should keep thier mouths full of vagina so we dont have to hear thier rants and thats all there is to it.... i spent all day working on that one

Well there are not that many Ranting feminists anyore I guess....but its kind of less necessary now.....

Originally posted by manjaro
i think those feminists should keep thier mouths full of vagina so we dont have to hear thier rants and thats all there is to it.... i spent all day working on that one

proud of yourself? great now shoo... go back to the playground

Originally posted by markie
Should women be allowed to play football with men?

With men? no. now don't get me wrong I don't mean they CAN'T or SHOULDN'T play with men... but should have their own leauge... It would be too easy to get sexual harrassment charges in it.

Originally posted by manjaro
i think those feminists should keep thier mouths full of vagina so we dont have to hear thier rants and thats all there is to it.... i spent all day working on that one

Dude? It took you all day to come up with that?! wallbash

there's a huge difference between games like tennis and golf (which are more skill oriented) and games like football and rugby. in my opinion, the main problem with the inclusion of women in contact sports is that it would change the whole psychology of the game. forget the fact that generally speaking the best female football player couldn't even be drafted 10th pick by the denver broncos. the real problem is that having a lady on the field would put the males at a psychological disadvantage. every male on the field would be playing at fractional capacity, so as not to injure the woman players. this not only makes for an uninteresting spectacle but is vaguely disrespectful towards the sport itself.

and bilb, don't you dare blame the lack of female chess champions on the theoretical ramifications of further theoretical mistreatment. that's weak on so many levels...

Originally posted by hoorayforpeepee

and bilb, don't you dare blame the lack of female chess champions on the theoretical ramifications of further theoretical mistreatment. that's weak on so many levels...

enlighten me then

look, you want equal rights, then take equal responsibility.

you're basically saying that there aren't as many high level female intellectuals because they didn't get enough attention in elementary school?

that is passing the blame in the lamest way.

Originally posted by hoorayforpeepee
look, you want equal rights, then take equal responsibility.

you're basically saying that there aren't as many high level female intellectuals because they didn't get enough attention in elementary school?

that is passing the blame in the lamest way.

no not at all.. what I mean is that this is a perception problem all the way around.. yes women should take responsibility for themselves but lets not discount the fact that there is & always has been a negative percetion when it comes to women in society

I don't think that is true anymore...at all actually....

Originally posted by Bardock42
I don't think that is true anymore...at all actually....

thats cause you're a guy

Originally posted by bilb
thats cause you're a guy

Perhaps...but maybe you just think it is because you are a girl......but in my experience it depends fro teacher to teacher...some prefer guys some girls some are neutral...none are really sexist...not the ones I experienced at least...

Originally posted by bilb
proud of yourself? great now shoo... go back to the playground

uuh yep actually i am....

drools like homer simspson.... drooldrooliomouths filled with vaginas..araraggargagrggggaggagrdroolio

Originally posted by hoorayforpeepee
the real problem is that having a lady on the field would put the males at a psychological disadvantage. every male on the field would be playing at fractional capacity, so as not to injure the woman players. this not only makes for an uninteresting spectacle but is vaguely disrespectful towards the sport itself.

Hahaha, always the way with women.

"Let's pretend that it's something psychological instead of actually admitting that we'd get creamed on a football field."

It's not psychological really is it? Because if women ever got to play with men, the rules would state that no biased treatment be given.

That being said, the best female football (real football) players are shit compared to the males. In terms of skill, not even taking into account the physical disadvantage.

Watch the best male teams play, then the best women. It's shit. They're falling all over the place, making themselves look stupid.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Hahaha, always the way with women.

"Let's pretend that it's something psychological instead of actually admitting that we'd get creamed on a football field."

It's not psychological really is it? Because if women ever got to play with men, the rules would state that no biased treatment be given.

That being said, the best female football (real football) players are shit compared to the males. In terms of skill, not even taking into account the physical disadvantage.

Watch the best male teams play, then the best women. It's shit. They're falling all over the place, making themselves look stupid.

-AC

Yes...and that's why they don't play in the Prime Leagues...not because they are discriminated...

you misunderstand AC. i agree that the best female football player isn't even worthy of being third string on the worst football team in the league. what i'm saying is that even if you were to disregard that fact, the mere presence of a woman on the field would psychologically tilt the game. men would be playing far below their abilities.

Originally posted by hoorayforpeepee
you misunderstand AC. i agree that the best female football player isn't even worthy of being third string on the worst football team in the league. what i'm saying is that even if you were to disregard that fact, the mere presence of a woman on the field would psychologically tilt the game. men would be playing far below their abilities.

Which is true of course, at least for me...

Originally posted by pr1983
Which is true of course, at least for me...

I won't bring it up.......although.....no......


But its true...probably most guys couldn't bring 100% against a girl....

I would, but I agree that there'd probably be some effect.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
I would, but I agree that there'd probably be some effect.

-AC

Not sure Iif I could....although there are probably lots of girls that are better in football than me....just think aboot it you think you could tackle a tiny 5'0'' girl....

i would, and no holds barredly. in fact i would play extra hard, 50% of wanting to let them know thier place, and 50% of not wanting to make a grl make me look bad..or beat me altogether

Originally posted by Bardock42
Not sure Iif I could....although there are probably lots of girls that are better in football than me....just think aboot it you think you could tackle a tiny 5'0'' girl....

Just think about it, does she put herself in the place of that by wanting to play against me? Yes.

So would I give her what she wants? Yes.

-AC

I just have this mental block that wont let me hurt a woman unless i absolutely have to...

i am way too nice...

Originally posted by bilb
wow that is the most thinly veiled 'chicks are just stupid' comment i have ever read.. perhaps the CHESS thing has a thing or two to do with how girls & boys are treared differently in classrooms... i'm not big on statistics (as they can be skewed to fit whatever argument you happen to be making IMO) but i have read some very interesting studies suggesting that when it comes to math, science, & the like.. girls almost always overlooked in the classroom when compared to how the boys are treated.. the implication from a VERY early age is that these arent subjects that females SHOULD be good at so they arent taught or fostered with the same enthusiasm for girls as it is for boys... so basically from elementary school on an anti - logical (if you will) mindset is taught to be proper for girls.. its crap but is there nonetheless

...

I thought it was down to the difference between women and men in how their brains handle spatial reasoning.

Why the hell you took that to mean 'women are stupid' I do not know, but that reflects very badly on you. Get off your damn high horse and try not to make such an ass of yourself; NO-ONE thinks it is because girls are stupid. It's not even estalished that brains make a good chess player. Plenty of clever people are shit at chess; it is a skill like any other which women cannot seem to be able to match.

The fact is, women are just not as good at chess as men. Period.

And yes, your idea it is due to inequality at school is feeble. Girls are outperforming boys at many school subjects now. It makes no difference. The chess competition field is fully open and women are failing in it.

I'm not trying to hurt the woman, I'm not trying to hurt anyone I'm playing against.

I'm certainly not gonna give her lighter treatment though. She made the choice, she can deal with whatever happens.

It's like women who beat men up because they hide behind that "You can't hit me" shield. They love to pull a law suit out their asses when one man finally turns around and clocks them back.

Women hide behind their gender way too much, while saying how strong-willed they are.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri


Women hide behind their gender way too much, while saying how strong-willed they are.

-AC

Spot on, you're absolutely right...

Originally posted by Ushgarak
...

I thought it was down to the difference between women and men in how their brains handle spatial reasoning.

Why the hell you took that to mean 'women are stupid' I do not know, but that reflects very badly on you. Get off your damn high horse and try not to make such an ass of yourself; NO-ONE thinks it is because girls are stupid. It's not even estalished that brains make a good chess player. Plenty of clever people are shit at chess; it is a skill like any other which women cannot seem to be able to match.

The fact is, women are just not as good at chess as men. Period.

And yes, your idea it is due to inequality at school is feeble. Girls are outperforming boys at many school subjects now. It makes no difference. The chess competition field is fully open and women are failing in it.

ahh yes once again the great and mighty Ush comes down from his all knowing throne to enlightenen us.. thank you oh great one

whatever

Woman 1: I can take anything you men can take. Can't we girls?

Women in unison: Yeah!

Woman 2: Hey boyfriend. Yeah? *Punch* You like this?! *Slap*

Man: What the? *Backhand*

Woman 2: YOU CAN'T HIT ME! I'M A WOMAN!!!!

And that's EXACTLY how it is. If you're a woman and deny that this is how it is (even if you aren't individually like it) you're wrong.

-AC

Originally posted by Dexx

well every man knows the answer to that but is reluctant to actually voice it. it attracts too many ..negative consequences


detective Vera Menchik was a very good chess player !

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/pics/cn3433_menchik.jpg

She beat Euwe, Sultan Khan, Sir George Thomas, Alexander, and Yates.

In such company, and she played in several of the Hastings International tournaments and others of similar grade, she usually obtained about 33%, though in the Maribor tournament of 1934 she finished third, behind Pirc and Steiner but ahead of Rejfir, Spielmann, Asztalos, and Vidmar.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Woman 1: I can take anything you men can take. Can't we girls?

Women in unison: Yeah!

Woman 2: Hey boyfriend. Yeah? *Punch* You like this?! *Slap*

Man: What the? *Backhand*

Woman 2: YOU CAN'T HIT ME! I'M A WOMAN!!!!

And that's EXACTLY how it is. If you're a woman and deny that this is how it is (even if you aren't individually like it) you're wrong.

-AC

Sadly yes, that is how it is, many women do hide behind their gender, though I personally do not. I don't have a boyfriend, could this be why? It seems I act too much liike a guy and not enough like a woman... But that's how it is here in the good ol' southeast USA, men still want women to be defenseless little ladies. I'll have to move out of state just to get laid..... Which leads me to another idea, I think I'll sign up for this football against men just in hopes of getting tackled, no matter how much damage it does.

Alot of women in New Jersey I've encountered have attitude problems, and I used to be against hitting women, family doesn't count, and who are my die-hard friends don't either. Some of them are serious bitches and I'm sure a swift smack would shut them up, but I'm probably wrong to say that, but sometimes the finger doesn't do the job anymore with society.

Originally posted by JToTheP
Alot of women in New Jersey I've encountered have attitude problems, and I used to be against hitting women, family doesn't count, and who are my die-hard friends don't either. Some of them are serious bitches and I'm sure a swift smack would shut them up, but I'm probably wrong to say that, but sometimes the finger doesn't do the job anymore with society.

So get someone else to slap them for you, that way you can't get sued and they'll still get shut up.

Originally posted by JToTheP
Alot of women in New Jersey I've encountered have attitude problems, and I used to be against hitting women, family doesn't count, and who are my die-hard friends don't either. Some of them are serious bitches and I'm sure a swift smack would shut them up, but I'm probably wrong to say that, but sometimes the finger doesn't do the job anymore with society.

Originally posted by bilb


Women get away with too much, as ac said, hiding behind the "man cant hit woman" shield...

Hey, everybody can hide behind SOMETHING, and those who choose to do so get away with too much. Not all women hide behind their gender.

Originally posted by obiwills
Hey, everybody can hide behind SOMETHING, and those who choose to do so get away with too much. Not all women hide behind their gender.

i didnt mean all women... but there are alot...

Originally posted by pr1983
i didnt mean all women... but there are alot...

True. My apologies. The way you put it made it sound like you meant all women.

Originally posted by pr1983
Women get away with too much, as ac said, hiding behind the "man cant hit woman" shield...

but some women enjoy being spanked

Originally posted by GCG
but some women enjoy being spanked

i was waiting on someone to bring that up

Originally posted by GCG
but some women enjoy being spanked

Yeah... bilb here loves it...

AHEM

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=290518&pagenumber=1625#post4750333

over here big boy flirt1

Originally posted by bilb
AHEM

http://www.killermovies.com/forums/showthread.php?threadid=290518&pagenumber=1625#post4750333

over here big boy flirt1

Surely thats not the wildest...

And i had such high hopes for you bilb...

oohh you are just ASKING for it aint ya!!

Yes... yes i am...

Aha... using your sexual wiles to tempt me... see... woman's control over man... so callled "feminism" at its worst...

Originally posted by pr1983
Yeah... bilb here loves it...

ha ha

as long as she doesnt bite the neck....










































...too hard

Originally posted by GCG
ha ha

as long as she doesnt bite the neck....

...too hard

I have it on good authority that she does...

Originally posted by pr1983
Yes... yes i am...

Aha... using your sexual wiles to tempt me... see... woman's control over man... so callled "feminism" at its worst...



well dear, we didnt create anatomy & physiology and it isnt out fault if you so easily swayed fo HELL YES we use it when we need to.. and you guys love every minute of it!!

Originally posted by pr1983
I have it on good authority that she does...

Originally posted by bilb
well dear, we didnt create anatomy & physiology and it isnt out fault if you so easily swayed fo HELL YES we use it when we need to.. and you guys love every minute of it!!

cry

Its not my fault i cant resist star wars fangirls...

sadwalk


Originally posted by bilb

Originally posted by pr1983
Yes... yes i am...

Aha... using your sexual wiles to tempt me... see... woman's control over man... so callled "feminism" at its worst...



In the Animal Kingdom, the female praying mantis devours her male counterpart after copulating - how about that for feminism !

Originally posted by bilb
well dear, we didnt create anatomy & physiology and it isnt out fault if you so easily swayed fo HELL YES we use it when we need to.. and you guys love every minute of it!!

Stop it !

My shoulder blade aches

Originally posted by GCG
In the Animal Kingdom, the female praying mantis devours her male counterpart after copulating - how about that for feminism !

that would be domination there sweets


and PR flirt

Originally posted by GCG
In the Animal Kingdom, the female praying mantis devours her male counterpart after copulating - how about that for feminism !

Yeah... yeah...

Originally posted by GCG
Stop it !

My shoulder blade aches



Originally posted by bilb
that would be domination there sweets


and PR flirt

naughty

Originally posted by GCG
Stop it !

My shoulder blade aches

thats not the most effective biting spot dear

Originally posted by bilb
thats not the most effective biting spot dear

it is when the next day im carrying a camping rucksak up a hill

Originally posted by GCG
it is when the next day im carrying a camping rucksak up a hill

ermmm.. why would you do that??

I think i will STFU and spare you the details

lets say weekend, camping for 2 and thorns

camping for 2? wewtage!!

Originally posted by obiwills
So get someone else to slap them for you, that way you can't get sued and they'll still get shut up.

As long as there's no names, or license plates exchanged, she won't know what hit her at all

Originally posted by JToTheP
As long as there's no names, or license plates exchanged, she won't know what hit her at all

true, just make sure there are no witnesses and run away as fast as possible.

when was the last time you saw a woman hold a door for a man? or pull over and help a man change a flat tire?

Originally posted by obiwills
true, just make sure there are no witnesses and run away as fast as possible.

Hey man, witnesses can kiss my ass, ski mask time

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
when was the last time you saw a woman hold a door for a man? or pull over and help a man change a flat tire?

uhhhh, isn't FJ the type to you know......*heads for the hills*

to you know what?

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
when was the last time you saw a woman hold a door for a man? or pull over and help a man change a flat tire?

I would have to be sitting in a wheelchair to have a woman opening a door for me OR or an absolute dumbass not to change my own tyre.

What i mean is that i would never expect a woman to stoop so low apart from it being embarrasing to the least. I would be an ambassador for chivalry but these days that is very rare.

Originally posted by GCG
I would have to be sitting in a wheelchair to have a woman opening a door for me OR or an absolute dumbass not to change my own tyre.

What i mean is that i would never expect a woman to stoop so low apart from it being embarrasing to the least. I would be an ambassador for chivalry but these days that is very rare.

Ok i'm confused.. why would it be 'stooping' for a woman to help you out? Can it not be just considered friendly?

Originally posted by bilb
Ok i'm confused.. why would it be 'stooping' for a woman to help you out? Can it not be just considered friendly?

Friendly ? How? i dont see it. give me an example.

unless she is telling you to get the eff out of her property, or because a man is invalid, or because a man has his hands occupied, i just cannot imagine a woman opening a door for a man just to be friendly.

Originally posted by GCG
Friendly ? How? i dont see it. give me an example.

unless she is telling you to get the eff out of her property, or because a man is invalid, or because a man has his hands occupied, i just cannot imagine a woman opening a door for a man just to be friendly.

I have opened doors and held doors open for men when their hands were full, just to be friendly... and if ANYONE guy or girl follows me out a door I hold it open for them. I consider it rude to just let it go and smack them in the face if they aren't paying attention.

Originally posted by JToTheP
Hey man, witnesses can kiss my ass, ski mask time

ski mask.... good idea! I should buy one of those... or just some other clever disguise... batman

Originally posted by JToTheP
Alot of women in New Jersey I've encountered have attitude problems, and I used to be against hitting women, family doesn't count, and who are my die-hard friends don't either. Some of them are serious bitches and I'm sure a swift smack would shut them up, but I'm probably wrong to say that, but sometimes the finger doesn't do the job anymore with society.

so that's the only way you can handle people with attitude problems? that's what's gonna make you come out on top of the situation?

I'm honestly at a loss when it comes to understanding this slapping/hitting/beating the opposite sex discussion. violence isn't acceptable, that's why we've forbidden it by law. so, unless your only way out of a given situation is to fight some violent person off you, what right have you, be of what ever sex you may, to hit back? in my opinion that would just be another show of a lacking ability to express or controll oneself.

Originally posted by obiwills


As for the chess debate, chess is a war game, war is something men are better at, not because they're more intelligent, but because they have a better mind for strategizing. Down through the centuries war has always been a man thing, not that there are no women who are good at it, just that women were usually at home taking care of the children and the old people, because if all of the women had gone to war as well as the men, you'd have infants and invalids left back home who'd all die from starvation.

Plus men have a mind for war, it's something that has been taught for generations. There have been some truly excellent female warriors such as the Amazon's but when it comes down to all the great battles in history 99 percent of them were masterminded by men. Men fight, women love. It is probably that compassion which keeps women out of war. It is easier for a man to kill another human being in the name of war than it is for a woman. Women have too much compassion, they might stop and question why, and while they're questioning it, get stabbed in the back by their opponent whom they were debating not killing.

Personally I think people just need to accept equality and move on, it is the older generations who are keeping this battle alive, not the younger.

This dead horse has been beat to the most rediculous extent, if men and women can't even get along, how can different races get along? How can different religions co-exist? If we are to achieve peace in this world we must learn to accept those around us and get over whatever issues we have with things. Women have achieved equality, they have the right to vote, right to work on any job, and the right to compete in any sport, even if it is in their own league. America no longer needs feminists, equality has been achieved, as it has in many countries in Europe, it's time to drop it and move on. Sure people are going to discriminate against women sometimes because they are prejudice, but they're the last of a dying breed, go back a generation or two from yourself and you'll be surprised how closed-minded the people who came before you really were. And one day your kids and grandkids will look at you and think of you as closed-minded. Step into the future. There's no longer a need for this debate, and feminists need to drop it. It is not essential to anyone's equality that some woman go out on a football field and get splattered all over the grass when she gets hit by some 350 pound quarterback. This is beyond rediculous, it's time feminists move to a country where they're needed and work there to get women the right to vote and the right to work. When the debate turns to sports it has reached the edge of sensibility.

It's simply rediculous to me that debates like this even happen. It's time for feminists to stop before they give a new generation of men a reason to hate women.

men fight, women love? women are too compassionate to go to war? I honestly doubt it, yet it's a die hard, sentimental idea, thrown in our faces again and again. yes, in the early wars men went to war and women stayed at home, looking after house and children, course they weren't physically as strong as the male enemies they'd meet on the battlefield, and because the norms of patriarchal society dictates that women love and men fight, and that women are naturally too compassionate to kill ( this of course only lasted till all the young male soldiers had died, then women were allowed to join in too - they were even expected to defy they're so called natural urge to avoid killing! whoa!)
what I'm hinting at here is that the overly compassionate nature of women, and the overly aggressive nature of men, isn't dictated by nature alone, but enforced by society. women do know how to kill, should they have to, and men do know how to be compassionate.

it isn't the older generation alone that keeps this 'battle' going, look at this thread! look at other threads than this, if you like, even go outside KMC and you'll still find young people of both sexes who think that the differences between the sexes are to the men's advantage. it's not something time alone will heal and make go away, it's socially conditioned, which is why I cannot believe all those people, you included, who are in such a hurry to dismiss feminists. you don't need them in America, you say? why, you've only just elected a president bend and determined to work against legal abortion. I'm also quite certain that you, just as any other country, have problems concerning lack of women in top positions, women earning less than men, women being beaten and raped by partners, etc. etc.
now, so much for the political part of feminism. apart from that, there's the theoretical part, concerning language, media, art and the like. sure, some female theorists I have a hard time agreeing with ( such as: men took over power because they stand up peeing! yeah, that's what happened! women were crawling around in the bushes and when we'd finally finished, the other team had made computers and raised tall, phallic buildings, leaving us nothing but kitchens!), but yet others study the way language affects us and our ideas about gender, as well as our perception of art, other medias, etc. etc. if the all buggered off to other countries, we'd loose out on that department.
all in all, what I'm getting at is basically this: I'm sick and tired of the image of the feminist as being the unshaved, bra-less man hater, who flashes the tattoos on her overly muscular arms and yells sexual insults after frightened men on the street. feminism is more than that and it's not about hating men.
I agree with you that some discussions do more damage than good, when it comes to the inter-gender peace, but I strongly disagree on the part where you give the feminists the entire blame. they don't always lead the way into ridiculous discussions, so do men. and they alone do not promote hating, so do men. either way, this again only proves that discussing gender and the relation between the two sexes are still much needed.

Originally posted by Line
men fight, women love? women are too compassionate to go to war? I honestly doubt it, yet it's a die hard, sentimental idea, thrown in our faces again and again. yes, in the early wars men went to war and women stayed at home, looking after house and children, course they weren't physically as strong as the male enemies they'd meet on the battlefield, and because the norms of patriarchal society dictates that women love and men fight, and that women are naturally too compassionate to kill ( this of course only lasted till all the young male soldiers had died, then women were allowed to join in too - they were even expected to defy they're so called natural urge to avoid killing! whoa!)
what I'm hinting at here is that the overly compassionate nature of women, and the overly aggressive nature of men, isn't dictated by nature alone, but enforced by society. women do know how to kill, should they have to, and men do know how to be compassionate.

it isn't the older generation alone that keeps this 'battle' going, look at this thread! look at other threads than this, if you like, even go outside KMC and you'll still find young people of both sexes who think that the differences between the sexes are to the men's advantage. it's not something time alone will heal and make go away, it's socially conditioned, which is why I cannot believe all those people, you included, who are in such a hurry to dismiss feminists. you don't need them in America, you say? why, you've only just elected a president bend and determined to work against legal abortion. I'm also quite certain that you, just as any other country, have problems concerning lack of women in top positions, women earning less than men, women being beaten and raped by partners, etc. etc.
now, so much for the political part of feminism. apart from that, there's the theoretical part, concerning language, media, art and the like. sure, some female theorists I have a hard time agreeing with ( such as: men took over power because they stand up peeing! yeah, that's what happened! women were crawling around in the bushes and when we'd finally finished, the other team had made computers and raised tall, phallic buildings, leaving us nothing but kitchens!), but yet others study the way language affects us and our ideas about gender, as well as our perception of art, other medias, etc. etc. if the all buggered off to other countries, we'd loose out on that department.
all in all, what I'm getting at is basically this: I'm sick and tired of the image of the feminist as being the unshaved, bra-less man hater, who flashes the tattoos on her overly muscular arms and yells sexual insults after frightened men on the street. feminism is more than that and it's not about hating men.
I agree with you that some discussions do more damage than good, when it comes to the inter-gender peace, but I strongly disagree on the part where you give the feminists the entire blame. they don't always lead the way into ridiculous discussions, so do men. and they alone do not promote hating, so do men. either way, this again only proves that discussing gender and the relation between the two sexes are still much needed.

My main point was that debating women playing sports against men is a waste of feminist's time. If they're main focus is now getting women in football games then they clearly have got a problem. Yes you're right, there aren't enough women in higher positions of government, and it's true that women know how to kill, but most women given the choice will not go to war. Not because they're incapable, but because they don't want to. Personally I feel that there are far more important issues feminists should be focusing on. Abortion is not so much a feminist issue as a moral issue. Some feel that it is murder, and if in fact it is, then no one should have that right. This debate has gone far beyond feminism and really shouldn't be included as part of this discussion about sports.

Many women do feel that it is their right to have an abortion, so be it, it's legal, no one can stop them. But no woman who honestly feels it is murder will have an abortion, and she would feel that those who do are cruel, because no matter how you look at it it is destroying a human life, so it's not a feminist issue anymore. It's a moral issue.

Originally posted by obiwills
My main point was that debating women playing sports against men is a waste of feminist's time. If they're main focus is now getting women in football games then they clearly have got a problem.

Personally I feel that there are far more important issues feminists should be focusing on. .

YES!!

This isn't like tennis. Football can get physical and bloody. There are so many things wrong with letting women play football with men. In terms of skill, I don't see a problem, although womens football is played differently. Potentially a woman footballer is as good, but only potentially, so far. In the real world, women are at a general disadvantage through a little thing known as DNA.

I was watching it the other day, and it was so wierd. Less aggressive and a much slower game. They wouldn't last five minutes in the big hitters of mens footy. It's just another "sisters doing it for themselves" thing to tick off on their never ending list.

There's also the fact that women ARE different to men. There are brick sized books written by so-called feminists detailing how different we are, yet they are the first to moan when either sex is treated slightly differently.

Footy can get really bloody sometimes. Broken limbs, noses, cheek bones. Imagine a male defender flooring a female striker, slamming her to the floor, well within the rules, but she lands funny, snaps her leg. I bet the feminists would be the first ones to moan about the rules (which are as safe as can be without reducing the game to crap). They're never happy.

The worst thing about feminists is that they tend to realise that half of the population of this planet are males, who simply don't agree with half of the crap they talk about. They get all high and mighty about equality without realising a scientific fact - women and men are different, and women cannot match men physically (in general).

Bringing in new laws about sports and women is like burying their head in the sand, it doesn't re-write the humans races DNA so that we are equal, we are different, and the sooner we embrace our differences productively, the sooner we'll become equal. Pretending to be equal by having a law that says "we are" is never a wise option.

Originally posted by obiwills
My main point was that debating women playing sports against men is a waste of feminist's time. If they're main focus is now getting women in football games then they clearly have got a problem. Yes you're right, there aren't enough women in higher positions of government, and it's true that women know how to kill, but most women given the choice will not go to war. Not because they're incapable, but because they don't want to. Personally I feel that there are far more important issues feminists should be focusing on. Abortion is not so much a feminist issue as a moral issue. Some feel that it is murder, and if in fact it is, then no one should have that right. This debate has gone far beyond feminism and really shouldn't be included as part of this discussion about sports.

Many women do feel that it is their right to have an abortion, so be it, it's legal, no one can stop them. But no woman who honestly feels it is murder will have an abortion, and she would feel that those who do are cruel, because no matter how you look at it it is destroying a human life, so it's not a feminist issue anymore. It's a moral issue.

I wouldn't go so far as to say it's a waste of time. if it truly was, it wouldn't spark off such a lively discussion as this. I don't really know exactly what to think of the issue myself, but so much the better that a discussion exists.

I'm not just saying in government, I'm saying all leader-type positions. same goes with the wages.

concerning the killing: that wasn't the impression I got from your last post, where you seemed to state that women would be too compassionate to make the quick killings needed in war. anyways, yes, I agree that most women choose not to go to war, which is very much fine by me, since I'm no fan of wars. still, this isn't only because they're female, it's because social norms still dictates that it's the men who are to go to war.

yes, abortion is a moral issue, yet I don't see why that should separate it from being a feminist issue too, since feminist issues are highly moral too. abortion has everything to do with female sexuality and women's welfare, so yes, I'll call it a feminist issue. that some women do not approve of abortion and wouldn't want one for themselves doesn't make it less so.

Why is this now about abortion? There's an abortion thread that's already been done to death and many people have pretty much nailed it shut.

This is about females wanting to play soccer.

Typical feminist tactic. Use the slightest chance to make eeeeeeverything about you.

Seriously though, let's not go from women playing football to abortion. They do have one commonality though. They both are issues containing balls (one of leather, one of cells) that I'd love to kick around.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Why is this now about abortion? There's an abortion thread that's already been done to death and many people have pretty much nailed it shut.

This is about females wanting to play soccer.

Typical feminist tactic. Use the slightest chance to make eeeeeeverything about you.

Seriously though, let's not go from women playing football to abortion. They do have one commonality though. They both are issues containing balls (one of leather, one of cells) that I'd love to kick around.

-AC

I agree with you entirely. My bit about abortion was criticizing the person who brought it into this conversation in the first place. Belong here, it does not.

And neither do the bits about women in leader's positions in the government, this thread is about football, women playing football against men, period. Let's not turn it into something it isn't.

Obiwills:
my main post was an answer and critique of your post on page 4, where you discuss chess, war, intellect and feminism. my thing about abortion was minimized to one line, an example, which you stated was not to be discussed here, whereafter you discussed it thoroughly. in short: we're together in this off-topic discussion, so don't point your finger at me solely.

Ok, I'll admit I said more about it than I should have, but you did bring it up. Perhaps we can both agree merely to drop it and hope that no one else offers any opinions on the matter? The matter in question being simply abortion.

I brought it up as an example on how feminism was going in the US and never meant for it to be the main topic of discussion. not discussing it is therefore fine with me.