Posted: Mar 02, 2014 12:21 pm
by TMB
Ihavenofingerprints wrote:
TMB wrote:
What is also relevant and as commentators point out that these women are not just expected to excel in their sport but also present an expected level of beauty, and the same does not apply to male athletes. However women athletes are not required to perform to the same level as male athletes, and are still able to be recognized with ultimate awards despite the fact they are protected because they are women and have their own event. If men were to be subject to the same pressures about their appearance as women are, something that runs deep in the makeup of both men and women, would we also require that women are treated equally to men in terms of athletic and sports ability. Once again this is unlikely to ever happen, as while it would offer gender equity in terms of events the social impact of disenfranchising women from this sort of protection would not be tolerated.

If you don't mind me asking, what is your main point here?

Are you arguing that giving women their own sport events goes against the idea of men/women equality?

I am asking why a female swimmer considers it unfair that she feels pressure to look better because she is female and men are not subject to the same judgement, while at the same time the only reason she is considered an elite athlete is because women have been given their own event because if sex discrimination was removed and sex neutral events only existed - ie. fastest 100m freestyle, women would be eliminated. It seems to me she want her cake and eat it to.

The underlying fact is that there is sex discrimination in sport because women have lesser ability, so yes of course it goes against equal treatment of the sexes.