The historic human rights legal battle resulted in the British Columbia Supreme Court declaring in 2009 that the IOC exhibited gender discrimination by excluding women’s ski jumping from the Vancouver Games, but stopped short of forcing VANOC and the IOC to hold an event for women.
How did the case result in women’s ski jumping being added in 2014, when it didn’t order the IOC to add any events? Perhaps through public pressure, but not the court action itself.
Recall that 2011 was also the year the FIS added women to the ski jump World Cup, and that the sports federations have an enormous amount of power over what goes into the Olympics. Once again, the FIS appears to be the roadblock; once they included women, the Olympics followed suit at the next opportunity.
So much for the Attack the post, not the poster rule?
Maybe it would help to read here a bit more closely instead of building strawmen?
Can you not address that the same people who were in charge of restricting women’s access in the FIS were the same individuals who were in the IOC, and also address how this was not adding an additional sport, but simply adding in the women’s competition?
U.S. Ski and Snowboard Association dropped the women’s ski jumping program in 2009. This decision was based upon budget cuts and because women’s ski jumping was not part of the Olympic program. You can’t just ignore these effects or that it was the Olympics that originally banned women based on false health claims.
Seriously to pretend this isn’t discrimination and that some of the responsibility is not asignable to IOC members is just absurd.
Honestly, I could see ski jumping being pretty close to a gender neutral sport. There isn’t much to it after all - it’s basically "hold an aerodynamic position for 20 seconds. I’m sure there were some sexist people involved in the decision to not include it initially but the main stated reasons aren’t really unbelievable. It was grandfathered in and only newly accepted sports have to be both men and women. Frankly, I am not all that fond of women’s hockey being in. It’s basically a Canada v USA thing with Canada usually winning because there really isn’t any world competition for them. Maybe inclusion in the Olympics will spur growth in women’s hockey in other countries but it doesn’t seem to have had much effect so far.
You were upset that I wrote something which was, in fact, the exact opposite of what I wrote. I’m not attacking you, I’m honestly suggesting you relax a bit and read a bit more closely. This isn’t an issue anyone has to take personally.
Yeah, but I just proposed the possibility. You pretty much denied it and demanded to be proven wrong. I think it isn’t unfair to give you some responsibility for a “theory” there.
Look rat, all your cites about people’s opinions are irrelevant as evidence that women and men have identical brain structure. For that you need evidence. Indirect such as performance results and IQ tests or direct such as brain scans. What some ski jump person did or did not say is a red herring.
Where did I say they have identical brain structure?
I was pretty clear that these minor population level differences are not a predictor of individual ability.
We will never know, because we won’t even allow women’s teams to use the same rules or to use the scary big jumps that they train on. It is still sexism to limit women from competing in the same rules and the same events, and it is quite clear that the ‘wandering uterus’ style myths is a significant contributing factor for these arbitrary restrictions.
You are fixated on the silly ski jump. Look at swim, track, bicycling times. Look at chess which isn’t a sport and has very few women near the top. Look at billiards.
And minor population differences are the difference in the 0.004% of the population that are Olympic athletes.
It’s not a strawman. Do you know what that means? He’s just applying your standard on your statement. Not applying your own demanded level of rigor on your own statement is hypocritical.
I have focused on social inequity causing a lack of opportunity. I would never generalize to all sport, that was a concession in debate because people cannot defend the best original Winter Olympics event example.
Social inequity definitely plays a role. It’s not the only factor though. I find it interesting that the presence of other factors is a reason to dismiss biological or physical factors in these discussions though.
AFAIK, there are three events where men and women compete together: mixed doubles curling, pairs figure skating, and ice dancing. The rules for figure skating say that, in both of those events, it must be one man and one woman. (In fact, until the 2017-18 season, the International Skating Union threatened sanctions against anyone that competed in a competition, such as the Gay Games, that had pairs skating where both persons in the couple were the same sex.)
There is also a “team event” in alpine skiing, but this is having men race against men and women race against women, and the results combined. This, or probably something along the lines of a cross country relay team, is probably as close to a mixed event as you are going to get in most sports.