There are mixed team relays in biathlon (2 men, 2 women) and luge (1 man, 1 woman, 1 men’s double).
I’m sick of these strawman arguments!
Give the strawwomen a chance!
Is that sarcasm? I don’t get it.
All the stuff after “IMO” was just speculation on my part and can’t be proven to be true or false at this time.
Yes. See post #111.
Ah, I see, LOL.
I can’t prove I will ever drink coffee again, therefore the claim is false and I’ll never drink coffee again 
I noticed something strange during a couple of the hockey games. The women have helmets with full masks that extend all the way down below their chins. The men have helmets with a plastic visor in front of their eyes, but the lower half of the face is wide open. I don’t know if that’s mandated in the rules or just the choice of the teams I happened to watch, but I’ve seen a couple guys take shots to the mouth or nose already.
I don’t know if that’s sexism, exactly, but it seemed a little odd.
Full face masks for women are, in fact, required under the international rules. There is no corresponding requirement for pro male adult players. Also, bodychecks are illegal in women’s hockey.
The reasoning I have heard is that women’s hockey is still considered a developing sport in need of increasing its participation numbers. Many parents would probably decline to let their daughters play hockey if there was a non-trivial risk of disfiguring injuries. I agree there does seem to exist a certain cultural double standard in this aspect.
The injury reduction benefits from full face protection would obviously apply to men as well and it may become mandatory at some point as a response to injuries. Then again, hockey has always had a reputation of being a tough and manly sport (the USSR even had a well-known sports song about cowards not belonging in hockey), which is another incentive for pro players to go without one rather than compromise their vision wearing a full mask or cage. There was quite a bit of controversy back in the day when goaltender masks started becoming popular as it was seen as an indication of lack of bravery. Even the modern visors have only become mandatory for men in the recent decades and are still optional (though heavily encouraged and used by some 95% of players) in the NHL.
Is it just me, or does this entire discussion remind everyone of “The Bell Curve” and the ruckus surrounding that?
Yes, if you use a single metric test, there are significant differences between people of different (insert: race, gender, etc.) due to biology, social, cultural reasons.
This is not a controversial statement. It’s the inevitable followup that is the issue:
Therefore, there is no use in taking remedial steps to ensure that outcomes are more equitable through (insert: Affirmative Action, Title IX, Separate competition leagues).
We’ve found a pretty good solution in the instant case, so I am wondering what problem the OP is trying to solve.
(ETA: sorry I missed that you did say social and cultural. Note that this is not what BC stated)
Well there are far more problems with the Bell Curve’s reasoning and methodology than just that. It was a ruckus because many people liked the message rather than it being scientifically sound.
For me the biggest is that IQs aren’t static: they’re steadily increasing, and countries that score worst are actually increasing the fastest. They’re catching up.
This is very hard to square with the idea that IQ tests accurately measure some innate characteristic, and that we can reliably infer that some responsible genotype is more prevelant in group A than group B.
I’ve heard a lot of Sam Harris and Charles Murray talking on this subject but I have yet to hear what the response to that is.
There are other issues like the fact that basically all of the cited research was funded by the same white-supremicist-linked organization, but I dare say there have probably been many threads on this topic, so I won’t hijack.
I think your first error was conflating curling with a sport