We are more then just physically different. Male and female brains are awash with different chemical concentrations which causes us to think about and react to things in a slightly different manner. These different mental approaches to competitions where physical strength plays a small role can certainly favor one sex over the other. I’m sure you could find dozens or more recent experiments which show the differences in the way men and women think.
Even a small male advantage in one pool shot or chess move can add up to absolute dominance when drawn out over the entire game.
Vlad does make an important point. We’re still in the middle of investigation into how exactly men and women differ. Although strong evidence do currently show that strong differences in the way we think. Unfortunately we’re trapped between the moral equality and the actual inequality.
Well, in bowling, at least, women don’t get as many strikes as men on average. There was some column on it somewhere that was discussing this. They said that women don’t get as many rotations on the ball as men, so are less likely to knock down all the pins even if their accuracy is just as good.
This is one of Mrs. Prefect’s pet peeves about me. If I am concentrating on something, the house could be burning and I wouldn’t notice. Whereas she can be doing about 3 things at once and still notice the house on fire.
Not according to a chef I heard interviewed on the radio. He explained it thus: Kitchen work used to be very heavy, hard work, just imagine stirring a sauce for one hour, and not suitable for the weaker sex. With the advent of modern machinery, though, there is nothing stopping women in commercial kitchens.
Let’s not ask Billy Jean. As I recall, while Ms. King defeated Bobby Riggs, what has been lost in history is the fact that Riggs sounded defeated Margaret Court prior to facing King, that the rules of the match were slanted towards King, and that Riggs was 30 years older than either King or Court.
It is also very important to note that the performance levels of exceptional athletes, male and female, cannot necessarily be applied to us commoners. The average member of the LPGA would whip the average non professional playing male golfer. If we consider men and women’s performance’s to be graphed in a bell-curve, the high end of the male performance would exceed the high end of the female, but most male and female performance would overlap in the middle, meaning that the performance of the average male and average female would be roughly the same.
In the SCA, we have coed combat using recreations of medieval armor and rattan swords. In the vast majority of cases, the men are better at this than the women. Current theory is that this is mostly due to neanderthallically stoopid training practices during the formative years of the society, and it is only in the past ten years or so that women have begun to stand their own ground on the battlefield. Given the lightweight armor options (and the size of some of the more diminutive knights in the society), there shouldn’t seem to be much of a strength benefit to being a guy.
There’s a lady who wrote a book on the differences between men & women as regarding competition in general and SCA combat in specific. A discussion of the psychological aspects of this can be found here.
I can think of several sports where women compete head to head with men (post 6th grade kickball).
The best example is Jockey Julie Krohn. She won the Belmont in 1993 and retired in 1999 with over 3,000 wins (virtually all against guys); in 2000 she became the first female jockey elected to thoroughbred racing’s hall of fame. She started racing again a year or so ago & broke her back – & is currently recovering.
Patsy Moise races respectably in NASCAR’s Busch Series races. She holds the record for the highest finish by a woman in a Busch series race, with a seventh-place finish at Talldega in 1995.
Shawna Robinson races in NASCAR too. Her career highlights include finishing in the top ten of a national oval-track racing series (6th in 2000), & was the first women to win a pole position in the NASCAR Busch Series. She did that with a track record (of 174.33 mph) in 1994.
I know there have been some of High School & college Kickers in football and that women have played minor legue mens baseball as pitchers.
I disagree with that. While LPGA players would certainly beat the average male non-pro golfer, I believe that the bell curve is shifted all the way. The average man-in-the-street is still stronger and faster than the average woman. The average man will beat the average woman at sports requiring strength or speed (not that speed applies to golf). This certainly applies in the sports I play (tennis and golf). The average 3.5 rated male tennis player is about the same as a 4.5 woman (the ratings go 2.5, 3, 3.5 etc up to about 5.5, and then become meaningless above that as you are a pro or close to it). At the local golf club I wouldn’t qualify to play the men’s championship but would expect to come in the top 3 in the women’s.
I agree with Amarone, but I also think women tend to willfully handicap themselves, on top of any natural handicap they may have.
Many men strive to become bigger and stronger, but very few women do. Most women I know strive to become smaller and weaker. These tendencies most likely increase whatever difference exists naturally.
Regarding the “male vs. female chefs” question… it’s possible that, since women are expected to cook for their families, they see it as WORK, and have no interest in getting any better than “adequate”… while a man will only start cooking if he thinks it’s FUN. Naturally, the person doing it for fun will be more enthusiastic about getting really GOOD at it.
Some amusing calculations were done when he uttered this now (in)famous claim and IIRC the conclusion was that to successfully service all these women allowing for a normal lovin’ time per woman, they would have to be delivered to his doorstep by the busload, (forget about dinner or dates) and trucked away when he was finished with them. He would more or less have to be humping pretty much non-stop during his off hours during his professional career.
What she did was significant, but mostly for symbolic reasons (and because Riggs was clever enough to play her foil and drive up public interest). The triumph was more social than athletic. Margaret Court was, I think, a good deal older than Billie Jean was when she beat Riggs (she was 29 and in her prime at #2 in the world).
Remember that Martina Navratilova - very possibly the best female player ever - was beaten pretty soundly by Jimmy Connors in the ‘Battle of the Sexes II’ thing in 1992. She got plenty of advantages (he got one serve, she got two; she got to use the doubles alleys). She was 36 - and while that was past her prime, she can STILL win Grand Slam doubles titles - and he was 40.
Also, Serena Williams got beaten badly by Kaarsten Brasch in '98 - she was young, and not nearly as good as she is now, and he was #203 in the world.
One or two women tried out/worked out for NBA teams in the 70s. I think Nancy Lieberman(-Kline) was one, and there’s another I think. Carol Blazejowski, maybe?
As to the general issue, I think Vlad makes some very valid points. I wouldn’t be surprised at all if the performance of women vs. men in athletics improved in the coming years/generations.
Danke.
To update things a bit, I’ve heard a number of commentators say that conventional wisdom is that even the top women today couldn’t beat a man in the top 100. I know, ‘what do they know?’ But I figured it’s worth throwing it out there. The #100-ranked player in the world is Christophe Rochus (heh, I hope I’m not the only one who knows who he is). He’s never won a singles title, but has beaten some of the top men.
