bengangmo, out of the 60 or so pilots in the company I work for, only 3 are women. Do you think this is because women are not very good aircraft pilots, or some other reason?
Edit: Changed number from 2 to 3, remembered an extra one.
Except for the fact that women tend to volley longer due to less upper body strength. Women’s matches would routinely last longer then men’s if you upped it to 5 sets. As it is, the record for the longest tennis match in the world is a men’s match that is only two minutes longer than the longest women’s match.
You essentially have two entirely different styles of play. Men’s matches are like a long series of sprints. Women’s matches are a short series of endurance runs.
Thanks for the info. Something to think about.
But how does gender affect where women start on a luge course? Is it a matter of strength? Luge requires very subtle movements to steer the sled and my understanding is that it does not require much strength to turn one. Is it about reaction time? I believe that women in general have faster reaction times than men. Speed? Women generally being lighter than men would go slower and it should then be safer. 
Not saying this is the reasoning or even valid, but it takes lots of strength to make subtle and accurate changes when pulling 4-5 Gs.
This reminds me of when international aerobatics competitions had male and female divisions. When there was a push to elminate the separation there were all sorts of dire warnings that women would get creamed in an open competition due to … well, a variety of the same tired excuses.
What actually happened?
Since they eliminated the separate division a woman has held the world title about 3 years out of every 4. Despite the fact that aviation, including aerobatics, is still very heavily male dominated, most world champions since that point have been women. I can only conclude that while many fewer women are interested in such flying, those that do get into it are, on average, more motivated and skilled than the average male pilot. (Of course, there are always exceptions, that’s why I say “on average”)
Give that men and women in aerobatics are both pulling the same g’s (which easily match the 4-5 g’s of luge and auto racing) and both need to make fine adjustments to control their machines which doing do, perhaps men and women can achieve rough equality in such performance. I am not familar enough with the mechanics of luge to definitively make a statement, but as I said, with both airplanes and cars women don’t seem handicapped in that regard so perhaps they would not be so in luge. The training for men and women might be different to achieve the same results - women might need to emphasize developing strength and men might need to work more on fine motor control - but if the end result is the same does that matter so very much?
My preference would be to have the top ranked men and women in luge run exactly the same course a number of times and compare the results. If the men and women have similar results then perhaps there shouldn’t be separate divisions. Ditto for something like ski jumping, which I understand is another area where perhaps women and men can compete on an equal footing. If there is a significant difference in the results of the two categories then perhaps we should maintain separate men’s and women’s competitions.
I was going to mention aerobatics as a counter example, but I don’t really know enough about it. I know women have had major success there.
My guess is that women’s competition just isn’t yet up to the caliber of men’s in luge. Over time, as more women enter the sport perhaps that will be a non-issue, but right now most women wouldn’t be fast enough to compete on the highest level so it might stifle the growth of the sport if they had to go head-to-head. It’s been resolved in equestrian events, so why not other sports?
The launch does rely on upper body strength, so that could be factor that’s harder to overcome. I haven’t seen the skeleton racing; how do they start? Do they rely on upper body strength?
But having separate men’s and women’s divisions lets them give out more medals to more people.
Then again, the different start-points for women’s luge are intended to slow their speeds. That’s I said you had to run men and women on the same course, you can’t simply compare historical records because they haven’t been running the same courses, even if they run on the same track.
That’s a very good point.
True. Is giving out more medals important? I suppose it is to some people. To some other people, having a true open competition might mean more.
The men are now running from what used to be the women’s starting point. Can we compare those times? I think I’ve read that the men’s times are faster still.
I suppose so - and as pointed out, the greater upper body strength of the men during launch may be a decisive factor if the speeds are greater over the exact same course. But wasn’t something else done to the track surface as well? It would be important to make sure conditions truly are as identical as possible when using results for the purpose of deciding whether or not to maintain gender-separate competitions.
Yes, the guide tracks were made less aggressive, to keep the sleds from going higher in the turns. I’m sure there are tracks or competitions that don’t have a mens and womens starts so the data should be out there.
Please don’t brand me a sexist for daring to suggest that motor racing may be a skill that men are inately better suited for.
Given the ranks of motor racing drivers, and the very best drivers in the world, it seems pretty self evident.
There may be many reasons for it, from strenght to spatial awareness to natural agression and risk taking (or stupidity if you will), and I wouldn’t discount that there are some social attitudes that stop woman from reaching the very top levels.
However to say that the only reason more woman are not at the top levels is sexism is (IMO) a bit misleading - if woman, in general were really as good as men at the sport, then I am very sure you would be seeing more than just token representation. It may not reach 50%, but wouldn’t you be seeing at least 20 or 30%?
I don’t think anyone is saying it’s just sexism, it’s as much to do with a lack of interest from females in the sport. If not many girls want to race cars then not many girls will race cars. You need more evidence than a lack of female competitors to show that it is due to an innate lack of ability.
I suspect the reasons are many, starting with a lack of interest due to social stigma, followed by them being less likely to be sponsored or given the financial backing to compete at the more expensive levels due to some sexism and social stigma. So no, I don’t think you would be seeing 20 or 30%.
The thing is that race drivers are not the strongest men around, they’re very fit (though some of the V8 guys carry a bit of weight) but they’re not so strong that a woman shouldn’t be able to achieve the same strength.
You may have a point with natural aggression and risk taking but that would be part of the reason why they don’t want to do it, not the reason why they can’t do it if they want to.
Women are fragile little flowers who must be protected from sports that are just too demanding for a woman to do. Well, apparently the Olympic committee sees it that way.
If they insist on doing a sport that is too tough, we must make it easy on them.
Well, let’s put it this way: The women’s 100m sprint gold medalist in the 2008 Games wouldn’t have made it out of the first round of the men’s division*. Not even Flo-Jo’s 1988 world record time was good enough to beat any of the 2008 men. The same disparity occurred in every other track and field event.
I’m not in any way opposed to having men and women compete directly against each other, but without a women-only division, women would hardly ever get any medals.
That’s not to say events with equipment and courses should have different setups for the two sexes. I don’t think that’s necessary unless there is a real safety issue.
*: Men’s results. Women’s results. An additional 20 men who didn’t qualify to move to round 2 also posted faster times than Fraser’s time.
Well, that’s not quite what I meant. What I meant was where the performance of men and women are equal do we need separate divisions? It would be ludicrous to combine, say, men’s and women’s shot put but clearly in aerobatics we don’t need separate divisions as the performance there is not limited by gender. If luge is an area where men and women perform equally well then do we need more medals or not? If luge is an area where men have an inherent advantage due to a gender-related factor, such as upper body strength used on launch, then yes, we should maintain separate divisions. The issue, as I see it, is that no one has bothered to determine if, in fact, there is a gender-related disparity in luge performance.
Unless I’m missing something, there shouldn’t be any disparity in results in the shooting sports, but there are mens and womens divisions. If you assume that strength doesn’t really play into it (please correct me if I’m wrong) then the results should be equivalent. And, in fact, in the “open” events before there was men’s and women’s, two women won medals so there are individual women competitors who have more than held their own against men.
But here are the current world records for 10 meter air pistol - ISSF 10 meter air pistol - Wikipedia
My guess is that the time disparity between men and women in luge is real, and the people in the sport can point you to the details. There may be a time when that is not the case, either through better training and opportunities for women or through a bigger field of athletes. But I don’t think that day is here yet, and the result would be that women would rarely if ever make it to the podium. Yes, it would be nice to have the data to back that up. 