BoldonLad
Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
- Location
- South Tyneside
Seemingly trivial things that elicit an emotional response of some kind
- Thread starter First Aspect
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
OP
OP
First Aspect
Legendary Member
Precisely.
CXRAndy
Epic Member
Its not about physicality in darts. Its men stealing women's titles and opportunities
Dickhead
AuroraSaab
Pharaoh
It's in the statement. Small physical differences that add up to overall male body advantage.
"Male advantage includes greater height, longer limbs, broader shoulders, increased muscle mass, and stiffer tendons. These attributes enhance reach, stability, and throwing mechanics, thereby influencing consistency and precision.
▪ Stance and throw. A combination of a larger skeletal structure and advantageous biomechanics – maximising reach and facilitating more effective exploitation of forward lean – contributes to an advantage for males in throwing mechanics and accuracy.
▪ Grip and motor control. Greater hand and arm strength delays fatigue in key muscles involved in release timing, thereby supporting sustained scoring consistency in male players".
Apart from fairness, it encourages female participation in areas that have been historically dominated by men. It's the same reason we have book prizes for black or gay authors or the MOBO music awards. You never see anyone saying 'Is it because gay people can't write as well as heterosexuals and can't compete?'.
As usual the press are gaslighting us into thinking trans identifying people have been banned. They haven't. It's just men. Men are banned from the women's competition. They can of course compete in the Open category.
I'm pleased for the women who play but especially for Deta Hedman, who has refused to play men in the Women's competition and thus brought attention to the issue.
Women are allowed to have their own stuff.
OP
OP
First Aspect
Legendary Member
I think this is largely postulation. If there is nothing in darts that pushes any of these attributes to their limits (Luke Littler is a chubby short man and was competitive on a world stage at least during puberty, for example) then the policy presumes a causal effect that has not been demonstrated.
This is materially different from the situation in athletics.
This is materially different from the situation in athletics.
AndyRM
Elder Goth
Reminds me of the snooker ban on trans competitors, which is just as spurious IMO.
OP
OP
First Aspect
Legendary Member
Not necessarily spurious. There is certainly a case to say that for sports requiring spatial coordination rather than outright strength or endurance, such as "pub sports", shooting or even Motorsport, the male bias can largely be explained by participation levels. However, by the same token there could be minor neurological differences that create differences in the ability bell curves between genders that become apparent only at elite level.
It would be a bit like the (I think) accepted observation that overall female IQ is slightly higher, but there are proportionally slightly more male geniuses, and more male morons.
None of which changes the fact that darts authorities are probably taking a shot in the dark. Boom boom.
AuroraSaab
Pharaoh
Women are allowed their own stuff. The male body advantage may be less obvious in darts or snooker but regardless women are allowed their own stuff.
I take it you guys object to the Samuel Ross Grant programme, the MOBO awards, and the myriad of prizes and awards for gay artists. Is it just women who can't exclude others from their competitions and awards or does it apply to other groups?
I take it you guys object to the Samuel Ross Grant programme, the MOBO awards, and the myriad of prizes and awards for gay artists. Is it just women who can't exclude others from their competitions and awards or does it apply to other groups?
OP
OP
First Aspect
Legendary Member
That's a false equivalence, not least because gay artists are a minority. At the very least you could ask whether it would be okay to have a straight only award (the answer is no).
As always these things are a balance between the rights of different groups. If, for example, there is no detriment to one group for it to be inclusive of another, then the detriment to that other group of exclusion would be arguably unfair.
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
There's plenty of men's clubs in London under pressure to allow women to be members.
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
There seems to be a lot of outrage about people making calls on speaker phone or listening to videos without headphones whilst on public transport, but it doesn't bother me that much. On a train yesterday, someone got on and proceeded to have a loud call on speaker phone; however, shortly afterwards, two women got on and chose, without thinking, to sit immediately opposite him despite there being plenty of other free seats. They then proceeded to have a conversation which was so loud that speaker phone man was struggling to hear his loud conversation, so he had to move away. This battle of who could be the most inconsiderate trivially amused me.
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
Me: "Please can we have the bill".
Waiter without fail every single time: "Let me just clear the table first".
(this is trivially annoying).
Waiter without fail every single time: "Let me just clear the table first".
(this is trivially annoying).
bobzmyunkle
Veteran
Daft none point
So, unfair to exclude blokes from women's sport? Poor excluded blokes, we'll have to set up an alternative for them. I know, let's have an open category where anyone can participate.
OP
OP
First Aspect
Legendary Member
For phone calls, I refer you to Dom Jolly.
For phone calls on speaker, video calls and YouTube, no, absolutely utterly no, it is the most annoying and selfish thing in the world. When making calls in particular, people only have to shout because the phone is further away than the designers intended. It is idiotic.
PurplePenguin
Senior Member
Absolutely. It's what happens when over the top statements are made.
