OK, I'll play... Snorman - bottom line, you are saying that men are more athletic than women???  

No surprise here... I would generally agree but considering that most of the games were created by men for men, it is not difficult to see that men are better suited for most of the events.  There are exceptions however: the female Olympic gymnasts are fantastic athletes... fully the equal of the guys.  

Quoted: OK, I'll play... Snorman - bottom line, you are saying that men are more athletic than women???   No surprise here... I would generally agree but considering that most of the games were created by men for men, it is not difficult to see that men are better suited for most of the events.  There are exceptions however: the female Olympic gymnasts are fantastic athletes... fully the equal of the guys.

To tell you the truth, what got me started thinking about this again (actually, the "special olympics" angle was in a *very* good article I read many years ago, I wish I was as articulate as the original writer to reconvey the idea as well) WAS the gymnastics.  

My and my wife were watching women's gymnastics.  Then, the next day we saw the men's.  The first was the floor excercise and immediately my wife says "WOW!! That is way better than the women's!"  

My point wasn't to show men and women are different, *but* only to point out and discuss the idea that women's classes are solely to remove competition - men - that would make it impossible for them to ever medal.  I.e., let's say hypothetically that black people always fill the podium, so we make a "white guy" class so the white guys can get medals too.

Quoted: Quoted: OK, I'll play... Snorman - bottom line, you are saying that men are more athletic than women???   No surprise here... I would generally agree but considering that most of the games were created by men for men, it is not difficult to see that men are better suited for most of the events.  There are exceptions however: the female Olympic gymnasts are fantastic athletes... fully the equal of the guys.   To tell you the truth, what got me started thinking about this again (actually, the "special olympics" angle was in a *very* good article I read many years ago, I wish I was as articulate as the original writer to reconvey the idea as well) WAS the gymnastics.   My and my wife were watching women's gymnastics.  Then, the next day we saw the men's.  The first was the floor excercise and immediately my wife says "WOW!! That is way better than the women's!"   My point wasn't to show men and women are different, *but* only to point out and discuss the idea that women's classes are solely to remove competition - men - that would make it impossible for them to ever medal.  I.e., let's say hypothetically that black people always fill the podium, so we make a "white guy" class so the white guys can get medals too.

Yeah, and if the smaller guys never win medals in wrestling aginst the big guys, maybe we should make a weight classes.... oh.... oops.

Quoted: My softball team is "competitive" but you don't see us in the Olympics.

No, but I am sure that you have leagues and tournaments that you play in and win if you are any good, otherwise you lose because your team sucks.

Quoted: Quoted: Well, in most equivalent events (100m, marathon, etc) the Gold winning woman would not have even placed close to the top 3 in the men's event (and no medal).  So, how is creating events just for women to compete in so they can get medals any different than creating "special olympics" for handicapped people so they can get medals?   <lol>, I owuld love for you to pick your absolute best sport, the one where you are the fair haired boy, and compete against the bronze medal winner.  Humbling might be the word that comes to mind, humiliated would probably be more like it.  <s>

Exactly why he is not in the olympics. And proves his point that if somebody cannot compete, they should not make a seperate event just for them.

Quoted: Well, in most equivalent events (100m, marathon, etc) the Gold winning woman would not have even placed close to the top 3 in the men's event (and no medal).  So, how is creating events just for women to compete in so they can get medals any different than creating "special olympics" for handicapped people so they can get medals?

By your logic, there should only be one Olympic event, any other events must have been created to give other "inferiors" a chance to earn medals.

Pardon me if I'm wrong, but I thought they chose the events by the merits of the event and to prove individual skill and display the human body pushed to it’s limits.  You know, sporty type-things that people like to watch and that are kinda tough for the average schmoe to do....  

Seems like people like to watch: big men in tight pants grabbing each other, little men in tight pants grabbing each other, men in tight pants skating, women in short skirts skating, men in short skirts skating, men in tight pants skating with women in short skirts, men swimming in speedos, women swimming in speedos, men jumping in water, women jumping in water...etc., you know, variety and the spice of life and all that.  I didn't think it had anything to do with who could potentially win a medal.

If I’m right and it is about skill and pushing the human body to it’s limits, then the human body comes in two main forms (male and female) - makes sense that they’d separate the events into the two categories so that the two forms can display their own unique merits.  Do you not appreciate the woman’s form?  Don’t like seeing what a woman can do when pushed to her physical limits?  Only like watching men?  Hmmmmmm, I won’t say it, I’ll just infer…………….

Besides, the more ways they split up the events, the longer they can stay on TV and the more sponsor $ they can make for even more events next year.  Maybe if you're lucky they'll have Olympic knuckle dragging or poo flinging next season.  (would that be a winter or summer sport?)

If I’m right and it is about skill and pushing the human body to it’s limits, then the human body comes in two main forms (male and female)


DAMN, that has too be the most brilliant argument posted here in weeks.

Oh crap snorman did it again, now the wimminz think we are intimdated by them. Dammit man can't you at least put forward a legitimate argument about wanting to see "the best" in the world and not divide it into a batlle of the sexes issue. Because of fuzzy thinking like that, we hhave the NBA allstars team that just got their asses handed to them. We want the best, not the highest paid or the prettiest. There are sevral sports where the women are currently kicking ass. Aerobatic flying is one. You got stuffed and now the women are going to ramp into overdrive to protect their half of the human race. When a woman tells me that men are intimdated by her, it is almost 100% gold plated guaranteed, that she likes to be dominated.

What are olympics? Do people really travel all over the world to watch volleyball?

That sort of appeals to the part of me that liked the "I'd like to buy the world a coke" commercial......the rest of me doesn't do spectator sports.

<-----would get sent home crying to momma if he had to compete against the average female olympian,

Quoted: My and my wife were watching women's gymnastics.  Then, the next day we saw the men's.  The first was the floor excercise and immediately my wife says "WOW!! That is way better than the women's!"

Ummm...it couldn't be because the guys are young, handsome, and very well built could it?

Quoted: When a man tells me that women are intimdated by him, it is almost 100% gold plated guaranteed, that he likes to be dominated.

From my experience.  

Hi persephone, thank you very much for taking that tired old saw and saying that it si exactly that, a warning sign for both sexes.

Quoted: Besides, do you really want to give up watching beach volleyball?

Best reason to watch the Olympics so far . . .