Stop Segregating Sports by Gender

What American Ninja Warrior tells us about sex segregation.


Kacy Catanzaro has put to shame a lot of men much bigger than she. The list includes Denver Broncos wide receiver Matt Willis, Tennessee Titans safety Jordan Babineaux, mixed-martial-arts fighter Jason Soares, snowboarder Graham Watanebe and Olympic gymnast Jonathan Horton. Those are just a few.

Catanzaro, who stands 5 feet 0 inches tall and weighs 100 pounds after a big lunch, did what none of those outstanding athletes could. She made it to Mount Midoriyama, the final stage of the American Ninja Warrior (ANW) competition. She is the first woman ever to do so.

ANW is basically a big obstacle course, in the same sense that an intercontinental ballistic nuclear missile is basically a big arrow. One standard obstacle is the warped wall, which requires competitors to get to the top of a 14-foot-tall concave wall that has no handholds. Another is the salmon ladder, which has to be climbed with arm strength alone.

To climb it, contestants must do pull-ups with sufficient explosive force to yank the pull-up bar out of one set of notches and move it up to another set before gravity pulls them out of reach. As they move up the ladder, the notches get farther apart.

And as the competition progresses, the courses get longer and harder. Much harder: Only a handful of competitors ever has made it to the final stage, and nobody has ever completed it.

The sport has a smallish following compared to more popular ones such as soccer, or jai-alai, or sepak takraw. But its appeal has grown, and coverage has migrated from cable to NBC.

People watch for a variety of reasons, but one of the sport's appeals may be the purity of its meritocracy. You either finish the course or you don't. ANW has no referees. It has no judges. It has no weight classes, time-outs, pinch hitters or relief pitchers. Each competitor is completely on his or her own. Anyone can try out; truck drivers, doctors and CPAs line up to test themselves alongside stuntmen and Olympic athletes. Walk-ons are welcome — and sometimes prevail.

And as noted above, ANW does not even segregate participants by gender, as every other sport more vigorous than shuffleboard does. Most women don't get very far — not even Olympic medalists like Dee Dee Trotter and Lauryn Williams. Then again, most men don't get very far either.

But some women do. Catanzaro has gone farther than any other to date, but her accomplishment probably won't remain unique for long. (You can watch her finish the Dallas finals course by searching YouTube for "Kacy Catanzaro at the 2014 Dallas Finals").

And that raises, once again, the question of why we segregate sports by gender. If a woman can play basketball or baseball well enough for a men's team, then it's hard to think of even marginally credible arguments for not letting her. Likewise, it's hard to think of a good reason for separating male and female golf, or track and field, and so on.

The only plausible explanation for keeping women out of men's sports is that it also keeps men out of women's sports. If you let women compete against men, then you have to let men compete against women, and gender physiology makes it likely that a lot of women's teams could soon become JV men's teams instead. Men who couldn't quite make the cut in the NBA, for instance, could try out in the WNBA — and some of them would elbow women aside.

But how much weight should we give such a consideration? Nobody seems much bothered by the fact that, say, African-American women dominate the 100-meter dash. On the list of fastest times for that event, not a single Asian, Caucasian or Latino woman appears until you get down to slot No. 29 (Irina Privalova). Yet nobody in his or her right mind would conclude that we therefore should segregate the short-distance track events by race, so that women from other ethnicities get a better shot at winning.

Sports are one of the last bastions of society where equality of opportunity reigns – and equality of results is out of place. Boxing and mixed martial arts make allowances for physical type by dividing participants into different weight classes. Most sports don't. And many sports, from fencing to diving, demand qualities other than mere brute strength. So why segregate them?

Granted, most women can't perform at the level of professional male athletes. So what? Most men can't perform at the level of professional male athletes either. Averages and medians are beside the point. Elite sports is a celebration of those so far beyond the ordinary that most of us can only sit back and gaze in awe, whether they're men — or women like Kacy Catanzaro.

NEXT: Kids Director Larry Clark: 'If I Had Lived Anywhere Else I Would Have Been Shot or Executed 40 Years Ago'

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Slow news day, apparently…

  2. I hope you’re not challenging the unquestionable fact that there is absolutely no difference between men and women!

    Well, OK – yes, men’s penises are usually longer, and women’s uteruses are usually bigger…

    But other than that, NOTHING DIFFERENT!

  3. Another kid and I wanted to play volleyball in high school – had to 1977, 1978. “You can’t. Girl’s sport – not boys.” “But they have men’s teams in the Olympics.” “Whatever.”

    We elected not to protest. I ran track and cross country instead.


    1. You’d be screwing up their title ix numbers if they let you into the volleyball team I bet.

    2. Start working at home with Google. It’s a great work at home opportunity. Just work for few hours. I earn up to $100 a day. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out.

  4. You made the perfect argument for segregating men’s and women’s sports in the last paragraph. It’s very similar to separating boxers into weight classes. I don’t want to watch a heavy weight beat the shit out of a light weight, but I still want to see light weights fight.

    If people are interested in seeing women play sports (besides basketball…no one is interested in seeing women play basketball), then you must segregate because no woman will ever be able to swim, play tennis, or sprint against the top men..

    It’s a free market response to a demand (again, except for basketball as the WNBA gets a $10,000,000 subsidy from the NBA).

    1. I heard that. A HS state champion male BB team most any state in CONUS would beat the five best female basketball players in the world. With that sort of disparity what is the point of mixing them in sports where they have no chance to compete?

      Motorsports? Maybe

    2. What’s wrong with women’s basketball? Sure, they can’t dunk, but good fundamentals.

      1. Sure, they can’t dunk

        Most can’t dunk, but there’s afew who can, like Lisa Leslie, Britney Griner, and…

        OK, so there’s two who can.

      2. They play a high quality game but the difference in speed, strength, etc. means the best women in the world cannot compete with a team of 16-18 year old men. So why try and extrapolate from the fine performance during the ANW contest to women and men should compete head to head?

        1. Who cares about fundamentals? I want to be entertained, and watching a bunch of lady manbeasts move at the speed of ass and jump 5 feet in the air isn’t entertaining…

          1. I’m betting you haven’t watched any WNBA. They do NOT have good fundamentals. It looks like a soccer game with all the turnovers.

      3. Women’s basketball is the most God awfully boring shit in the history of the world. Period.

      4. Femputer: What?! Did you explain how the women’s good fundamentals make up for their inability to dunk?
        Ornik: Yes. They still laugh.
        Femputer: The men must die.

    3. It is not exactly a free market. Women’s tennis players used political pressure to get equal pay, even though there isn’t equal interest in their game.

  5. I’m also reminded of a tomboy girlfriend I had early in HS. She insisted she should be able to play sandlot football with us boys (pads, helmets). After suggesting she really didn’t (5’0″, maybe 100 lbs – we were all about 5 10, 6′, 150-200) we relented.

    She was on the other team. She received the kickoff, and I hit her in the stomach at full tilt with my shoulder, sending her flat on her back,looking up at the sky, minus football.

    She exited the game, and did not ask to play any more.

    Same reason I stopped playing tackle football when I went to college – cause I was STILL 170, and even at a D III school, the varsity players were WAY bigger and tougher. No thanks.

    Anyhoo – this just reminded me of that little lesson in “boys and girls are absolutely equal in all things, forevermore”.

    1. we were all about 5 10, 6′, 150-200) we relented.

      My wife might have been able to compete with you guys. 5’8″, 145 lb shotput/ discus thrower, but even then she would have been on the smaller side. And she apparently did play tackle football with a lot of male friends up until HS, but they stopped playing with her more because they were starting to get uncomfortable with tackling a female than because of her being too small.

      So she played DE/LB in powder puff in HS, and apparently broke a couple of opponents noses.

      1. women’s shot puts and discuses are rather smaller than the men’s sizes. I’m sure that’s not by accident either.

  6. Without segregation there would be no female sport champions. Is that what you want!?

    1. We have to grade the female athletes on a scale to ensure equality. So if a woman’s basketball team is playing a men’s basketball team and the men’s team are winning 40-0 after the first ten minutes, then we award the women’s team an automatic 50 points. This will make sports more fair and fun to watch for everyone, and no more sexism! Nothing could possibly go wrong!

    2. How is this different from saying, “Without segregation there will be no black valedictorians.”

      1. Because it is accepted that there are physiological differences between men and women. It is not equally accepted that there are academic differences between races.

        1. “Because it is accepted that there are physiological differences between men and women”

          Oh, the HELL it is. If you said this on national television, NOW (and a lot of women who aren’t NOW members) would suffer a complete and total sense of humor meltdown. Troches and pitchforks and hissy-cat-fits as far as the eye could see. Which is, I suspect, more or less the subversive point of this article.

    3. Back when Martina Natarilova and Chris Evert were competing, Martina wondered out loud (or responded to a question) about whether some elite women could now compete against male tennis players. Chris Evert said it was not realistic as her brother who was unranked beat her all the time and Bjorn Borg who had retired a few years earlier was not in the top 100 at that time. So it is fine to allow elite women to try, but it will be a rare thing when they can compete. Gymnastics and an obstacle course are a rare time when a strong but light woman might have an advantage. I think I saw Kacy C. on TV when she finished the obstacle course and she was awesome.

  7. “Elite sports is a celebration of those so far beyond the ordinary that most of us can only sit back and gaze in awe”

    Why do you get to define what sports are all about?

    1. I gaze in awe at women’s tennis all the time.

      1. Yep. Far superior to the men’s game at least in terms of watchability.

        1. Tennis…absolutely! Women’s tennis is amazing. That’s why we need segregation. Because that amazing sport wouldn’t exist without it.

        2. This is true

        3. You think it is? 6-3 6-0 final, almost every event. Once a woman tennis player gets behind she quits. Ever seen a match that went on and on, with women?

          Definitely not more watchable.

  8. I’m assuming the title IX people will be just fine with everyone playing together when it’s 99.9% males.

    1. Can we have wrestling back then? God I hate title IX, if for no other reason than all but killing NCAA wrestling. I came up with an idea once that would satisfy title IX and give schools a revenue producing women’s sport, but apparently mud wrestling is considered sexist now.

      1. We should bring wrestling back – as MMA.

    2. They’d just keep cutting sports that men were interested in until there was nothing left but synchronized swimming. Gotta keep those numbers proportional!

      1. More money left for club sports, then.

  9. Golf is one of the few possible sports were women might have a chance to compete on a nearly (not many chicks can hit a 300 yard drive) even field. Wie and Sorenstam have both had some experience in competing against men. Annika finished third this last weekend in a semi-pro celebrity tournament.

    1. Both failed spectacularly when competing in PGA Tour events.

      More and more women can drive the ball a ton off the tee. However, that is not what makes a champion golfer.

      1. So you’re saying women can’t putt?

        1. They are bad with numbers and don’t know which iron to use.

          1. Hey I still confuse my 6 and 9 irons…

      2. However, that is not what makes a champion golfer.

        It’s mainly the short game and mental skills I agree, which is why I think there there might be some hope for the occasional female golfer to compete with the men.

        1. It’s also the ability to muscle a ball out of 4-6″ rough and put it on the green from 150 yards. That’s strength as well as hand-eye coordination.

        2. To compete with men golfers you have to be able to hit a driver somewhat close to where the big hitters are driving the ball. Given equal talent somebody consistently hitting an 8 iron to the green is going to out score (over the long haul) somebody who is consistently hitting a 5 iron to the green regardless of variation in pro level short games.

    2. Most women ‘could’ hit a 300 yard drive, if not for the patriarchy.

  10. And that raises, once again, the question of why we segregate sports by gender.

    Well this is obvious when it comes to some sports. A woman can’t even make it as a kicker in the NFL, it’s already been tried and it quickly shut the traps of all the ‘NFL is sexist!’ crowd. I don’t have any problem with women competing in any sport that they want to.

    Why are there no women in FIFA? I’ve never even heard mention of it. All of those soccer countries must be sexist, that could be the only reason. Of course, we don’t need any of that soccer here in America, it’s Un-American because …. because … well, it just is!

    1. Womens soccer is fine.

      Men playing it, is not.

    2. Why are there no women in FIFA?

      FIFA oversees some women’s tournments too. I guess you meant why are there no women playing men’s soccer?


      1. or /pedant, even

  11. God Hinkle is a moron. There is so much wrong in this article. First

    And many sports, from fencing to diving, demand qualities other than mere brute strength. So why segregate them?

    All sports demand qualities beyond mere brute strength you fucking half wit. But strength, size, quickness matter. To take driving, the g-forces experienced by an F1 driver require tremendous strength and give men an advantage that women cannot overcome. This is why there has never been a female F1 driver, even though having one would be a boon to marketing.

    Granted, most women can’t perform at the level of professional male athletes. So what? Most men can’t perform at the level of professional male athletes either.

    No elite women can’t in most sports perform at the level of a good male high school athlete. For example, the winning women’s 100 meter time in the Olympics would not finish in the top five of any top high school boys state track meet and an elite AAU boys basketball team would physically bully and dominate a WNBA team. The top women’s tennis player couldn’t take a game from even a poor men’s professional.

    1. Can we agree, at least, that the WNBA team you referenced shouldn’t exist even if there were a demand for it? Because seriously, women’s basketball is the most God awful fucking waste of time possibly in the history of the world.

      1. Yes. Girls basketball is fucking awful. The co-owner of my local bar (a giant but friendly lesbian) keeps trying to give us patrons tickets to the LA Sparks games. No one is taking up the offer. Because the WNBA SUCKS!!!

        1. It has become de rigueur here in Sunny Minnesoda for prog wimmen to complain that even though the Lynx are dominating the WNBA they get no ink in the sports page.

          “They are national champions and all anyone cares about are the Twins and Vikes who are big losers! Patriarchy!!!”

          1. I bet the Twins could beat the Lynx (that’s really their name!?!?!) in basketball.

    2. Check your privilege, you sexist cisshitlord.

    3. There is something much, much different in the physical make-up of men than women. Not that this is an example indicative of everything/everyone, but in the gym that I go to there are a few women who look like they are absolutely jacked – and I can lift more weight then them and I don’t look much different than an average guy on any street anywhere.

      1. You must be some sort of demi God!

      2. They may look jacked, but do they have The Jack?


      3. I used to own a bar. I had a couple of cocktail waitresses that were tough. One was tough athletically and one was physically tough and had beaten a few guys up. I weighed about 145 pounds, 5’8″. At a company picnic the two girls wanted to wrestle with me, obviously they had been drinking. I said it wouldn’t even be close, and not to bother. They said they would clean my clock, and they said they were going to depant me, just for fun. This was a time before sexist lawsuit type stuff. These were trim, young, muscular women. I was in shape, but there was barely a guy in my bar I could beat in a fight. Maybe all the wrecked out of shape guys, but anyone younger, nah I would have lost.

        We wrestled, everybody laughed. I pinned them both without even trying hard. At the same time. It was like wrestling with two 10 year old boys. (Okay, not that I’ve ever done that, just to be clear….). They were shocked. They couldn’t understand how I could have beaten them so easily. They assumed because we were all three much the same weight they would be all over me.

    4. Someone asked Navratalova once if she could compete on the men’s tour. She said that her coach (who couldn’t make the top 100 on the tour) routinely ran down her best shots and returned them at her.

      1. The average serve speed for men’s tennis is about 15 percent faster than the average women’s serve. Not only would the women’s serve seem slow the the man, but the man’s serve would seem crazy fast to a woman.

    5. The Bronze medal 2006 US women’s hockey team lost to the Warroad MN boys high school team in an exhibition game with no checking.

    6. “the winning women’s 100 meter time in the Olympics would not finish in the top five of any top high school boys state track meet”

      I am skeptical of that considering the world record for men is 9.58 and for women is 10.49.

      1. And the record for high school boys in the 100M is 10.0 seconds, 1/2 a second faster, which is a lot in the 100m.

        1. Yes, but that’s the world’s record for high school boys, John said ‘the top five of any top high school boys state track meet.’ What’s that average like?

          1. Assuming a poisson distribution with the world record at one end, most top althetes will be very close to the record. They measure results in 100ths of a second for a reason. Given a .49 spread between the men’s record and the women’s record, almost all men at the top of their field will outperform all women at the top of their field.

            I expect John is about right. I would absolutely state that no woman is going to medal against a field of top high school males given the 0.03 spread between top teens and the world record.

            1. That’s a nice statistics discussion, but the actual results from the Iowa High School Track State Championships seems to belie that analysis.

              Here’s more from 2011:


            2. Looking at the recent state championships in Delaware (which is the only state where I’ve had anything to do with high school sports), the winning boys’ time was 11.06 seconds. The all-time state record for boys is 10.54 seconds. Meanwhile, the girls’ winning time is 12.33, with an all-time record of 12.04.

              So the fastest female 100m sprinter would in fact have taken the gold at a (small) state HS championship. But it’d be close.


        Iowa High School Boys Track and Field All-Time

        All-Time Records

        Track Events

        100 Meter Dash ? Adam Haluska, Carroll (2002) – :10.1
        200 Meter Dash ? Tom Jennings, Marshalltown (1955); Tim Dwight, Iowa City West (1994) – :20.8
        400 Meter Dash ? Calvin Davis, Iowa City High (2002) – :47.01
        800 Meter Run ? David Korir, Cedar Rapids Washington (1975) ? 1:49.3
        1600 Meter Run ? Ed DeLashmutt, Fort Madison (1976) ? 4:05.6
        3200 Meter Run ? Jim Eicken, Davenport Central, (1975) ? 8:52.0
        110 Hurdles ? Randy Elliott, Charles City (1977) – :13.6
        400 Hurdles ? Dustin Avey, Ames (1996) – :50.96

        1. Again, these are the state all time records.

          Here’s results from Iowa’s 2014 state high school track and field for 100 m:

          Notice Meliek Meyer at first with 11.13.

          1. I can run the hundred faster than that. How the Hell can that be right???

            1. citation ?

              1. 100 Meter Dash – Brian Clark, Cincinnati (2005) – :11.00

                1. unfortunately not even close to fast enough to run on my high school track team 🙁

                2. Iowa is not exactly well known for producing sprinters {other than that Tim Dwight guy} 😉

                  We mostly produce wrestlers and linemen.

                3. best citation ever

          2. No female olympian is going to medal against a field of high-school all-star males.

            1. And yet:

              “Meyer showed he was serious in the preliminary races, posting the fastest qualifying time in the 1A 100-meter dash. In Saturday’s final, Meyer won the first individual state championship for Lynnville-Sully since 2004 in a blazing time of 11.13 seconds.”


              1. I could run faster and I’m a college professor…

          3. So you picked the 1A finals and ignored the 2A, 3A, and 4A (big schools) finals as well as ignoring the wind conditions. So Meliek ran 11.13 into a 1.7 knot headwind in the finals, but ran 10.96 in the prelims with a 1.5 knot tailwind.

            The 4A champ ran 11.07 into a 2.9 knot wind in the finals.

            Apples to apples dipshit. Records are only recorded when the winds are calm which doesn’t happen that fucking often during the spring in Iowa.

            1. Is goal shifting a track event? Because I could have sworn John’s comment said ‘any top meet’ and not ‘any NWI meet’

              1. Is goal shifting a track event?

                Bo Classic

              2. Here are the results for the MN state 2014 championships. Notice in heat 1 and 3 of the 100 m boys, both of which were running with winds assisting them, no boy matched the woman’s record.


          4. Note the spread between #1 and #8. 0.33 seconds.

            4A Finals
            1 Rico Gafford 12 Dowling C, WDM 11.07 -2.9 10
            2 Kaleb Kesselring 12 DSM Lincoln 11.25 -2.9 8
            3 Bryson Runge 11 IC, City High 11.29 -2.9 6
            4 Ronald Nash 12 SC, East 11.34 -2.9 5
            5 Lance Dunn Jr. 12 WAT West 11.38 -2.9 4
            6 Tate Christensen 12 SE Polk 11.39 -2.9 3
            7 Isaiah Kramme 11 Ankeny Cent 11.40 -2.9 2 11.391
            8 Moussa Kuyateh 11 SE Polk 11.40 -2.9 1 11.394

            1. 4A Finals (girls)
              1 Jalynn Roberts-Lewis 12 DSM, Roosevelt 12.09* -0.8 10
              2 Briyana Carter 10 DSM, Roosevelt 12.38 -0.8 8
              3 Jasmine Blue 10 CR Jefferson 12.53 -0.8 6
              4 Talia Buss 10 Waukee 12.63 -0.8 5
              5 Kadejah Sanders 12 CR Washington 12.67 -0.8 4
              6 Amarri Waller 10 CR Kennedy 12.81 -0.8 3
              7 Britney Calvillo 12 SC, East 12.83 -0.8 2
              8 Sydney Reysack 10 Ankeny Cent 12.87 -0.8 1

              1. The spread between #1 and #2 for the girls is almost the same as the spread between #1 and #8 for the boys.

            2. Bianca Knight, high schooler of MS ran the 100 m in 11.28 in 2006. That would put her third against Iowa’s top boys. Here is my entire point in all of this: if that girl moved to Iowa, why not let her run against those boys?

              1. The equipment (shoes) and track condition as well as wind are much different than in the Olympics. Need to compare under similar circumstances. John may have overstated his case though. Maybe he should have said top male high school runners, not any track meet ever held. The main point still holds. The size and strength, leg length, etc. of men plus testosterone and the different angle that the legs attach to the pelvis all give men a huge advantage in most sports such that high school boys can often beat the top women in the world. In some sports, it may take college male athletes.

          5. Bo, you’re right. John was slightly out, but the fact remains, very likely a high ranking boy runner is faster than the fastest woman around. A college ranked male tennis player who couldn’t crack the top 200 in the world could beat any woman player. A top quality 15 year old team of boys who would lose 50-0 against a pro male team, could beat the Canadian women’s team, which won the last two Olympic golds. And, so on.

        2. Tim Dwight!!!

          Man, Timmy could run.

          1. No doubt.


        Texas 5A; 9th place is 10.71. I would say John’s overstating it, but not by much.

      4. Your skeptical because you are stupid.

        The winner of the 2012 women’s 100 meters ran a 10.75 second 100.…..ics/100m-w

        The 2014 Texas top class boys 100 meter finals That would have placed her butt naked last in the finals of the Texas 5A boys 100 meters this year.…../index.htm

        No feel free to waste inch after inch making meaningless distinctions rather than just admit you don’t know what you are talking about.

        1. That’s a nice cherry pick of Texas, did you mean Texas only when you wrote “the winning women’s 100 meter time in the Olympics would not finish in the top five of any top high school boys state track meet”?

          I just posted that this woman would have won outright the Iowa state championship for boys 100 m.

          1. 2014 Utah State Championship, high school boys 100 m:

            “Jonah Trinnaman of American Fork was the favorite entering the 5A 100-meter finale Saturday, and the senior did not disappoint. A 10.73 was .05 seconds off his all-time best, but it gave him a comfortable margin of victory in claiming the top spot on the podium at state.”


            1. Bo picking the top all time fastest 100m time for women vs the Iowa high school state championships isn’t?

              1. When someone says ‘any’ then I think it is more than fine to cherry pick any counterexample.

                If John had said ‘the top women racers would not place in the top five at many or some boys high school meets’ I would not agree. Contrary to Warty’s usual simplifications I’m not denying significant average differences physiologically between men and women, I just think John’s comment inaccurately portrayed the extent.

                1. From
                  Any:one, a, an, or some; one or more without specification or identification: If you have any witnesses, produce them. Pick out any six you like.

                  Top-the highest or loftiest point or part of anything; apex; summit. Synonyms: zenith, acme, peak, pinnacle, vertex. Antonyms: bottom, base, foot, lowest point.

                  John’s quote:”the winning women’s 100 meter time in the Olympics would not finish in the top five of any top high school boys state track meet”

                  Take from that what you will.

                  1. I wouldn’t pick Iowa’s single A high school programs as “any TOP high school program” but that is just me.

                    1. I wouldn’t either, I picked the best runner in that category in the entire state. And I repeated it for two other states so far. I think that’s starting to get into the ‘top’ category, but if you don’t I can agree to disagree and let you have the last word.

                    2. He said TOP high school state track meet. That would seem to me to be the top four or five States, or even two or three. Not Iowa, but likely California or Florida, etc.

                    3. Considering we have to recruit running backs and wide receivers from Texas and Florida because all the white Iowa boys are so slow, that’s a reasonable statement.

                  2. Yeah, good point. He didn’t say, top five of any high school boys state track meet. He said in the top five of any TOP high school boys state track meet.

                    Which could mean the top five track meets for boys high school of all time.

                    Bo….I thought you were technically correct, but being a dick. But, now I think Idle Hands has pointed out you are technically wrong, and being a dick.

          2. Which part of “top High School meet” do you not understand? Iowa is a small state. It is not surprising the top runner there couldn’t make the finals of a big state like Texas. And Texas hardly has a monopoly on great runners.

            And yes, you are going to waste everyone’s time making meaningless distinctions. The bottom line is the top women in the world in 2012, couldn’t make the finals of the top boys high school meet.

            1. I am curious, what is your criteria for ‘ANY top high school boys track meet’ that would not include many state championships?

              1. I would take it as what it means the top high school programs in the country.

            2. Also keep in mind that all the athletes at the top levels, including the women, are on shitloads of PEDs. So you have women who are absolute genetic freaks, who have spent their entire lives training, and who are juiced up, and they’re approximately as good as a good high school boy.

              1. “they’re approximately as good as a good high school boy.”

                No, no, Warty, TOP high school boys, not merely good.

                1. God you’re precious. You just spent, what, 15 posts sifting state high school track records desperately trying to find a handful of examples with which you could create a distinction between “any top high school boys’ track meet” and “most high school boys’ track meets”, and you’re gonna get pissy about John being a pedant about the word “top”.

                  Never, ever change, Bo.

                  1. I tell you guys, PM just can not resist my posts.

                    And, true to his double standards, John defending his generalization when counterexamples are produced by trying to make the word ‘top’ do some strong work doesn’t bother him, but my focus on ‘any’ does.

                    1. And yet, even with all that being true, you still look like an enormous asshole.

                      You care so much about something so trivial that you waste every shred of credibility and good will you have Just to shoot John down.

                      Never once realizing how fucking sad you look for doing it.

              2. they are biochemically males.

                this point is lost on most ppl.

                the gender difference is SMALLEST in this event.

                they want to say those women (like marion jones) are nearly competing with men, but calling them women is an abuse of truth.

                they would physiologically be male if they had spent their entire lives at their competing hormone levels.

            3. That woman would have gotten 4th in NJ, which is like totally a hotbed of Track talent.


        2. You’re wasting your time, John. Women are weaker and have less testosterone than men because of patriarchy or something.

    7. Wrong. Women aren’t really at a physical disadvantage in auto racing. The reason that one hasn’t been a breakthrough success yet is pure numbers. When there are only 1-3% as many women in racing as there are men, of course the odds of success are going to be lower. It’d be like asking why NASCAR drivers with Polish backgrounds and last names beginning with P haven’t won as many races.

      Simona de Silvestro has placed as high as second in Indycar, and is spending this season as a development driver for Sauber F1, with an eye on a race seat if sponsorship can be landed. Simona is a very talented and aggressive driver and does not like to be judged or viewed based on her gender.

      Additionally, as awful and annoying as Danica Patrick can be, she has also won in Indycar and was a regular front runner in the Indy 500 from 2005-2011.

      1. Danica couldn’t get a F3000 ride. It is not about numbers.

        1. But there are female fighter pilots who arguably have to deal with similar if not greater g-forces as race car drivers. If I had to guess I would say that might be an area where there is a ‘cultural’ preference for men over women.

          1. I just did some research on this because I was going to call bullshit, but John probably has a point.

            Women fighter pilots actually have an advantage over men in G-tolerance (shorter). But these are vertical Gs and aligned with the spine. 9 is about the limit (and still be able to perform) but there isn’t a lot of strength required as you are getting it all in your ass and are strapped to the seat.

            F-1 drivers experience lateral Gs, and the article I read says they can pull up to 5.3, and would/could require some strength to overcome it while manipulating controls. Not sure it would be a big issue for a woman, but not complete BS either.

            The biggest issue with Gs is not really how much, or how often, but how long you need to sustain it. Jumping off a chair is something like 20+ Gs on impact, but it’s instantaneous. In a car you wouldn’t be sustaining 5.3 for very long.

            1. great post, FdA

        2. Danica could get a GP2 ride (F3000 hasn’t been around in years) long before almost any driver in U.S. road racing, but that has nothing to do with talent. Racing is not a meritocracy.

          1. Bullshit, see the comment below about her Formula Atlantic career. She raced for Lynx Racing (I think that’s right). They were the best team in the sport. I don’t think she ever won a race and we rarely on the pole.

      2. It’s a similar situation in children’s football. The girls are competitive with the boys, but so few girls are interested in playing football that 99% of the players are boys.

      3. Patrick was a mid grade driver in Formula Atlantic racing for the best team. She’s cute and has a great body…that’s why she has gotten decent rides.

      4. “Women aren’t really at a physical disadvantage in auto racing.”

        You’re a fucking imbecile.

    8. No elite women can’t in most sports perform at the level of a good male high school athlete.

      Soccer is a good counter-example. No way is any high-school boys team going to beat, say, the Women’s USA national team.

      1. Ok, but how about a D1 men’s team?

        1. Ok, but how about a D1 men’s team?

          Possibly not – but that wasn’t the point I was refuting.

          In any case, soccer depends a bit more on skill and endurance than on brute strength. As a consequence, players tend to peak later than in the “brute” sports which is another strike against the high school athletes in this comparison.

          1. Uh, no. Back when the UWWNT played Loomis Chafee in our area in a scrimmage, they got beat 7-1. Badly. Ass whipped. Done.

          2. if your point is that you didn’t read ‘in most sports’ then you win.

            I think women have an innate advantage in sports like gymnastics and figure skating because judgment is subjective and femininity elicits sympathy, protection, etc. (also having a tiny skeleton is advantageous in those sports)

      2. This is apparently not true. A good high school boys team from a big state apparently gives them a game but generally loses, the best high school boys teams are an even match. When you move on to college teams a good college team apparently overwhelms them.

        Apparently for a very long time, that was the way they prepared: by playing against boys and men. Which is usually why Mia Hamm would laugh when they’d ask her about trying to play against men in MLS or whatever.

      3. Or how about an all-star boys high school team from one of the bigger states? I have no idea. Has it ever been done? The thing is that some of the women may have great skills but most of the high school boys would be faster due to longer, stronger legs.

    9. John…you should look before you leap:

      Five women racing drivers have entered at least one Grand Prix, although only two of them ever qualified and started a race. The woman who competed in the most Grands Prix is Lella Lombardi, with 17 entries and 12 starts.

      Desir? Wilson became the only woman to win a Formula One race of any kind when she won at Brands Hatch in the British Aurora F1 series on 7 April 1980.

    10. Just on the fencing aspect, it could easily work (at least for team events, mixed gender like mixed doubles tennis). My recollection is that a number of years ago when women’s sabre fencing become an international event, the Olympics wouldn’t give an additional slot. So now they rotate, each Olympics one of the fencing sports (men/women foil/epee/sabre, both individual and team) is not in the Olympics.

      One proposal had been to have team events be mixed, both men and women, but supposedly a number of more conservative European countries killed that idea. But it was doable while still maintaining a competitive sport, and I think would have helped invigorate interest because how many contact combat sports have men facing women?

  12. I want to wrestle women.

    1. Andy Kaufman holds that title.

    2. Even Chyna?

      1. I’m willing to believe a girl could win some wrestling matches, but I’m not willing to believe that someone named Maisie could.

        1. Are you there God, it’s me, Maisie.

    3. A guy on my HS team got to in the 103 weight class, liberties were taken stadium laps were run. Still funny to watch though.

  13. This is embarrassingly silly. For one thing, women aren’t kept out of men’s sports. You don’t think the NFL would love it if the next elite quarterback was some hot chick?

    1. Tom Brady doesn’t count?

    2. What we need is a Handicapper General, to ensure parity between the sexes.

    3. Did you see that lady knuckle baller that threw BP to some MLB players? I think she hit one!!!

    4. Like I just posted above, a woman cannot even kick in the NFL. It’s already been tried and was an extreme joke.

      Myself, I’m really happy about the differences between men and women. And not just so I can feel superior is some way. People who aren’t happy about that difference are malcontents who cannot be made happy by any means.

      1. I looked up what you were talking about. It hurts. Oh, it hurts.

        1. In all fairness, that’s a publicity stunt gone horribly awry. It always was. There are much better female athletes than her.

          They still stink.

        2. While she is new to the gridiron, Silberman had said she hoped her years of studying sports video games would give her an advantage.


      2. “Like I just posted above, a woman cannot even kick in the NFL. It’s already been tried and was an extreme joke.”

        How much of this is due to the fact that there is not nearly the same culture of football playing and opportunities for girls?

        1. Amazingly enough, there appears to be no culture in the whole goddamn world where women are better athletes than men. I wonder why that might be?

          1. Most cultures also didn’t let women vote and such for a long time. Wonder why that might be?

            1. “Most cultures also didn’t let women vote and such for a long time. Wonder why that might be?”

              Because you’re a pedantic asshat?

              1. Wow, somebody is really upset.

                1. Wow, somebody is really upset.

                  I know. You should probably calm down and stop trying to cherry pick data in order to justify not having to recant your insanely retarded position.

                  Chill, bro.

            2. Most cultures also didn’t let women vote and such for a long time. Wonder why that might be?

              Because false equivalence?

            3. Because men are physically stronger and thus have been able to oppress women since the dawn of time?
              Which is exactly what we are discussing.

        2. Nothing. Females are not as strong as males.

          1. It’s hard for me to buy it doesn’t have something to do with it. Look at how different ethnic groups have such a strong presence in different sports at different times. Surely that has something to do with culture and opportunities.

            1. Maybe. But the bottom line when it comes to competitive sports is strength, speed and endurance are everything and women are sufficiently genetically different from men as to be unable to compete against them.

              1. You’re wasting your time.

                1. Warty’s comment is usable in more than just this thread…

              2. Of course not all of it is going to be because of culture and opportunities, but some of it is, and depending on the sport, at the margins, with that constant I’d expect more women able to compete than currently.

                1. I don’t doubt that if all women played all/more/enough sports competitively there would be more that might/could compete successfully against men than currently do – law of large numbers kind of thing.

                  That said there are still plenty of sports where women have competed side by side with men for long periods of time and they just do not measure up.

                  Men are genetically stronger, faster and possess more endurance. This is hard coded into human DNA and might have something to do survival of the species.

                  1. I agree with everything you wrote there.

                  2. Men are genetically stronger, faster and possess more endurance.

                    Not sure that last one – I’ve heard it said many times that women beat men on endurance.

                    1. I’ve heard it said many times that women beat men on endurance

                      Well, when was the last time a female marathon runner beat her male counterpart?

              3. Actually, I think women have an advantage swimming the English channel because they are fatter. 🙂

            2. Women have been competing in the Olympics since 1900 that’s 114 year old ongoing case study? why don’t we see them competing head to head with men. Compare that to when baseball was desegregated, it produced many all time great player of color in 10 years.

              1. typing from a phone sucks.

              2. Women competing in Olympics =/= a comparable culture and opportunities for girls and boys re: most sports

                1. Consider the Communist Block countries. In those countries there were/are far more opportunities for girls/women to compete (for the glory of the motherland and to display the superiority of communism over capitalism).

                  Still, in swimming, track and field, or any sport that requires strength, speed and endurance for success the women from those countries cannot compete against the men from any other country.

                2. What? that’s exactly what it means.

                  1. I don’t think so. The fact that the Olympics has a sport for women (or men for that matter) does not mean that girls are encouraged to play that sport and that training and junior experiences in that sport are as available to women.

                    1. The fact that the Olympics has a sport for women (or men for that matter) does not mean that girls are encouraged to play that sport and that training and junior experiences in that sport are as available to women.

                      Yeah, it’s not like women’s soccer does national tours to recruit and develop talent from a young age

                      or track and field

        3. Probably very little to none. Girls can play organized soccer from an early age.

          At one point in time a lot of kickers in the NFL had never played football either. They were Futbol players who were recruited from Europe. Being able to kick field goals proved to have nothing to do with playing football as a kid.

        4. They have less leg strength. Women’s tackle football teams have noticeably shorter kicking distances than men’s adult amateur teams. Women’s rugby has noticeably less kicking than men’s because it’s tactically better for the women to keep the ball in close & ruck it than to kick, because of the shorter distances they tend to get.

  14. Maybe sports should have an “open” category that is, well, open to whoever of either/any gender wants to come in and try their luck. I don’t think it would last very long, but at least the offer would have been made.

    1. You’d have to institute this throughout the entire pipeline. Having an open category in football won’t make a bit of difference unless the same exists at the college, high-school varsity, jv, and pee wee levels. Same for any other sport. That would require major cultural and institutional shifts. Good luck with that.

      1. It would require major hormonal shifts. If Holley Mangold couldn’t make it as a lineman at the shitty Division III school she played at, normal women don’t have a chance.

        1. IIRC even the East German women track and field (and weight lifters) athletes who were turned into men without their knowing it didn’t compete with the men’s records.

          1. Swimmers too.

  15. Kacy Catanzaro = hot. Esp. for an athlete. IMO, Kacy’s unique acomplihment & sculpted, muscular physique proves that the ideal weight range for a 5 foot woman is roughly 97-103. If you are 5 foot & 121 lbs, you are fat.

    1. I would say that even if you are 5′ 3″ and 121 pounds, you are pushing it.

      1. I think you guys are leaving out T&A in that formula.

        1. Based on these NSFW pictures I’d say 105 pounds is a nice target even for a woman as tall as 5 foot 8.

  16. TV Ratings. You turn the WNBA into the “NBA part 2” and there go your precious eyeballs and associated advertising money.

    Once you understand how this drives almost everything in spectator sports, you’ll know what the endgame looks like:

    – Women’s leagues stay women only (because that’s part of the appeal for their viewer base).
    – Men’s leagues is more of a suggestion than a hard rule: Whenever there’s a woman that can play competitively in the men’s leagues, she just plays in it (since that, in itself, makes for good TV). It’s actually happened a handful of times in the NHL.

    Free markets at work.

    1. I still dream of Manon Rheaume…

    2. The WNBA has no ratings. That’s why it needs a massive subsidy from the NBA every year. I’m totally cool with the free market developing women’s sports. But I think that we can all agree that the torturous, shit fest that is women’s basketball would should be banned for all time and not considered even if there’s demand for it.

      1. Ummm…we get it, you don’t like the WNBA.

        1. Damn it Fluffy! No one likes the WNBA!

          1. No, they don’t.

            But my father in law subjects me to women’s college basketball.

            “More of the game takes place below the rim!” he says.

            Yeah, great.

            1. I love how the just shoot from the hip.

            2. Is your father in law Lisa Leslie?

  17. Spinner.

    1. Butter face.

      1. Yeah, but spinner.

  18. Yet nobody in his or her right mind would conclude that we therefore should segregate the short-distance track events by race, so that women from other ethnicities get a better shot at winning.

    Don’t give them ideas.

    1. You have to admit, the Black Lesbian Midget Quadriplegic League of Athletics would be entertaining, if only for a brief period.

      1. No track racing can provide more entertainment than QWOP.

      2. Valerie Jarrett, a league does not make.

      3. Can’t wait for the synchronized floating competition.

  19. I used to say this in ’98 as a joke. Now it’s an intellectual position?

    1. It’s a still a joke, not everyone gets it.

      1. I will say that the USWN soccer team ruled back in those heady Brandy Chastain days. The whole city of D.C. People were so…excited! To watch a team that lost to the local high school boys’ prep school team where I live by a count of 7-1.

    2. Libertarians often also are contrarians. This is Hinkle’s contrarian article.

      1. Good for him. I missed the dry wit. Kind of?

  20. In college, I played pick up basketball against a female basketball hall of famer and a fringe NBA PG. I didn’t get embarrassed, too badly, by the female HOF’er. I got absolutely clowned by the NBA guy and it was crystal clear that he was going no more than 50%. No chance any WNBA player could even make a DII team, probably not even a DIII team.

  21. I have no problem with women competing with men, if they can/choose to.

    The vast majority won’t be able to.

    I also have no problem with privately mandated all-women teams.

    Didn’t this train sail like 30 years ago?

  22. Women have done well in some areas, like as jockeys, and Kulick has had some success in the PBA against men.

    1. In the US, do women have to register for the draft when they turn 18? If not, why not?

      1. The draft for bowling?

        1. Don’t try to be a smartass, just answer the question.

          My understanding is that only men are eligible to get forced to fight in a war. Is that no longer the case? If World War III broke out tomorrow, would a 22 year old American female be as likely to get drafted as a 22 year old American male?

          1. I guess I am wondering what in the world this has to do with anything.

            1. So the logic behind only drafting male soldiers is entirely unrelated to the logic behind segregating sports by gender?

              Also, you’re a lawyer / law student, right? Does an all-male draft violate constitutional equal protection guarantees?

              1. No, they do not register with selective services.

                Yes, it violates 14A.

                Because, FYTW!

                1. Yes, it violates 14A.

                  But, the draft, violates about another half dozen amendments too.

              2. I think you’re misunderstanding my argument. I am not arguing cultural differences explain segregation in sports, just that it explains some of it. That’s all. And the significance of that varies by sport.

    2. But they haven’t done remotely well against men in sports that require strength, speed, and endurance. And in ostensibly pure, or at least moreso, skill sports like golf they are still unable to compete.

      1. “But they haven’t done remotely well against men in sports that require strength, speed, and endurance. ”

        Sure, of course in those sports where that matters the average differences are going to matter there. I am just noting that there are exceptions.

        1. I don’t think anyone is quibbling with the fact that their can be exceptions – even though these are still exceedingly rare.

          However, the broader suggestion that ‘cultural’ differences or other explanations account for the lack female participation in male sports is entirely absurd.

          1. I think its absurd to think they don’t count for something, while equally absurd to think they count for everything.

            With equal cultures of support and opportunities I suspect you’d see more women competing against men in horseracing, car racing, bowling…You would not see women competing against men in track, basketball, baseball, football, but I bet women’s performances would be closer to men’s than they currently are, and at the margins there might be some interesting exceptional cases.

            1. I wouldn’t see women competing against men in horseracing, car racing, or bowling, because I don’t care about those sports and neither do most people.

              1. Well, F1 is hugely popular outside of the US. The others…well unless you’re a king or a yinzer, then yeah.


                  And for fucks sake if someone stats with me on the “Racing isn’t a sport” I will DRIVE THIS BUS OFF THE NEXT CLIFF!

                  1. *straps on parachute*

                    “Ahem….Racing isn’t a sport”

                    *crouches at emergency exit, one hand on ripcord*

                    1. GWAHAHHHHAHAHH!H!~!HH!HAHGJDFKOPBN VG#! !



    3. great examples. you picked a sport where the horse is the athlete and another “sport” that has no athletes.

      1. So when faced with counterexamples just say they are not ‘real sports?’

        1. I’m pretty sure people have been saying horse racing and bowling aren’t sports for a while now.

      2. Also female jockeys doing well is not a surprise, that’s a sport where common female body characteristics are an advantage. Male jockeys tend to be short and thin as well for obvious weight reasons.

  23. Honest question: How far would the best WNBA team make it in the NCAA Men’s tournament? We’ll even assume they start at a 1 seed.

    1. Don’t think I am going out on a limb by saying they’d get crushed.

    2. They’d be down 20 by halftime.

      1. At least. I’d put money on double that.

      2. 20 if they weren’t trying. And there was no shot clock.

    3. Interesting question – would they get out of the first round?

    4. Against an NCAA team, it would be a blowout. Against an NBA team, a shutout. As in, the NBA team would score at will and the WNBA team would have no points on the board at the final buzzer.

  24. Because one woman competed at an elite level, comparable to that of only a few men, in an obscure individual competition, all professional sports should not be segregated by sex.

    What does this argument tell us about A. Barton Hinkle? – That he’s not very bright.

    In truth, men’s professional sports are not segregated by sex. If there was a female that could compete an a man’s level she would be welcome – if for nothing but the ratings and publicity. Do you think the number one tennis player could beat the lowest ranked man in any tournament? The answer is no. She can’t even beat her coach who is some middle aged retired male pro who never won anything. Get real, Hinkle.

    1. I usually like ABH, but I think he needs to apologize for this article.

    2. Hinkle is very bright. I simply think he knows nothing about sports. That’s really the only conclusion that can be reached from reading this article.

      1. Karl,
        He also knows very little about biology.

    3. A woman has played in men’s PGA tour. One of only a few that could drive 300 yards. No fucks were given.

    4. This!!!!

      Hinkle is being a utopian dreamer with this article.

      Roger is correct, Hinkle made a false equivalent: elite individual event with all professional sports.

  25. The NFL, NBA, MLB are not segregated, any woman capable can play.
    MLSoccer is, cuz that’s a girl’s game.

  26. UFC’s Dana White recently suggested that Ronda Rousey could beat Floyd Mayweather in an MMA match.

    Of course, as anyone who’s ever, you know, watched sports already knows, if such an abomination were ever allowed to occur, the outcome would be instant and ugly: he would beat her unconscious in a matter of seconds, and she wouldn’t land a single blow.

    If there was any chance at all that Rousey could beat a male fighter – even one from a different discipline, such as boxing – it would be made to happen. The pay-per-view revenues would break records, and Rousey’s (and, by extension, White’s) stock would soar. Hell, make it some second-tier fighter; say, the last guy that Mayweather beat.

    Sorry, sexual dimorphism trumps political correctness every time. Someone like Hinkle should know that.

    1. Mayweather would punch Rousey so hard, her brain would pop out the back of her skull.

      1. And the only way that wouldn’t happen is if Mayweather was squeamish about fighting her, or if he were instructed to pull his punches to make sure the PPV audience got its money’s worth.

        1. IIRC, Mayweather is not squeamish about punching girls.

          1. Most boxers are not squeamish about hitting anyone or anything, right?

    2. This is interesting. I think it would be more about the comparison of sports and not gender in this case. IF (a big if) she can avoid a Floyd punch and get close to him I honestly think he is fucked. IF he hits her it is over…one punch. He would have ZERO defense against locks and holds…Lest we forget Wing Chun Kung Fu (Bruce Lee’s formal training by Ip Man) was created by a woman for these very reasons.

      1. If you started the fight with her applying a choke, he’d be out of it in a couple seconds, at which point she’d be soundly thrashed.

        Your scenario also relies on the idea that Mayweather has zero experience fighting on the ground, something I find doubtful. The man is a world-class fighter and athlete, and while his skills as a boxer wouldn’t translate into a successful MMA career, he’s going to go into that match with a level of strength, speed, agility, and skill against which she would have zero defense.

        Sorry, but short of sending her into the ring with a baseball bat, I see no scenario in which she stays conscious for more than 30 seconds.

        1. I feel you are likely correct, however if he is truly inexperienced in grappling her goal is only to get him on the ground. There are examples of well trained skill beating brute force. GRANTED it is much less common but that is the basis of Jute Keen do and Wing Chun. Bruce believed that in a fight you should do everything to destroy the danger. Not the case in boxing. Gouge a fuckers eye out or pinch off a testicle he is d u n done.
          I think floyd is probably pretty quick.

          1. pinch off a testicle he is d u n done.

            Reading that, I’m sitting here squeezing my legs together lol.

            Definitely skill can trump strength and size.

            Remember Royce Gracie when UFC was just starting, maybe ’93 or ’94? He came in at like 6’1″ and 175 pounds, and he was routinely beating guys much bigger and stronger than he was – experienced grapplers, no less. My guess is that it was because Brazilian Jiu Jitsu was an unknown quantity at the time.

            Still, if you were to pit a world-class male athlete against a female of any stripe, the outcome is all but certain. The physical advantages that Mayweather would bring to the fight would be insurmountable. But like I said, if Dana White is feeling froggy, he should set up a fight (we’ll call it an “exhibition match”), MMA rules, against some second-rate lightweight boxer. Pay-per-view revenues would be through the roof, so there’s probably no downside, financially. I wonder what sort of odds Vegas would give her . . .

  27. Kacy Catanzaro has put to shame a lot of men much bigger than she. The list includes Denver Broncos wide receiver Matt Willis, Tennessee Titans safety Jordan Babineaux, mixed-martial-arts fighter Jason Soares, snowboarder Graham Watanebe and Olympic gymnast Jonathan Horton.

    Did (slurp, pant) Catanzaro complete the same course as those other competitors? Because from what I’ve seen of the show, all the different cities feature different obstacles (some being more upper-body and strength intensive than others). I mean, good on her for getting as far as she did, but after watching some of the other cities’ shows, I’m doubtful she would have made it as far on another course.

    1. She went toe-to-toe with dudes on a very difficult course.

      1. With some dudes. Others kicked her ass, time-wise.

        Also, was her course of the same difficulty (or moreso) than the others? You don’t think that factors in to how well she performed?

        1. Same course. Same difficulty.

          1. It may just be that she was perfectly suited to the course while the others were not. Doesn’t mean that all are not outstanding athletes.

            1. She was perfectly suited to the course. She was clowning around during the run. She took her her time. But never looked tired or stressed. She’s a tiny little ball of muscle with a gymnastic background and a kick ass attitude. This is not a sport. This is an athletic curiosity that one woman was able to conquer.

        2. It was the exact same course that the men ran.

          Yes, she took longer, but she finished it.

    2. I disagree. While she might have struggled in St Louis with the rolling dice obstacle, the Dallas course was rough on short people.

  28. Ridiculous.

    If a woman could compete in the NBA, an NBA team would let them. The P.R. bonus would make them tons of money. But women simply can’t. Ever watched the WNBA? Not the same as the NBA.

    And girls have tried high school football, and mostly failed.

  29. Only a handful of competitors ever has made it to the final stage, and nobody has ever completed it.

    Wrong. I think maybe he meant no American has ever completed the American Ninja Warrior final stage. Three Japanese men have done it in the original Japanese version.

    Also, in Japan there is a women’s Ninja Warrior called Konoichi, so his entire premise falls on its face (although they do allow women to compete in the regular show too, but curiously men aren’t allowed to compete in the women’s).

    1. The female Japanese Ninja Warrior course is calibrated for less upper body and more agility based skills. Japanese women don’t do so hot on the men’s course.

      1. True. I was merely pointing out that

        1) 3 men have beaten the course before (one of them twice) and

        2) that there is a segregated women’s only version in Japan, probably because the course does require insane upper body strength and women have not done well on it in the past.

        Or it could just be that TEH PATRIARCHY is even stronger in Japan than here. /sarc

  30. I am not aware of any rules that prohibit women from playing in any of the professional leagues like the MLB, NFL, NHL etc. If a woman can compete, I believe she would be given a shot. Ann Myers had a cup of coffee in the NBA, and recently Brittney Griner was rumored to be trying out before opting to become a star in the WNBA. Also, I remember when Ila Borders was pitching at Vanguard College-it was really cool! And she went on to pitch in the minors. Sports has always been merit based. The creation of the women’s leagues just provides another platform for women to compete on if they can’t make the cut in the top tier leagues.

  31. Sports aren’t segregated out of malice. it is done to even the playing field. Some people just have an overwhelming genetic advantage in some activities that skill and training can’t overcome. So, either segregate the sport by sex, or NEVER see successful women competitors.

    Boxing and wrestling (the real kind) segregate by weight class for exactly the same reason.

    1. Exactly

  32. I’m a big American Ninja Warrior fan and I watched her run.


    She kicks ass!

    It was so amazing I had to drag my wife into the living room and rewind it so she could watch. Even she was amazed.


  33. Hate to break this to you, Barton, the day is already here when any women who can play baseball or basketball as good as a man gets to play professionally with them. Hockey even tried years ago with a female goaltender.

    We’re not making a choice to keep them out, it is a meritocracy (you have no problem with that, I would think), and right now women have not proven to a professional man’s equal, particularly in strength. My son played ice hockey, and for the first few years he was on a team where a female was the second best player on the team. Quite honestly, it got to the point as the years went by where she could not handle the physical aspect of the gaNme with the boys. She was more skilled than almost all of them, just not as strong, and that took its toll (by the way, she went on to a full ride at University of New Hampshire).

    There are certain sports where women are already proving to be a man’s equal, including ultra-marathons, where some of the very best are female, and they routinely beat the men. But they’re not there yet in things like baseball, hockey, and others. Maybe one day, but there isn’t a barrier right now for them.

  34. No AMERICAN has ever completed it. Yuuji Urusihara has achieved Total Victory twice. Research before writing please.

  35. Late to the party on this thread, but wow what a bunch of wasted digital ink. ABH knows how to stir the puddin.

    To Hinkle: many sports are segregated because that’s what women (and the market as a whole) want. Like many have said: the major US sports are NOT segregated, but women would understandably prefer not to see their fellow gender crushed every time they step on the field/court with men. The sports that women DO want in on are only the ones they have a snowball’s chance in, eg golf and bowling.

    To Bo: No, “culture” isn’t to blame for less women in top sports, even a little bit. Chicken vs egg here. The (lack of) female sports culture comes from the fact that most females are not interested in sports, whereas most men are – naturally. The racial segregation comparison proves this, as there was a vibrant black (male) sports culture before integration. Moreover, an all-black team could obviously compete with an all-white one, whereas this cannot be said for any major sport when applied to gender splits.

  36. There are a couple of reasons why male athletes out perform female athletes in our modern set of sports. First, males are on average physically stronger/faster/etc so they have an advantage not just on average levels, but also at elite levels. Second, genders are segregated early on which means that males compete against physically stronger/faster/etc opponents requiring that they build up skills and techniques that allow them to compete at that higher physical level. If gender segregation were removed from the start, you would see some women being able to compete at that higher level, but it would be so few that it would seem just as unfair as the current system.

    When compared to male competitors, Kacy actually has an equal (if not advantageous) physical makeup for the ninja competition – which is what makes the ninja competition an arguably cooler sport than our current pro set especially for non-team comparisons. The announcers would make a big deal out of the fact that she was 5ft tall and was having to deal with 5ft expanses but her strength/height/weight ratio actually made those expanses moot. The ninja competition is oriented towards having a certain strength/height/weight ratio. She matched it perfectly and there may not be a guy alive that could match her ratio. For football, there probably isn’t a woman alive that could match the strength/height/weight ratio that any pro currently requires at each position (other than kicker).

  37. Was this article supposed to have a point?

  38. Let’s consult the Commissioner of the Obvious on whether the message being given here is obvious. Commissioner? “That’s obvious.”

    I coach children in American football. It would be fatuous to not segregate them by age, or to have them play with adults. (We don’t segregate them by sex, BTW.) We have weight limits too. We allow them to “play up”, i.e. in a higher class than they’re qualified for, but not in a lower one. Similarly, there’s no reason women couldn’t be allowed to play in “open” competition against men, while still keeping a women’s, i.e. lower, class for women only.

  39. Are we entirely sure this article is ABH and not Shikha Dalmia?

    1. Because seriously, I thought she was the only reason writer that made such poor arguments.

  40. just because there is ONE or a minute amount of women who could conceivably compete (we’re not even talking about being the best) in any of the male dominated sports like football, baseball or basketball, track & field, swimming, etc. doesn’t mean the sports shouldn’t be segregated by gender. The likelihood of women even being able to compete with their male counterparts (especially as the participants move up the ranks from T-ball to the majors, etc) is incredibly small. Having our institutions based on this reality of life isn’t some form of atrocious discrimination.

    And it’s not like the pro sports leagues have no-women policies, there just aren’t any women who can play at those levels. Women’s pro basketball, for instance, is not an equivalent to men’s pro basketball. Sure, the rules and courts are the same, but the women play with a smaller ball and simply can’t complete with the men’s athleticism. The worst team in the NBA would go undefeated in the WNBA. Most college men’s teams probably would, too.

    In any event, that Kacy Catanzaro completed this obstacle course may have been because she is so small that it gave her lack of size gave her an advantage her bigger counterparts didn’t have. I don’t if that’s true, but it makes sense to me.

  41. Barton, good commentary.

    Let’s take it one step further:

    “Should ‘men are stronger’ bar women from combat roles?” http://malemattersusa.wordpres…..bat-roles/

  42. If segregation ends, it is likely to come by letting women compete in the men’s division, but not the other way around. Chess already does that. I guess letting men compete in the women’s divisions would be considered a continuation of the war on women.

  43. Female Linebackers? Could be interesting.

  44. The SCCA I believe has a women’s only version of many races, like Ladies’ Stock…they are also allowed to compete against men in the normal class – so of course, most do, because that means they get more track time.

  45. The course she finished, albeit extremely slowly while the men are sprinting, caters to being lightweight. She’s a veteran gymnast.

  46. There is another big reason why women don’t do as well. When a young guy is into something he is a nutcase.

    My son, now 27, got a guitar for Christmas when he was 15. Picked around for a year, then something tweaked and he got into it a year later. He started playing 6 hours a day. He would skip school, he would stay up until 3 in the morning working on a lick and then couldn’t get up in the morning to go to school. As a result he became a phenomenal guitar player, still is. Every guy I know who ended up drafted in the NHL lived and breathed hockey from the time he was 4. He didn’t care about anything else, not his teeth that was for sure.

    I’ve never seen a woman do anything as hard and driven as I’ve seen 100s of young guys do. I see women get driven like that in their 40s in some area. But, by then it is too late.

    Guys are way, way, way more extreme. And, they push the boundaries in ways women can only dream of.

  47. I am a triathlete, and my sport is a perfect case study for what would happen if we ended gender segregation in sports. Last week, I attended the TriUtah Echo Triathlon 2014, a USAT regional qualifier race, supporting members of my club who were racing that day. We had many people achieve podium finishes. The results are available at
    I went through the results and redid the 1st, 2nd, and 3rd place awards for each category. For the Olympic distance, men won 36 medals, women won 2, with one medal left vacant for lack of participants in the age group. For the sprint distance, men won 36 medals, women won 3.
    Final Tally:
    Men: 72
    Women: 5 (3 bronze, 2 silver)
    Vacant: 1
    Congratulations, A. Barton Hinkle – you have effectively killed off the competitive female triathlete. Without any hope of winning in any category, what incentive is there for women to try to win? Just racing to finish only carries the competitive spirit so far. Women would drop out of the sport in droves. And not just this sport, EVERY SPORT. Swimming, track and field, basketball, soccer, tennis, you name it. This would be an apocalypse of women’s athletics as women would realize that they had nothing to play for.
    Gender segregation in sports doesn’t exclude women – human physiology does. Gender segregation is humanity’s answer to balance out the inequality that naturally exists between the sexes. Nice job breaking it, hero.

  48. Been saying this for years.

    And also get rid of different swimming strokes – just get through the water as fast as you can.

    And reduce the number of different distances for running and swimming – short, medium and long is all we need.

    But if people want to watch women compete then so be it – there’s a market to be created, but never think it’s the elite you’re watching, it’s a commercial enterprise, not the best of the best.

  49. The major sports were developed to highlight the athletic advantages of men, like strength, speed, and height. It seems likely that men will continue to dominate these sports, and having separate leagues for women seems the best way to go.

    There are some sports that seem uniquely suited to women, like balance beam. I doubt that many men would be able to compete successfully in a sport where a really tiny body is a major advantage.

    I heard a NASCAR driver complain that Danica Patrick had an unfair advantage because she was so much lighter (100lb) than the male racers combined with the minimum weight restrictions on the race car, giving her a lighter car to drive.

    Reminds me of a line from the movie Lawrence of Arabia:
    “…the virtues of war are the virtues of young men. Courage and hope for the future. Then old men make the peace. And the vices of peace are the vices of old men. Mistrust and caution…”

  50. Name 5 women who could compete in the NFL in skill positions.

  51. One reason Kacy Catanzaro is so good at Ninja Warrior is her ability to control her body weight (which is minimal). Her power to weight ratio is amazing, better than most elite male athletes. In sports like gymnastics and climbing, this can be a huge advantage.

    In the NFL, you have to have power and agility, but you also have to have MASS. Desegregation would work in some sports, but most are already desegregated and nature has drawn the lines.

  52. There is more than anatomy that separates the sexes. You admit that men edge out the women in almost every physical activity. They are less competitive. The federal law that mandates equal money for each gender has hurt all sports activities and hasn’t helped interest.

    Let the market have at it. The market has already spoken. Women have already spoken on this issue with their abstaining from the opportunities that the government mafia has already commanded.

    Pwah. Shall the pot say to the potter, why hast thou made me thus?

  53. Another reason why libertarians can’t be taken seriously. Just remember Michelle Wie.

    Read and weep suckas:…..n-the-nba/

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.