THE RADICALISATION OF SPORTSWOMEN WHO DO NOT BELIEVE IN EQUALITY

The problem with modern feminism in its radical form is that it radicalises young women into believing everything that does not go their way is down to sexism, a sexist system and evil men. They want equality but when it does not 'work' for them - they don't want equality - though they would never say it. This McCarthyism can be seen in sport and the Olympics has given it a new platform.

Last month, the site pointed out the hypocrisy of those who wanted and got equality at Wimbledon when clearly there is a difference in the work needed to win a men's title compared to a women's title.

This week, we have had silver medalist Lizzie Armitstead raising the issue of sexism in cycling about the coverage and the money (Guardian1, Guardian 2 and BBC) . If women get paid less in the Velodrome competing in the same events (in terms of the races which are circa the same distances as the men's) that is unfair but is Ms Armitstead saying the men on the Tour De France should get paid the same as women in their Tour de France which is nowhere near as tough.

Following hot on the heels of this is Denise Lewis calling for a separate women's Sports Personality of the Year (thanks everyone for sending me the link). Again, on the one hand women like Denise want to be seen as equals to men but then when it does not work in their favour (as Bradley Wiggins is likely to win) they hypocritically call for inequality but dress it up as though they calling for equality. Ms Lewis is just indulging in man-bashing and witch hunting.

Gabby Logan though speaks up for equality in the coverage proving that many many women understand the meaning of equality (Daily Telegraph and Daily Mail). A short debate took place on the Daily Mail.

Lastly, there has been much about girl power in the papers about their achievements and there is nothing per se wrong with that if the tone is right (that is, it is not anti-male). Everyone in Britain should be pleased about the success of our female athletes, and of course, our male ones.

Except though, it is then taken up by the radical gender feminists and turned into a 'it proves women are superior to men debate'. This article in The Guardian sums it up , and sums up why they are the biggest hypocrites when it comes to equality. Who cares if women win more medals than men - it is not relevant in an equal society.

Posted by Skimmington

 

Comments

[John Kimble]

Good article, I like the balance in the writing where you highlight both sexist females and also praise those who believe in equality.

People are always going to want to watch men's events over women's ones due to the fact that the levels of performance are so much higher 99.9% of the time. It's just so much more impressive to see someone run 9.6 seconds than 10.6 - who wants to watch events where the level of performance is a guaranteed 10% inferior on average? Whilst most of us can't imagine getting close to the levels of performance of female athletes, many hundreds of men can beat them quite easily. This means female athletes by definition are already beneficiaries of sex discrimination so most of them need to stop complaining.

It's worse than that in some cases, many female athlete don't even always achieve their slower times doing the same activities as the men. Hurdlers jump MUCH smaller hurdles and run a shorter distance, Jessica Ennis gets to skip 3 events, and we all know what goes on at Wimbledon.

I say we should celebrate the few genuinely brilliant female athletes who match and even beat men in preference to lesser performers. Names include Beryl Burton, and Zhang Shan and there is a great deal of female talent and ability in ultra long distance swimming too with women able to beat men. These are the women who should be household names because they genuinely became the best in the world at something rather than the 500th best. I also think we should have as many such mixed events as possible so there can be more such names in future.

[ian]

It's a bit more than 10% inferior John! Good on Gabby Logan though for speaking sense. All the time women have to have their own this and that they do not deserve the respect they want,especially on the false premises they want it.

This video my MWM says it all.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3YbnLN5pZc

[ian]

I see the coverage is all about Jessica ennis this morning, going on as if she alone was responsible for GB getting 14 golds. She done brilliant sure, but on Sky, "it is being "led" by her?" I think not.

With the hype I expect like before she will go on to earn Millions while the Men who had to fight harder for the same, don't.

Then Sky news even making excuses for WHY their coverage was all about her today.

"Because there was so much pressure on her because she was on all the billboards, in the papers and magazines"

So by their own admission they are giving her more coverage and glory, because she has had so much hype?

[Bob]

Yes I noticed that the BBC waited until the cycling events were over to broadcast a "Who is the hope for Britain?" type article. Sir Chris Hoy, the joint most successful Olympian Britian has ever had, was sidelined for Jessica Ennis whose event was just starting. We were then bombarded with a propagandathon about her and women's achievements, with more pink than an expolosion in a candy floss factory.

I'm finding it very difficult to fully support team GB in the Olympics when I'm subjected to a peppering of political messages and propaganda.

Basically though, its all the media. They control our view of everything except what we see daily around us and even then one must be careful to not interpret this though "TV eyes".

On a more positive note, there was a poll on a site (whose name escapes me) that over 75% of prople do NOT want there to be a genderised Personality of the Year, so at least the public are not being taken in by the TV and good on Gaby Logan for having some common sense.

[ian]

Yeah I saw a Poll (and voted no of course) it was in the Telegraph, it was around that figure.

Yes after the manipulated Media coverage I feel like I am obliged to go and buy some Tampons and go roller skating with a Poodle.

[Paul]

I have said it before and I will say it again, because it does not cease to be true: female performances in sport are measurably inferior to those of men, across the board in just about every area of physical endeavour. The only exceptions are where the sports are simply different - such as gymnastics - or those where women have a horse or a machine of some kind to help them. That is exactly why women get their own sections of so many sports: athletics, cycling, rowing, swimming, tennis, golf, hockey, football...because everyone knows that if there was no sex segregation, women would be beaten out of sight time and again by the men.

This is reflected in the Olympics where, in my view, the overwhelming majority of women competitors should count themselves dead lucky even to be in the Games to begin with, considering they qualify for them with significantly inferior performances that would never be good enough if they were recorded by men. A guy can run 100 metres in 10.5 seconds and will get nowhere, no medals, no plaudits and no recognition, because all the top men are thundering home in under 10 seconds flat; while any woman running the same distance in 10.8 seconds will be a national heroine, feted and honoured, and with every prospect of winning an Olympic medal. Fair? Only if you are happy to turn a blind eye to the gender apartheid practised so openly that nobody even seems to notice it.

I watched an American woman competing in the Olympic heptathlon: the javelin throw. She had three attempts, all of them demonstrating that she was clueless. The first and third were dismal no-throws; the second effort, if you can call it that, went something like 21 metres. Utterly pathetic. And this woman was representing a great nation like the USA? She didn't even know the rudiments of one of her seven events. There are probably about 100 million schoolboys worldwide who could have done far better. But will any of them ever get to be Olympians, or represent their countries at international level, and have their names and faces on television? Only if they change sex, it appears. No wonder Jessica Ennis won the heptathlon by a country mile; what did she have to beat? I looked at her seven event performances, and I figure I could beat her at three of them. And I am a nobody, nearly three times her age and with no particular credentials. But then, I am a man.

This is why I get highly irritated by arrogant, mouthy women like Denise Lewis sounding off about not getting the same recognition as male athletes. When you can match their performances, ladies, you will maybe have a point. Until then, just be thankful you are female, because that is the sole reason why you have a place at all in the premier sporting event in the world; otherwise you would never get anywhere near selection, let alone being able to shoot for gold medals, money and glory. You have a massive artificial leg-up over literally thousands of men who are better than you, but who have a far harder task trying to get to the top of their tree because it is hugely tougher to climb, and far more competitive, than yours. The Olympics is really two separate competitions: one for the best athletes and sportsmen on the planet; and one for the best of the lower-performing half of the human race, who get to be judged by a corresponding lower standard.

That is why I don't rate the medals won by women as equal to those won by men. To me, that is the equivalent of saying that Accrington Stanley winning the npower division 2 of the football league is of equal merit to Manchester United winning the Premiership. It just isn't, no matter how much you cheer and bury the reality in overinflated hype.

I am not trying to knock female athletes; it is good that everyone, male and female alike, has the chance to play at their chosen sport and to enjoy the best facilities for doing so. I am merely pointing out that equal rewards for what are clearly unequal performances, are simply wrong and unfair; and to indulge in bellyaching and false victimhood when you have already taken advantage of that unfairness to your benefit, over the heads of better people who were never given the opportunities you have had laid on a plate for you, smacks of self-indulgence, ignorance and a brand of sexism that is not any the less ugly just because it is being practised by women.

[ian]

I wonder why Ennis didn't do the 100mtr hurdles? The other event with a Gold opportunity for her if she really tried?

"But Ennis told the BBC that she would not be competing in the individual event, instead wanting to give her body a rest after a gruelling seven events in two days.

"I did think about it, especially after my display in the hurdles," she said. "But for me it was just about the heptathlon. I'm more than happy coming away with this medal.

"Right now it is just to enjoy this moment for as long as I can.

"I want to spend some time with my family and then just have a bit of a break. It has been such a long build-up and stressful. I am looking forward to relaxing."

It's the OLYMPICS you silly woman! Yeah screw your country, I guess seeing as the media have hyped you up beyond any sense, higher than men who have achieved for more, you don't have to do it.

She'll be forced up as sports personality of the year probably.

[Bob]

It'll be very difficult for them to NOT give the Sports Personality of the Year to Bradley Wiggins but with more spin than a giroscope I'm sure they'll give it a bash.

Yes it was the Telegraph poll (no pun intended) that I saw aswell.

[andr0meda]

No amount of equality can get rid of the strength differences nature created. Women get stronger and can do more when fit, but it has a cut off point. Women put as much into playing sport as the male players and should get paid as much. I used to want men and women to compete in the same game at sport, and wear the same uniforms. I also wanted women to have to work to the same standards as men in sports, because i believed it were possible. Now i know it is not possible i no longer hold that view. But that does not mean that women should have less chances in sport, or have less pay. Men are pissed that women may take away some of there shine by playing the sports that men think are theres.

Most men envy women, lets face it a womans body it better put together then a mans. A man may be stronger, but men are also bigger. For there size a lot of women do really well, and when it comes to doing distance rather then strength and speed women do better.

What men want is to do the sport, and have girls and women watching them. It blows there ego when women instead turn around and either play sport for themselves or watch women play.

[Groan]

I doubt if many men, apart from the youngest, think women are watching them. All those Saturday/Sunday footballers can see the lack of females on the touchline. No, men are the big audience for sport.
Given that sport is a form of entertainment then pay should simply reflect the money paid by the audience.