LetÂ´s get rid of Womens Competitions

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 12 Aug 2008 10:56

lets make everyone compete in the same competition. the learning experence will make it work in the end.

trust me

Eric Chang · Post by **Eric Chang** » 12 Aug 2008 11:14

Yeah I agree.

you don't see any serious competitions having men and women competitions at the same time. I mean who wants to just see a man win and go well you only won because you didn't compete against the girls or vice versa.

If we want to be taken seriously as a sport we need to just pull everyone together. That way everyone will become better at the World Championship. Because the logic of this is that if you play against better people, you're going to learn more.

Kyle you're so smart, I wish I could be cool like you.

Moxie · Post by **Moxie** » 12 Aug 2008 11:22

LEGOMAN wrote:LetÂ´s get rid of Womens Competitions

I think they tried to do that at Euros last year when no one filmed Women's Shred 30.

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 12 Aug 2008 11:57

dude it totally took 5 minutes for the statement to fully hit me. its like hey lets go like shred for 30 seconds and make it a comp but not score it.

colefieldhouse22 · Post by **colefieldhouse22** » 12 Aug 2008 13:52

I was wondering if someone was going to start this topic. You never disappoint

Even though I suspect this topic was made sarcastically, he has a point. If we get rid of intermediate competition, why not get rid of women's as well? Just merge everyone together.

I am not advocating getting rid of women's or intermediate, by the way.

Cass · Post by **Cass** » 12 Aug 2008 13:56

Sounds good to me

mc · Post by mc » 12 Aug 2008 14:01

taylor c got first place in intermediate at the NYFA jam, and if cassy t had competed, she probably would have beat most of the guys. I think it would be awesome to see more women players choosing to compete in intermediate and open instead of in comparable womens' divisions.

colefieldhouse22 · Post by **colefieldhouse22** » 12 Aug 2008 14:15

Well, most tournaments don't offer a women's division so if a woman wants to compete then she has to compete intermediate or open.

But I have often thought that I would prefer competing in the intermediate division as opposed to a women's division when it is offered. The reason I never have is more a "sticking with my fellow shreditas" mentality than anything.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Aug 2008 14:49

This topic is not an accurate analogy at all. If you're incapable of constructing reasoned and rational arguments, don't bother debating at all.

Being the World Women's Footbag Champion clearly means you are the best female footbagger in the world. What does being the World Intermediate Footbag Champion mean?

professor · Post by **professor** » 12 Aug 2008 15:00

You're the best Intermediate Footbagger in the world.

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Aug 2008 15:04

And what's an intermediate? [edit]Chris Kovacs came second at worlds in intermediates in 2004 and could hit 5 fearless.[/edit] How do you define "Intermediate?" It's pretty easy to define "woman."

mc · Post by mc » 12 Aug 2008 15:10

Jeremy wrote:It's pretty easy to define "woman."

keep your definitions off of my body.

I see the sarcasm in Kyle's original post, but it's spurred and actual discussion which has nothing at all to do with your post about intermediates, Jeremy.

onward with the actual discussion!

LEGOMAN · Post by **LEGOMAN** » 12 Aug 2008 15:47

i love my topics

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Aug 2008 15:52

You don't really believe that do you Matt? The first two posts are basically identical to posts from the intermediate topic. This topic is clearly in response to that and is putting forward the position that it's logically consistent to get rid of women's competitions if you get rid of intermediate competitions. They're arguing that because it's unpopular and silly to get rid of women's comps, it would be unpopular and silly to get rid of or significantly change intermediate competitions.

The argument fails because we can easily define who is allowed to compete in a women's comp (ie. women) but one of the biggest issues with intermediate competitions is that there isn't a clear definition of who is allowed to compete in intermediate. Therefore the main issue with intermediate competitions doesn't apply to women's competitions and the argument fails.

Cass · Post by **Cass** » 12 Aug 2008 15:56

Just because women are easily identified does not mean we need a separate competition.

I don't really see the point in segregating the women at the few jams where there are actually enough of us (usually barely) to make a separate comp. Whats the point in going to a competition with 40+ footbaggers and only competing against 3 or 4?

I have only ever competed in intermediate competitions because none of the jams that I have been to have had enough female footbaggers for a separate category. So I haven't been in this situation yet, but it would suck having to choose between competing against girls or guys.. I want to compete with everyone!

Jeremy · Post by **Jeremy** » 12 Aug 2008 15:59

The original topic about intermediates was only about major competitions - US Open, Worlds, Euros etc. It's obviously at the discretion of the tournament organiser whether small events have a women's division or not, and they would base that decision on the number of competitors. There are enough competitors in bigger tournaments to warrant a women's division.

Sporatical_Distractions · Post by **Sporatical_Distractions** » 12 Aug 2008 16:07

Jeremy O'Wheel for inequality

maybe we should make a seperate category for people with disabilities, or of different ethnic backgrounds which can be clearly defined

mc · Post by mc » 12 Aug 2008 16:08

Jeremy wrote:You don't really believe that do you Matt? The first two posts are basically identical to posts from the intermediate topic. This topic is clearly in response to that and is putting forward the position that it's logically consistent to get rid of women's competitions if you get rid of intermediate competitions. They're arguing that because it's unpopular and silly to get rid of women's comps, it would be unpopular and silly to get rid of or significantly change intermediate competitions.

The argument fails because we can easily define who is allowed to compete in a women's comp (ie. women) but one of the biggest issues with intermediate competitions is that there isn't a clear definition of who is allowed to compete in intermediate. Therefore the main issue with intermediate competitions doesn't apply to women's competitions and the argument fails.

absolutely!!! 100 % !!! I totally agree with the 33% of the information I skimmed off that post!

now, let's really talk about women's competition and forget that whole intermediate comparison blah blah blah stuff!

Tsiangkun · Post by **Tsiangkun** » 12 Aug 2008 16:47

This topic was clearly started to make the statement that getting rid of womens is a ridiculous idea, and by poor logic, ridding the sport of intermediate would be ridiculous too.

colefieldhouse22 · Post by **colefieldhouse22** » 12 Aug 2008 17:39

Matt Cross wrote:keep your definitions off of my body.

This topic was clearly started to make the statement that getting rid of womens is a ridiculous idea, and by poor logic, ridding the sport of intermediate would be ridiculous too.

I don't necessarily think it is a ridiculous idea. I agree with Cassy that if I go to a tourney, I would like to compete with everyone. It is really hard having to choose between the two.