« Top Blogging | Main | Tory Millions - Where the Money Goes »

The Girly Games

Tessa Jowell’s gender Olympics - Times Online
TESSA JOWELL, the Olympics minister, wants the 2012 Games to meet equality targets by allowing women to compete in heavyweight wrestling and men in synchronised swimming.
She has written to UK sports chiefs asking them to help end “gender discrepancies” in the Olympic and Paralympic rules...

Why not get rid of the whole unfair outdated winning and losing concept as well?

Comments

Why not get rid of separate mens and womens events; let them all compete together? You often get top women athletes complaining that they don't get the same appearance fees as men. Well, now they could.

Providing they can win anything apart from synchronised knitting, of course.

Why not get rid of separate mens and womens events; let them all compete together? You often get top women athletes complaining that they don't get the same appearance fees as men. Well, now they could.

Providing they can win anything apart from synchronised knitting, of course.

Absolfrigginlutely! Dontcha just think in this golden age of equality that Women should compete against men in the Wrestling, gymnastics, 100m, shot putt etc. Prove they are equal once and for all! :) I'm sooo looking forward to Harperson proving once and for all that we ARE NOT EQUAL, YOU DAPPY FUCKING BINT. (Note to idiots/feminists - I'm not saying men are _better_ than women, or vice-versa, but I think you will find, and I really hope you get the chance to find this out - that men make better heavyweight wrestlers than women.)
Z.

Why is any taxpayer's money spent on sports? If we are spending billions because some people think it is essential to national pride, then let's switch the funding to psychiatrists for them.

If our concern is not about who is best at putting balls in nets or wherever, but about health then where should spending go? Mostly on men, because their health matters more? Equally on men and women, because actually we are all people? Roughly equal, but a bit extra on teenage girls because their health affects that of the next generation? Where do you think it really mostly goes, and why?

Some people argue men are entitled to their extra billions, because they are more interested in the currently hyped sports. On the health argument, that is actually a reason for increasing the spending on things that women and especially those teenage girls would enjoy doing. As it is, we tend to define physical activities that men do as sport which should be supported by the taxpayer, and physical activities that women do as frivolities that obviously they should pay for in full. I wonder what sex the decision-makers are?

(And what on earth is the point of synchronised diving?)

Post a comment