Hacker News Reader

Comment by dpbriggs | Hacker News Reader

There's the reality that there's considerable althetic differences at the highest levels.

By not grouping at the source you'll end up with almost all women being strictly lower in the rankings, which is undesirable for obvious reasons.

Not to mention the deluge of articles decrying sexism when reality is getting in the way.

View on HN

You don't choose to be born man or woman the same way you do not choose to be born with 10% shorter constitution, or with just an average one. Why do, say, basketball leagues not differentiate between short/average people (those who cannot reach the hoop, as originally intended) and tall giants, who can touch it by holding out their hand, and why isn't a hoop moved out of reach for the latter ones?

I mean, it is not a question about basketball, it is about why gender is so important, when there are tens of parameters that may matter for a particular game. Sports is (should be at least) valued for an effort, skill and hard work first, builtin params last. This entire system is broken at the core, and gender is among the last of problems here.

If people really want to differentiate between men and women for some reason I can't understand they could still say themselves 'top person identifying as a woman'. Just don't make it part of the official system so other people can ignore it if they want.

You could be the 'only woman in level 4 sprinting'.

And wouldn't it be better for women - if they're able to push beyond other women and also compete with men? There would certainly be men in lower tiers than the top tier women.

I don't see how it would be better for women. If Serena Williams is in a league 3 levels below Roger Federer, playing with no name male players [1], what would that do to her star-power, endorsements, contracts?

[1] http://www.tennisnow.com/Blogs/NET-POSTS/November-2017-(1)/T...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com