sodiummuffin

2 followers follows 0 users joined 2022 September 05 03:26:09 UTC

No bio...

User ID: 420

‎

Culture War Roundup for the week of November 9, 2026

sodiummuffin 17hr ago

There was a guy on the Slatestarcodex subreddit that, based on the idea that some activities were more efficient at combining multiple benefits, tried to figure out what activities were most efficient. His candidate for the most optimal activity was playing sports outside in the sun with your friends.

The foremost benefit of sports is not "self-confidence", and it certainly isn't providing an advantage in zero-sum college admissions (which could likely be revised directly if you had the power to abolish women's sports). The foremost benefit is fitness, and secondary benefits include recreation, both spending time with people you know and meeting new people, etc. Competition provides a framework that encourages all of those benefits.

So why are middle and high school sports this one, weird exception where everyone wants segregation?

Middle and high-school sports? What's with the age-segregation? Why shouldn't middle-schoolers try to compete in professional adult sports leagues along with everyone else? The answer, of course, is that this would amount to them not having the benefits of organized sports at all. Abolishing women's sports is the same, but for half as many people.

You might ask, but wouldn’t this stop girls from playing sports? No, I don’t think so. They’ll still be on the team, they’ll still practice and compete. It just might stop them from being starters, because they’re probably not good enough for that. But that’s the same problem that most boys have, too. It’s not some fundamental human right to have a starting spot on the varsity basketball team.

This seems to contradict your other post:

It's disengenious to talk about how the boys' league is "technically open to all" when we all know darn well that will never happen.

In any case, it's wrong. Open leagues are both unrealistic and sometimes dangerous for women to compete in, if that wasn't the case far more female athletes would participate in the current open leagues for the bragging rights, fame, and superior competition. Indeed, it's already fairly common for female professional athletes to compete against high-school boys teams as practice, because that's the sort of gap needed to make it reasonably even.

The girl who was the star of her girls’ field hockey team gets a full-ride scholarship to Harvard, then gets recruited into a hedge fund, where she is quickly promoted to make diversity quotas. So she becomes an extremely confident, ego-tripping, “girl-boss,” with immense power to make bad decisions that damage the world, or at least her company. She makes life hell for her subordinates, and loses all attraction to any normal men. She advocates strongly for feminist programs that benefit women like herself: more money for girls sports, no trans girls allowed in girls’ sports, and more female executives.

This seems like something you should check before assuming, because I'm pretty sure it's all completely wrong. For starters, this study found no correlation between women's sports participation and attitudes towards sexism except in highly inegalitarian countries such as Iran. And of course opposition to MTFs in women's sports is more popular among right-wingers and thus would negatively correlate with support for diversity quotas. Also, I think if you took away their hobby in the name of anti-feminism that would make feminism more popular among women, not less. (Compare to SJWs censoring videogames in the name of feminism - how successful has this been at making more men feminist?)