The Atlantic is a magazine that stupid people with six-figure salaries in suburban bedroom communities outside urban hellholes read and then spit back at parties to sound smart.
“Separating Sports by Sex Doesn’t Make Sense” is primed for that purpose. The details of its arguments matter less than that enthusiastic wealthy hipsters will recite the general tone of it at cocktail parties convinced that somehow the world has been altered by its arguments.
And these are some arguments.
The insistence on separating sports teams strictly by sex is backwards, argues Michela Musto, an assistant sociology professor at the University of British Columbia who has studied the effect of the gender binary on students and young athletes. “Part of the reason why we have this belief that boys are inherently stronger than girls, and even the fact that we believe that gender is a binary, is because of sport itself, not the other way around,” she told me by phone.
An “assistant professor of sociology”. So a jumped-up grad student in an imaginary field with deep thoughts like sex differences being invented by the existence of sports. Someone ought to tell it to moose and lions. I’m not sure why male lions have manes? Do they play football?
Someone should ask an assistant professor of sociology by phone. Call your nearest university, tell them it’s an emergency and ask to speak to the nearest assistant professor of sociology. Tell them it’s a lion-sex related question.
And if you think that’s an amazing argument, get ready for this one.
“One recent small study in Norway found no innate sex difference when it came to youth-soccer players’ technical skills. The researchers hypothesized that the gap they did find between girls and boys was likely due to socialization, not biology.”
A small-scale study in Norway. Technical skills. No innate differences. Due to socialization, not biology. How stupid do you have to be to write out that entire paragraph? Not as dumb as you have to be to read it and believe it.
The issue isn’t technical skills. It’s power and resiliency. But here’s the summary of that study.
“Sixteen male and 17 female youth soccer players of the same age and experience level took part in technical skill tests of reception of the ball on the ground and long passes. The results show a significant difference between the sexes in reception performance in favour of the male players, but no significant difference in the long pass test. This leads to the conclusion that the lower score on ball reception is probably the result of experience in small-sided self-organised soccer games during childhood among the male players, which influences reception skills but not the ability to make accurate long passes.”
Okay folks, that’s it. We’ve disproven the idea of sex. Biological differences don’t exist.