Equality at the Olympics

titan18

I know a lot of people have been on about women being treated equally in sport, especially at the Olympics. We now have boxing which was the only sport not to have female representation in London, and every country is sending a female athlete afaik.

What about men having equality though? Synchronised swimming and rhythmic gymnastics have no male entries into them. There are male competitors in these events/sports, so why should they not be allowed compete.

johnmcdnl

titan18 wrote: »

I know a lot of people have been on about women being treated equally in sport, especially at the Olympics. We now have boxing which was the only sport not to have female representation in London, and every country is sending a female athlete afaik.

What about men having equality though? Synchronised swimming and rhythmic gymnastics have no male entries into them. There are male competitors in these events/sports, so why should they not be allowed compete.

Do men even compete in these sports? Wikipedia tells me that the first world championship for mens rhythmic gymnastics was in 2003 and only 5 countries competed and in 2005I 7 countries competed. That's far from big enough of a sport to be considered for entry into the Olympics.. I'm on the phone so not going to look up the numbers for synchronized swimming but I'd imagine it's similar...... It's not about equality - they're just isn't enough interest to warrant an event in the Olympics which I'd assume is the main reason why it's not included... I'm sure when it grows and becomes a more widespread sport they'll be considered for entry..

titan18

johnmcdnl wrote: »

Do men even compete in these sports? Wikipedia tells me that the first world championship for mens rhythmic gymnastics was in 2003 and only 5 countries competed and in 2005I 7 countries competed. That's far from big enough of a sport to be considered for entry into the Olympics.. I'm on the phone so not going to look up the numbers for synchronized swimming but I'd imagine it's similar...... It's not about equality - they're just isn't enough interest to warrant an event in the Olympics which I'd assume is the main reason why it's not included... I'm sure when it grows and becomes a more widespread sport they'll be considered for entry..

Aye, it's not popular, but neither is women's boxing, and that's at the games. . Even if it's impossible to have male events, it wouldn't be difficult to allow for mixed teams.

There are only 24 countries competing in the two sports at a female level at the Olympics, so it's not like they're widespread sports in general

Pherekydes

Jeez, we should be getting rid of stupid sports, not extending them.

titan18

Pherekydes wrote: »

Jeez, we should be getting rid of stupid sports, not extending them.

Definitely, they're not sports imo, but considering the complaining there was over the lack of female equality, I find it odd that nothing has been said about men not being able to compete .

metaoblivia

I can't speak for synchronized swimming, but currently men's rhythmic gymnastics is not approved by the Federation of International Gymnastics (FIG). In order to be considered for a spot in the Olympics, the form of gymnastics must be approved by the FIG because that's the federation that speaks for gymnastics.

Currently, the FIG recognizes Artistic gymnastics, women's Rhythmic gymnastics, Trampoline, Aerobic, and Acrobatic gymnastics. Only the first 3 are in the Olympic Games. I would happily replace Rhythmic with Acrobatic gymnastics as a competitive Olympic sport. Rhythmic is wrought with judging scandals more so than any sport I've ever seen. I actually do appreciate the athletic value to it, but I think more people would enjoy Acro and it's more fairly scored. Plus, men and women are equally represented.

KevIRL

What about the Japanese and Australian federations flying their mens and womens olympic soccer teams on the same plane from each country. Men in 1st class, women in economy...

titan18

KevIRL wrote: »

What about the Japanese and Australian federations flying their mens and womens olympic soccer teams on the same plane from each country. Men in 1st class, women in economy...

Yup, and plenty complained about it. I've heard nothing about men not being in these sports

Cardinal Richelieu

KevIRL wrote: »

What about the Japanese and Australian federations flying their mens and womens olympic soccer teams on the same plane from each country. Men in 1st class, women in economy...

It was Australia basketball teams, they haven't qualified for the Mens and Womens Soccer.

LiamMc

Institutionalised inequality

London 2012 Mens Football Groups A,B, C, D.
http://www.london2012.com/football/event/men/

continued with London 2012 Womens Football Groups E, F, G.
http://www.london2012.com/football/event/women/

The 'ease of administration' excuse isn't a defence as other Olympic Team Sports and multi-sport Tournaments with Football are able to label Men's and Women's Groups equally.

London 2012 Basketball Groups
Women's Basketball
http://www.london2012.com/basketball/schedule-and-results/day=28-july/index.html

Men's Basketball
http://http://www.london2012.com/basketball/schedule-and-results/day=29-july/index.html

World Student Games/Universiade Szenchen 2011
Men's and Women's Football schedule
http://match.sz2011.org/Sd/FB/20110811ENG.htm

kanuheist

OP, FYI canoeing (both sprint and slalom) has had no female competitors at the olympics to date.

It has recently been introduced at International level with plans to include it in Rio.

titan18

kanuheist wrote: »

OP, FYI canoeing (both sprint and slalom) has had no female competitors at the olympics to date.

It has recently been introduced at International level with plans to include it in Rio.

It does, there's the womens K-1 slalom, and and 4 sprint events for them. Unless you just mean the C1 and C2 events

kanuheist

K1 and K2 are kayak's

C1 and C2 are canoe's, women havent competed in this discipline at any level up until a few years ago

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/sports/olympics/female-canoe-racer-takes-olympic-inequality-to-court/article4426727/

Guy:Incognito

KevIRL wrote: »

What about the Japanese and Australian federations flying their mens and womens olympic soccer teams on the same plane from each country. Men in 1st class, women in economy...

Women are smaller so dont need the extra room

Lapin

titan18 wrote: »

What about men having equality though? Synchronised swimming and rhythmic gymnastics have no male entries into them. There are male competitors in these events/sports, so why should they not be allowed compete.

Some serious straw clutching going on here.


As a male, there are some things I don't ever want see achieve equality with our female cousins.

Synchronised Swimming is top of the list. Its not a real sport in my opinion and if we lads did take it up, it would be quite literally, a load of bollox.

As for Rhythmic Gymnastics, graceful to watch, and we blokes just don't have grace.

Leave it to the girls.

Equality between lads and lassies is an unobtainainable goal anyway.

Women always win in the end !

titan18

Lapin wrote: »

Some serious straw clutching going on here.


As a male, there are some things I don't ever want see achieve equality with our female cousins.

Synchronised Swimming is top of the list. Its not a real sport in my opinion and if we lads did take it up, it would be quite literally, a load of bollox.

As for Rhythmic Gymnastics, graceful to watch, and we blokes just don't have grace.

Leave it to the girls.

Equality between lads and lassies is an unobtainainable goal anyway.

Women always win in the end !

Rhythmic gymnastics for men is scored based on power, strength and martial art skills. It's not a similar style as the women's equivalent.

Naomi00

titan18 wrote: »

Definitely, they're not sports imo, but considering the complaining there was over the lack of female equality, I find it odd that nothing has been said about men not being able to compete .

The events in men's and women's gymnastics are nearly completely different. Women don't compete in the rings, pommel horse or parallel bars and lots more things. Those are men's events, just like men don't do the beam either. They both do floor routines but it's still a bit different.

So men doing rhythmic gymnastics (which is pointless anyway) would be like women competing on the pommel horse. There's nothing wrong with it, it just isn't something they do in gymnastics. It's not comparable with women competing in boxing etc.

Mushy

LiamMc wrote: »

Institutionalised inequality

London 2012 Mens Football Groups A,B, C, D.
http://www.london2012.com/football/event/men/

continued with London 2012 Womens Football Groups E, F, G.
http://www.london2012.com/football/event/women/

The 'ease of administration' excuse isn't a defence as other Olympic Team Sports and multi-sport Tournaments with Football are able to label Men's and Women's Groups equally.

London 2012 Basketball Groups
Women's Basketball
http://www.london2012.com/basketball/schedule-and-results/day=28-july/index.html

Men's Basketball
http://http://www.london2012.com/basketball/schedule-and-results/day=29-july/index.html

World Student Games/Universiade Szenchen 2011
Men's and Women's Football schedule
http://match.sz2011.org/Sd/FB/20110811ENG.htm

Thats not inequality in the football, its just laziness. Its the same group stages with a different letter to denote what group a team is in.

nothing

I think, with respect to artistic gymnastics, it's more to do with equity than equality. The sport is very different for men and women, women only have 4 apparatus, men have 6, and even the two they have in common; floor is very different (for men it's all about strength and balance, for women there's emphasis on the choreography and precision as well), and with the vault it's even a different method of vaulting.

I do agree that it would be nice to see acrobatics rather than rhythmic.

And the point made earlier about synchronised swimming, there being little interest in the men's, makes sense. There is still a large amount of skill, precision and strength involved, and I hate hearing the "it's not a real sport" line trotted out again and again. I mean, you could say the same for diving in that case!

I definitely think equity rather than equality is the way to go. (basically equitable treatment for sports that suit men and women differently, and equal where the sports are the same).

K_1

kanuheist wrote: »

OP, FYI canoeing (both sprint and slalom) has had no female competitors at the olympics to date.

It has recently been introduced at International level with plans to include it in Rio.

Actual canoeing (Canoe not kayak) isn't popular with women, or men for that matter, there aren't the numbers to justify it with women. At international events, women frequently capsize during it, showing both how difficult it is and how few people there are at a high level in it.

Naomi00

titan18 wrote: »

Rhythmic gymnastics for men is scored based on power, strength and martial art skills. It's not a similar style as the women's equivalent.

Do you not mean artistic gymnastics?

Rhythmic gymnastics is with ribbons and hoops etc, not the normal gymnastics events.

byhookorbycrook

Women and men compete on equal footing in eventing.

Silvio.Dante

Archery is an obvious example. Yet somehow the men score higher. Similar to Darts. Strange one...

Naomi00

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Archery is an obvious example. Yet somehow the men score higher. Similar to Darts. Strange one...

What point are you trying to make?

Silvio.Dante

Naomi00 wrote: »

What point are you trying to make?

Archery s asport you would think men and women could compete together in but don't.

Also for whatever reason the men are more accurate...

Naomi00

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Archery s asport you would think men and women could compete together in but don't.

Also for whatever reason the men are more accurate...

I think you'll find that most sports are available to boys when they're very young. Lots of female athletes, depending on the sport, only ever had the opportunity to start much later, often when they start college etc which is a huge disadvantage. So unless they've had the same amount of training and experience your point is invalid. This is usually the case in Ireland though.

LiamMc

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Women and men compete on equal footing in eventing.

Mostly Gelding (GD)

Mushy wrote:

Thats not inequality in the football, its just laziness. Its the same group stages with a different letter to denote what group a team is in.

Your post doesn't give an adequate reason why in Men's Football Groups A-D are used and in Women's Football E-G are used. They are Mutally Inclusive, they are more then just identifying labels. As shown in my own post, it hasn't happened in Basketball in this Olympics nor does it happen in the Football competition at other Multi-Sport events.

Your post gives me the opportunity to go forward and say there is a Culturally Miopia within the Sport of Football.

How so Joe

Silvio.Dante wrote: »

Archery s asport you would think men and women could compete together in but don't.

Also for whatever reason the men are more accurate...

Higher poundage means it's generally easier to be more accurate. Women are statistically less likely to be able to draw the same poundage as men.

The best (recurve) archer in my club is female, though.

ETA: Although compound isn't available at Olympic level, at Irish student level, ladies and men compete in the same recurve league.

Mushy

LiamMc wrote: »

Your post doesn't give an adequate reason why in Men's Football Groups A-D are used and in Women's Football E-G are used. They are Mutally Inclusive, they are more then just identifying labels. As shown in my own post, it hasn't happened in Basketball in this Olympics nor does it happen in the Football competition at other Multi-Sport events.

Your post gives me the opportunity to go forward and say there is a Culturally Miopia within the Sport of Football.

I didn't give "adequate reason" cos its something thats so unimportant it should barely be looked at. Only the organisers will know why they have different letters. The group from which the winners emerge from doesn't diminish the achievement. And the second part can be classed as wrong cos its the olympics organising people who would determine the groups.

Pherekydes

Mushy wrote: »

I didn't give "adequate reason" cos its something thats so unimportant it should barely be looked at. Only the organisers will know why they have different letters. The group from which the winners emerge from doesn't diminish the achievement. And the second part can be classed as wrong cos its the olympics organising people who would determine the groups.

If the local organising committee were responsible for determining the groups then why the differences across sports? The truth is that each sport in the Olympics is administered by its own governing body. The Olympic soccer tournament is administered by FIFA. When FIFA organises major tournaments the male and the female versions are separate; here they are together, so their organising committee are probably at a loss at what to do.

Sparks

OP, is there any sport where:

• a lot of men compete at a high level;
• all the defined rules and criteria governing olympic inclusion have been followed and met; and
• the international governing body has sought inclusion

-- but where the IOC has just said "no, men are no good at this" and refused them on that basis?

Or is it possible that this is a slightly less rigorous look at the situation than the title of the thread would suggest? Because this whole thread screams "Troll" to me, to be honest.

titan18

Sparks wrote: »

OP, is there any sport where:

• a lot of men compete at a high level;
• all the defined rules and criteria governing olympic inclusion have been followed and met; and
• the international governing body has sought inclusion

-- but where the IOC has just said "no, men are no good at this" and refused them on that basis?

Or is it possible that this is a slightly less rigorous look at the situation than the title of the thread would suggest? Because this whole thread screams "Troll" to me, to be honest.

Here's an interview with the British mens synchronised swimming team

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/olympics/synch-male-synchronized-swimming-team-barred-london-olympics/story?id=16887027#.UBfd-rSe6io

Whilst, I can't say if a lot of men compete at a high level as I don't much about synchronised swimming, that video says there's men who are rated highly amongst women.

Bill May is one of the guys mentioned http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_May_(synchronized_swimmer)

Tbh, there might not be a lot of high level competitors in the sport (I'd argue the same for womens boxing though) but it's clear just reading up on it that men aren't considered equal in it, as it's considered a woman's sport. The Olympics imo is the best place to change that opinion, as everyone is watching it.

Don't accuse me of being a troll btw

Sparks

That doesn't really answer my question though, does it?

titan18

Sparks wrote: »

That doesn't really answer my question though, does it?

Your question doesn't make much sense though, but to try and answer it.

a lot of men compete at a high level; I doubt it, but there's a few who do. However, I'd say it wouldn't be far different than women's boxing, in that there's a few who are excellent and a lot who are ordinary.

all the defined rules and criteria governing olympic inclusion have been followed and met; and Similar rules as the women competing, and a lot of men already compete with women in national and local events

the international governing body has sought inclusion FINA, the governing body for it, do not allow men to compete in their own events

This is on synchronized swimming, and rhythmic gymnastics.

http://wap.yahoo.com/w/ygo-frontpage/lp/story/us/2452455/coke.bp?ref_w=frontdoors&.ysid=T7KasSRI8j_437LuHX1PXo.5&.intl=US&.lang=en

and on a German boy who's been battling FINA for recognition

http://www.spiegel.de/international/zeitgeist/only-boy-on-the-team-male-synchronized-swimmer-fights-for-right-to-compete-a-618738.html

Fair enough, if there's not enough men to compete in their own event, but I see no reason why men shouldn't be allowed compete with women, or as mixed teams

Tbh, I see it as the exact same situation women's boxing was before being recognised.

Sparks

titan18 wrote: »

Your question doesn't make much sense though, but to try and answer it.

Well, to give it some sense, consider it as the moderator trying to determine if the thread that's already had a few posts deleted for trolling has any merit in staying around.

a lot of men compete at a high level; I doubt it, but there's a few who do.

You doubt it is not the same thing as you know for sure.

all the defined rules and criteria governing olympic inclusion have been followed and met; and Similar rules as the women competing, and a lot of men already compete with women in national and local events

You've answered a different question to the one I asked. To clarify; has the sport itself met all the rules and criteria set down by the IOC for the international governing body governing olympic inclusion.

the international governing body has sought inclusion FINA, the governing body for it, do not allow men to compete in their own events

Well, then the issue is not the Olympics.
If the international governing body doesn't allow it, the IOC will not try to dictate things to them because it doesn't have the authority to do so. That's why they've never just told the Saudis that they had to have women athletes in the Games.

and on a German boy who's been battling FINA for recognition

You see my point?
He's battling FINA, not the IOC. And there are structures in place for that, right up to the CAS. The IOC - and the Olympics - have nothing to do with this.

titan18

Sparks wrote: »

Well, to give it some sense, consider it as the moderator trying to determine if the thread that's already had a few posts deleted for trolling has any merit in staying around.


You doubt it is not the same thing as you know for sure.

You've answered a different question to the one I asked. To clarify; has the sport itself met all the rules and criteria set down by the IOC for the international governing body governing olympic inclusion.

Well, then the issue is not the Olympics.
If the international governing body doesn't allow it, the IOC will not try to dictate things to them because it doesn't have the authority to do so. That's why they've never just told the Saudis that they had to have women athletes in the Games.

You see my point?
He's battling FINA, not the IOC. And there are structures in place for that, right up to the CAS. The IOC - and the Olympics - have nothing to do with this.

My point in creating the thread was to show that whilst they're all on about the Olympics being equal this year as women compete in every sport that men do, the men don't and not many seem to care. The IOC could put pressure on the organisation though by saying either men compete equally or no one competes. If they were truly committed to the Olympic ideals, men would be competing in these sports

Sparks

titan18 wrote: »

My point in creating the thread was to show that whilst they're all on about the Olympics being equal this year as women compete in every sport that men do, the men don't and not many seem to care.

That's not what they're saying.
They're saying that it's a great step forward for the cause of equality that women are competing from every nation in the Olympics this year.
You're expecting that highly qualified statement to mean "that's it, we've completed the task, men and women are now completely equal because the Olympics says so". Which isn't the case.

The IOC could put pressure on the organisation though by saying either men compete equally or no one competes.

And the organisation would take them to the CAS in response and they would win because what you're talking about is unethical.

It's unethical because you're proposing to punish the female athletes - who have nothing to do with this and have no influence on this - by denying them access to the Games because of the actions of their governing body in relation to male athletes; even though there are already rules and procedures and avenues open to appeal to the governing body on this point.

If they were truly committed to the Olympic ideals, men would be competing in these sports

Last I checked, punishing innocents as a PR exercise wasn't in line with Olympic ideals; or even basic common sense.

titan18

Sparks wrote: »

That's not what they're saying.
They're saying that it's a great step forward for the cause of equality that women are competing from every nation in the Olympics this year.
You're expecting that highly qualified statement to mean "that's it, we've completed the task, men and women are now completely equal because the Olympics says so". Which isn't the case.


And the organisation would take them to the CAS in response and they would win because what you're talking about is unethical.

It's unethical because you're proposing to punish the female athletes - who have nothing to do with this and have no influence on this - by denying them access to the Games because of the actions of their governing body in relation to male athletes; even though there are already rules and procedures and avenues open to appeal to the governing body on this point.


Last I checked, punishing innocents as a PR exercise wasn't in line with Olympic ideals; or even basic common sense.

This is the Olympic Charter.
http://www.olympic.org/Documents/olympic_charter_en.pdf

Just going to quote pieces from it unless you want to go through it yourself.


The mission of the IOC is to promote Olympism throughout the world and to lead the
Olympic Movement. The IOC’s role is:
1. to encourage and support the promotion of ethics and good governance in sport as
well as education of youth through sport and to dedicate its efforts to ensuring that, in
sport, the spirit of fair play prevails and violence is banned;
2. to encourage and support the organisation, development and coordination of sport
and sports competitions;
3. to ensure the regular celebration of the Olympic Games;
4. to cooperate with the competent public or private organisations and authorities in the
endeavour to place sport at the service of humanity and thereby to promote peace;
5. to take action to strengthen the unity of the Olympic Movement, to protect its independence and to preserve the autonomy of sport;
6. to act against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic Movement;
7. to encourage and support the promotion of women in sport at all levels and in all
structures with a view to implementing the principle of equality of men and women;
8. to lead the fight against doping in sport;
9. to encourage and support measures protecting the health of athletes;15
Olympic Charter
In force as from 8 July 2011
10. to oppose any political or commercial abuse of sport and athletes;
11. to encourage and support the efforts of sports organisations and public authorities to
provide for the social and professional future of athletes;
12. to encourage and support the development of sport for all;
13. to encourage and support a responsible concern for environmental issues, to promote
sustainable development in sport and to require that the Olympic Games are held
accordingly;
14. to promote a positive legacy from the Olympic Games to the host cities and host
countries;
15. to encourage and support initiatives blending sport with culture and education;
16. to encourage and support the activities of the International Olympic Academy (“IOA”)
and other institutions which dedicate themselves to Olympic education.


In relation to the International Federations, you can check Chapter 3/Page 51.

The statutes, practice and activities of the IFs within the Olympic Movement must be in
conformity with the Olympic Charter, including the adoption and implementation of the
World Anti-Doping Code. Subject to the foregoing, each IF maintains its independence and
autonomy in the administration of its sport.

The mission and role of the IFs within the Olympic Movement are:
1.1 to establish and enforce, in accordance with the Olympic spirit, the rules
concerning the practice of their respective sports and to ensure their application;
1.2 to ensure the development of their sports throughout the world;
1.3 to contribute to the achievement of the goals set out in the Olympic Charter, in
particular by way of the spread of Olympism and Olympic education;
1.4 to express their opinions on the candidatures for organising the Olympic Games,
in particular as far as the technical aspects of venues for their respective sports
are concerned;
1.5 to establish their criteria of eligibility for the competitions of the Olympic Games in
conformity with the Olympic Charter, and to submit these to the IOC for approval;
1.6 to assume the responsibility for the technical control and direction of their sports
at the Olympic Games and, if they agree, at the Games held under the patronage
of the IOC;
1.7 to provide technical assistance in the practical implementation of the Olympic
Solidarity programmes.


The points I've highlighted to me represent why men should be represented.

In particular, number 6 and 7 in the missions and role of the IOC, and point 1.5 in the role of the International Federations. I don't really see why the IOC could approve no men being represented when it goes against their own role to prevent discrimination.


In Chapter 6/Page 99, there's the sanctions that can be imposed upon an International Federation for not working to the Olympic Movement

1.2 with regard to IFs:
a) withdrawal from the programme of the Olympic Games of:
– a sport (Session),
– a discipline (IOC Executive Board),
– an event (IOC Executive Board);
b) withdrawal of provisional recognition (IOC Executive Board);
c) withdrawal of full recognition (Session)



The Charter sets out that the fundamental principles of the Olympic Movement are

4. The practice of sport is a human right. Every individual must have the possibility of practising sport, without discrimination of any kind and in the Olympic spirit, which requires mutual understanding with a spirit of friendship, solidarity and fair play.

6. Any form of discrimination with regard to a country or a person on grounds of race, religion, politics, gender or otherwise is incompatible with belonging to the Olympic Movement.

To me, just from the Olympic Charter, the International Federations are not obeying the rules and obligations on them set in it, and sanctions are there that allow for them being removed from the Olympics because of it. By not allowing men to compete, the IOC and the Federations involved are going against the Olympic Charter

Sparks

titan18 wrote: »

By not allowing men to compete, the IOC and the Federations involved are going against the Olympic Charter

I was going to refute that point-by-point, but it would have been ridiculous because this entire argument is daft.

If you have an event in the Games that is men-only or women-only, that is not, under the rules of the Games, reason to create an entirely new event in the Games for the other Gender. For example, there's Women's 25m Sport Pistol in the Games, but no Men's 25m Sport Pistol.

In some cases, that's because there is no equivalent event in the sport for the other gender (there is no Mens 25m Sport Pistol event in the rulebook of the ISSF for example - it just doesn't exist. There's Men's 25m Standard Pistol, but that's a different event).

In other cases, it's because the IF never pushed for the event to be included in the Games, deciding instead to push other events. That's not an IOC decision - they can't take an application to push Men's Tiddlywinks into the Games and tell the IF they won't accept it, but they'll accept Women's Checkers instead. That's not how it works.

And above all else, it is not the role of the IOC to push for such an event to be created - it's not their business to run the IF's sports for them or to have veto or dictat rights over the sport. And while they could bring a case to kick the IF out of the Games, the IF would go straight to the CAS to appeal the decision and unless the IOC's case was very, very solid (and those quoted points above wouldn't qualify as the executive summary of the legal argument, let alone form a legal case in and of themselves), the IOC would lose and their decision would be reversed. And that's how it should be. The IOC cannot punish an entire sport because its IF only pushes certain events forward for the Games. That's punishing the athletes for the decisions of their governing body; it's monumentally unethical and unfair.

And just to top it all off; you're completely ignoring the point that all of this is something you should be taking up with the IF themselves; not with the IOC. You appeal through the IF, you lobby with them, you take them to CAS if you have to; but by going to the IOC, you're going to the wrong people, asking them to do the wrong thing, by punishing the wrong group, to right a wrong which may not even be a wrong in any logical sense.

I can't see any merit anywhere in your argument.

titan18

Sparks wrote: »

I was going to refute that point-by-point, but it would have been ridiculous because this entire argument is daft.

If you have an event in the Games that is men-only or women-only, that is not, under the rules of the Games, reason to create an entirely new event in the Games for the other Gender. For example, there's Women's 25m Sport Pistol in the Games, but no Men's 25m Sport Pistol.

In some cases, that's because there is no equivalent event in the sport for the other gender (there is no Mens 25m Sport Pistol event in the rulebook of the ISSF for example - it just doesn't exist. There's Men's 25m Standard Pistol, but that's a different event).

In other cases, it's because the IF never pushed for the event to be included in the Games, deciding instead to push other events. That's not an IOC decision - they can't take an application to push Men's Tiddlywinks into the Games and tell the IF they won't accept it, but they'll accept Women's Checkers instead. That's not how it works.

And above all else, it is not the role of the IOC to push for such an event to be created - it's not their business to run the IF's sports for them or to have veto or dictat rights over the sport. And while they could bring a case to kick the IF out of the Games, the IF would go straight to the CAS to appeal the decision and unless the IOC's case was very, very solid (and those quoted points above wouldn't qualify as the executive summary of the legal argument, let alone form a legal case in and of themselves), the IOC would lose and their decision would be reversed. And that's how it should be. The IOC cannot punish an entire sport because its IF only pushes certain events forward for the Games. That's punishing the athletes for the decisions of their governing body; it's monumentally unethical and unfair.

And just to top it all off; you're completely ignoring the point that all of this is something you should be taking up with the IF themselves; not with the IOC. You appeal through the IF, you lobby with them, you take them to CAS if you have to; but by going to the IOC, you're going to the wrong people, asking them to do the wrong thing, by punishing the wrong group, to right a wrong which may not even be a wrong in any logical sense.

I can't see any merit anywhere in your argument.

That would be cool if Synchronised Swimming was an event, but it's considered a separate sport run by FINA, not an event.

Can you give any reason why men compete at a national and local level in synchronised swimming, and should not be allowed compete in FINA events or the Olympics? The IOC could push for its inclusion if it wanted to, as men not being allowed compete is discrimination, and nothing else.

Sparks

titan18 wrote: »

The IOC could push for its inclusion if it wanted to, as men not being allowed compete is discrimination, and nothing else.

No they couldn't, and no it isn't.

I don't know how much more simply I can illustrate this, but I'll give it one last try.

Take (for an example), Women's 25m Sport Pistol. It exists in the Olympics today (actually, it's being shot tomorrow), but there's no equivalent Mens event. Let's say the IOC listened to you and decided - even though every bit of evidence in the world says that sexism goes in the other direction in every modern society we know of - that this was unfair sexist discrimination against men and it was time to do something about it. So what could they do?

Could they kick the ISSF out of the Games until the ISSF fix the problem? Well, (a) they couldn't because the ISSF would appeal this to the CAS and win; and (b) the ISSF couldn't fix the problem anyway, because even if they created a whole new sport and got it into the Games (that last step, btw, is a monumentally difficult one to take on, because this isn't a community games, it's a 13 billion dollar event and they don't add events without a lot of pushing); how would the ISSF stop Saudi Arabia not sending people to the event?

And that's another thing to consider; even if the event is in the games - like, say, Women's Air Pistol - it doesn't mean that there's no sexism. You just get some countries not sending women to the events (or men, in theory). And how do you prevent that? Demand that they send women? What if none make the qualification standard? What if the event is illegal in that country (which was the case for Women's Air Pistol in Ireland from '72 to '04) - do you assume the ISSF or the IOC will ban the entire country from the Games until they change their laws? National sovereignty, and the law, doesn't work that way.

So you've banned athletes from one event, then one sport, then one country, all in the pursuit of something that neither the people you're punishing, nor the people you're trying to influence, can give you.

And that's not how you pursue equality anyway - you work from the bottom up, not the top down, if you want real change. You've confused the finish line with the track, to be honest, and I just don't see any merit in the thread given that level of misunderstanding in the starting premise.