Here is a chart of male vs female marathon record times for the past 100 years. You can see on the chart where women are first even allowed to participate in marathons, 70 years after the record for the males begins. And you can see their record times dropping just as the men's rates have dropped. Faster, in fact, as if they are making up for lost time.

http://www.marathonguide.com/history/records/

"When it comes to speed and strength the best men will always out-perform the best women"

This is exactly why the sex segregation should end. I would go down on my knees and kiss the ground to never have to hear this kind of bullshit again. As the graph I posted shows, women are catching up with men, and the record marathon times are converging.

A woman can go to the gym and lift weights and build up her strength just as a man can. Mostly they don't, but they could. I don't know why that's hard to understand.

Since most sprints are won by black athletes, don't you guys think we should divide the competitions up by race? Otherwise, white athletes are discouraged from participating, since they are never going to be the best of the best. :(

Hey when I looked for some stats to back me up, I found this thread on stormfront.com: http://www.stormfront.org/forum/showthread.php?t=624612

It's the same arguments people are making here for why we need women-only sports. Fuck y'all.

You're right, and let's stop insulting white athletes who train so hard but still can't be the best of the best in running sports in the Olympics, let's give them their own competitions.

This is a well written article in the Christian Science Monitor about how women's games are pretty much rigged so that women aren't better than men, and what subtle political messages these things send out.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0131/p09s01-coop.html?page=2

It discusses the historical and current prejudices against women which prevent them from ever playing on par with men in many sports. For example, men pro tennis players play five sets and women play three.

I looked up a scientific article on the gender physiological differences, and it finds that there are negligible differences between men and women as far as strength training, the difference you are so defensive about in running races is due to body fat, which women naturally have more of. However, in other sports requiring more than just speed, men shouldn't have a distinct advantage over women, except for the historical and institutionalized unfairnesses in the ways they are expected to train and the things they are told about what they can do. Here is the article: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3529284

Kitt, I was actually looking for data about race differences in sports events when I found the stormfront thread. I was looking for that because that's the kind of people who discuss segregating sporting events. I wanted you to realize what it sounds like to me when people say that women can't compete with men. I think that you intentionally misread my intentions and just want to call me names in lieu of an argument. That doesn't make you less wrong.

I think this is such a great idea, because I remember the feeling that was in the air on and after 9/11, and it wasn't just a feeling of fear, though that was there. There was also a feeling of concern for the safety of others. People were driving more carefully and politely on the road. People made more eye contact with one another in the shops and on the streets. There was a feeling in the air of wanting to be of service to your fellow Americans, 9/11 had been a stark reminder of how precious they are and that we take them for granted in the day to day grind and among petty disagreements. It's laughable that this guy wants to criticize Obama for turning a day of fear into a day of service. That criticism falls very flat.

Here's one of the signatures I saw when I checked out the petition:

HEY GEEKS LOOK AT SOME NAKED GIRLS [website link omitted]HEY GEEKS LOOK AT SOME NAKED GIRLS [website link omitted]HEY GEEKSHEY GEEKS LOOK AT SOME NAKED GIRLS [website link omitted]

I think you forgot to take your paranoid schizo meds.

Wow, did she really accuse her husband of sexual abuse in a nationally published mag? That lady is all class.

But I think they're obviously talking about something they're not talking about.

If a child is just going to look around at the snapshot of racial makeup in the US, having no social or historical context, they could come away with some very obtuse conclusions.

Let us please remember that DADT is not a ban enacted by Clinton. Before DADT, homosexuals were banned from the military and all applicants were asked specifically about their sexual orientation before being accepted into the military. By passing DADT, Clinton allowed gays to serve in the US military for the first time since 1942. At the time, it was either something like DADT or nothing. We would have never come this far without DADT; the broad public acceptance of gays in the military is partly a result of DADT. It is because of DADT that we can now speak of DADT as a ban, an unnecessary burden.

I know of a girl who was mute, and she went to the bathroom at work one day, a male coworker followed her in there and raped her. I guess he thought it would be easy to do because she couldn't scream for help. It really messed her up, but the last I heard, she was pressing charges. She can still write down what he did to her, though that didn't help her while he did it.

Every child I know will get a copy!!!