framedglasshadd,
I don't understand why you would be disappointed with seperating the genders?
"Even if women do end up at the bottom of the rankings lists because of this, it would be... more encouraging."
More encouraging for whom?
"Besides, having a separate list for females is like having a list for "lower-skilled" people anyway, so you are basically saying the same thing."
Huh?
"It is categorizing people by something they could not even choose! All play the same, wonderful game, and the most important thing we have in common is gender?"
I will give you the benefit of the doubt and presume you know that hormones are huge determinants beyond physical strength. Don't take my word for it. Ask any neurologist about hormonal effects on brain function. Please don't under-estimate this. There will be exceptions for sure. But I wouldn't want to set policy or rethink norms based on aberrations.
It would be encouraging for me. If there was a ranking list with both men and women on it and women ranked below men it would merely make them want to try harder to become a better player. If women really did have such a disadvantage, it would mean that women would simply have to practice with more diligence and concentration and should a female become a top player, she would have worked harder than the men to achieve that and it would thus be encouraging. If women
did not have such a disadvantage, then it would mean that this is, indeed, a fair game for men and women and that gender is irrelevant.
For the second part, I meant to say how if we have a list for women because we do not think they can stack up to men, it is just the same as having a list with both men and women on it and having women rank lower because it conveys the same message: we believe women cannot stack up to men. Which is very, very sad because this is one of the few sports where having massive physical strength does not give you much of an advantage as precision, accuracy, and practice will.
As for the third point you made, I believe that if physical strength plays that big a role in billiards, then women who want to improve would train physically to meet that standard. I do not think it is worth asking a neurologist, because if it really took
that much strength, then I would think men would talk about body building and training physically for it too. Yes, men do have the biological advantage on physical strength. But this sport does not require so much of it that women are disadvantaged
because of a lack of physical strength.
For the part on brain function, if there are women who can become mathematicians and scientists and excel in academia just as men can, then females certainly wield enough "brain function", as you call it, to play billiards. I sincerely do not believe that women are "too dumb" or lack the mental capacity to compare against men. This is something that improves with practice, and should women need to practice more to be as good as men, then so be it. It will just be a bigger accomplishment in the end. But if the game continues to separate gender, there is no opportunity for that to even happen. If women do
not need to practice more to be just as good as men, then it again proves that gender is irrelevant.
This was quite awhile back but this woman was considered world class
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Katsy
Thank you, I just read about her and she is... inspirational. It gives me hope that one day, another female player will be noticed and be invited to play against the world, literally and figuratively, as the "real world" has both men and women. This is one of the few gender-fair sports where having 20 cm diameter biceps will not leverage your playing very much.
