Pink Poogle Toy Forum

I clicked yes too, but changed my mind. I feel that they aren't "emotionally ready", since boys will tend to give in to girls or not use their full strength, as opposed to when boys go against each other. After all, which red-blooded male will want to beat up a female, eh? They may be afraid that beating the girl will result in a loss of a potential girlfriend.

Mmm, as a middle schooler girl who's not allowed to wrestle (with other girls, even), I'm bound to say "HELL YES!" I could beat probably a third of the boys in some classes (I beat my friends arm-wrestling all the time in Biology), and it's probably funner than doing the Grapevine and getting lunch detention for doing a shoulder roll.

Which by the way is probably the safest roll you can possibly do besides a log roll.

I'm thinking the problem is... girls and boys on top of eachother... and yeah, that's real immature of me to say that, but that's probably it.

Yes, boys ARE stronger as a rule, but as I've discovered through epic battles with Tharkun, it's not all strength. Indeed, if you're really fast you've got it won, and especially (coughSPIDER-MANcough) if you use your opponent's strength against them. Plus... I like to play dead/k.oed and then get back up and knock em down. ('Course, that's Roleplayed.)

Yes, they should be allowed to... but not MADE to. It oughta be, y'know, something optional. That way you don't get the people going "eew! Inuendo and out the other!" and if the girls lose, it doesn't matter, because they WANT to play.

Hooray for the one generalization I've found that works for everyone!

(I REALLY wanna be allowed to wrestle... or... swordfight? At least do a FRICKIN SHOULDER ROLL WITHOUT GETTING DETENTION?

*hem hem* Please?)

but you're not basing this on fact. you're basing this on the assumption that it's dangerous for the girl, which it in fact usually is not.

my boyfriend wrestled in high school, and there was a girl on his team (not in his weight class, so he never actually wrestled her), and seeing as she was paired with people in her weight class and on her level she never got hurt.

hell, you could generalise that ANYONE could get very hurt in wrestling. to single out the girls is, indeed, very sexist, no matter how much feminism annoys you. what you're saying is, it doesn't matter if the girl is an amazing wrestler, she shouldn't be allowed to wrestle simply because she is a female. sorry, but this is a sexist statement.

besides, the strength thing is a bad argument, because there's a lot more to wrestling than strength. if a person, male or female, was not up to par, they shouldn't be on the wrestling team to begin with.




another unfair argument. if this were the case then you'd have to not allow gay boys on the team, and no one would argue that that isn't discrimination.

That's why I'll never take wrestling.

Well, why not? Also, from the girls' aspect it would give them more confidence, those who actually wrestle, I mean.

I didn't say females shouldn't be wrestling, I said they shouldn't wrestle males.

Would you say the olympics are sexist because they don't have mixed wrestling classes?

And it is a fact that in general men are stronger than women (of the same weight). People may not like it but it's true. And though wrestling is not all about strength, this does increase the liklihood of them getting hurt.
Yes, anyone could get hurt in wrestling. If I played in a girls rugby match and got hurt, well fine. If I were playing in a rugby match where I was playing against boys and I got hurt, not fine. I shouldn't be in a situation like that.

You HAVE TO generalise in sports. You have to generalise to make your rules. In all likelihood there are, for example, some female tennis players who could beat males. I wouldn't be too surprised if Serena Williams could beat someone like Bogdanovic, but it doesn't mean they should be playing the same categories. The world #1 in the men's group will beat the #1 in the women's group almost always.

Some female sprinters could beat some male sprinters, but the male sprinters they beat would be lower down the ladder than they would be.
You can't have rules in sports if you don't generalise. A wrestler in one weight category could beat someone in a higher one, but that doesn't mean they should be wrestling eachother, because in general you'd suppose the heavier one would win. You can't say 'oh, they'd probably be evenly matched so let's have them fighting' but then say 'ah, he's probably win and she might get quite hurt, so we can't have them fighting eachother'. Sports need set rules.

To be honest I find it completely ridiculous that you are all but accusing me of being a sexist, despite the fact that I am a girl.

I'm sure there are plenty of girls capable of wrestling on a par with guys, I'm not denying that there are. But as this poll asks, in a matter of emotional AND physical maturity, it's not a good idea after about 12.

Igg, you can be a girl and still be sexist just like you can be a man and still be a feminist. Or you can be racist against blacks and still be black, ect ect.

Yes, but I'm blatantly NOT sexist.

Although I might as well be all the good it's doing.

*sigh*

Girls are crap at everything, in fact they should stay away from sports in general and do thing that are going to be more worthwhile to their adult lives, like cooking and cleaning. And meeting nice young men and getting married.

Personally, I agree with Igg. You can banter on and on about "women's rights" and all of that lovely stuff, but the bottom line is that men are scientifically proven to have more upper body strength than women. Igg is right. In the sports word, generalizations NEED to be made in order for there to be rules.

It doesn't matter if the boy is in the same weight class as the girl. Statistically, most of the boys are going to have the girls beat in the upper body strength category. Instead of thinking about "rah rah, shishkumbah GOOOO GIRL'S RIGHTS!" we should be thinking about their well being. Not everything that doesn't include someone of a certain gender is that way because it's 'sexist'. It's just common sense.

but you can say that all you want, but there are STILL girls that wrestle boys and do just fine. some people claim that SCIENTIFICALLY bees can't fly, but they can. they fly all the time, because there are other factors to be taken into consideration. girls end up on boys' teams all the time, and they do quite well. because it's more than strength.

maybe generalizations need to be made in sports, but this is a bad one.

and sorry igg. you can say you're not sexist all you want, but the statements you're making are sexist. girls can wrestle boys. they already do. to deny them that right based simply on gender is absolutely, blatantly sexist.

I'm sorry, but I'm with Igg and Fidds. Men have more upper body strength than women, as a rule. While there are obviously exceptions, in general, it is not safe for most girls to be wrestling guys, regardless of their weight class.

Call me sexist if you wish, it doesn't bother me, because I'm not. If girls want to wrestle, they can wrestle other girls. While they may feel they are capable of taking on a guy (I'm guilty of this feeling at times), chances are, they can't.

If I was making a sexist statement, I'd say 'girls can't wrestle boys because they're girls'.
That's not what I'm saying.

There are some boys I can beat hands down in athletics competitions, but I don't compete against them. And do I whinge about sexism? Do I hell.

and what of the girls already on wrestling teams? do you feel they should be kicked off because they might get hurt? despite the fact that they've already proven themselves to be more than capable of wrestling boys?

Yes. Just because they haven't been hurt doesn't change the fact that guys have more upper body strength. Yes, they've shown themselves to be capable in some cases. No, they won't be happy about it. That doesn't change the facts. If they want to continue wrestling, they should see about getting a girl's wrestling team.

Le Sigh.

If girls wrestle, there's no doubt they're gonna get hurt sometime.
Same with boys.
If we're supposed to be worried that we're gonna get hurt going against boys, I... meh, dun get it. I still say if they WANT to wrestle, they oughta be aware of the fact that people are going to get hurt no matter what, and with that knowledge can wrestle people of the same strength group. (We did this with running... in wrestling it's as easy, you'd have a tournament among your own gender, and people in the lowest groups in girls would fight people in the lowest groups in boys. It might take a bit of tweaking.)

Eowyn alter-ego says: Hmm, I don't even know any girls allowed to wrestle (rohirric cursing) girls!

That's right! At my school, us girls have to do gymnastics... in which we are only allowed to walk on the two-foot-high-above-squishy-mats balance beam with people holding both our hands while they're on the ground. That's the most dangerous thing. The funnest thing we're allowed to do is pick our own music for 'gymnastics routines'. At many schools girls can't wrestle boys, but it's only boys who get to normally... so we can't go against our own gender either.

Now THAT's sexism.

(I... have an urge... to read a Grampa Jack book O.O)