Same as athletics - the finalists in the women's 100m wouldn't make the semis in the men's

Of course that doesn't stop the women's 100m being a thrilling event

But it raises ontological questions about the nature of sport and why we watch it.

Basically, by dividing sport into women and men we are acknowledging that some human beings (men) are better at sport than other human beings (women) and so it is necessary to separate them in order to allow the less good humans to have a fair competition (ie only with other less good humans). And there is nothing wrong with that, in fact there is a lot right with it.

But you do then start to wonder: why THESE less good humans? Why not other ones?

To take an example: the 100m final determines who is the fastest woman in the world, ie who is the fastest human in this particular category of less good humans. Why not have a white male 100m? Then we could all see who the fastest white male is. Or the fastest redhead. Or the fastest who weighs more than 15 stone. Or whatever.

Would anyone watch any of those? Probably not, or not very many. Whereas there's no doubt that seeing who the fastest woman in the world is retains a huge appeal, even though we all know that that person is just the best of a particular category of "less good" humans.

Posted By: Old Git, Mar 22, 10:25:38