^^^^i don't know, but she needs to ditch tennis and take up gymnastics...I'd coach her in some floor exercise.
8/1/2008 5:48:37 PM
Pretty sure that's a ball girl, not a player.
8/1/2008 6:01:05 PM
See, the problem is that the stuff that has huge gaps between men's and women's performance is the shit I think is boring. Basketball, soccer? I can watch that any time.Women's judo is usually more entertaining because they do SOMETHING other than Uchi Mata into a juji katame. Biathlons are awesome to me. And women's running may be slower than men's, but it's still a HELL of a lot faster than I can go.
8/1/2008 6:03:53 PM
it saddens me that there aren't even any realms women really dominate at anymore. even cooking and decorating shows are dominated by "men"i guess they've got a good lead in the "marry for money, then divorce" race though but thats what we've forced them to do after pretending to take them seriously for the kicks.
8/1/2008 6:28:20 PM
HEY GUIIISE WHAT"S GOING ON HERE?
8/1/2008 6:30:56 PM
so espn actually says women's basketball players are just as good as men??the williams sisters i can understand. not that i'm saying they're EQUAL but that seems like a better argument to go to bat over than women v. men basketball players.and, as i've said a trillion times (now that we're on page four) women ARE good at sports. just not when you use the best male athletes as the reference point. if we use other women (OMG why would we ever compare two things that are SIMILAR) or even non professional men OR MEN in OTHER countries as a reference point, the status of women changes. so it just depends on what you use. even if women aren't as good as men, they are still decent athletes. again, it isn't like were saying please let a person with no arms and legs to run a marathon.and, with regards to gymnastics (this is slightly off topic) no one has mentioned that there are like 20 and 30 year old men competing in gymnastics whereas on the women's side there are like 12-16 year old females. yet they aren't good at what they do? those little 12 year olds can kick the men's ass on floor routine. and so what they don't do the rings. we've already said men and women are different physically. and since when are the rings that interesting to watch anyway. never in my life have i picked the rings out as the MUST SEE event of the olympics.
8/1/2008 6:37:21 PM
ha, rings are bad ass. have you ever tried to to do anything on a set of rings?
8/1/2008 6:41:14 PM
8/1/2008 6:43:41 PM
there are enough athletic women without big boobs and butts that I'd think they could still compete and physically dominate a 13 year old girl.I think it's because 75 lb young teenagers are, for whatever reason, what the judges in that sport want to see.
8/1/2008 6:58:03 PM
i KNOW the rings are badass but i'm just saying people say women's sports are boring. i'm not negating the difficulty of the rings. i'm just saying...i'm sure the rings aren't on anyone's MUST SEE list. yet the argument is that they are fanatically better/more interesting/whatever simply because they are a male event. i'm just saying i don't get how someone could say that all women's sports are boring/not worthy of being watched/competed/whatever other statements have been made.
8/1/2008 7:32:44 PM
This thread sucks
8/1/2008 8:22:05 PM
^i keep trying to get it on the right track
8/1/2008 8:23:06 PM
As long as you have morons that think women aren't athletes just because they're women, this thread will never get on track.The WNBA sucks. A lot of other women's sports suck. But they're still impressive athletes.
8/1/2008 8:24:57 PM
yall are all sayin the same shit over againi am about to destroy this thread with somethin brazilianand i aint talkin bout womens volleyball
8/1/2008 9:11:45 PM
you won't do it
8/1/2008 9:12:24 PM
8/1/2008 9:14:42 PM
i hate you so hard
8/1/2008 10:17:14 PM