P.S.-this post isn't to promote sports but rather to illustrate the point of male-female differences by DESIGN.
The rationale for Title IX in 1964 came not only from a desire for fairness to women and girls in sports programs, but from “the assumption that females’ sports interest is intrinsically equal to that of males,” the American Psychological Association says in a piece posted on Science Daily.
How sound is that assumption? Because the assumption has “policy implications,” three
psychologists studied sex differences in sports in 3 ways.
First, they found that females generally have less interest in sports – and this applies to all cultures and all times.
Second, they considered four “adaptive, functional hypotheses” for this observation.
Finally, they looked into whether the difference is due to cultural conditioning. Has any program been able to reverse the difference? “In particular, no experimental manipulation or systematic historical comparison has ever shown a decrease in the sex difference,” they say.
“Moreover, several studies indicate that prenatal hormones contribute to males’ greater sports interest.” Men and women, surprisingly, are different!
The take-home points from this review are that the sex difference in sports interest is (1) substantial and widespread, (2) partly due to evolutionary pressures that differentially affected males and females, and (3) unlikely to be fully overturned by socialization.
These points challenge the bedrock assumptions of many scholars and policy makers. Most notably, Title IX is a U.S. law that prohibits sexual discrimination in educational opportunities, including sports, and Title IX is generally implemented under the assumption that females’ sports interest is intrinsically equal to that of males. The present research indicates that this implementation may require revision. They’re not saying that opportunities for female involvement in sports should be diminished. But if the interest in sports for boys and men is truly “substantial and widespread” – and has been throughout history and across cultures – then the basis for Title IX lacks empirical support, putting liberals and evolutionists at cross currents in this instance. How this could impact the current policy dispute about transgender accommodation remains to be seen." CEH
But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
Mark 10:6
"There are innate biological differences between men’s and women’s sports interests, say evolutionary psychologists. Title IX is big in the news these days, as the Obama administration seeks to use the provision of the 1964 civil rights law to force colleges into compliance with his agenda for promoting the normalization of transgender status The rationale for Title IX in 1964 came not only from a desire for fairness to women and girls in sports programs, but from “the assumption that females’ sports interest is intrinsically equal to that of males,” the American Psychological Association says in a piece posted on Science Daily.
How sound is that assumption? Because the assumption has “policy implications,” three
First, they found that females generally have less interest in sports – and this applies to all cultures and all times.
Second, they considered four “adaptive, functional hypotheses” for this observation.
Finally, they looked into whether the difference is due to cultural conditioning. Has any program been able to reverse the difference? “In particular, no experimental manipulation or systematic historical comparison has ever shown a decrease in the sex difference,” they say.
“Moreover, several studies indicate that prenatal hormones contribute to males’ greater sports interest.” Men and women, surprisingly, are different!
The take-home points from this review are that the sex difference in sports interest is (1) substantial and widespread, (2) partly due to evolutionary pressures that differentially affected males and females, and (3) unlikely to be fully overturned by socialization.
These points challenge the bedrock assumptions of many scholars and policy makers. Most notably, Title IX is a U.S. law that prohibits sexual discrimination in educational opportunities, including sports, and Title IX is generally implemented under the assumption that females’ sports interest is intrinsically equal to that of males. The present research indicates that this implementation may require revision. They’re not saying that opportunities for female involvement in sports should be diminished. But if the interest in sports for boys and men is truly “substantial and widespread” – and has been throughout history and across cultures – then the basis for Title IX lacks empirical support, putting liberals and evolutionists at cross currents in this instance. How this could impact the current policy dispute about transgender accommodation remains to be seen." CEH
