This Iowa wrestler decided to forfeit his first-round bout at the state-tournament because he did not want to wrestle a female. He said the reason he wouldnt grapple his state-qualifying counter-part is because he doesn't feel comfortable wrestling a girl in a combat sport. Is this not the most honest argument we have heard in the girl vs guy athletic debate?
5 comments:
Not at my Hamilton.
At my high school we had a couple of girls that joined the wrestling team... there were a good deal of opponents (mostly religious schools) that by policy refused to wrestle a guy against a girl, so they always won a good amount of forefit victories.
Pretty impressive/crazy that there were girls who qualified for the state tournament in general. Were their records aided by forefit victories? And am I sexist for asking that?
What do you mean TJE? I think this kid brings up a good point. Not only does he respect his competitor but he feels that he would do her an injustice by not being able to put forth his greatest effort against her. I don't think he is trying to disrespect her at all, I just think that it is something rooted in his psyche that tells him it is wrong engaging a female in a combat sport. This isn't an issue of bigger, stronger, faster, better; this is an issue of how this kid was raised to treat women. I, for one, can't blame him.
I was being facetious. I can't remember which incident it was-- Golf Pros, Tennis ***" or Mexican Night poster that borrowed image from Jon Stewart-- but the slogan of politcal correctness at the time was "Not at My Hamilton." I was suggesting that at Hamilton, chivalry may be not only dead but politically incorrect.
sorry TJE...who ever you are...
Post a Comment