High School Wrestler Refuses to Take on Girl

Such a Christian attitude you have there brother I B.. Originally Posted by WTF

Another error. You are ass-uming I’m a “Christian.”

Yeah, it’s chauvinism. It’s the same kind of chauvinism that leads proper gentlemen to open doors for ladies or motivates a gentleman to give a lady his seat when there are no other chairs available. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I think your confusing being polite to someone and what chauvinism really is. Two different things.

I for one do not need a man to pull my chair out for me at a table, I am a grown women and can do that for myself. If I am carrying packages and need help with the door, I always appreciate a man or woman helping me with the door.

Yes, I stand by my opinion, that kid was stupid, and this reeks of chauvinism. Just as WTF stated had said had this been a gay person, or someone of a different religion, or color and suddenly this kid did the same thing, you know there would be a lot of people getting a lot more upset about this. It is all the same and all in the same category of prejudice.

I don't care if the kid was polite about it, it doesn't change the fact that he copped an out on a very stupid reason.

Another error. You are ass-uming I’m a “Christian.” Originally Posted by I B Hankering

I stated you comment wasn't Christian like. I made no comment on your faith. I'm ass uming you can see the difference.

I stated you comment wasn't Christian like. Originally Posted by WTF

How would you know?

How would you know? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Why wouldn't I know?

Care to argue why you think I wouldn't know or better yet why you think the comment in question was Christian like?

That's fine . . .

I for one do not need a man to pull my chair out for me at a table, I am a grown women and can do that for myself. If I am carrying packages and need help with the door, I always appreciate a man or woman helping me with the door. Originally Posted by Bebe Le Strange

. . . there are many more who enjoy the extra attention. I never suggested that a woman couldn't stand interminably or open a door.

Yes, I stand by my opinion, that kid was stupid,

I don't care if the kid was polite about it, it doesn't change the fact that he copped an out on a very stupid reason.[/quote]Still smacks of condescension no matter how you say it.

That's fine . . .
. . . there are many more who enjoy the extra attention. I never suggested that a woman couldn't stand interminably or open a door.

Yes, I stand by my opinion, that kid was stupid,

I don't care if the kid was polite about it, it doesn't change the fact that he copped an out on a very stupid reason. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Still smacks of condescension no matter how you say it. [/quote]




The kids actions speaks of condescension no matter how you say it.

Is that so hard to understand. I actually see both sides I B. Hopefully, you can too.


Were he in the military , could he shoot the enemy if they were women?


Would people cheer that choice? Were he to let his unit down , like he did his teammates that were trying to win a state title. His choice not to wrestle hurt is teams chances to win a state title. Is that fact overlooked because of how we feel towards women?

Still seems awfully silly to put in all that work and pull out because of antiquated beliefs based on an immaginary angry man in the sky whether the percentage is 0.5% or 50%. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

Maybe...maybe not. If his chances of drawing a female opponent in the state tourney were between 0% (none had qualified prior to this season) & 0.5% ( 2 out of x wrestlers in his weight class)...it seems equally silly to just "punt" on the entire season based on the extremely remote chance that this would happen.

I've certainly seen (allegedly) grown men react with more childish behavior to poker table beats with much worse odds...

What if he hadn't wanted to get on the mat with a person of color or a Jewish person or a gay person. Would it then been ok to say he was stupid for not doing so? Originally Posted by WTF

Point of order, Brother WTF... No need for a hypothetical to make it "ok" to say he was "stupid" as far as I'm concerned. I never said it wasn't "ok" to do so here. "Stupid" wouldn't be my choice of word but if it's yours...or someone else's...knock yourselves out. I can disagree with the kid's belief* while agreeing with the way he acted on that belief.

As to your hypothetical, I would suspect he could expect to see the level of vilification ratcheted up exponentially under those circumstances. It's much more difficult to craft a sound religious argument for it being a sin to compete in those circumstances. I recall Hank Greenberg & Sandy Kofax refusing to play at certain times because they were Jewish. I don't recall anybody refusing to pitch to Greenberg - or step into the batter's box against Kofax - because they were Jewish. Likewise, there were a lot places Jackie Robinson couldn't eat & a lot of guys who wouldn't room with him but I don't recall anybody refusing to take the field against him.




* I do disagree with his interpretation of the Bible but the Bible does say pretty clearly that if someone believes an act to be a sin then - to that man - it is a sin. I can't think of the verse off the top of my head but do recall is was over something as "mundane" as eating meat at certain times.

I understand why he didn't but isn't there a philosophical question in here somewhere? Originally Posted by WTF

Probably...it does feel a little "off" somehow to admire the way someone acts on a belief I disagree with. But, where's the fun in exploring that when there's plenty of ignorant statements to be made by simply ignoring the facts & questioning the integrity of the direct participants???

All kidding aside, you may be finding it hard to get any takers in your quest to mine hypotheticals based on this story for philosophical gold because it can lead to some very unpleasant places...not the least of which is endless wrangling with you, my Brother!

I'd be happy to give it a go with you over scotch & cigars some evening. In this forum?? Eh...the juice ain't worth the squeeze...

Still seems awfully silly to put in all that work and pull out because of antiquated beliefs based on an immaginary angry man in the sky whether the percentage is 0.5% or 50%. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

You must be the single most unintelligent educated man in the history of this board.

My analogy of your sports understanding still stands. You are just like the reporter who thinks Roger Maris didn't break the record out of failure to perform.

And this goes for the others, you sit in judgment of a kid you know nothing about yet are absolutely convinced he had ulterior motives.

Omnipotence is a trait I am yet to master.

I actually see both sides I B. Hopefully, you can too. I have never called the girl "stupid" as you and others have labeled the boy. So I think I'm seeing both sides more clearly than you.

Were he in the military , could he shoot the enemy if they were women? I think he might initially have a problem with that 'little' detail: many men do. But as I mentioned above, a wrestling match is not a world ending - life or death - situation.

Originally Posted by WTF

Do these "hypotheticals" compensate for an on topic counter argument?

Omnipotence is a trait I am yet to master. Originally Posted by Boltfan

+1
I resemble that!

What if on principles he would not wrestle a black or a Jew? Would that be stupid or not?

I'm playing my favorite role....devil advocate. So go light on me folks. Originally Posted by WTF

What if he hadn't wanted to get on the mat with a person of color or a Jewish person or a gay person. Would it then been ok to say he was stupid for not doing so?

I understand why he didn't but isn't there a philosophical question in here somewhere? Originally Posted by WTF

What if it had been blacks or Jews or Gays? Would you be so proud of his decision. Thats all I'm asking?

Is this such a hard question to answer? Originally Posted by WTF

I actually see both sides I B. Hopefully, you can too. I have never called the girl "stupid" as you and others have labeled the boy. So I think I'm seeing both sides more clearly than you.I have never labeled to boy stupid, I have went to the trouble of quoting myself, nowhere will you find me calling him stupid. I will say that because of certain beliefs people will do stupid things. Won't you agree? Was not hijacking a plane and slamming it into a building stemmed from a stupid belief? Now can we agree that stupid actions/beliefs are in the eye of the beholder?




Were he in the military , could he shoot the enemy if they were women? I think he might initially have a problem with that 'little' detail: many men do. But as I mentioned above, a wrestling match is not a world ending - life or death - situation. I never said it was but neither is believing that the boy has a stupid belief system a life or death situation.


I think I have shown that the same actions taken in a different context have different reactions.

ie. sexist actions are still ok in certain circumstances (such as this) , racist (not so much) gay bashing ( jury is still out)

How would you feel if he would not get on the mat aganist a gay person? That is an easy enough question. Would you think it stupid? If you did , is that the same as calling the kid stupid?

Why do you guys always try and twist words? I never called the kid stupid. You are forgiven in advance for telling that lie on me. We Humanist are a forgiving lot!

Do these "hypotheticals" compensate for an on topic counter argument? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

What counter arguement? That the kid can wrestle who he wants or not? Of course he can. He can choose not to wrestle a black or a Jew or a gay or a woman.

Do you not want to discuss the bigger picture of why we hold these beliefs?

It is simple as shit to discuss the kid not wanting to wrestle a girl...it requires a tad more thought to understand why and then question why that belief, is it right/wrong? Do you never question your belief system? why you think a certain way? I do all the time. Maybe that is another difference in how we see the world. I look at things from a scientific viewpoint. I always question things.

Aww, guys, give the kid a break. He's home-schooled. AND he's 15. AND HE'S PENTECOSTAL! He has probably never had an encounter with a girl to start with. Maybe he didn't want his first date to be a wrestling match. He's still getting boners thinking of being mounted by her. Then he is just that- a kid.

I have 9 brothers, 8 of which would LET me win in a wrestling match as a kid, and one whose ass I had to actually kick. The reason I got away with so much with the 8 is they don't believe in hitting women. The other is a sexually submissive woman-hater (Come on, there's one in every family). Even as adults I still slap-box with them (after long absences it's a must) they still take it easy on me, and I know this.

I'm just saying, in my opinion, it's hard to find a boy that would engage a girl the way he would engage a boy. It's got to be something that makes men hold back, even when a woman is getting completely out of hand with him. Maybe it's the fact that he knows he could hurt her or worse if he lost control. If he defends himself, it's only to get her to realize how bad things could get.

Also, in my opinion, if this were a ploy to not give the two ladies a fair chance of winning, it would have been a uniform action by all the males competing. He didn't gain anything and the girls didn't lose anything by one person refusing to compete. The other girl is already out of the tournament, and I'm pretty sure Herkelman will be as well.

It's probably more his parent's choice than his. If his parents say, "No you can't roll on the floor with a girl," then he really did not make too much of a decision based on his own beliefs. He is probably scared as hell of mom and dad. Some of them Church Folk are darn scary...that was meant to sound redneck btw.