Originally Posted by MikeSid (Post 10382474)

Well... we need to say it because men and women participate in different divisions! Not distinguishing between gender divisions in sports accolades is tantamount to saying a group of little leaguers won the world series. Good for them. But it's not the same as the MLB world series, and acknowledging exactly what their accomplishment was in no way disparages the achievement of these youth.

Everyone knows there is a difference between youth baseball players and adults, just like everyone knows there is a difference between adult men and women in virtually all sports.

Now, to her point, we typically don't refer to men's champions as such. We simply call them champions. But that's just a matter of the default being set to men in the past. I don't think any men in the world would have a problem with all future men's championships referring to the gender division. That should be her argument. But to say we don't need to distinguish is laughable.

Originally Posted by Bob Kontak (Post 10382725)

In how many threads could (should) this be the last post?

Originally Posted by Rawknees'Turbo (Post 10383114)

Totally agree, and MMA is a prime example; the toughest, most badassed, and highest skilled female fighter would be destroyed by any male fighter in her weight class, or even weight classes below hers. I love women's MMA, as those ladies are some of the highest skilled, fiercest, strong willed, and entertaining competitors in the sport, but they appear little more than wet noodles compared to the males in terms of strength, endurance, and physical power (definitely not wet noodles in terms of mental toughness, no-quit mindsets, etc., however), so to not distinguish between classes in terms of gender, does a real disservice to all of the male and female fighters. ...