Male vs Female UFC Fights

[mushybees]

Something not very surprising, well not to me...

Did you watch the video? She turned up at the gym for sparring pretending to be a beginner when she was in fact a MT champ. The guys spar lightly with her then she switches it on and shows what she can do. It isn't even remotely relevant to the discussion we had here.

[Alan Armstrong]

Something not very surprising, well not to me...

Did you watch the video? She turned up at the gym for sparring pretending to be a beginner when she was in fact a MT champ. The guys spar lightly with her then she switches it on and shows what she can do. It isn't even remotely relevant to the discussion we had here.

This is an open discussion, what doesn't seem relevant to one person doesn't mean it isn't to another.

I see this video as relevant to this discussion, therefore it works for me.

The males in this video, most definitely changed their opinion of women fighters after this encounter.

The way the male was taunting the girl wasn't right, she turned the tables on him and looked slightly humiliated, something he deserved.

The girl is clearly a superior fighter than the males and by no means bigger, isn't that biologically relevant enough?

(Happy to see you back in the discussion, mushybees)

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mushybees

Yellow Belt

Joined: 16 Nov 2014

Posts: 78

Location: UK

Styles: Wado ryu (Wado-kai)

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 5:53 am

I carry no demons.

In every other way apart from physical makeup women are the equal of men and surpass them in others. In some species the female is larger and stronger than the male.

Denying biology isn't being a feminist.

It's clear we don't agree on this subject so with the utmost respect I'll bow out

[mushybees]

Back against my better judgement.

She was a beter fighter but then she was a champion fighter. Were the men at the same level? Clearly not and that's the crux of the discussion.

When all things that can be controlled are equal, men will still have an evolutionary advantage which is almost impossible to overcome in a consensual fight.

No amount of white knighting will change that. What brings me back to the discussion is your allusions, intended or not, that those that don't agree the sexes are physically equal in a fight are borderline chauvinist. The demons comment was especially disappointing to read.

It is a known aspect of our development as children and adolescents that boys continue to develop for years after girls have reached their peak strength. They can develop this further as can males but it's generally a deficit they can't overcome.

There are outliers like Lucia Rijkers but even she got knocked out easily by a no body male fighter. It doesn't diminish what she's done but its a little patronising to pat her on the head for punching hard and pretending like she'd won the fight just for taking part.

I bit my tongue when I watched that fight science video but the part when the back of the dummys head blew out destroyed all credibility. It had 5 screws in it. No correction, it had holes for 5 screws. Where were they?.

Also the mechanics of her punch were not the same as the males at all. It was a different type of punch.

I wouldn't want to eat one of her punches and I'm sure she's a formidable fighter. Her lose in that muay thai fight shows her at her best imo, not that fight science video.

I see people on this thread saying 2+2=5 and I guess I can't comprehend the mindset.

It isn't insulting to acknowledge the facts and giving women a false sense of reality doesnt help them. Not in full contact sports and not in self defence. In fact I'd go so far as say it's irresponsible.

[singularity6]

Something not very surprising, well not to me...

Did you watch the video? She turned up at the gym for sparring pretending to be a beginner when she was in fact a MT champ. The guys spar lightly with her then she switches it on and shows what she can do. It isn't even remotely relevant to the discussion we had here.

This is an open discussion, what doesn't seem relevant to one person doesn't mean it isn't to another.

I see this video as relevant to this discussion, therefore it works for me.

The males in this video, most definitely changed their opinion of women fighters after this encounter.

The way the male was taunting the girl wasn't right, she turned the tables on him and looked slightly humiliated, something he deserved.

The girl is clearly a superior fighter than the males and by no means bigger, isn't that biologically relevant enough?

(Happy to see you back in the discussion, mushybees)

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

mushybees

Yellow Belt

Joined: 16 Nov 2014

Posts: 78

Location: UK

Styles: Wado ryu (Wado-kai)

PostPosted: Sun Aug 06, 2017 5:53 am

I carry no demons.

In every other way apart from physical makeup women are the equal of men and surpass them in others. In some species the female is larger and stronger than the male.

Denying biology isn't being a feminist.

It's clear we don't agree on this subject so with the utmost respect I'll bow out

I wasn't going to chime in on this discussion, as I didn't think it's worth discussing (the 2+2 = 5 bit by Mushybees made a lot of sense to me.) But actual logic is being ignored. This video is ridiculous, and does nothing for the argument at hand.. It's not even a cherry picked. It's completely staged. This is Reality TV, at best.

The internet can be a wonderful resource, but you've really gotta be able to vet the source, and distinguish fantasy and reality (and no, Reality TV is not reality.)

In response to the bold: This came across as "I'm right and you're wrong. If you don't like it, don't participate." This doesn't feel like it fits the "martial arts way."

[Alan Armstrong]

Back against my better judgement.

She was a beter fighter but then she was a champion fighter. Were the men at the same level? Clearly not and that's the crux of the discussion.

When all things that can be controlled are equal, men will still have an evolutionary advantage which is almost impossible to overcome in a consensual fight.

No amount of white knighting will change that. What brings me back to the discussion is your allusions, intended or not, that those that don't agree the sexes are physically equal in a fight are borderline chauvinist. The demons comment was especially disappointing to read.

It is a known aspect of our development as children and adolescents that boys continue to develop for years after girls have reached their peak strength. They can develop this further as can males but it's generally a deficit they can't overcome.

There are outliers like Lucia Rijkers but even she got knocked out easily by a no body male fighter. It doesn't diminish what she's done but its a little patronising to pat her on the head for punching hard and pretending like she'd won the fight just for taking part.

I bit my tongue when I watched that fight science video but the part when the back of the dummys head blew out destroyed all credibility. It had 5 screws in it. No correction, it had holes for 5 screws. Where were they?.

Also the mechanics of her punch were not the same as the males at all. It was a different type of punch.

I wouldn't want to eat one of her punches and I'm sure she's a formidable fighter. Her lose in that muay thai fight shows her at her best imo, not that fight science video.

I see people on this thread saying 2+2=5 and I guess I can't comprehend the mindset.

It isn't insulting to acknowledge the facts and giving women a false sense of reality doesnt help them. Not in full contact sports and not in self defence. In fact I'd go so far as say it's irresponsible.

The fight science show proves that it is in fact fake; the producers of the show should have been sitting in place of the dummy, getting head shots, for insulting the intelligence of the viewers.

I'm not convinced that males are better fighters than females just based on strength/muscle size.

How is it that this person (female) is only displaying martial art skills, that are obviously far more superior than the (male) combative fighters?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rHJiuFAVsIA

Never should any person male or female assume that they will loose a fight due to being smaller or weaker; those that promote bigger is better, are the irresponsible weak minded people, that have no real business promoting, their inferiority complexes on others.

[mushybees]

Never should any person male or female assume that they will loose a fight due to being smaller or weaker; those that promote bigger is better, are the irresponsible weak minded people, that have no real business promoting, their inferiority complexes on others.

Do you think men and women are separated in almost all competitive arenas, be it combative or otherwise, because of weak minds and inferiority complexes?

You've made no counter argument to the scientifically accepted physiological differences between men and women. Men are on the whole are more powerful and athletic than women which in a combative, rules based sport gives them an almost unassailable advantage. It's neither fair or unfair, it's the product of evolution. Evidence of the same can be seen in the animal kingdom and also exceptions. Our species just so happens to have evolved to make men, generally, larger, faster and stronger.

I'm saying "men and women are different" and you seem to be reading "women are not as good as men" and also seem to be jumping to the conclusion that I promote a falsehood when I do nothing of the sort. I'm just observing what's in front of me.

I re-entered the discussion because there a lot of video links being posted with no one discussing their merits. Some of them were quite frankly farcical.

The Chloe Bruce video displayed a lot of gymnastic ability but next to nothing of what is required to win a fight. She came to prominence doing a fight sequence on Britain's Got Talent and I can't find footgae a fight of hers which isn't choreographed.

[Alan Armstrong]

Never should any person male or female assume that they will loose a fight due to being smaller or weaker; those that promote bigger is better, are the irresponsible weak minded people, that have no real business promoting, their inferiority complexes on others.

Do you think men and women are separated in almost all competitive arenas, be it combative or otherwise, because of weak minds and inferiority complexes?

You've made no counter argument to the scientifically accepted physiological differences between men and women. Men are on the whole are more powerful and athletic than women which in a combative, rules based sport gives them an almost unassailable advantage. It's neither fair or unfair, it's the product of evolution. Evidence of the same can be seen in the animal kingdom and also exceptions. Our species just so happens to have evolved to make men, generally, larger, faster and stronger.

I'm saying "men and women are different" and you seem to be reading "women are not as good as men" and also seem to be jumping to the conclusion that I promote a falsehood when I do nothing of the sort. I'm just observing what's in front of me.

I re-entered the discussion because there a lot of video links being posted with no one discussing their merits. Some of them were quite frankly farcical.

The Chloe Bruce video displayed a lot of gymnastic ability but next to nothing of what is required to win a fight. She came to prominence doing a fight sequence on Britain's Got Talent and I can't find footgae a fight of hers which isn't choreographed.

I think there are those, that are happy to hide behind their inferiority complexes and fears and try to justify them with stereotype explanations; instead of being able to make up their minds without having to rely on cliché's.

I like the term used ("make men, generally, larger, faster and stronger")

Using the word "generally" doesn't seem very scientific or "on the whole" sounds vague; are these to imply "sort of" or "mostly" ?

By all means, believe in generalized, scientific research, on the whole, it's the most easy way out for many, letting others create opinions for them.

I personally do not believe in other peoples observations, my preference is to use my own judgment based on personal experiences.

If Chloe Bruce wasn't showing as you say "but next to nothing of what is required to win a fight"

Then why is she in the middle of a boxing ring doing her thing, while surrounded by fight fans cheering her on (I'm just observing what's in front of me) could the appreciation be because she does have what it takes to win a fight?

Decide for yourself

Chloe Bruce

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rHJiuFAVsIA

[mushybees]

I think there are those, that are happy to hide behind their inferiority complexes and fears and try to justify them with stereotype explanations; instead of being able to make up their minds without having to rely on cliché's.

Of course there are but are you saying that's the reason why men and women are divided in all but two olympic sports?

Or are you suggesting that I am such a person? I assure you I'm not but I'm also not going to drink the kool-aid and hold an opinion in public that doesn't align with what I believe and know and what the general concensus is.

Two women in this forum have told you that they don't think men and women competing at top flight mma is a good idea.

There's a term you might like to look up while you're googling. "Mansplaining"

I like the term used ("make men, generally, larger, faster and stronger")

Using the word "generally" doesn't seem very scientific or "on the whole" sounds vague; are these to imply "sort of" or "mostly" ?

By all means, believe in generalized, scientific research, on the whole, it's the most easy way out for many, letting others create opinions for them.

I personally do not believe in other peoples observations, my preference is to use my own judgment based on personal experiences.

I'm not a scientist and don't claim to be. I use the term generally, sort of and mostly because there is quite a lot of variance, within what is considered, the normal range of human physique and I am always open to being proven wrong. There is always an exception and no absolutes. There are small, weak, not very powerfully built men and tall, strong, powerfully built women.

Unless something unprecedented happens they are not going to meet in the highest echelons of mma because being relatively strong and powerful for your gender is a bar you have to hurdle to reach that level of competition to begin with.

This isn't blindly following the consensus. I can and have articulated why I believe this is the case. You haven't put forward a counter argument other than to create this false narrative that I am in some way afraid of women and can't think critically. I really don't understand your motivations.

If Chloe Bruce wasn't showing as you say "but next to nothing of what is required to win a fight"

Then why is she in the middle of a boxing ring doing her thing, while surrounded by fight fans cheering her on (I'm just observing what's in front of me) could the appreciation be because she does have what it takes to win a fight?

Decide for yourself

Chloe Bruce

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rHJiuFAVsIA

For the same reason the NFL have musicians put on shows during the Superbowl. The fans are there to watch football but can still be entertained while they wait.

Again I have to ask if you have actually watched the video you have linked to?

The real fighters are stood in the corners of the ring. Waiting to fight.

I can appreciate kata for its aesthetics but that isn't fighting.

Martial arts isn't fighting. Heck, self defence isn't necessarily fighting. There are overlaps but they are not synonymous.

Chloe Bruce displays great flexibility and nice kihon but nothing else. She may be capable of fighting a man at mma but I haven't seen it. If you genuinely can't see that then we must surely be speaking at cross purposes.

The question you've posed is whether we'll see men and women compete in mma. If you already had an entrenched position and choose to mischaracterise the argument and/or people who disagree with you, why did you ask the question?

[DWx]

I feel like we are straying away from the original question. The question and scenario posed was about male vs female in the UFC, that is male and female at peak performance doing this professionally. We're talking the top 5% of fighters at the top of their game.

When looking at a population there will always be a distribution of abilities and in effect you have 2 overlapping bell curves. Some women will be able to beat some men, but at the performance end of each gender, women will still be lagging behind.

Some food for thought: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2012/08/we-thought-female-athletes-were-catching-up-to-men-but-theyre-not/260927/

You can't tell me that the Olympians in the above article have "inferiority complexes and fears". They're pushing themselves to the extreme and still the women are falling short.

[Alan Armstrong]

Original question and statements

Female UFC fighters, like it or not; they are here to stay.

Is this fair to say, is ths correct?

Eventually with equality and diversity men and women, will be fighting each other in the octagon, in the distant future; it's just a matter of time.

Is this fair to say, is this correct?

Will you be for or against men and women fighting each other in the octagon?

Is this fair to say, is this correct?