But weight doesn't mean anything. An equal weight man and woman will still be in a totally different class. Also, it's not about what you can do now, but about your potential. Someone who is currently physically within the "male range" will have to do way less to achieve the same performance as someone within the "female range". Mixing them together would be very demotivating to anyone not in the "male range" physically since they'd have to work insanely hard to even beat the less serious men.

Note: I'm using "male/female range" rather than man/woman because gender doesn't necessarily align with physical build.

[–] cannibalia@slrpnk.net 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Source? I'm afab and fucking sick of being told this with a flimsy hand wave of 'biology'. Give me some stats.

[–] OlPatchy2Eyes@dormi.zone 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You need a source to know that a man and woman at the same weight class would be advantageous to the man?

[–] ProgrammingSocks@pawb.social 1 points 1 year ago

For it to be considered an empirically true statement, yes.

[–] onion@feddit.de 1 points 1 year ago

That is why I wrote "skill based" in my top comment, the weight classes where just an example