It’s not true that the USWNT was beaten by a team of 15-year-old boys. In 2017, the USWNT participated in a structured practice (not a game) with a Dallas boys’ team to give the boys a chance to learn from the women’s team.
Go to the “truth or fiction” website to find an article about how that event has been mischaracterized by trolls. I’ll try posting the link below:
Hello, I respectfully disagree. However, even if I accept your claim that the USWNT didn't really lose to the U-15 boys team, I still have one question: why do elite female athletes regularly train against high school boys anyway?
A few years ago, US Women's National Team legend Carli Lloyd was asked about the scrimmage. Here's what she said: "Yes it’s true. I know…thousands of people have already brought that up. They were good. We actually lost to a youth Bayern Munich team in my career as well." It happened, nbd. Men and women are different. Thank God.
Males should not participate in female sports. It's just not fair, and the underlying fairness of sports is what makes them worthwhile, meaningful, and beautiful.
Here’s my bottom line on this discussion. As an athlete, I don’t appreciate men who aren’t athletic claiming the achievements of men who are. And I’m far from alone. A cousin of mine played in the NFL. He said guys in the stands - as if they could do better - would yell the most outrageous things at the players. He said the players thought, “You don’t even deserve to step on the same field as me.”
As I suggested above, could the average guy beat Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone in the hurdles or Katie Ledecky in the 1500 meter freestyle? No, but male Olympians best the women’s times consistently. In other words, the general rule is just that - general. Not all men can beat all women in athletic competition all the time. And men who aren’t athletic need to get real.
I don’t know why you think the performance of a non-athletic guy, or his opinion, is relevant to anything. You want to dunk on him? fine. You, or your cousin, want to dunk on the guy in the stands? fine. It means nothing, except that you and your cousin are athletes and other guys are not. You win that one.
The fact is that there are two bell curves, and the male bell curve is to right of the female one. That doesn’t mean every male is better than every female. Why are you even arguing?
You’re so triggered, you can’t see the point I was making at all. Let me guess - you weren’t picked for sports teams as a kid, and you hated dodge ball because you’d get hit and couldn’t catch the ball. No wonder men like you can’t bring yourself to respect athletic ability in women - it gives them a popular status you’ll never have. I’ll admit it’s insensitive of me, but I find that hilarious.
This will be a little long. I’m putting things in bold not to scream, but to make it easier to read.
I want so say that I value this discussion and appreciate that you are taking part in it as an “away game” of sorts. We need more of that. Still, I feel the need to address some of your claims and the faulty reasoning behind them.
In another comment on this thread, you say that women’s ability and experience are being discounted. You are free to believe that and there’s nothing I can do about it. I would ask that just for fun, you try to entertain the idea that I’m not discounting anyone of anything and see where that leads you.
Perhaps you could play around with the idea that my position is based in the fact that I value women’s ability and experience in athletics.
When you say that you do not appreciate men who are not athletic claiming the achievements of men who are, I am not sure what you mean, but that sounds likes some pretty serious gatekeeping. Lots of successful coaches, GMs, owners and analysts who were not necessarily top flight athletes would also disagree that they are not qualified to make judgements about other people’s athletic ability.
I am a Social Studies teacher and have taught about ancient Greeks and early Christians, even though I am neither. I’ve even taught my students about Economic principles. I’m not a principle of market economics.
Gatekeeping has no place in Western Civilization. You wanna use it? Cool, but you have to move to Kabul.
In saner times, Serena Williams said on television that she’d lose to top male players in ten minutes.
Could average men beat Richardson and McLaughlin-Levrone? I doubt it, but that’s not the discussion. The discussion is if men belong in women’s sports. We do not.
This is based on size, strength, speed, reflexes, lung capacity, bone density, muscle mass and general competitive nature.
Here are some track results to consider
Sha’Carri Richardson’s fastest ever 100m time is 10.65 seconds
The fastest boys’ 100m time in 2025 was 9.92 seconds
The boys time above is more than .5 second faster than the women’s 100m world record, set by the legendary Florence Griffith-Joyner. I loved her, but her world record has stood for nearly 40 years. That’s suspicious.
Richardson would not crack the top 100 fastest high school boys in America.
Okay, that’s the 100m. How about middle distance?
Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone’s currently holds the women’s 400m hurdles world record at 50.37 seconds.
She ran that in the 2024 Olympics.
The best boys 400m hurdles time of 2025 was 50.53. Not only good enough for silver in Paris, but it would be the second fastest women’s time ever. It’s not fair.
You also mention the Battle of the Sexes between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs. That was milestone event for women’s athletics and gender equality.
Here is an important piece of information that changed my understanding of the match, which I had to go and look up on my own because it is never mentioned: at the time of the match, Billie Jean King was 29 years old. Bobby Riggs was 55.
Again, I value your input and your willingness to have a discussion. More of that. We are too siloed in our online communities. Keep talking, keep debating, keep learning.
I agree that women’s sports must be protected. I never said otherwise. I simply pointed out that while men are generally stronger, bigger, etc., than women, that doesn’t mean all men can beat all women in any and all athletic competitions. You made the same point by noting Billie Jean King beat Bobby Riggs. What makes you think women having their own sporting category depends on all men always being able to beat all women in all sporting competitions? Women should be able to have their own category, just as men have, period.
Frankly, you seem triggered by this whole discussion. You’ll find many men on the internet who argue the physical superiority of men over women as if it was true of themselves as individuals when, in fact, it’s not true. They may be old, injured, not an athlete, etc., but their egos - or perhaps misogyny - override their sense. No offense, but my guess is that you’d look like idiot if you tried to race Richardson or Ledecky, or tried a move like Megan Keller made to win gold for the US women’s hockey team in the Olympics. So would I, but I can admit it. Why is it so hard for you to respect athletic ability in women?
Instead of thinking in broad, self-serving generalizations - “men are always more physically capable than women,” “men are always more logical than women, who are emotional,” etc., how about people start seeing themselves as individuals. Maybe, just maybe, it would start letting the air out of some hugely inflated - and bigoted - egos.
Thank you for saying this. It’s so fecking OBVIOUS, it’s pathetic. The physical, mental and psychological differences between men and women are what makes men, men and women, women.
?!? I took my daughter out of gymnastics because of the book, Little Girls in Pretty Boxes because of the hard-assed MALE (and some female) coaches. She could easily have been world class. Easily. Try again, BR? What’s your gripe?
This is regarding the author’s article, not necessarily the thread.
I totally agree with this, that women are able to be in competitive sports without worrying about transfuckery.
Interesting but I’m not convinced. Scrimmages are games. I have played in countless scrimmages myself. There are a normal part of practice, where you stop doing drills or teaching lessons, and start competing. Any time elite athletes participate in any sort of context in which the score is kept, they are going to be competing. Seriously. They’re certainly not going to be taking it easy on the other team no matter what the circumstances are. They have their pride, their competitive spirit. Now that does not mean anything about how much money they deserve. And it was just one game/scrimmage, which does not really prove anything on its own. But we have other stats from BoysVsWomen.com showing that many ordinary 15-year-old boys are faster than the fastest elite women. And by that age, many boys are stronger too. And all that really matters is when you match people at the same level, not different age groups. Could Megan Rapinoe hold her own against male soccer professionals? No. So it’s hypocritical or very short-sighted of her to open the door for any males at any level to compete against their female peers.
Is it supposed to be a winning argument that the best woman’s team in the world lost to a random HS age boys team, but it was only a scrimmage so it doesn’t count?
You’re discounting the women’s ability and experience. They had experience at the highest level of their sport.
Could the boys have beaten Sha'Carri Richardson or Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone in a race? No. Could those women have beaten the best men on the Olympic track? No.
Women’s sports must be protected. But, as Billie Jean King showed, males don’t always beat females in an athletic contest.
Probably a good thing that ad wasn't on the Super Bowl, because for the unaware viewer, its message is REALLY confusing. It's fine as a social media post, where it reaches people who already understand its intended message (which is exactly who it would reach thanks to algorithms), but to the general public viewing it for the first time, I fear the reaction would be "What are they talking about?" or "Which side are they on?" So, my sense is that it's preaching to the choir.
It’s not true that the USWNT was beaten by a team of 15-year-old boys. In 2017, the USWNT participated in a structured practice (not a game) with a Dallas boys’ team to give the boys a chance to learn from the women’s team.
Go to the “truth or fiction” website to find an article about how that event has been mischaracterized by trolls. I’ll try posting the link below:
https://www.truthorfiction.com/was-the-u-s-womens-national-team-defeated-by-teenaged-boys-in-a-2017-soccer-match/
Hello, I respectfully disagree. However, even if I accept your claim that the USWNT didn't really lose to the U-15 boys team, I still have one question: why do elite female athletes regularly train against high school boys anyway?
A few years ago, US Women's National Team legend Carli Lloyd was asked about the scrimmage. Here's what she said: "Yes it’s true. I know…thousands of people have already brought that up. They were good. We actually lost to a youth Bayern Munich team in my career as well." It happened, nbd. Men and women are different. Thank God.
Males should not participate in female sports. It's just not fair, and the underlying fairness of sports is what makes them worthwhile, meaningful, and beautiful.
Here’s my bottom line on this discussion. As an athlete, I don’t appreciate men who aren’t athletic claiming the achievements of men who are. And I’m far from alone. A cousin of mine played in the NFL. He said guys in the stands - as if they could do better - would yell the most outrageous things at the players. He said the players thought, “You don’t even deserve to step on the same field as me.”
As I suggested above, could the average guy beat Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone in the hurdles or Katie Ledecky in the 1500 meter freestyle? No, but male Olympians best the women’s times consistently. In other words, the general rule is just that - general. Not all men can beat all women in athletic competition all the time. And men who aren’t athletic need to get real.
I don’t know why you think the performance of a non-athletic guy, or his opinion, is relevant to anything. You want to dunk on him? fine. You, or your cousin, want to dunk on the guy in the stands? fine. It means nothing, except that you and your cousin are athletes and other guys are not. You win that one.
The fact is that there are two bell curves, and the male bell curve is to right of the female one. That doesn’t mean every male is better than every female. Why are you even arguing?
Read through the thread and try again.
I didn't miss anything. Criticizing "Men who aren't athletic" (most of us) is shooting fish in a barrel. Why are you bothering?
You’re so triggered, you can’t see the point I was making at all. Let me guess - you weren’t picked for sports teams as a kid, and you hated dodge ball because you’d get hit and couldn’t catch the ball. No wonder men like you can’t bring yourself to respect athletic ability in women - it gives them a popular status you’ll never have. I’ll admit it’s insensitive of me, but I find that hilarious.
Hello BR, been a few days.
This will be a little long. I’m putting things in bold not to scream, but to make it easier to read.
I want so say that I value this discussion and appreciate that you are taking part in it as an “away game” of sorts. We need more of that. Still, I feel the need to address some of your claims and the faulty reasoning behind them.
In another comment on this thread, you say that women’s ability and experience are being discounted. You are free to believe that and there’s nothing I can do about it. I would ask that just for fun, you try to entertain the idea that I’m not discounting anyone of anything and see where that leads you.
Perhaps you could play around with the idea that my position is based in the fact that I value women’s ability and experience in athletics.
When you say that you do not appreciate men who are not athletic claiming the achievements of men who are, I am not sure what you mean, but that sounds likes some pretty serious gatekeeping. Lots of successful coaches, GMs, owners and analysts who were not necessarily top flight athletes would also disagree that they are not qualified to make judgements about other people’s athletic ability.
I am a Social Studies teacher and have taught about ancient Greeks and early Christians, even though I am neither. I’ve even taught my students about Economic principles. I’m not a principle of market economics.
Gatekeeping has no place in Western Civilization. You wanna use it? Cool, but you have to move to Kabul.
In saner times, Serena Williams said on television that she’d lose to top male players in ten minutes.
Could average men beat Richardson and McLaughlin-Levrone? I doubt it, but that’s not the discussion. The discussion is if men belong in women’s sports. We do not.
This is based on size, strength, speed, reflexes, lung capacity, bone density, muscle mass and general competitive nature.
Here are some track results to consider
Sha’Carri Richardson’s fastest ever 100m time is 10.65 seconds
The fastest boys’ 100m time in 2025 was 9.92 seconds
The boys time above is more than .5 second faster than the women’s 100m world record, set by the legendary Florence Griffith-Joyner. I loved her, but her world record has stood for nearly 40 years. That’s suspicious.
Richardson would not crack the top 100 fastest high school boys in America.
Okay, that’s the 100m. How about middle distance?
Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone’s currently holds the women’s 400m hurdles world record at 50.37 seconds.
She ran that in the 2024 Olympics.
The best boys 400m hurdles time of 2025 was 50.53. Not only good enough for silver in Paris, but it would be the second fastest women’s time ever. It’s not fair.
You also mention the Battle of the Sexes between Billie Jean King and Bobby Riggs. That was milestone event for women’s athletics and gender equality.
Here is an important piece of information that changed my understanding of the match, which I had to go and look up on my own because it is never mentioned: at the time of the match, Billie Jean King was 29 years old. Bobby Riggs was 55.
Again, I value your input and your willingness to have a discussion. More of that. We are too siloed in our online communities. Keep talking, keep debating, keep learning.
I agree that women’s sports must be protected. I never said otherwise. I simply pointed out that while men are generally stronger, bigger, etc., than women, that doesn’t mean all men can beat all women in any and all athletic competitions. You made the same point by noting Billie Jean King beat Bobby Riggs. What makes you think women having their own sporting category depends on all men always being able to beat all women in all sporting competitions? Women should be able to have their own category, just as men have, period.
Frankly, you seem triggered by this whole discussion. You’ll find many men on the internet who argue the physical superiority of men over women as if it was true of themselves as individuals when, in fact, it’s not true. They may be old, injured, not an athlete, etc., but their egos - or perhaps misogyny - override their sense. No offense, but my guess is that you’d look like idiot if you tried to race Richardson or Ledecky, or tried a move like Megan Keller made to win gold for the US women’s hockey team in the Olympics. So would I, but I can admit it. Why is it so hard for you to respect athletic ability in women?
Instead of thinking in broad, self-serving generalizations - “men are always more physically capable than women,” “men are always more logical than women, who are emotional,” etc., how about people start seeing themselves as individuals. Maybe, just maybe, it would start letting the air out of some hugely inflated - and bigoted - egos.
Thank you for saying this. It’s so fecking OBVIOUS, it’s pathetic. The physical, mental and psychological differences between men and women are what makes men, men and women, women.
What’s the confusion? Pretty dang simple.
Read through the thread and try again.
?!? I took my daughter out of gymnastics because of the book, Little Girls in Pretty Boxes because of the hard-assed MALE (and some female) coaches. She could easily have been world class. Easily. Try again, BR? What’s your gripe?
This is regarding the author’s article, not necessarily the thread.
I totally agree with this, that women are able to be in competitive sports without worrying about transfuckery.
Thanks, David. All good points.
And it was a great commercial!
Coming from one who despises commercials, this one sails…;) Just beautiful. Most we are left wondering what the dang point was, anyway.
Yes!
Interesting but I’m not convinced. Scrimmages are games. I have played in countless scrimmages myself. There are a normal part of practice, where you stop doing drills or teaching lessons, and start competing. Any time elite athletes participate in any sort of context in which the score is kept, they are going to be competing. Seriously. They’re certainly not going to be taking it easy on the other team no matter what the circumstances are. They have their pride, their competitive spirit. Now that does not mean anything about how much money they deserve. And it was just one game/scrimmage, which does not really prove anything on its own. But we have other stats from BoysVsWomen.com showing that many ordinary 15-year-old boys are faster than the fastest elite women. And by that age, many boys are stronger too. And all that really matters is when you match people at the same level, not different age groups. Could Megan Rapinoe hold her own against male soccer professionals? No. So it’s hypocritical or very short-sighted of her to open the door for any males at any level to compete against their female peers.
Is it supposed to be a winning argument that the best woman’s team in the world lost to a random HS age boys team, but it was only a scrimmage so it doesn’t count?
You’re discounting the women’s ability and experience. They had experience at the highest level of their sport.
Could the boys have beaten Sha'Carri Richardson or Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone in a race? No. Could those women have beaten the best men on the Olympic track? No.
Women’s sports must be protected. But, as Billie Jean King showed, males don’t always beat females in an athletic contest.
Probably a good thing that ad wasn't on the Super Bowl, because for the unaware viewer, its message is REALLY confusing. It's fine as a social media post, where it reaches people who already understand its intended message (which is exactly who it would reach thanks to algorithms), but to the general public viewing it for the first time, I fear the reaction would be "What are they talking about?" or "Which side are they on?" So, my sense is that it's preaching to the choir.
Interesting - and good feedback for them. Perhaps their intent, since it was a social media ad. Thanks!