ProgressiveCON
New member
- Joined
- Nov 20, 2018
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 8
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Other
I have always been curious, as to why organizations such as the WNBA and NBA could be legal and not in violation of the civil rights act of 1964, or in violation of the equal protection clause.
I understand when it comes to competitive sports there is universal segregation on the basis of sex; there are no male players in the WNBA and there are no female players in the NBA. The practical reason is that males are quite simply better in terms of athleticism, not always true (for example, although I am male, I'm pretty sure every single player in the WNBA would easily make me look like a fool on a basketball court.) but generally true.
So my first question would be, why it would be legal for a sports organization to exist that bans someone from participating on the basis of their sex? What is the legal argument that it does not violate the 1964 civil rights act? Why doesn't it violate the equal protections clause?
The second question; if segregation on the basis of sex isn't illegal and/or unconstitutional, would segregation on the basis of race be?
Could I use statistics to show that there should be racial segregation in sports, the same way that statistics is used to show why segregation on the basis of sex is appropriate?
The NBA has 74.4% of players that are black, 23.3% are white, 1.8% latino, and 0.2% asian.
Clearly, just based off statistics (and assuming that people get accepted as a NBA player on the basis of skill rather than race), black people dominate the NBA. If sports should be segregated on the basis of gender, because one gender generally dominants the other gender in performance, should be logically consistent and segregated on the basis of race, because one race dominants the other races?
Would racial segregation trigger issues with the 1964 civil rights act that segregation on the basis of sex does not?
Why or why not?
I understand when it comes to competitive sports there is universal segregation on the basis of sex; there are no male players in the WNBA and there are no female players in the NBA. The practical reason is that males are quite simply better in terms of athleticism, not always true (for example, although I am male, I'm pretty sure every single player in the WNBA would easily make me look like a fool on a basketball court.) but generally true.
So my first question would be, why it would be legal for a sports organization to exist that bans someone from participating on the basis of their sex? What is the legal argument that it does not violate the 1964 civil rights act? Why doesn't it violate the equal protections clause?
The second question; if segregation on the basis of sex isn't illegal and/or unconstitutional, would segregation on the basis of race be?
Could I use statistics to show that there should be racial segregation in sports, the same way that statistics is used to show why segregation on the basis of sex is appropriate?
The NBA has 74.4% of players that are black, 23.3% are white, 1.8% latino, and 0.2% asian.
Clearly, just based off statistics (and assuming that people get accepted as a NBA player on the basis of skill rather than race), black people dominate the NBA. If sports should be segregated on the basis of gender, because one gender generally dominants the other gender in performance, should be logically consistent and segregated on the basis of race, because one race dominants the other races?
Would racial segregation trigger issues with the 1964 civil rights act that segregation on the basis of sex does not?
Why or why not?
Last edited: