Katie Taylor vs. Chantelle Cameron | DAZN - 20 May 2023

[JamesPhilips]

This is a big threat for Taylor. Although she beat Cameron in the Amateurs, Cameron is a lot fresher in the pros and naturally slightly bigger which gives her the chance of beating the obviously declining Taylor. Credit where it's due, Taylor has one of the best resume's in boxing history when you look at belts, rankings and records only.

We don't want to see her against anyone but these:

• Cameron - Serrano II - Baumgardner - Mayer - McCaskill II - Mossely - Braekhus

That would have seen her clear out all of the achievable weightclasses for a generation.

Lol imagine caring about womens boxing. These girls would get flattened by 15 yr old male amateurs it’s pathetic.

And on this bill out of 4 confirmed fights 3 are women’s fights. You’d have to pay me (really) to attend. Even a free ticket wouldn’t be enough for me to go.

Plenty of the lower male weightclasses would get flattened by amateur heavyweights. Do people still watch? Plenty of people also watch amateur boxing aswell. You're complaining about something that nobody is forcing you to watch.

Dreadful comparison. The point is the quality is SO low. As for ‘nobody is forcing you to watch it’….. I mean that’s such a disingenuous statement. I love boxing and when I watch a bill I have two sit through 2 awful low quality womens bouts while waiting for the decent fights….. during which the commentators are treating the audience like idiots telling us that we are watching quality boxing when our eyes tell us different. Telling us that some short dumpy, slow, light hitting woman has a left hook like Joe Frazier

Plus boxing magazines and media are filled with articles and talk on trash quality boxing that deserves nary a mention.

[JamesPhilips]

This is a big threat for Taylor. Although she beat Cameron in the Amateurs, Cameron is a lot fresher in the pros and naturally slightly bigger which gives her the chance of beating the obviously declining Taylor. Credit where it's due, Taylor has one of the best resume's in boxing history when you look at belts, rankings and records only.

We don't want to see her against anyone but these:

• Cameron - Serrano II - Baumgardner - Mayer - McCaskill II - Mossely - Braekhus

That would have seen her clear out all of the achievable weightclasses for a generation.

Lol imagine caring about womens boxing. These girls would get flattened by 15 yr old male amateurs it’s pathetic.

And on this bill out of 4 confirmed fights 3 are women’s fights. You’d have to pay me (really) to attend. Even a free ticket wouldn’t be enough for me to go.

You could make the same argument re: male teenagers beating top women at most sports. Does that mean you won’t watch them either?

Yup. I never watch women’s sports. They’re awful compared to the men. The ‘lionesses’ who are so lauded wouldn’t get past a county under 15 boys team.

The only women’s sport I vaguely watch is women’s tennis, and that’s largely to stare at the sorts playing it. Women’s tennis is also probably the highest quality women’s sport but Serena Williams(about as manly as you can get) still got crushed by some male no one’s ever heard of and rated about 400.

I want to watch quality and the best in the world. And that’s always the men. In boxing is especially amplified as the women are so dreadful, have weak upper bodies, and the depth of talent is very weak. There are by far more male pro lightweights than the total number of women pros.

Yet we are told that Katie Taylor is the Mayweather of the women

The bottom line is - it’s about quality.

[maverick23]

Lol imagine caring about womens boxing. These girls would get flattened by 15 yr old male amateurs it’s pathetic.

And on this bill out of 4 confirmed fights 3 are women’s fights. You’d have to pay me (really) to attend. Even a free ticket wouldn’t be enough for me to go.

You could make the same argument re: male teenagers beating top women at most sports. Does that mean you won’t watch them either?

Yup. I never watch women’s sports. They’re awful compared to the men. The ‘lionesses’ who are so lauded wouldn’t get past a county under 15 boys team.

The only women’s sport I vaguely watch is women’s tennis, and that’s largely to stare at the sorts playing it. Women’s tennis is also probably the highest quality women’s sport but Serena Williams(about as manly as you can get) still got crushed by some male no one’s ever heard of and rated about 400.

I want to watch quality and the best in the world. And that’s always the men. In boxing is especially amplified as the women are so dreadful, have weak upper bodies, and the depth of talent is very weak. There are by far more male pro lightweights than the total number of women pros.

Yet we are told that Katie Taylor is the Mayweather of the women

The bottom line is - it’s about quality.

I think that’s a sexist way of looking at things. Men are naturally physically bigger and stronger than women so will always have an advantage in the majority of sports. I don’t really see the need in comparing them.

Women’s tennis comes across as the best quality because it’s put on the same pedestal as men’s tennis at the big events due to the work done in the 70s creating the WTA and the women pushing for it. The bulk of other sports are well behind that and these things take time.

I just want to see competitive fights at a high level. Give me Taylor/Serrano any day over Fury/Chisora 3.

[JamesPhilips]

You could make the same argument re: male teenagers beating top women at most sports. Does that mean you won’t watch them either?

Yup. I never watch women’s sports. They’re awful compared to the men. The ‘lionesses’ who are so lauded wouldn’t get past a county under 15 boys team.

The only women’s sport I vaguely watch is women’s tennis, and that’s largely to stare at the sorts playing it. Women’s tennis is also probably the highest quality women’s sport but Serena Williams(about as manly as you can get) still got crushed by some male no one’s ever heard of and rated about 400.

I want to watch quality and the best in the world. And that’s always the men. In boxing is especially amplified as the women are so dreadful, have weak upper bodies, and the depth of talent is very weak. There are by far more male pro lightweights than the total number of women pros.

Yet we are told that Katie Taylor is the Mayweather of the women

The bottom line is - it’s about quality.

I think that’s a sexist way of looking at things. Men are naturally physically bigger and stronger than women so will always have an advantage in the majority of sports. I don’t really see the need in comparing them.

Women’s tennis comes across as the best quality because it’s put on the same pedestal as men’s tennis at the big events due to the work done in the 70s creating the WTA and the women pushing for it. The bulk of other sports are well behind that and these things take time.

I just want to see competitive fights at a high level. Give me Taylor/Serrano any day over Fury/Chisora 3.

*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon….

Rule number 1 of moronic arguing when you don’t have a concrete point, and you know it, but don’t want to concede the loss whilst fooling yourself you hold a morally superior position:

1. At the appropriate moment, pull out of the hat a label that is considered societally negative, such as sexist / racist / homophobe / ableist / misogynist/ transphobic / chauvinist / bigoted etc etc and present it as a counter argument
Then, like a pigeon playing chess, sh1t all over the board, knock all the pieces over and strut off with a inflated chest pretending you won the game

(Although in reality these terms are rebranded and redefined by organisations and individuals whose aim it is to restructure and mould society. They do so by reprogramming the masses, largely the midwits, via a constant barrage of messages in politics, the media, entertainment, advertising and so on. Those that absorb these initiatives wholeheartedly do not even realise they’ve been thoroughly indoctrinated: they genuinely believe they have come to these belief systems independently. These people hold on to these concepts inextricably, they become a ‘truth’ in their very being which can never be contested, whatever evidence to the contrary is presented. )

TLDR Your labelling is not an argument

[maverick23]

Yup. I never watch women’s sports. They’re awful compared to the men. The ‘lionesses’ who are so lauded wouldn’t get past a county under 15 boys team.

The only women’s sport I vaguely watch is women’s tennis, and that’s largely to stare at the sorts playing it. Women’s tennis is also probably the highest quality women’s sport but Serena Williams(about as manly as you can get) still got crushed by some male no one’s ever heard of and rated about 400.

I want to watch quality and the best in the world. And that’s always the men. In boxing is especially amplified as the women are so dreadful, have weak upper bodies, and the depth of talent is very weak. There are by far more male pro lightweights than the total number of women pros.

Yet we are told that Katie Taylor is the Mayweather of the women

The bottom line is - it’s about quality.

I think that’s a sexist way of looking at things. Men are naturally physically bigger and stronger than women so will always have an advantage in the majority of sports. I don’t really see the need in comparing them.

Women’s tennis comes across as the best quality because it’s put on the same pedestal as men’s tennis at the big events due to the work done in the 70s creating the WTA and the women pushing for it. The bulk of other sports are well behind that and these things take time.

I just want to see competitive fights at a high level. Give me Taylor/Serrano any day over Fury/Chisora 3.

*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon….

Rule number 1 of moronic arguing when you don’t have a concrete point, and you know it, but don’t want to concede the loss whilst fooling yourself you hold a morally superior position:

1. At the appropriate moment, pull out of the hat a label that is considered societally negative, such as sexist / racist / homophobe / ableist / misogynist/ transphobic / chauvinist / bigoted etc etc and present it as a counter argument
Then, like a pigeon playing chess, sh1t all over the board, knock all the pieces over and strut off with a inflated chest pretending you won the game

(Although in reality these terms are rebranded and redefined by organisations and individuals whose aim it is to restructure and mould society. They do so by reprogramming the masses, largely the midwits, via a constant barrage of messages in politics, the media, entertainment, advertising and so on. Those that absorb these initiatives wholeheartedly do not even realise they’ve been thoroughly indoctrinated: they genuinely believe they have come to these belief systems independently. These people hold on to these concepts inextricably, they become a ‘truth’ in their very being which can never be contested, whatever evidence to the contrary is presented. )

TLDR Your labelling is not an argument

Re: your first sentence, I said it was a sexist way of looking at things. I’m not a child so don’t call names.

[JamesPhilips]

I think that’s a sexist way of looking at things. Men are naturally physically bigger and stronger than women so will always have an advantage in the majority of sports. I don’t really see the need in comparing them.

Women’s tennis comes across as the best quality because it’s put on the same pedestal as men’s tennis at the big events due to the work done in the 70s creating the WTA and the women pushing for it. The bulk of other sports are well behind that and these things take time.

I just want to see competitive fights at a high level. Give me Taylor/Serrano any day over Fury/Chisora 3.

*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon….

Rule number 1 of moronic arguing when you don’t have a concrete point, and you know it, but don’t want to concede the loss whilst fooling yourself you hold a morally superior position:

1. At the appropriate moment, pull out of the hat a label that is considered societally negative, such as sexist / racist / homophobe / ableist / misogynist/ transphobic / chauvinist / bigoted etc etc and present it as a counter argument
Then, like a pigeon playing chess, sh1t all over the board, knock all the pieces over and strut off with a inflated chest pretending you won the game

(Although in reality these terms are rebranded and redefined by organisations and individuals whose aim it is to restructure and mould society. They do so by reprogramming the masses, largely the midwits, via a constant barrage of messages in politics, the media, entertainment, advertising and so on. Those that absorb these initiatives wholeheartedly do not even realise they’ve been thoroughly indoctrinated: they genuinely believe they have come to these belief systems independently. These people hold on to these concepts inextricably, they become a ‘truth’ in their very being which can never be contested, whatever evidence to the contrary is presented. )

TLDR Your labelling is not an argument

Re: your first sentence, I said it was a sexist way of looking at things. I’m not a child so don’t call names.

Sorry - To which sentence are you referring, I have made a number of posts?

[maverick23]

*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon….

Rule number 1 of moronic arguing when you don’t have a concrete point, and you know it, but don’t want to concede the loss whilst fooling yourself you hold a morally superior position:

1. At the appropriate moment, pull out of the hat a label that is considered societally negative, such as sexist / racist / homophobe / ableist / misogynist/ transphobic / chauvinist / bigoted etc etc and present it as a counter argument
Then, like a pigeon playing chess, sh1t all over the board, knock all the pieces over and strut off with a inflated chest pretending you won the game

(Although in reality these terms are rebranded and redefined by organisations and individuals whose aim it is to restructure and mould society. They do so by reprogramming the masses, largely the midwits, via a constant barrage of messages in politics, the media, entertainment, advertising and so on. Those that absorb these initiatives wholeheartedly do not even realise they’ve been thoroughly indoctrinated: they genuinely believe they have come to these belief systems independently. These people hold on to these concepts inextricably, they become a ‘truth’ in their very being which can never be contested, whatever evidence to the contrary is presented. )

TLDR Your labelling is not an argument

Re: your first sentence, I said it was a sexist way of looking at things. I’m not a child so don’t call names.

Sorry - To which sentence are you referring, I have made a number of posts?

Your first sentence on your response that I quoted where you mention ‘unintellectual names calling’.

I didn’t read the rest of your post.

[JamesPhilips]

Re: your first sentence, I said it was a sexist way of looking at things. I’m not a child so don’t call names.

Sorry - To which sentence are you referring, I have made a number of posts?

Your first sentence on your response that I quoted where you mention ‘unintellectual names calling’.

I didn’t read the rest of your post.

Well I suggest you do read it, it contains some important learnings.

The post to which you refer, the first sentence is ‘Yup.’ I assume then you mean the second sentence “ I never watch women’s sports.”

Please explain what you mean when you say it is sexist? Please also define what you mean when you use the word sexist, as if you’d bothered to read the post to which you refer above, you would’ve learnt that terms like ‘sexist’ are largely meaningless, and are coined purely to push an agenda. They are not authoritative and hold little value…..

[maverick23]

Sorry - To which sentence are you referring, I have made a number of posts?

Your first sentence on your response that I quoted where you mention ‘unintellectual names calling’.

I didn’t read the rest of your post.

Well I suggest you do read it, it contains some important learnings.

The post to which you refer, the first sentence is ‘Yup.’ I assume then you mean the second sentence “ I never watch women’s sports.”

Please explain what you mean when you say it is sexist? Please also define what you mean when you use the word sexist, as if you’d bothered to read the post to which you refer above, you would’ve learnt that terms like ‘sexist’ are largely meaningless, and are coined purely to push an agenda. They are not authoritative and hold little value…..

Your post I replied to had this as the first sentence….

‘*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon…. ’

As I said in one of my previous posts, men are naturally bigger, stronger and quicker than women so obviously are better at the bulk of sports. That doesn’t make women’s sport poor though and I think it’s pretty futile making the comparison.

Saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is a sexist way of looking at things I think as it stereotypes based on their sex.

[ashall2]

Think KT wins a comfortable decision.

She struggles with high volume punchers like Serrano and Persoon but Cameron isn’t that.

[margaret thatcher]

the most marketable fight in the world

[JamesPhilips]

Your first sentence on your response that I quoted where you mention ‘unintellectual names calling’.

I didn’t read the rest of your post.

Well I suggest you do read it, it contains some important learnings.

The post to which you refer, the first sentence is ‘Yup.’ I assume then you mean the second sentence “ I never watch women’s sports.”

Please explain what you mean when you say it is sexist? Please also define what you mean when you use the word sexist, as if you’d bothered to read the post to which you refer above, you would’ve learnt that terms like ‘sexist’ are largely meaningless, and are coined purely to push an agenda. They are not authoritative and hold little value…..

Your post I replied to had this as the first sentence….

‘*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon…. ’

As I said in one of my previous posts, men are naturally bigger, stronger and quicker than women so obviously are better at the bulk of sports. That doesn’t make women’s sport poor though and I think it’s pretty futile making the comparison.

Saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is a sexist way of looking at things I think as it stereotypes based on their sex.

You still haven’t define what you mean by ‘sexist’. Please do so. But To suggest that somehow I’m in the wrong because I don’t want to waste my time watching a substandard level of sport is simply risible..

I mean it seems you are suggesting if I like watching boxing I HAVE to watch women’s boxing in equal measure otherwise I’m **GASP** a SEXIST and therefore a bad person…
This is one of the most ludicrous statements and lines of argument I have ever heard offered. lol It’s a similar logic that I should have homosexual intercourse even though I hate the idea, just to prove I’m not an eebil homophobe and I have actually seen morons profer that argument in the mainstream media

Man you have been so successfully indoctrinated; in the words of Yuri Bezmenov, completely and utterly demoralised…. To such a point that you can no longer put together coherent arguments… nor approach a topic with any objectivity

[KiwiRider]

The only women’s sport I vaguely watch is women’s tennis

You never heard of beach volleyball mate?

[maverick23]

Well I suggest you do read it, it contains some important learnings.

The post to which you refer, the first sentence is ‘Yup.’ I assume then you mean the second sentence “ I never watch women’s sports.”

Please explain what you mean when you say it is sexist? Please also define what you mean when you use the word sexist, as if you’d bothered to read the post to which you refer above, you would’ve learnt that terms like ‘sexist’ are largely meaningless, and are coined purely to push an agenda. They are not authoritative and hold little value…..

Your post I replied to had this as the first sentence….

‘*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon…. ’

As I said in one of my previous posts, men are naturally bigger, stronger and quicker than women so obviously are better at the bulk of sports. That doesn’t make women’s sport poor though and I think it’s pretty futile making the comparison.

Saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is a sexist way of looking at things I think as it stereotypes based on their sex.

You still haven’t define what you mean by ‘sexist’. Please do so. But To suggest that somehow I’m in the wrong because I don’t want to waste my time watching a substandard level of sport is simply risible..

I mean it seems you are suggesting if I like watching boxing I HAVE to watch women’s boxing in equal measure otherwise I’m **GASP** a SEXIST and therefore a bad person…
This is one of the most ludicrous statements and lines of argument I have ever heard offered. lol It’s a similar logic that I should have homosexual intercourse even though I hate the idea, just to prove I’m not an eebil homophobe and I have actually seen morons profer that argument in the mainstream media

Man you have been so successfully indoctrinated; in the words of Yuri Bezmenov, completely and utterly demoralised…. To such a point that you can no longer put together coherent arguments… nor approach a topic with any objectivity

If you want a word defined then just check the dictionary. It means ‘characterized by or showing prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.’

As I said before saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is stereotyping based on sex I think.

I’m not suggesting anything else by it. I’m not implying you have to watch women’s boxing. I’m also not suggesting whether you should enjoy homosexual intercourse either.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Cherneka Johnson vs Ellie Scotney added to Taylor vs Cameron on May 20th

Make that three world title fights on May 20th in Dublin. Matchroom Boxing announced today that former amateur standout Ellie Scotney will challenge IBF super bantamweight champion Cherneka Johnson in her seventh pro fight.

Scotney (6-0, 0 KO) is coming off a nice win over Mary Romero in October, which earned her the European title at 122 and capped off a 3-0 2022. Melbourne’s Johnson (15-1, 6 KO) claimed her title last April with a close decision over Melissa Esquivel, then defended it six months later by beating Susie Ramadan.

Not a lot to complain about here; Scotney’s passed all her tests so far and Johnson, whose only loss came against Shannon O’Connell via split decision, is a legitimate champion.

Besides the main event between Katie Taylor and Chantelle Cameron, the card will also see former undisputed welterweight champion Cecilia Braekhus return to action to challenge super welterweight champion Terri Harper.

[JamesPhilips]

Your post I replied to had this as the first sentence….

‘*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon…. ’

As I said in one of my previous posts, men are naturally bigger, stronger and quicker than women so obviously are better at the bulk of sports. That doesn’t make women’s sport poor though and I think it’s pretty futile making the comparison.

Saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is a sexist way of looking at things I think as it stereotypes based on their sex.

You still haven’t define what you mean by ‘sexist’. Please do so. But To suggest that somehow I’m in the wrong because I don’t want to waste my time watching a substandard level of sport is simply risible..

I mean it seems you are suggesting if I like watching boxing I HAVE to watch women’s boxing in equal measure otherwise I’m **GASP** a SEXIST and therefore a bad person…
This is one of the most ludicrous statements and lines of argument I have ever heard offered. lol It’s a similar logic that I should have homosexual intercourse even though I hate the idea, just to prove I’m not an eebil homophobe and I have actually seen morons profer that argument in the mainstream media

Man you have been so successfully indoctrinated; in the words of Yuri Bezmenov, completely and utterly demoralised…. To such a point that you can no longer put together coherent arguments… nor approach a topic with any objectivity

If you want a word defined then just check the dictionary. It means ‘characterized by or showing prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.’

As I said before saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is stereotyping based on sex I think.

I’m not suggesting anything else by it. I’m not implying you have to watch women’s boxing. I’m also not suggesting whether you should enjoy homosexual intercourse either.

Ah good! We have come to a definition! And this proves to me you are misattributing that term (a vague and subjective non word truthfully.)
There’s no stereotyping or discrimination on the basis of sex. For me it’s about quality as I said many times, not if they’ve got a vag. I just want to see the best. It’s a fact of life lol that in every sport (except possibly whingeing ) the best women are significantly inferior to the men. In intellectual activities as well (chess, IQ etc.)

That’s not a stereotype it’s a fact. If you can find me a women who can get into the male top ten deservedly, then I will watch her. And she deserves her title shot. But it won’t happen. (Well without DNA manipulation or if one is insane enough to consider a man with bolted on tits who ‘identifies’ as a women )

[Spud]

I can see Chantelle Cameron winning this
By stoppage

[Glass Joe]

KT is already 8 rounds up on the cards.

[Ruthless-RKO]

Caoimhin Agyarko joins the Katie Taylor Homecoming Party

It appears Caoimhin Agyarko [12(7)-0] has won the race to be back in time for the massive Katie Taylor Homecoming card.

It’s yet to be officially confirmed but the popular Belfast fighter should join the likes of Dennis Hogan, Gary Cully and Thomas Carty on the undercard of Katie Taylor’s undisputed world title fight with Chantelle Cameron.

Rumour indicated the Matchroom fighter had recovered from a hand injury in time to fight on the Matchroom card, and it now seems a May 20 3Arena fight will be confirmed next week.

Boxing Ticket’s NI report Grant Dennis [18(3)-4(2)] will populate the away corner, suggesting ‘Black Thunder’ won’t ease his way back into proceedings.

‘The Go-Getter’ is a former Area title holder who has only lost when he stepped up in level, most recently against Conrad Cummings defeater Danny Dignum.

Agyarko suffered a hand injury last year and hasn’t fought since July. The 26-year-old admits the prolonged period away from the gym and the ring proved difficult to the point it became mentally taxing.

However, he sees light at the tunnel, will be back in the ring on a huge card in May, and still has big plans for 2023.

Indeed, the Holy Trinity graduate wants to fight three times before the year is done and has his sights set on an EBU European title win at 154lbs.

“Hopefully I am back punching within the next six to eight weeks. It’s on the mend I’m back in the gym training doing one-handed stuff and running, stuff like that. I’m buzzing just be able to be back in the gym,” he says when speaking to Boxing Social recently.

[tannervegas]

You still haven’t define what you mean by ‘sexist’. Please do so. But To suggest that somehow I’m in the wrong because I don’t want to waste my time watching a substandard level of sport is simply risible..

I mean it seems you are suggesting if I like watching boxing I HAVE to watch women’s boxing in equal measure otherwise I’m **GASP** a SEXIST and therefore a bad person…
This is one of the most ludicrous statements and lines of argument I have ever heard offered. lol It’s a similar logic that I should have homosexual intercourse even though I hate the idea, just to prove I’m not an eebil homophobe and I have actually seen morons profer that argument in the mainstream media

Man you have been so successfully indoctrinated; in the words of Yuri Bezmenov, completely and utterly demoralised…. To such a point that you can no longer put together coherent arguments… nor approach a topic with any objectivity

If you want a word defined then just check the dictionary. It means ‘characterized by or showing prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.’

As I said before saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is stereotyping based on sex I think.

I’m not suggesting anything else by it. I’m not implying you have to watch women’s boxing. I’m also not suggesting whether you should enjoy homosexual intercourse either.

Ah good! We have come to a definition! And this proves to me you are misattributing that term (a vague and subjective non word truthfully.)
There’s no stereotyping or discrimination on the basis of sex. For me it’s about quality as I said many times, not if they’ve got a vag. I just want to see the best. It’s a fact of life lol that in every sport (except possibly whingeing ) the best women are significantly inferior to the men. In intellectual activities as well (chess, IQ etc.)

That’s not a stereotype it’s a fact. If you can find me a women who can get into the male top ten deservedly, then I will watch her. And she deserves her title shot. But it won’t happen. (Well without DNA manipulation or if one is insane enough to consider a man with bolted on tits who ‘identifies’ as a women )

What was she called and which one of your mates did she run off with James?

[garethhop]

Your post I replied to had this as the first sentence….

‘*SEXIST* LMFAO I knew the facile and unintellectual names calling was gonna come out soon…. ’

As I said in one of my previous posts, men are naturally bigger, stronger and quicker than women so obviously are better at the bulk of sports. That doesn’t make women’s sport poor though and I think it’s pretty futile making the comparison.

Saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is a sexist way of looking at things I think as it stereotypes based on their sex.

You still haven’t define what you mean by ‘sexist’. Please do so. But To suggest that somehow I’m in the wrong because I don’t want to waste my time watching a substandard level of sport is simply risible..

I mean it seems you are suggesting if I like watching boxing I HAVE to watch women’s boxing in equal measure otherwise I’m **GASP** a SEXIST and therefore a bad person…
This is one of the most ludicrous statements and lines of argument I have ever heard offered. lol It’s a similar logic that I should have homosexual intercourse even though I hate the idea, just to prove I’m not an eebil homophobe and I have actually seen morons profer that argument in the mainstream media

Man you have been so successfully indoctrinated; in the words of Yuri Bezmenov, completely and utterly demoralised…. To such a point that you can no longer put together coherent arguments… nor approach a topic with any objectivity

If you want a word defined then just check the dictionary. It means ‘characterized by or showing prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.’

As I said before saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is stereotyping based on sex I think.

I’m not suggesting anything else by it. I’m not implying you have to watch women’s boxing. I’m also not suggesting whether you should enjoy homosexual intercourse either.

I think you're right.

I think for example someone who enjoys men's golf, athletics or swimming for example would find it very difficult to justify not enjoying the female versions of those sports.

I also think it's absolutely fine to be uninterested in female boxing because there's a lot of reasons (2 min rounds, very low talent pool, some really awful boxers) not to be just yet.

[maverick23]

You still haven’t define what you mean by ‘sexist’. Please do so. But To suggest that somehow I’m in the wrong because I don’t want to waste my time watching a substandard level of sport is simply risible..

I mean it seems you are suggesting if I like watching boxing I HAVE to watch women’s boxing in equal measure otherwise I’m **GASP** a SEXIST and therefore a bad person…
This is one of the most ludicrous statements and lines of argument I have ever heard offered. lol It’s a similar logic that I should have homosexual intercourse even though I hate the idea, just to prove I’m not an eebil homophobe and I have actually seen morons profer that argument in the mainstream media

Man you have been so successfully indoctrinated; in the words of Yuri Bezmenov, completely and utterly demoralised…. To such a point that you can no longer put together coherent arguments… nor approach a topic with any objectivity

If you want a word defined then just check the dictionary. It means ‘characterized by or showing prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.’

As I said before saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is stereotyping based on sex I think.

I’m not suggesting anything else by it. I’m not implying you have to watch women’s boxing. I’m also not suggesting whether you should enjoy homosexual intercourse either.

I think you're right.

I think for example someone who enjoys men's golf, athletics or swimming for example would find it very difficult to justify not enjoying the female versions of those sports.

I also think it's absolutely fine to be uninterested in female boxing because there's a lot of reasons (2 min rounds, very low talent pool, some really awful boxers) not to be just yet.

Agreed. I’m not overly interested in watching women’s prospect vs journeywoman fights as the gulf in glass is often too wide and the lack of power of a lot of the women means it’s going to be an extremely predictable wide decision.

There’s nothing wrong at all with seeing 2 talented well matched women against each other. Taylor/Serrano was one of my favourite fights last year. As was Mayer/Baumgardner.

[JamesPhilips]

If you want a word defined then just check the dictionary. It means ‘characterized by or showing prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex.’

As I said before saying you don’t watch women’s sports because ‘they’re awful compared to the men’ is stereotyping based on sex I think.

I’m not suggesting anything else by it. I’m not implying you have to watch women’s boxing. I’m also not suggesting whether you should enjoy homosexual intercourse either.

Ah good! We have come to a definition! And this proves to me you are misattributing that term (a vague and subjective non word truthfully.)
There’s no stereotyping or discrimination on the basis of sex. For me it’s about quality as I said many times, not if they’ve got a vag. I just want to see the best. It’s a fact of life lol that in every sport (except possibly whingeing ) the best women are significantly inferior to the men. In intellectual activities as well (chess, IQ etc.)

That’s not a stereotype it’s a fact. If you can find me a women who can get into the male top ten deservedly, then I will watch her. And she deserves her title shot. But it won’t happen. (Well without DNA manipulation or if one is insane enough to consider a man with bolted on tits who ‘identifies’ as a women )

What was she called and which one of your mates did she run off with James?

Lol,what on earth are you on about? Are you drunk?

[Boxerbeetle]

It’s a bit weird when people say they only want to see ‘the best’ play sports. In that case, shall we not bother with the British title? Do you literally just watch world title fights and the big European football teams? Should I chuck my season ticket in the bin just because my club isn’t in the Premier League?

Personally the level doesn’t really bother me as long as I’m enjoying it. The Taylor - Serrano fight was excellent, as it was competitive and gruelling. That’s all I really want in the majority of boxing matches tbh.

[mickey1975]

Scotney off because she's trained by McGuigan.... Cameron apparently demanded it. With Moore training her it's a terrible look for Hearn. Looks like DK isn't having any of it.