Sport’s very dangerous for women, oh yes

Football could be more dangerous for women than men because their brains are more susceptible to damage from heading the ball, new research suggests.

In a new study which looked at nearly 100 amatuer players, females showed five times the amount of brain tissue damage than males on scans.

Seems the warming hasn’t changed,even if the reason for it has. Who knows, it might even be right this time. But people have been saying sport’s very bad for women for some time now. Wombs fall out or summat wasn’t it?

16 thoughts on “Sport’s very dangerous for women, oh yes”

  1. Well yes, women have smaller, thinner skulls. Mens have evolved to be able to take impacts better. So of course women are going to show more damage from smashing a moving object with their face.

    Still doesn’t mean it’s dangerous though…

  2. What sexist nonsense! Gender is an entirely social construct and there is no difference whatever between men and women, physically or in any other way.

    Millions and millions of species of animals, birds, fish and indeed plants need to be re-educated. I have started by giving a stern talking-to to my pet mouse, Arnold, who thinks he is male. ‘You would vote UKIP if you had the chance, I suppose,’ I added, before slipping some oestrogen into his water supply. He’s no better than Godfrey Bloom.

  3. Let’s be honest, eh? Sport’s dangerous for everyone. There’s an optimum level of exercise & if the sportsman is competitive, some parts of the body will be exercised above that level to the point where long term permanent damage accumulates. One is, after all, pushing the body to the limits of its capabilities. Hence the long list of sports related injuries.
    Despite the endless wittering of the sports lobby, there’s nothing “healthy” about sport.

  4. Wombs fall out or summat wasn’t it?

    I thought it was hanging that caused a women’s womb to fall out*. Not exactly a “sport” as such, but I’m game!

    * – As allegedly happened in the execution of Edith Thompson on January 9th, 1923.

  5. John Galt–The answer to that is to avoid committing murder.

    “Football could be more dangerous for women than men because their brains are more susceptible to damage from heading the ball, new research suggests.”

    Practically speaking–leaving aside scans etc –how would we tell? And what difference would it make?

  6. “Yeah,” said Zaphod with a sudden evil grin, “you’d just have to program it to say What? and I don’t understand and Where’s the tea? — who’d know the difference?”

    I don’t really go along with the sexism on here. Plenty of women are smart and funny. JuliaM’s blog alone is a source of much mirth, and the female co-creator of Godfrey Elfwick is brilliant. That’s not to say there isn’t a wider problem of the choices young women are pushed to make (often by older, more bitter women); and the top end of the Bell curve doesn’t extend quite as far, but we’d be remiss to write them all off.

    Sportspeople on the other hand, of either sex, I’m quite happy to write off as dimwits. That’s not just jealousy on my part. No, not at all.

  7. Andrew M – sportspeople don’t need to be intelligent; they are lithe and strong and sometimes very rich. Everyone wants to sleep with them.

    Bastards.

  8. “What sexist nonsense! Gender is an entirely social construct and there is no difference whatever between men and women, physically or in any other way.”

    There’s a great bit of footage in this video (its about female tennis players getting paid the same for less work) where a female college professor has the temerity to say that men and women are physically different (height, strength etc) and a whole load of the usual nutters walk out:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oBmp8OOJ8sE&feature=youtu.be&t=550

  9. Jim

    They are nuts, mentally gone. How can anyone walk out / get on their high horse over something so utterly uncontroversial.

  10. @Chernyy_Drakon, August 1, 2018 at 7:15 am

    +1

    Men, through survival of the fittest, have ticker skulls, especially forehead, and a more pronounced brow to protect eyes in combat.

  11. @Thomas Fuller, August 1, 2018 at 7:32 am

    The SJWs and feminazis should turn their attention to birds – blatant sexism there with females relegated to dowdy nothings.

  12. Bloke in North Dorset

    PF,

    But did you see those that walked out? Most of them looked worthy of at least a walk on part in a David Thompson post.

  13. Surreptitious Evil

    and the top end of the Bell curve doesn’t extend quite as far

    And the bottom end is much thinner too (until you get to brain damage cases.)

  14. Sport IS dangerous – in my case the Long Jump, I’ve suffered “soft tissue damage” in two of my last three contests. It is an intrinsic element of sport (which is why Chess is classified as a “Game”).
    So what is the problem? That females have not the skull strength of males? I do not believe that the problem is caused by female footballers kicking the ball that much harder than males. No I just do not.
    Maybe we could design a ball that had a lower impact for female football? The current ball has far less impact than the wet leather balls that I used to head 60 years ago (my USP was that I could and would head heavy leather footballs and take throw-ins that went over the opponents’ heads to my team).
    Does someone thinks I should have brain damage from 60 years ago? OK – let’s measure her IQ against mine.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *