Almost every sport in existence has a men’s and women’s variation. Some sports even have a completely different version of the game for the opposite gender.  Lacrosse is a good example of this; the men’s version requires more protective equipment and involves more phyiscial contact than women’s lacrosse.  In women’s lacrosse, the only protective gear required is a pair of goggles and a mouth guard.  Additionally, there is very little contact allowed in the women’s lacrosse.  The objective of both versions of the game, however, remain the same: score more points than your opponent by the end of the game.  Why is there such a difference in the rules of a game between the men’s and women’s variations of the game for some sports, but not others?

Lacrosse, as women play it, is an orderly pastime that has little in common with the men’s tribal warfare version except for the use of the long-handled racket or crosse (stick) that gives the sport its name.  It is true that the object in both men’s and women’s lacrosse is to send a ball through a goal by means of the racket; the Quora website, however, explains the differences.  It states that male lacrosse players resort to brute strength whereas female lacrosse players solely dependent on skill. In other words, this infers that women are not as strong as men, but they are more skillfully orientated.

Other sports that are different for each gender include gymnastics, bobsleigh, and swimming.  Gymnastics for women showcases grace and flexibility, but for men, it is all about power and strength.  Bobsleigh has been an Olympic winter sport for men since 1924, yet the only women’s variation that exists in the Winter Olympics is the two-women bobsleigh (this has only been around since 2002.)  Swimming for the most part is the same, except in the men’s variation, they compete in the 1500m while women compete in the 800m.  Should these sports really have variances in how they are played because of a difference in gender?

I believe athletic ability is not determined by one’s gender.  There are sports such as rugby and hockey that remain brutal in both the men and women variations without any differences in the rules at all.  Sometimes though, in some sports, the rules of the game are the same, but the way men play is different than the way women play. An example of this is basketball; men are usually taller than women so they tend to play above the rim. On the contrary, women play a more passing-oriented game. Sports such as lacrosse should remain the same without any variation of the rules of the game.  This could make the sport more popular and more entertaining to watch.  Although women’s lacrosse is becoming more and more popular, it should be its own sport with its own name.  This would allow for women who are interested in lacrosse but are disinterested by the amount of rules against contact in women’s lacrosse to participate in what interests them.

Another sport that faces a similar dilemma with this is wrestling.  Although it is not very common that women wrestle, almost all of the time that female will have to wrestle a male.  The problem, however, does not lie with the female, rather the male.  If the male goes all out on the female, he could be perceived as a brute with no respect for women.  If he loses to her by not giving his all, the he could be seen as not a respectable athlete.  If he does lose to her even after giving his all, then he could be seen as weak and inferior.  Though this is not a common occurrence, when it does come up, the male has a lot to consider before going into the match.

By definition, an athlete is a person who is proficient in sports and other forms of physical exercise, but to me, an athlete is someone who dedicates themselves to a sport, regardless of gender.  Athletes should be respected as competitors in their sport of choice, not discriminated against due to their gender.  Sports that have rules changed because they implicate women as weak or physically unequal to men should be revised or completely eliminated.