Discussion on Male/Female Coaches / Leaders, are Women incompatible to be coaches

[ArbitraryWater]

coaches in sports, or on an extended note, in leading positions overall.

What do you think?

I think specifically when it comes to sports, women are not suited to coach/lead male payers. In fact, probaby not even female payers.

I had this discussion with a female "friend" recently.

I pointed out that most sports individuals and teams are coached by men, which she put down to the patriarchy / history. Fair enough, women were obviousy initially not yet given the opportunity to coach sports teams. But they are now.

I then pointed out that even most female tennis payers (or female volleyball teams) are coached by men, where the women can handpick their coach and still choose Men.

She chose to not consider that very relevant, and maintained her position that the only differences between Men and Women are bioogical/physical.

That there is no inherent advantage or benefit from having a man guide you over a female, nor a lack of expertise (this gap could of course be closed, but I feel on an inherent level, Men will aways understand battle and thus competition more than Women).

Simon Sinek said it well in his Ted Tak: A leader needs to give you a sense of security

And a woman cant make me feel more secure.

Since sporting competition are extended feelings of battle / WAR, and women are not suited for war and dont want to go there themselves, how coud I ook at her to guide me through this war? A woman is less suited to be a leader in most professions or a coach in sports.


I think 20 years ago most would have instinctively said that obviousy Men are better suited to be sports coaches than Women, since Sports is more their thing (theyre better at it) and the competitive environment is more in their nature, yieding an interest and understanding of whatever is happening that Women cannot comprehend/relate to.

But since everything is equal (not in opportunity but in outcome) nowadays and any differences are shunned and cannot be acknowedged since they lead to tradition and family and strength, this is now a real discussion.

[Nanners]

This isnt just true for sports leadership, men are more effective in almost every situation/activity (especially when it involves creativity).

How many great female composers have there been in history?
How many great female film directors?
How many great female philosophers?
How many great female scientists?
How many great female political leaders?
How many great female poets?
How many great female artists?
How many great female engineers?

[FKAri]

This isnt just true for sports leadership, men are more effective in almost every situation/activity (especially when it involves creativity).

How many great female composers have there been in history?
How many great female film directors?
How many great female philosophers?
How many great female scientists?
How many great female political leaders?
How many great female poets?
How many great female artists?
How many great female engineers?

Sports coaching is probably one of the best things they can do compared to the things listed here. Navigating social structures, empathy, and a manageable ego are things they excel at. A lot of modern sports coaches aren't required to be leaders so much as motivational coaches and therapists.

As for the above, the issue imo is that women are too "normal" or "average". It's been shown that women deviate from the norm less than men when it comes to mental eccentricity and risk-taking. This in turn affects competitiveness, ambition, and creativity. These are all valuable traits for someone to separate themselves from the pack into greatness. It makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint as well. Women are too valuable to our species' to lose since they're the bottleneck to reproduction. Men are the fodder where nature can afford to experiment.

[Nanners]

Sports coaching is probably one of the best things they can do compared to the things listed here. Navigating social structures, empathy, and a manageable ego are things they excel at. A lot of modern sports coaches aren't required to be leaders so much as motivational coaches and therapists.

As for the above, the issue imo is that women are too "normal" or "average". It's been shown that women deviate from the norm less than men when it comes to mental eccentricity and risk-taking. This in turn affects competitiveness, ambition, and creativity. These are all valuable traits for someone to separate themselves from the pack into greatness. It makes perfect sense from an evolutionary standpoint as well. Women are too valuable to our species' to lose since they're the bottleneck to reproduction. Men are the fodder where nature can afford to experiment.

https://i.ibb.co/cDSGDPR/unnamed.jpg

I dont agree with everything said in this pic, but i think it does a good job of explaining some of the key differences between masculine and feminine minds

[Off the Court]

It depends on the woman, or man.

Anyone who is under the impression that every male can coach better than every female is an absolute moron.

And then when you realize it's retarded to make blanket statements about entire genders or races what is the point of the debate? It then becomes clear that the men infatuated with this topic or threatened by it are just insecure at their core

[FKAri]

https://i.ibb.co/cDSGDPR/unnamed.jpg

I dont agree with everything said in this pic, but i think it does a good job of explaining some of the key differences between masculine and feminine minds

He doesn't say much on the nature of the masculine or feminine mind. Only using it as a springboard for his other points. His main point seems to be that society caters to women and is built to benefit them while it is more advantageous for men to be rogue nomads. And that the powers of society and their slaves get mad at the men who pursue the latter. Based on how he squeezes antifa, trump and the left in there, I reckon this is a veil for his underlying political argument that socialist collectivism is killing individualism.

I agree that women prefer stability to men but I disagree with his other points completely. Society caters to families not women, because a family unit keeps it stable. He doesn't seem to grasp that without reproduction and sex a society disappears. And this is the real reason for immigration and refugee crises(the intake of it at least). Our society isn't reproducing normally(because of birth control, incels, whatever) and we're patching this problem by opening the floodgates to new members from outside. Funny how he demonizes the left because only far left libertarians would be on board with his society collapsing vision.

[ShawkFactory]

This isnt just true for sports leadership, men are more effective in almost every situation/activity (especially when it involves creativity).

How many great female composers have there been in history?
How many great female film directors?
How many great female philosophers?
How many great female scientists?
How many great female political leaders?
How many great female poets?
How many great female artists?
How many great female engineers?

Men tend to think better on their feet better and command situations at a greater level, and thus push forward their products and/or talents more effectively.

But there have been plenty of great females in most of the areas you mentioned. Up until not too long ago they typically weren't given the opportunities to practice the same shit (babies ya know) or weren't taken seriously and borderline sabotaged by some if they did have talent. Or just straight up not recognized, talent or not.

[ShawkFactory]

To answer the question though, yes I think that a woman is probably incompatible to be a professional mens head coach. Part of the job is getting everyone to buy into your message and there are always going to be dudes who just won't, regardless of how much she knows.

[ArbitraryWater]

It depends on the woman, or man.

Anyone who is under the impression that every male can coach better than every female is an absolute moron.

And then when you realize it's retarded to make blanket statements about entire genders or races what is the point of the debate? It then becomes clear that the men infatuated with this topic or threatened by it are just insecure at their core

Nobody said that.

Only a moron would even try to read into it like such a thing was said. Obviousy fat gamer joe from the basement wont be a better coach or motivator than an ex-slam champion, for exampe.

But on average. It becomes pretty impossible for a woman of note in her field to be better at coaching/leading than a man of note in the same field. Thats the point.

And if you try to disagree with said notion that men inherently are better at it, youre probably a follower yourself.

[iamgine]

coaches in sports, or on an extended note, in leading positions overall.

What do you think?

I think specifically when it comes to sports, women are not suited to coach/lead male payers. In fact, probaby not even female payers.

I had this discussion with a female "friend" recently.

I pointed out that most sports individuals and teams are coached by men, which she put down to the patriarchy / history. Fair enough, women were obviousy initially not yet given the opportunity to coach sports teams. But they are now.

I then pointed out that even most female tennis payers (or female volleyball teams) are coached by men, where the women can handpick their coach and still choose Men.

She chose to not consider that very relevant, and maintained her position that the only differences between Men and Women are bioogical/physical.

That there is no inherent advantage or benefit from having a man guide you over a female, nor a lack of expertise (this gap could of course be closed, but I feel on an inherent level, Men will aways understand battle and thus competition more than Women).

Simon Sinek said it well in his Ted Tak: A leader needs to give you a sense of security

And a woman cant make me feel more secure.

Since sporting competition are extended feelings of battle / WAR, and women are not suited for war and dont want to go there themselves, how coud I ook at her to guide me through this war? A woman is less suited to be a leader in most professions or a coach in sports.


I think 20 years ago most would have instinctively said that obviousy Men are better suited to be sports coaches than Women, since Sports is more their thing (theyre better at it) and the competitive environment is more in their nature, yieding an interest and understanding of whatever is happening that Women cannot comprehend/relate to.

But since everything is equal (not in opportunity but in outcome) nowadays and any differences are shunned and cannot be acknowedged since they lead to tradition and family and strength, this is now a real discussion.
I tend to agree with your friend.

I think your argument is more from your own need that you generalized. Not everybody feels that sport is war. Or that one need the coach to be a warrior. Or one cannot be more secure with a woman coach. Those seems to be your own need.

It's akin to saying, white people can't coach in the NBA. Because they can never give me security or understand me as a black person. I'm sure some black players feel that way, and yeah in that case white coaches isn't right for them.

[Axe]

I think women can as long they are knowledgeable about it and know what they're doing.

[Lakers Legend#32]

Mike McCarthy sure does not have leadership qualities.

[Norcaliblunt]

Yeah why the hell not? Coaching a kids game? Lol. It’s probably harder to manage a grocery store or restaurant. Plenty of females doing that shit.

[Norcaliblunt]

This isnt just true for sports leadership, men are more effective in almost every situation/activity (especially when it involves creativity).

How many great female composers have there been in history?
How many great female film directors?
How many great female philosophers?
How many great female scientists?
How many great female political leaders?
How many great female poets?
How many great female artists?
How many great female engineers?

And men do all that shit for what? P u s s i e.

[ArbitraryWater]

I tend to agree with your friend.

I think your argument is more from your own need that you generalized. Not everybody feels that sport is war. Or that one need the coach to be a warrior. Or one cannot be more secure with a woman coach. Those seems to be your own need.

It's akin to saying, white people can't coach in the NBA. Because they can never give me security or understand me as a black person. I'm sure some black players feel that way, and yeah in that case white coaches isn't right for them.

There are no inherent character differences between races though, so that is actually not "akin to", lol.


I dont feel like sport is war, but its certainly a battle.

And if you need to feel security from your leader, it makes sense youd have the leader be a man.

Regardess of the creative qualities.

Have you ever played sports?



BTW you have a Trump avatar lol.

Why?

Its probably not his raw intellect that reasons with you.

There is something else that reasonates with you.

Why Trump?

[Off the Court]

Nobody said that.

Only a moron would even try to read into it like such a thing was said. Obviousy fat gamer joe from the basement wont be a better coach or motivator than an ex-slam champion, for exampe.

But on average. It becomes pretty impossible for a woman of note in her field to be better at coaching/leading than a man of note in the same field. Thats the point.

And if you try to disagree with said notion that men inherently are better at it, youre probably a follower yourself.

My point went over your head.

If you agree that some women are capable then what is the point of the debate? Do you see school teachers running around declaring that women are better at teaching? No because they can see that some men are great school teachers. So anything after that would just be their insecurity needing confirmation that they are better than men.

That's what we can see in here with you. Why do you need confirmation that men are better coaches than women?

[ArbitraryWater]

My point went over your head.

If you agree that some women are capable then what is the point of the debate? Do you see school teachers running around declaring that women are better at teaching? No because they can see that some men are great school teachers. So anything after that would just be their insecurity needing confirmation that they are better than men.

That's what we can see in here with you. Why do you need confirmation that men are better coaches than women?


Men being better is the truth. The truth can aways be declared.

But any retort that goes "not every single..." is a retort of no intellectual capacity. Its a useless assertion.

And Michael Jordan is the GOAT but he wasnt aways. On some days he was worse than a bench player.

Its a dumb statement. It has no meaning.

Finding odd exceptions doesnt prove your point.

I find it odd that you are so vehementy against decaring your kind to be better at something, but it is because you are the odd exception that woud not be able to live up to such innate standard. Thats what causes the insecurity within you.

[Off the Court]

Men being better is the truth. The truth can aways be declared.

But any retort that goes "not every single..." is a retort of no intellectual capacity. Its a useless assertion.

And Michael Jordan is the GOAT but he wasnt aways. On some days he was worse than a bench player.

Its a dumb statement. It has no meaning.

Finding odd exceptions doesnt prove your point.

I find it odd that you are so vehementy against decaring your kind to be better at something, but it is because you are the odd exception that woud not be able to live up to such innate standard. Thats what causes the insecurity within you.
I am secure, that is why I don't need confirmation that men are better. I am not threatened by women. You are threatened.

[Norcaliblunt]

I don’t get the question. Are you asking if a woman could become Phil Jackson or Greg Popovich? Or if they can coach at all and just be lightweight successful?

Either way professional sports is about the players. If players and a team don’t perform well, simply because there is a woman leading them, then that’s on the players not the coach.

[Axe]

I don’t get the question. Are you asking if a woman could become Phil Jackson or Greg Popovich? Or if they can coach at all and just be lightweight successful?

Either way professional sports is about the players. If players and a team don’t perform well, simply because there is a woman leading them, then that’s on the players not the coach.
Sometimes it's the other way around lol. Many players haven't won a ring without a specific coach. Jordan and kobe were under phil jackson before but they never won with any other coach.

[ArbitraryWater]

I don’t get the question. Are you asking if a woman could become Phil Jackson or Greg Popovich? Or if they can coach at all and just be lightweight successful?

Either way professional sports is about the players. If players and a team don’t perform well, simply because there is a woman leading them, then that’s on the players not the coach.


Bruh, I spelled it out very clearly.


Who is more suited to be a coach or leader / Are Men more suited/capable to be coaches/leaders than Women? (Yes)

[Norcaliblunt]

Bruh, I spelled it out very clearly.


Who is more suited to be a coach or leader / Are Men more suited/capable to be coaches/leaders than Women? (Yes)

Oh ok gotcha.

Well the obvious answer would be someone like Caitlyn Jenner because then you’d get the best of both worlds.

[coin24]

Men and women are not equal.
Not intellectually or physically.

Yes they should have the same rights and opportunities, but until this dumb shit woke
era ends and people accept the basic truths then things are just going to keep spiralling down the toilet..

Why are the most important boxes on applications now race, gender and religion?
We’ve gone backwards
Cucks like r3 love it because it gives them validation for being a total fkn loser in life.


And women are shit coaches it’s not even a debate. You want a coach who has experience and you can look up to and learn from. It’s a dominant alpha position. Pretty rare case where that would be a female.

[iamgine]

There are no inherent character differences between races though, so that is actually not "akin to", lol.


I dont feel like sport is war, but its certainly a battle.

And if you need to feel security from your leader, it makes sense youd have the leader be a man.

Regardess of the creative qualities.

Have you ever played sports?



BTW you have a Trump avatar lol.

Why?

Its probably not his raw intellect that reasons with you.

There is something else that reasonates with you.

Why Trump?

Some black people certainly see it that way so it is "akin to".

It makes sense for you. Akin to the black people example.

Certainly not cause Trump's a male lol.

[Manny98]

Women aren't biologicaly fitted to lead

Think back to the caveman days, the leader of the group who made the tough decisions was the alpha male

Women make great assistants though

[Norcaliblunt]

If men are biologically such natural leaders, why would they even need a coach at all? Couldn’t a group of guys just lead themselves? Why one man calling the shots over an entire group of perfectly capable men? And what does that say about men who follow? You need a “man” to tell you what to do? Sounds pretty gay actually.

Screw leaders and followers. A real alpha rides alone.

[Overdrive]

I pointed out that most sports individuals and teams are coached by men, which she put down to the patriarchy / history. Fair enough, women were obviousy initially not yet given the opportunity to coach sports teams. But they are now.

I then pointed out that even most female tennis payers (or female volleyball teams) are coached by men, where the women can handpick their coach and still choose Men.

K.C. Jones was a coach in the 80s, yet the NBA still has mostly white coaches. Even (big) if a female HC becomes successful in a sport it would take decades to normalize it. Something not being a taboo anymore doesn't mean it happens immediately.



Simon Sinek said it well in his Ted Tak: A leader needs to give you a sense of security

And a woman cant make me feel more secure.


Throughout history women looked after their children while men were out hunting/battling/working. Children feel alot more secure with their mothers than their fathers.

That's not the point. The problem is more that men need the feeling that their leader is better. Depending on the situation it means stronger, smarter, richer, younger, older or whatever trait. The moment the leader lacks the quality that sets him apart there's a mutiny. Most men feel women are inferior when it comes to any trait.



This isnt just true for sports leadership, men are more effective in almost every situation/activity (especially when it involves creativity).

How many great female composers have there been in history?
How many great female film directors?
How many great female philosophers?
How many great female scientists?
How many great female political leaders?
How many great female poets?
How many great female artists?
How many great female engineers?

To be fair in case of classical artists, composers, poets and philosophers women were mostly excluded from an education that would lead there. Just look at the songwriter scene in pop/rock music there's a plethora of women so nothing suggests that women aren't capable of being outstanding musicians.

More and more women are getting Nobelprices for literature.

They're definately underrepresented in STEM. There are like 10% females studying physics, chemistry or anything related. I think there's no appeal for them same goes for apprenticship. It's rare to see female electricians or locksmithes.

[ArbitraryWater]

Throughout history women looked after their children while men were out hunting/battling/working. Children feel alot more secure with their mothers than their fathers.

Bruh, in what environment?

Secure? From what are they secure?

Are you trying to say grown men feel more secure in a competitive situation with a woman looking on than a man?

[ArbitraryWater]

They're definately underrepresented in STEM. There are like 10% females studying physics, chemistry or anything related. I think there's no appeal for them same goes for apprenticship. It's rare to see female electricians or locksmithes.

Youre so close.


Now why coud they be underrepresented in STEM?

Youre almost there.

[ArbitraryWater]

Some black people certainly see it that way so it is "akin to".

It makes sense for you. Akin to the black people example.

Certainly not cause Trump's a male lol.


Thats a strawman if I ever saw one. No wonder youre barely expanding on your point.

It actually is because Trump is a male.


You might not realize it.

There coud be women beieving the same things he does, in fact there might be, but you chose Trumps bravado and male-ish attitude about it. Thats the difference maker. Innately.

Dont be ashamed, thats what won him the presidency.

[Overdrive]

Youre so close.


Now why coud they be underrepresented in STEM?

Youre almost there.

Ever been at a STEM lecture? There are women there and they're smart AF. It's mostly a lack of interest. The smartest schoolmate in my class was a woman, who excelled at math. She went on to become a fn teacher.

So what are you trying to imply?

[Overdrive]

Bruh, in what environment?

Secure? From what are they secure?

Are you trying to say grown men feel more secure in a competitive situation with a woman looking on than a man?

Men don't feel secure with other men. They just accept that their leader is superior and thus follow.

[ShawkFactory]

Youre so close.


Now why coud they be underrepresented in STEM?

Youre almost there.

Not smart enough?