Throwing Like a Girl... Fixes? Cures?

Curious

G.O.A.T.
Clearly, you don't seem to comprehend what true misogyny is. None was intended here. In fact, I started the OP with a disclaimer about this very thing.

This is an observable phenomenon. Even a staunch feminist would not deny if she had observed this. If you've taught boys and girls, you would observe that trait holds true for the most part... Only a small % of pre-teen and teen girls have decent overhand throwing mechanics. OTOH, a majority of boys that have taken up tennis or other sports will have respectable throwing mechanics. A relatively small % will not. This can be seen by even a casual observer.

Women in both psychology and sports science have used the phrase "throw like girl" in discussing this observed behavior. Did you even bother to read the links I provided?
With this post you sadly continue with your misogynistic approach!
 

Curious

G.O.A.T.
Girls who have been taught to throw at a young age will often develop very decent overhand throwing mechanics. But if that optimal WOO (window of opportunity) is missed, it can be very difficult to correct flawed throwing mechanics later.
If you think the second part applies to girls only you’re saying that they have some sort of deficiency/inferiority compared to boys. And that’s misogyny.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
Yeah agreed. My point is that I don’t think girls have any deficiency in terms of muscle, coordination etc to perform a proper throwing motion compared to boys. Differences in power and speed is a different matter obviously, which is not clearly the topic of discussion in this thread hence my objection.

Pegging the BS meter here? PLEASE read the articles provided. A couple of them have statements and opinions from female scientists on the subject. You will find that there is more to physiological differences than just power and speed. There are anatomical differences. Difference in brain structure (relating to spatial tasks) as well as hormone and, possibly, neurotransmitter diffs.

Women, on average, excel in areas that most men do not. Acknowledging this is no more an example of misandry than this thread is an example of misogyny.
.
 
Last edited:

rkelley

Hall of Fame
A couple of thoughts for what it's worth:

- Some of the best teaching of throwing I saw was when my younger child was in little league. The coaches, all fathers of kids on the teams, had a simple technique to help the kids (ages 7-9) learn a proper throwing motion. Kind of hard to describe (but I'll try): the coaches just had the kids start in a specific pose, non-dominant shoulder forward, non-dominant arm either pointing at the target or elbow pointing at the target and elbow at a 90 deg angle with the hand point to the side, and with their dominant arm pointing straight back at the elbow, elbow at 90 deg, lower arm pointed up to the sky holding the ball. Kids mostly got the idea after a season of playing.

- I taught both of my kids to throw. My older daughter didn't have much interest in sports, but I treated it like reading. Just one of those things you have to learn. I never made her play organized sports, but we'd go out and throw a ball. She got pretty good at it. Not only could she throw well, she learned to catch with both her hands and a mit.

- One thing I've noticed when I throw with my non-dominant arm and I also saw in the mythbusters vid: one of the hallmarks of poor throwing technique is poor use of the non-dominant arm and shoulder. The non-dominant side is important to a good throwing motion because the action of the non-dominant arm and shoulder help drive the dominant shoulder around and allow the dominant arm to be whipped by the shoulder motion. Without the help from the non-dominant side the should motion is a lot less powerful, resulting in a lot less whip of the dominant arm.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
If you think the second part applies to girls only you’re saying that they have some sort of deficiency/inferiority compared to boys. And that’s misogyny.

This response makes no sense. You are clearly reading things into this that are not intended.. Please start another thread rather than trying to sabotage or derail this one
.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
With this post you sadly continue with your misogynistic approach!

READ the links and please cease this attack. While you are at it, please (re)read the first 3 paragraphs of my OP (if you've not done so already) and tell me again that the intent of this thread or the thread itself is an example of misogyny.
 
Last edited:

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
The title is a bit misogynistic [as I pointed out, there are neutral ways of expressing the same thing].

The thread, insofar as it concentrates on fixing the problem of inefficient throwing motions instead of the differences between boys and girls, is not.

For example, where in my post did I single out girls? I didn't. I explained how to fix an inefficient throwing motion. No mention of gender. I would have posted the same thing if the person in question was a boy.

So it's ok for The NY Times, The Washinton Post, Popular Science, female playwrights & authors, female scientists, etc to use this phrase in the title of articles and books. But I am called out as a misogynist for doing the same?
.
 
Last edited:

kramer woodie

Professional
Yeah agreed. My point is that I don’t think girls have any deficiency in terms of muscle, coordination etc to perform a proper throwing motion compared to boys. Differences in power and speed is a different matter obviously, which is not clearly the topic of discussion in this thread hence my objection.

Curious

Now you really have me confused. What should young women of the 1950s and 1960s be called who for some reason learned to throw like a
man? What label would you apply to those young ladies?

Now, I can tell you what they were called back then, "TOM BOYS" and those tomboys grew up to be the finest of young women, I have ever met.
They were out in the street playing hit-the-bat and stick-ball. They were athletically slim and trim and in a Fine physical form for a fit female. They
also had a love of sports. They gave birth to fine families and their husbands and sons died fighting in far away places. They could and were a
man's best friend because they appreciated men.

Though some of them became a Navratilova type.

So what derogatory label would you have accused them with? Or was "Tomboys" misogynistic for you also?

Aloha
 

Chas Tennis

G.O.A.T.
First off. Many will find the phrase, "throw like a girl" to be derogatory or even offensive. But, even tho the gender gap has diminished quite a bit in many/most areas, overhead throwing mechanics continues to be one area where the gap persists.

Girls who have been taught to throw at a young age will often develop very decent overhand throwing mechanics. But if that optimal WOO (window of opportunity) is missed, it can be very difficult to correct flawed throwing mechanics later.

I've had success correcting the mechanics of some teen and pre-teen girls. But incorrect technique or bad habits appears to be so ingrained with some girls, correcting those flaws seems to be insurmountable.

Any sure-fire fixes out there?

I currently have a couple of 12 year old girls who can spin their serve in most of the time. But they are lacking power or RHS because of sub-optimal throwing mechanics. They may never develop that power/RHS unless they are able to correct those flawed mechanics.

The primary issue with these two is the position/motion of the elbow. In one case, the elbow drops (tucks in) just before the forward motion commences. In the other case, the elbow comes forward much too soon -- as if she was throwing darts rather than throwing a ball.

At my wits end. Have repeatedly gone over proper throwing mechanics. We've spent time throwing tennis balls, footballs and even rackets. Have tried elbow awareness (proprioception) exercises --with eyes open and with eyes closed. But the problem persists.

Any other ideas (that don't involve time travel)?
.


Interesting article with a brief analysis. Analysis emphasizes how body rotation is performed. Progressions are mentioned. Some of the brief discussion seems related to forum discussions of 'separation'. Separation stretches trunk muscles (for speed). Also, turning the hips may help.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.196a0128f264

Suggest that you study the original publications of all the researchers mentioned in the article and also their more recent publications. Do the same for the references in the relevant publications. A limited number of publications are available free from the NCBI PMC publications and also Researchgate (search by publication and author). Search for publications using Google Scholar. On Google Scholar the publications available free are to the right.
https://scholar.google.com/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/

Find high speed videos of effective throwing techniques of girl athletes and compare to those of your students. Body rotations of heavy body parts are slow and do not require high speed video.

I usually picture a girl throwing as having the arm too high. The Ellenbecker video for the tennis serve on the arm-shoulder orientation to hold the upper arm to minimize the risk of impingement would apply to throwing. There must be throwing and pitching references equivalent to the Ellenbecker video ("Rotator Cuff Injury").
 
Last edited:

Bender

G.O.A.T.
Show them a video of sureshs serving
0203-en.jpg

Interesting article with a brief analysis. Analysis emphasizes how body rotation is performed. Progressions are mentioned. Some of the brief discussion seems related to forum discussions of 'separation'. Separation stretches trunk muscles (for speed). Also, turning the hips may help.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...ory.html?noredirect=on&utm_term=.196a0128f264

Suggest that you study the original publications of all the researchers mentioned in the article and also their more recent publications. Do the same for the references in the relevant publications. A limited number of publications are available free from the NCBI PMC publications and also Researchgate (search by publication and author). Search for publications using Google Scholar. On Google Scholar the publications available free are to the right.

Find high speed videos of effective throwing techniques of girl athletes and compare to those of your students. Body rotations of heavy body parts are slow and do not require high speed video.

I usually picture a girl throwing as having the arm too high. The Ellenbecker video for the tennis serve on the arm-shoulder orientation to hold the upper arm to minimize the risk of impingement would apply to throwing. There must be throwing and pitching references equivalent to the Ellenbecker video ("Rotator Cuff Injury").
Do you have any 240 fps videos of some ladies by any chance?
 

Hmgraphite1

Hall of Fame
Only since the PC Culture!
PC is only meant to educate people so their narrow, previous lack of education can include what others have experienced, gone through in life. The sociopath lacks empathy for others, in line with this some lack empathy for others who are different than them or their group. Making a conscious decision to inflict negativity onto others or turning your back on others in need isn't illegal its just plain weak.
 
Florian Meier has a great video [which I can't find since I don't know what keywords to use] where he put a bunch of balls in a plastic bag, tied up the bag, and then put it in a bigger plastic bag with long handles. He then had the student grab the handles and swing in a service like motion. In order to do it smoothly without hitting yourself in the head due to jerky motion, you have to swing it with a reasonable approximation to a serve.

I've watched that video recently and I was going to copy it, but then I saw Ian Westermann doing basically the same thing with tennis balls shoved down into long soccer socks. I liked Florian's video better, but went with the socks. It does seem to help me when my rhythm gets way off.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
First question I'd ask myself is "how badly do my female students REALLY want to learn throwing mechanics / how to serve"?

Not a PC question to ask, but one that will save you lots of frustration and lots of anger from them.

In other words, don't be "that guy" in mixed doubles that is filled with great tips for the ladies. Yes, you are well intentioned. But no, women don't always "appreciate" such advice (and they really don't appreciate it over and over and in a tone that suggests "why can't you do this?"). As much as it's frowned upon to say openly these days, girls really are girls. They aren't boys. They won't do things like boys. They don't care about the same things boys do. They don't care as much about sports as boys will.

Anyway, good luck.

Not the case here. The girls in question are very competitive when it comes to rallying or groundstrokes exchanges. But early on they were always losing their service games because they were not getting their serves into play often enough. Now, after significantly improving serving %, they win their own serves occasionally.

But they still lose it most of the time because their serves are so attackable. Trust me, these girls DO wish to improve their serves and win more of their service games.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
A couple of thoughts for what it's worth:

- Some of the best teaching of throwing I saw was when my younger child was in little league. The coaches, all fathers of kids on the teams, had a simple technique to help the kids (ages 7-9) learn a proper throwing motion. Kind of hard to describe (but I'll try): the coaches just had the kids start in a specific pose, non-dominant shoulder forward, non-dominant arm either pointing at the target or elbow pointing at the target and elbow at a 90 deg angle with the hand point to the side, and with their dominant arm pointing straight back at the elbow, elbow at 90 deg, lower arm pointed up to the sky holding the ball. Kids mostly got the idea after a season of playing.
that's how i taught my kids...
use the words "point, listen, throw"
the "listen" part is when the throwing elbow bends up (ie. listen to the ball like it's a sea shell)
- I taught both of my kids to throw. My older daughter didn't have much interest in sports, but I treated it like reading. Just one of those things you have to learn. I never made her play organized sports, but we'd go out and throw a ball. She got pretty good at it. Not only could she throw well, she learned to catch with both her hands and a mit.
ditto... except i insisted both kids catch (a tennis ball), with both left and right hand independently.
- One thing I've noticed when I throw with my non-dominant arm and I also saw in the mythbusters vid: one of the hallmarks of poor throwing technique is poor use of the non-dominant arm and shoulder. The non-dominant side is important to a good throwing motion because the action of the non-dominant arm and shoulder help drive the dominant shoulder around and allow the dominant arm to be whipped by the shoulder motion. Without the help from the non-dominant side the should motion is a lot less powerful, resulting in a lot less whip of the dominant arm.
IMO, the issue with throwing (or hitting a fh, or serving) with the non-dominant side (despite "knowing mechanics", is the timing of the power sources firing... getting them to sync and "constructively interfere" is the key to good throw/fh/serve. every time a power source fires to soon or too early, even with a correct mechanical motion, the motion will look awkward (like someone trying to snap a towel or a bullwhip, but doesn't quite have the timing down....)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
that's how i taught my kids...
use the words "point, listen, throw"
the "listen" part is when the throwing elbow bends up (ie. listen to the ball like it's a sea shell)

ditto... except i insisted both kids catch (a tennis ball), with both left and right hand independently...

I'm having some of my students learn 3 types of catches, esp if they have problems catching with just 1 hand. They will often start with a 2-handed catch. Will sometimes show them a cricket catch variation -- where the hands pull back to blend with the incoming ball to minimize the sting on faster balls -- just as cricket player would.

They will then learn to catch 1-handed -- sometimes with the hand of their own chosing. Lastly, they learn to catch 1-handed with the opposite hand.

Catches are usually made "on the fly". Helps with learning to volley. But it is also useful to have students catch balls after one bounce. Helps with body positioning for groundies.
 

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
Not the case here. The girls in question are very competitive when it comes to rallying or groundstrokes exchanges. But early on they were always losing their service games because they were not getting their serves into play often enough. Now, after significantly improving serving %, they win their own serves occasionally.

But they still lose it most of the time because their serves are so attackable. Trust me, these girls DO wish to improve their serves and win more of their service games.

Are they using Continental grip? Achieving a racquet drop? Exhibiting Waiter's Tray?
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
Are they using Continental grip? Achieving a racquet drop? Exhibiting Waiter's Tray?

They will use either a conti (a bevel 2 grip) or a semi-conti (2.5 grip). The latter is the grip used by Serena (and Boris Becker) for 1st serves.

Racquet drop sometimes acceptable, other times not -- wandering elbow position during & after trophy phase appears to affect the drop. Ditto for the WTE -- sometimes exhibited, but not always.

Toss height (& placement) varies a bit. Likely has some effect on what the racket arm is doing.
 
Last edited:

Raul_SJ

G.O.A.T.
Toss height (& placement) varies a bit. Likely has some effect on what the racket arm is doing.

A lot of things break down when the toss is introduced. I'd be inclined to confirm they can shadow swing correctly before progressing to an actual serve.
But it sounds like they've already gone through that with the racquet throws and related drills.

At my wits end. Have repeatedly gone over proper throwing mechanics. We've spent time throwing tennis balls, footballs and even rackets. Have tried elbow awareness (proprioception) exercises --with eyes open and with eyes closed. But the problem persists.
.

Would be interesting to know if they are throwing ok but its not transferring over to the serve. Or if the throwing is off too.
I'm guessing the latter. Hard to imagine an average thrower struggling that much with the serve.
 
Last edited:

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
A lot of things break down when the toss is introduced. I'd be inclined to confirm they can shadow swing correctly before progressing to an actual serve.
But it sounds like they've already gone through that with the racquet throws and related drills.

Would be interesting to know if they are throwing ok but its not transferring over to the serve. Or if the throwing is off too.

I'm guessing the latter. Hard to imagine an average thrower struggling that much with the serve.

Similar issues with both ball throwing and racquet throwing (although the latter is slightly better).

But yeah, ball toss does complicate things. Sometimes, I'll toss the ball for them. Unfortunately, these girls did not play catch or any sports when they were younger. Great progress with grounded but constant struggle with volleys and serves.
.
 

Curious

G.O.A.T.
most girls simply don't throw things as kids. Girls that do start throwing early can develope a good throwing pattern so it is not genetic.boys who did not throw won't have a good pattern either.
This discussion was over for me but one last attempt to make my point clear:): I agree with what you say above. My objection was to the claim that girls have an inherent deficiency about throwing compared to boys, anatomically, neurologically or whatever. This is what I thought SysA put forward as a 'fact'. If we agree that the only reason girls have a 'girly throw' is that they don't throw much while growing up then there is no problem. Go and check the public tennis courts, 8 out of 10 boys will have a 'girly' throw!
 

mcs1970

Hall of Fame
@SystemicAnomaly You've mentioned before how you're a huge badminton fan. Why not just bring those racquets and shuttlecocks and have them smash those as a drill? Maybe get them used to the feel of it than struggling with a bigger ball and a heavier racquet. Don't worry about throwing. Once they get used to the feel of moving and smashing stuff in the air, transition them slowly to lighter racquets and softer tennis balls before moving on to the real deal? Even as an adult taking this sport relatively late in life, I felt a huge difference the day after I practiced hitting with the green dot balls with my kids. Somehow everything seemed slower and easier, even though it should have been the opposite. I think it's because I began to have a feel for the motion of my strokes than hurry through my shots.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
@SystemicAnomaly You've mentioned before how you're a huge badminton fan. Why not just bring those racquets and shuttlecocks and have them smash those as a drill? Maybe get them used to the feel of it than struggling with a bigger ball and a heavier racquet. Don't worry about throwing. Once they get used to the feel of moving and smashing stuff in the air, transition them slowly to lighter racquets and softer tennis balls before moving on to the real deal? Even as an adult taking this sport relatively late in life, I felt a huge difference the day after I practiced hitting with the green dot balls with my kids. Somehow everything seemed slower and easier, even though it should have been the opposite. I think it's because I began to have a feel for the motion of my strokes than hurry through my shots.

Love the idea. The overheads in tennis and badminton are nearly the same (very minor diffs). In fact, good badminton players often master the overhead, volleys and then serves in tennis before they really get a handle on groundstrokes.
.
 
D

Deleted member 23235

Guest
Florian Meier has a great video [which I can't find since I don't know what keywords to use] where he put a bunch of balls in a plastic bag, tied up the bag, and then put it in a bigger plastic bag with long handles. He then had the student grab the handles and swing in a service like motion. In order to do it smoothly without hitting yourself in the head due to jerky motion, you have to swing it with a reasonable approximation to a serve.

Here's one example, although it's not the one I was hoping to find [the guy's motion isn't as full circular as I would like but it's the right idea]:


Another idea: video yourself throwing and compare with a video of her throwing so she at least understands what the differences are even if she can't fix them yet.

Then, guide her arm through the correct throwing path with proper elbow separation. Do that enough times and she will have the muscle feel for how to do it. Then let go and let her body take over. Sort like throwing with training wheels. The problem with just telling her to throw is that she doesn't know what the proper motion is supposed to feel like so her trying to do it full speed with no guidance is difficult. This way, you're making her follow a proscribed path, even if slowly at first.

Also, are you sure that her shoulder is bio-mechanically sound? Maybe she has some shoulder issue that limits her range of motion.

lol, nunchucks might do the same thing... and i’ve definitely hit my head with those before [emoji14]

I wonder if there’s some cross over learnings,... using nunchucks. i used to do tkd competitions (ie weapons katas) as a kid. might have to dig mine up and try. would make our resident martial artist, lg7 , proud.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
It is not misogyny, most girls simply don't throw things as kids. Girls that do start throwing early can develope a good throwing pattern so it is not genetic.boys who did not throw won't have a good pattern either.
So basically it's just about development growing up, regardless of the sex. So, why even use "girl" in a negative statement "Throwing Like a Girl"?

SA would not have run into any issue if he used "throwing like a beginner" which is a true statement.

"Throwing like a girl" is completely wrong on the fact as you have pointed out above. Only purpose left for the statement to exist is to insult people on the expense of "girls". No?
 

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
So it's ok for The NY Times, The Washinton Post, Popular Science, female playwrights & authors, female scientists, etc to use this phrase in the title of articles and books. But I am called out as a misogynist for doing the same?
.

It's a subtlety, I think.

When someone says "you throw like a girl", it's usually meant as an insult, not a recognition of anatomical differences, hormones, or neurotransmitters. If you meant it as the latter, then I'm wrong. But I couldn't tell that from reading the title of the thread.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
@user92626
It's a subtlety, I think.

When someone says "you throw like a girl", it's usually meant as an insult, not a recognition of anatomical differences, hormones, or neurotransmitters. If you meant it as the latter, then I'm wrong. But I couldn't tell that from reading the title of the thread.

Were you only going by the thread title? If you has read the first half of the OP, I qualify that title. It should be readily apparent from the tone & explanation in the OP that the thread was not meant to be an insulting one. Misogyny was certainly not the intent.

The title was meant to be somewhat provocative and succinct. It was meant to immediately bring to mind exactly the type of mechanics in question without having to employ a very wordy title.

Did you read the pages/articles that I linked? Most of them used the very same phrase in their titles. I read more than a half dozen articles on the subject before starting this thread. For those who actually read those articles, I suspect that they did not give the authors grief for using that phrase
.
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
So it's ok for The NY Times, The Washinton Post, Popular Science, female playwrights & authors, female scientists, etc to use this phrase in the title of articles and books. But I am called out as a misogynist for doing the same?
.
I have skimmed over the NY Times article. No time for the others.

Take the NY Times article, there's a difference between what they do and what you do here. First, they acknowledge that the phrase is an insult. Secondly, it is a topic that they're researching and attempting to explain. It's a study and studies are usually acceptable. Besides, researchers are free to theorize, suggest anything. They put their credibility on the line. It's not necessarily proven or accepted.

You, however, use the phrased as a fact. Your intent isn't to dissect or argue about the phrase.

You have bought into it as a fact and moved on to address "the problem" . You got no legitimacy of using the phrase. Contexts matter.

In a way, it's like a study on races and their productivity which is always a hot button topic. Studying it isn't wrong and it's fair game to question the bias and stupidity of the study if there's any. Until it's proven and widely accepted, it's seriously wrong to use a (faulty, unproven) study to justify and push for a different agenda.
 
Last edited:

S&V-not_dead_yet

Talk Tennis Guru
@user92626


Were you only going by the thread title? If you has read the first half of the OP, I qualify that title. It should be readily apparent from the tone & explanation in the OP that the thread was not meant to be an insulting one. Misogyny was certainly not the intent.

The title was meant to be somewhat provocative and succinct. It was meant to immediately bring to mind exactly the type of mechanics in question without having to employ a very wordy title.

Did you read the pages/articles that I linked? Most of them used the very same phrase in their titles. I read more than a half dozen articles on the subject before starting this thread. For those who actually read those articles, I suspect that they did not give the authors grief for using that phrase
.

Yes, I was only going by the title. While one shouldn't judge a book by its cover nor a thread by its title, let's face it: people still do.

I'm not arguing with you on the merits of the articles. I just think you could have chosen a neutral title rather than a deliberately provocative one. I probably still would have read it with a boring title because I appreciate the points you make.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
I have skimmed over the NY Times article. No time for the others.

Take the NY Times article, there's a difference between what they do and what you do here. First, they acknowledge that the phrase is an insult...

The PC police seem to be coming out of the woodwork here. Feels like nitpicking here.

Did you read the OP or just the title? I did the very same thing that you say the NY article did. Pls read all of the articles then read my OP again and then crucify me as a misogynist.

Are we really not getting the intent of the OP?
 

user92626

G.O.A.T.
The PC police seem to be coming out of the woodwork here. Feels like nitpicking here.

Did you read the OP or just the title? I did the very same thing that you say the NY article did. Pls read all of the articles then read my OP again and then crucify me as a misogynist.

Are we really not getting the intent of the OP?

It's not nitpicking. You're not using the misogynistic phrase in the same context as the NY Times, which I have read.

Even for the NY Times, if they used the phrase in an op-ed article in their sports section to comment on a sportsperson, they'd be grilled hard for it. But here they use it in a research article which makes it ok.

You however have no context to hang your usage of the statement on. Your unnecessary repeat of the phrase only reinforces the misogyny against women.
 

Ronaldo

Bionic Poster
This is not just a girl problem. Anyone even Nadal can have this problem. Let's see Rafa throw a ball or even a sweatband left-handed.
 

Curious

G.O.A.T.
SysA is avoiding to say clearly whether he thinks the girls are not good at throwing because they have not had much exposure, experience compared to boys or because they have some sort of inherent deficiency anatomically or neurologically. And I sense he believes in the latter.
 

WildVolley

Legend
SysA is avoiding to say clearly whether he thinks the girls are not good at throwing because they have not had much exposure, experience compared to boys or because they have some sort of inherent deficiency anatomically or neurologically. And I sense he believes in the latter.

OK, but let me be clear about your position. You believe the difference in throwing ability is solely due to nurture differences.

Why are you so confident that women are naturally equal to men in throwing ability?

Do you think we should get rid of the WTA because there are no physical differences between men and women? Or are there some physical/skill differences between men and women that aren't due to nurture?
 

5263

G.O.A.T.
BTW, I am not talking about the service ball toss here. This is about the overhead throwing mechanics of the racket arm.
.
How much throwing have you had them do? Imo they have to do it once or twice a day till it looks and feels natural to get it, but I've had great success with the football throwing and have found nothing even close so far. Good luck and let us know how it goes...
 

5263

G.O.A.T.
OK, but let me be clear about your position. You believe the difference in throwing ability is solely due to nurture differences.

Why are you so confident that women are naturally equal to men in throwing ability?

Do you think we should get rid of the WTA because there are no physical differences between men and women? Or are there some physical/skill differences between men and women that aren't due to nurture?
I guess it depends on what you mean by equal, but Imo, if you take away the size and strength differences (which is saying quite a lot) then ladies can learn to throw equally well. When serving I think they can swing a racket close to the best of them, but suffer in the 'launch' execution phase due to lack of vertical ability.
 

WildVolley

Legend
I guess it depends on what you mean by equal, but Imo, if you take away the size and strength differences (which is saying quite a lot) then ladies can learn to throw equally well. When serving I think they can swing a racket close to the best of them, but suffer in the 'launch' execution phase due to lack of vertical ability.

I don't agree with your perspective, but it is one that could be further tested.

I believe, beyond the size and strength issue, men statistically have a greater capacity to mentally organize a proper throwing motion, which is why across cultures men statistically throw better than women and this throwing ability difference manifests quite young. On the other hand, I'm sure that if women are trained in throwing that they can definitely throw better than they do today. But I don't believe the difference we observe is solely due to nurture.

I also think these discussions go off course because a lot of people have no experience thinking in terms of statistics. When I read that women don't throw as well as men, I think in terms of distributions. Apparently a lot of other people read "ALL men are better at throwing than ALL women," which I don't think the OP or anyone else involved in this discussion believes.

I'm not sure about the best way to teach a throwing motion. I've found I can get some women to do a nice shadow swing but they revert to a push when a ball is brought into the situation. But honestly, this is a common problem I see with men, too. I like using a junior football to practice throwing for the serve.
 
Last edited:

5263

G.O.A.T.
I don't agree with your perspective, but it is one that could be further tested.

I believe, beyond the size and strength issue, men statistically have a greater capacity to mentally organize a proper throwing motion, which is why across cultures men statistically throw better than women and this throwing ability difference manifests quite young. On the other hand, I'm sure that if women are trained in throwing that they can definitely throw better than they do today. But I don't believe the difference we observe is solely due to nurture.

I also think these discussions go off course because a lot of people have no experience thinking in terms of statistics. When I read that women don't throw as well as men, I think in terms of distributions. Apparently a lot of other people read "ALL men are better at throwing than ALL women," which I don't think the OP or anyone else involved in this discussion believes.

I'm not sure about the best way to teach a throwing motion. I've found I can get some women to do a nice shadow swing but they revert to a push when a ball is brought into the situation. But honestly, this is a common problem I see with men, too. I like using a junior football to practice throwing for the serve.
No, I think you make good points, but ask you to look at well the ladies throw fast pitch softball and throw to 1st base for that matter. I don't know guys who throw that well underhanded, and think it would take a lot of training to get there. Just a thought.
 

Curious

G.O.A.T.
It's either true or false. I hate to break it to you, but there's sexual dimorphism in humans. It logically isn't any more misogyny than saying that men are taller than women is misogyny.

And in any case, be a rebel and join me in the he-man woman haters club. We have the best parties!
Do you ever think that men have more capacity to be better drivers, surgeons, pilots than women? Just curious.
 

coupergear

Professional
Yes it’s misogynistic. Very simple: what’s the difference between a girl and a boy who both suck at throwing?! Nothing. So, the problem is what to do/how to fix a person’s poor throwing motion?!
Agree. Both boys and girls can throw like a girl. My boys throw like girls, they didn't grow up playing traditional ball sports.

"Throw like a girl" is kind of the like the "ATP Forehand". You know it when you see it. It's a general description of certain form of throwing an object--typified by no cross-body action or torso coil, and leading with the same side foot as the throwing arm (darts example.) Usually the elbow leads as a fulcrum. It usually provides very little power, as the kinetic chain is very short, basically the elbow extension and possibly a stepping forward before release.
 

WildVolley

Legend
Do you ever think that men have more capacity to be better drivers, surgeons, pilots than women? Just curious.

I have heard that women tend to have better fine motor skills so they may have some advantages in being surgeons. I know women doctors who are quite skilled in surgery. In general, I think men probably have a better capacity to be drivers & pilots, but I haven't thought about it in detail.

In short, I don't believe that men have an advantage over women in all respects. I believe that hormonal differences in development between men and women do not necessarily develop brains equivalently. And I definitely believe there are sex differences in terms of temperament and physical strength.
 

mcs1970

Hall of Fame
There's a difference between saying something that might be sexist vs something that is misogynistic. Sexism is rooted in certain stereotypes that might or might not be true, but the person indulging in it generally doesn't hate women or look at women as cattle. Misogyny is a different beast and you can easily make out when someone is indulging in that.
 

SystemicAnomaly

Bionic Poster
@user92626
This discussion was over for me but one last attempt to make my point clear:): I agree with what you say above. My objection was to the claim that girls have an inherent deficiency about throwing compared to boys, anatomically, neurologically or whatever. This is what I thought SysA put forward as a 'fact'. If we agree that the only reason girls have a 'girly throw' is that they don't throw much while growing up then there is no problem. Go and check the public tennis courts, 8 out of 10 boys will have a 'girly' throw!

You didn’t really read my OP, did you?

8 or 10 boys? Not been my experience with students at all. Not even close. ‘Girly’ throw? Is phrase not misogynistic according to your own view?

SysA is avoiding to say clearly whether he thinks the girls are not good at throwing because they have not had much exposure, experience compared to boys or because they have some sort of inherent deficiency anatomically or neurologically. And I sense he believes in the latter.

Seriously! Reading comprehension is suspect. Not avoiding anything. This something that I had addressed in POST #1. Please stop with the harassment and attempts to derail this thread. Again, PLEASE read the OP as well as the links that I provided for you.

Even tho I brought up this stuff in the first (and subsequent) posts, it was NOT meant to be the main the focus of this thread. I gave it several short paragraphs in post #1. I did not want to get into a long dissertation on the subject. That is why I provided you with several of the pages of the 6 or 7 articles that I had read before starting this thread.

If you two guys feel strongly enough about this, please do as I requested earlier and start you own thread on this. Further attempts to derail this thread might very well be reported to the mods.
 
Last edited:

Steady Eddy

Legend
Np just that some boys don't care, some girls don't care, some boys care some girls care. Did I leave anyone out?
I think this is a problem with formal logic. Logic only has categories like: all, none, or some. In real life those aren't very satisfactory. Statistics works better. Knowing things like the mean and standard deviation can be so useful.

If the understanding of those ideas became commonplace, it would end these kinds of exchanges. "Men, on average, are taller than women." "Not so Eddy. Yesterday I saw a woman who was 6'4"!" That doesn't contradict the claim. People will some up with, "Some women are tall, some men are short, and vice versa. You cannot generalize." But this won't do, as the difference in height is significant. So, on average, more boys care about sports, this does not imply that all boys care, or that no girls care.
 
Last edited:
Top