Wow, you guys serious? I don't see any direct correlation to religion or sexism, you fools. This is simple biology/ gender differences. The kid simply has strong convictions in his family values and that value at question is...would you essentially fight a girl? I would expect most of you to say no. Males always have been and will generally be stronger than women. Thats not sexism. Thats reality.

Whats next mixed gender UFC fights? You guys spend too much time on the internet, philosophizing. The people who claim sexism are the funniest. Are you guys the same guys that punch girls in domestic violence disputes because its an even fight?

1 Timothy 11(B)A woman must quietly receive instruction with entire submissiveness.

12(C)But I do not allow a woman to teach or exercise authority over a man, but to remain quiet.

Come on man, don't ignore the story. He specifically stated that his forfeiture was a direct result of his religious feelings. Also, coming up with the whole "males are stronger" thing is kind of a joke, considering this girl had won her way into the tournament, beat a competitor after this guy skipped out on the match, and oh yeah; wrestling has this thing called "weight classes" that makes the sport much more about wrestling skill than pure physical strength.

Don't ignore the story? Ive read the story twice now and Im telling you that he quit because of his moral values, which happened to be bestowed upon him by a christian upbringing and your telling me this is all about religion? right? as if non christian or religious values would result in a different story?

And again, what are you smoking? the "males are stronger" thing is kind of a joke? Is that why the strongest humans in the world in pretty much any sport and the best athletes are generally men? I am not sexist. I want to make that clear. But there is a reason you have men's and women's activities...think about it, clown.

And also according to your weight classes theory...a woman at 175lbs who wants to fight MMA should be let into an octagon with even an 170lb male? Is this fair to you? Is your mother or wife a feminist or something?

99% of 175 lbs males shouldn't get into the ring with an MMA fighter. If this female has actually trained and has shown that she can compete at this level and won't get killed (like 99% of men) there is no reason to forbid her from fighting. You can choose not to fight her, but your position is not based on any logical arguments.

nice try...but my position is based on a logical argument...and its called testosterone.

Sorry, I was using a stricter definition of logical, something that would convince a smart person that your argument makes sense. I'm sure your argument makes sense to you, but that obv doesn't count.

The girl had been wrestling all year against men, and had a winning record.

I love how you claim you're not sexist, though. You might want to look up the definition of that word, clown.

Well thats very convenient of you to be able to expand and contract the definition of logical at your own leisure.

You're clearly missing my point. Men are athletically more adept creatures than women. This is a physiological fact. You cannot argue this. And the reason for this, is the production of a hormone called testosterone which results in muscle mass, strength, bone, etc. Speed is also proportional to muscle force.

So in almost all major recognized sports, men will athletically dominate females. Im sorry to burst your bubble. Now...i am not saying this girl could not have gone on to win the tournament, because she really may have been the most skilled wrestler. What i am saying is that this child forfeited out of principle and that i can respect. If he accepted the match, he is in fact accepting open competition in any sport between male and female competitors. Im not sure how you would look at that, but thats biologically unfair, given the fact that men create up to over 10x as much testosterone as women.

Then men shouldn't feel threatened when women enter a competition. If this is true (I believe it is), then the approach to a woman who claims she can beat the men should be "bring it on."

There are female leagues. She opted to compete in a male league. There's no "unfair" about it.

Well sorry to offend your liberal 21st century fair and equal minded ideology. Thats just how nature made us, i guess, hmmm??

And thats my final point... His conviction was so strong in his values that he forfeited the match out of principle and not for personal glory. Even he wrestled her and won, how tough would he really feel? This is the admirable and respectable aspect of the story, which even the opposing girl's family acknowledged. Go read the full article somewhere, this is an edited version.

Apparently not in this women case since she has beaten men and the testosterone thing doesn't seem to be holding her back.

Lolz... I can't tell if I am being leveled or not. All we are saying is the tautology that if a particular girl is good enough to wrestle with boys she is good enough to wrestle with boys. You don't need to know anything else to verify the truth value of that... nobody is saying that a random girl will be as good as a random boy or that women and men are equal in physical activities.

Should I feel insulted now? How disgusting of me that I view men and women as equals.

Don't worry about it. Its a common problem these days. I'M KIDDING! I'M KIDDING! I love women and i respect them very much.

He should feel exactly as tough as is merited from beating the second-best wrestler in the tournament. Generalizations are irrelevant when information about a specific case is available. To apply a generalization in such a situation is a failure of reason.

I'm not concerned with her family, I don't respect this foolishness.

Also an error in reasoning...

I can see you're one of those people that does not like to be proven wrong or you're out on a mission right now to make me look like an idiot? I don't know.

but a failure of reason? lol huh? well my reasoning leads me to believe that testosterone is an anabolic steroid and any male regardless of how successful the female competitor may be, has a competitive advantage due to the chemicals in his body that physiologically differentiate him from that female. That is like having a team or athlete cheat because they are on steroids and the other athlete is not, correct? Now, the very nature of competition is that there is an even playing field to determine the best skillset? correctomundo? So what kind of a s s hole would he be if he felt as is merited to beating the number 2 male competitor?

You tell me, smarty pants...

As you almost bring up, wrestling is about more than pure strength. Regardless, this girl did lose her matches after this one, so I think it's fair to say she stood nearly no chance in this match, no matter what you attribute that to.

But more to the point, what is the point here? Should he have forfeited if any weaker opponent entered the ring (or mat, or whatever)? Why does anything matter when competitor X is set to compete against competitor Y except for how X will fare against Y? Should how the gender of X would fare against that of Y matter? What about race? Why don't we just see who can bench more weight and then have that person forfeit since he clearly has an unfair advantage?

If the girl wants to compete, then it's disrespectful to take that away from her and tell her she gets a win just because she's a girl.

You don't need any help from him....

Yes, let's check the testosterone levels of the competitors before each match. Whoever's is lowest automatically gets the victory since it's otherwise not fair. Even 2 boys in the same weight class won't have the same levels, so what's your point?

Also, that generalizations statement. Thats some grade A regurgitation of....hmmm...almost every poker book i've ever read. This is not poker we're talking about here, champ. Its a forum about the morality of a decision a youth wrestler made.

She had already beaten the number 2 male competitor. She was stronger and tougher than he was. We know this, because she kicked his ass.

If he would have felt good to beat the #2 male, then he should feel even better to beat her, because she is a better wrestler than the #2 male.

That women in general aren't as good as men in general is irrelevant. This woman is better than the men - we know this because she beat them down. They met on an even playing field, she crushed them. That proves her strength.

If the guy is too stupid to see that, then he deserves a ****ing lobotomy. It might raise his IQ.

Oh, I thought she won the tournament? Ah well.