There are many truths in this world that the Left simply refuses to accept and will often make propaganda claiming the exact opposite to be the case. One such truth is that men, on average, are physically superior to women and thus, when engaged in some sort of athletic event, the men will always have some sort of advantage and will almost always win. This is not always the case, of course, but more often than not, men will win in athletic competitions against women.
 
And this is what happened on Monday, when for the third straight time, Canada’s women’s hockey team, while preparing for the 2022 Winter Olympics, lost to a men’s junior A hockey team.
 
And it wasn’t particularly close. The team, the Drumheller Dragons, beat the women’s team in a shut-out, with the final score being 8-0.
 
Now, it’s really hard to score goals in hockey, so I won’t be too harsh on the women’s team for not being able to score a goal. On the flip-side, I will be harsh for the fact that they allowed eight scores against them as, again, it’s really hard to score goals in hockey.
 
According to CBC, “Adam Raesler scored a hat trick for the Alberta Junior Hockey League side, while Luke Fennig added a pair of goals. Ty Daneault, Grayson Dietrich and Ty Whitford all scored singles for the men’s junior A club.”
 
For those who might not know hockey terminology, a hat trick is when a single player scores three times in a single game. This is important because, like I said, it’s really hard to score goals in hockey, so to do so three times in a single game as an individual is relatively rare. A lot of games go unscored and many others will have relatively low scores.
 
CBC continued: “Canada’s Kristen Campbell stopped 19 of 22 shots in two periods of work and Emerance Maschmeyer six saves in relief. Eric Ward saved all five shots he faced in 29 minutes of play for the Dragons and Garrett Fuller finished out the game, making six stops.”
 
While stopping 19 of 22 shots might sound impressive, it shows just how many attempts at the goal the women’s team allowed the men to have. Combined, the two female goalies stopped 25 shots, allowing 8 goals, and the men stopped 11 shots and kept the women from scoring at all. This demonstrates how much more dominant the men’s team was than the women’s team.
 
And this is far from the first time that a woman or a women’s team have lost to a man/men’s team. For example, the U.S. women’s soccer team lost to FC Dallas back in 2017 5-2. FC Dallas is a soccer team for boys under 15-years-old. Now, sure, one can make the argument that the women’s team wasn’t really trying, which would be a fair argument. But we’re not done with the examples.
 
This is one which I have used many times in the past: the time when Serena and Venus Williams lost to a man outside the top-200.
 
To recount the story for those who might not remember the details, back in 1998, when the two women were at the top of the women’s tennis world, they boasted to the men’s ATP office that they could beat any player around the top 200. It’s likely that they understood, at least back then, that they stood no chance against the very best male tennis players, but believed they could beat those who were good but not particularly great.
 
German player Karsten Braasch, who was ranked 203rd at the time, seemingly overheard the sisters making such a claim and stepped up to challenge both competitors back-to-back.
 
According to USA Today, “Braasch would smoke cigarettes and sip beer during the changeovers, and to be honest no longer looked the part of a fit professional athlete.” Despite this, however, he went on to beat Serena 6-1 and Venus 6-2 in a single-set match.
 
In other articles, I have mentioned that Braasch boasted that he played like someone outside the top 500, and while it’s difficult to assert the accuracy of such a statement, the fact that he smoked cigarettes, sipped beer and no longer looked like a fit professional athlete lends credence to such a statement. The guy was very, very clearly not trying against the top female tennis players of the time, when both Serena and Venus were at their physical PRIMES.
 
Not to mention that, since Serena and Venus were the ones who were boasting about who they could beat in the first place, it’s entirely likely that the two of them WERE trying to win, so the excuse that “they weren’t trying, it was just for fun” is far less believable here.
 
It’s probably because of those particular matches against the Williams sisters that notable rage monster John McEnroe made the statement in an interview that while Serena was the best female tennis player in the world, “if she played the men’s circuit, she’d be like 700 in the world.”
 
He made this statement back in 2017, and of course, hysterical Leftists criticized McEnroe for such a statement, and even Serena Williams tweeted: “Please please keep me out of your statements that are not factually based… Respect me and my privacy.”
 
While we can’t know for sure that Serena Williams would be only 700 in the men’s circuit, what is a fact is that she would not be considered the best tennis player in the world (like the woman interviewing McEnroe was asserting) because she lost to a man outside the top 200 who likely actually did play like someone outside the top 500, back when she was in her physical prime and was likely really trying to win the match. So people got mad at McEnroe, not because he said something untrue, but because he said something which was likely certain and people didn’t like it.
 
People get ticked off when you remind them of the reality that men, on average, are physically superior to women, and when a man and a woman (or men and women) are competing physically, the men will usually come out victorious.
 
Does this mean I, an unathletic man who hasn’t played tennis in years, could beat Serena Williams in a single-set match? Almost certainly no. But I do have a physical advantage anyway (in part because I am much younger), so there is some amount of chance I could win, slim as it might be.
 
But all things being equal, having a male athlete compete against a female athlete in the same sport, almost all the time, the man will win. It’s why having transgender “women” compete against actual women is unfair and disgusting. Those men calling themselves women have a physical advantage over the actual women they are competing against. This is such an obvious reality that even South Park parodied it, when they had a man who looked and sounded a lot like “Macho Man” Randy Savage (for obvious reasons) compete against women in a “Strong Woman” competition and beat all of them with extreme ease.
 
When even the writers of South Park have more logical sense than Leftists, you know Leftists are particular lunatics.
 
Men are stronger than women. That is a fact that has been known since the dawn of time. Whining about it and making false claims to counter it does not make it untrue.
 
Ephesians 6:14
“Stand therefore, having fastened on the belt of truth, and having put on the breastplate of righteousness.”

Certain things are self-evident. We are created in the image of God, and the Lord created the heavens and the Earth. Anyone with the ability to sense the world at any capacity should be able to recognize that nothing could be possible without the hand of God. Similarly, it is self-evident that the sky is blue, as anyone with eyes can tell you. Gravity has an effect on everything on this planet, as everything is subject to having -9.8m/s2 weighing down on them.
 
And no matter what any Twitter scientist might try to tell you, male is male and female is female. Someone might FEEL that they are the opposite gender, but they biologically cannot be the opposite gender. No matter how hard a man tries, he cannot get pregnant, even if he undergoes surgery to possess a vagina. No matter how hard a woman might try, she cannot get a woman pregnant, even if she undergoes surgery to possess a penis. This is because, despite such surgeries, they lack the necessary reproductive parts to do either thing.
 
In a similar fashion, due to the way in which male and female bodies develop, men tend to have a physical advantage over women, on average. However, it seems as though this obvious fact was dubious enough that a study was necessary.
 
You see, a recent study published in the British Journal of Sports Medicine suggests that, even after a year of hormone “therapy”, transgender “women” (men who claim to be women) still retain an athletic physical advantage over real women.
 
The study examined transgender men and women serving in the Air Force between 2013 and 2018. According to NBC News, who are reporting on this study, “The Air Force’s fitness assessment includes the number of pushups and situps performed in a minute, and the time required to run 1.5 miles. For the first two years after starting hormones, the trans women in their review were able to do 10 percent more pushups and 6 percent more situps than their cisgender female counterparts.”
 
The study found that, even after two years of “hormone therapy”, transgender “women” were still 12% faster on the 1.5 mile run than the real women they were competing against.
 
The way in which the male body develops is different from that of women. Men possess higher muscle mass and stronger bone development, so “hormone therapy” would still not be enough to make those transgender “women” equally as athletic as real women.
 
Women are at higher risk of developing osteoporosis than men are for precisely the reason that women develop weaker bones than men. So of course the transgender “women” are going to still have an athletic advantage over the women: it’s NATURE!
 
Must I revisit the topic of the Williams sisters, at the height of their careers, losing to a man outside the top 200 who might have been holding back?
 
I’ve already shared that one plenty of times because it is a prime example of the differences between men and women. The Williams sisters were undoubtedly more talented than that man, but his physical superiority is what won him those games, somewhat to the admission of the famous sisters, who noted that the guy got to balls which would “be winners” against female competitors.
 
The guy’s physical superiority won him those games, and a man’s physical superiority, even despite years of “hormone therapy” will still show against women, at least usually.
 
I say “usually” because if I, an untrained man, were to play against the Williams sisters (even now), I would probably get creamed. I may currently be more physically superior to them, but they are athletes and I am not. I would certainly get destroyed if I played against them in their primes. In an arm-wrestling competition, I would most likely win (at least against Venus, seeing as Serena has a very mannish body structure), because of my very genetic and physical composition.
 
But regardless of whether or not I would be able to win against literal athletes, the fact remains that the average man is physically stronger than the average woman. On a level playing field, just about any man playing tennis today could beat any woman playing tennis today 99 times out of 100, or somewhere around that. Men being physically superior to women is the norm, not the exception.
 
So I ask, again, did we really need a study to confirm what anyone with a brain already knows? Do we need to run tests to prove again and again that gravity is a thing that exists? Do we need to perform examinations and studies which showcase that, yes, the sky is blue?
 
Do we need to perform tests to see that men and women really are different? It’s extremely observable throughout the history of mankind that men are physically superior to women, on average. There exist women, for example, who are professional weightlifters such as the following women:

​I don’t think I have to tell you that I am almost certainly not physically superior to those women, particularly the ones which are obviously using steroids. So, for the feminists out there, yes, there are women who are/can be physically superior to most men. Though, again, on a level playing field, weightlifting men are usually going to be physically superior to the weightlifting women.
 
The world record holder for heaviest weightlifting for men is a Georgian (country) man named Lasha Talakhadze, with a 220kg Snatch record and a 264kg Clean & Jerk record, totaling 484kg. For women’s weightlifting, the record is owned by a Chinese woman named Li Wenwen, who owns the Snatch record at 147kg, Clean & Jerk record at 186kg, for a total record of 332kg.
 
By the way, those are the records for men who weigh more than 109kg and women who weigh more than 87kg respectively. But even comparing the record-owning woman with men in a similar range of weight, she is still outclassed.
 
The record for an 81kg man is 378kg total, shattering both of Li’s records. Only 67kg men (147.71 lbs.) are near where she set her record… and still beat her by a few pounds.
 
So even significantly lighter men can still beat the strongest woman’s record.
 
It’s for that reason that common sense activists (both conservatives and real feminists whom would usually not side with conservatives on anything) are opposed to men and transgender “women” participating in girls’ sports, because men are PHYSICALLY AND ATHLETICALLY SUPERIOR.
 
Once again, I ask: did we really need a study for this? I’m not trying to bash the researchers for doing their jobs and exploring some scientific curiosity, but why does this kind of scientific curiosity exist? Like I said in the beginning, certain things are self-evident. That means you don’t need studies to verify their veracity. Like you don’t need studies to show that the sky is blue or that gravity is a thing that exists, you don’t need studies that show that men are physically superior to women, even men who have gone bananas and inject themselves with estrogen.
 
I can only hope that common sense and reason return soon to Western society, else the rest of the world will easily destroy us (well, we’ll have destroyed ourselves, really).
 
Proverbs 16:25
“There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way to death.”

In what is perhaps a rather interesting twist of events, the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) released a “fact sheet” regarding the U.S. Women’s soccer team as part of a lawsuit filed by the Women’s team against the USSF alleging pay discrimination due to gender. As it turns out, the U.S. Women’s soccer team was LOSING the USSF money for most of the past decade, but they still were paid more money overall than the Men’s soccer team.
 
Just so there is no confusion and contradiction to my other article regarding the Women’s team being paid, the USSF and FIFA are two different organizations. If you remember, FIFA pays its male players roughly $400 million and its female players $30 million. As I said from that other article, from that alone, you would think there was gender discrimination, but I asserted that the Men’s team generate more revenue than the Women’s team, so they have a larger pool of money to receive (and the Women are paid a larger percentage from the smaller pool than the Men do in the larger pool).
 
But the USSF is slightly different. Back in June, the Women’s team released info saying that they brought in more revenue than the Men’s team did ($50.8M vs. $49.9M, so barely any difference, but still enough to drive their point). However, there are a number of things that actually hurt the Women’s team in their suit.
 
First, as it stands, that number has not been confirmed, as far as I can tell. They COULD be right, but given some statistics that we will see later on, I have my doubts regarding this.
 
Second, there is one major difference between the Women’s team and the Men’s team that affects wages, and that’s that one receives a base salary of $100,000, plus bonuses of $67,500 to $72,500 for playing in a national soccer league, while the other is not paid a base salary at all. The gender that is paid a base salary and bonuses is the female gender. The men are only paid bonuses for games.
 
What’s more, the Women’s team receives other benefits such as a 401k, health insurance, which includes maternity leave and injury protection. The men don’t receive such benefits.
 
Third, the USSF claimed that they actually pay women more than they do men. According to The Daily Wire: “USSF claimed that it paid women $34.1 million in salaries and game bonuses and ‘we paid our men $26.4 million – not counting the significant additional value of various benefits that our women’s players receive but which our men do not.’”
 
So if the USSF is correct, they are actually paying women MORE than men, simply due to salaries + game and other bonuses.
 
The USSF also claimed that the “hypothetical per game comparison” often used in Leftists’ arguments regarding gender wage discrimination (as far as soccer goes) isn’t exactly plausible because neither team has ever played 20 friendly matches in a year: “That said, if the men and women ever did play in and win 20 friendlies in a year and were paid the average bonus amount, a women’s player would earn more from U.S. Soccer than the men’s player – the women’s player would earn at least $307,500 (WNT and NWSL salaries, plus game bonuses) and the men’s player would earn $263,333 (game bonuses only),” according to the USSF.
 
But perhaps what is most damning for the Women’s case against the USSF is the following:
 
“From 2009 through 2019 – a timeframe that includes two Women’s World Cup championships – the Women’s National Team has earned gross revenue of $101.3 million over 238 games, for an average of $425,446 per game, and the Men’s National Team has earned gross revenue of $185.7 million over 191 games, for an average of $972,147 per game. More specifically, WNT games have generated a net profit (ticket revenues minus event expenses) in only two years (2016 and 2017). Across the entire 11-year period, WNT games generated a net loss of $27.5 million. Nevertheless, U.S. Soccer does not view these as losses, bur rather as an important investment in our Women’s National Team and in the long-term growth of women’s soccer.”
 
In other words, the Women’s team has LOST money for the USSF in most years in the past decade and STILL are paid more than the men are. And they dare to cry “sexism”?
 
But do you want to know what is honestly the saddest part of this? Reread the last sentence of the paragraph: the USSF did not see these net-loss years as losses at all, but as an investment in the future of women’s soccer. They are willing to take some years in the red for the sake of women’s soccer (which would usually be a bad thing for a business, but I suppose the Men’s team makes enough to make the USSF feel comfortable with such losses for the sake of women hoping to become professional soccer players). So basically, the Women’s soccer team, in their lawsuit against the USSF, is essentially acting like one of those spoiled kids who get everything they ask for and on their 16th birthday, are given a brand new and expensive car, but they cry and throw temper tantrums because “it’s the wrong color” or “it’s not the kind of car I wanted”.
 
Granted, I’m fairly certain most of those instances on those reality TV shows are fake, but there are a lot of comparisons here. The U.S. Women’s soccer team, as far as the USSF is concerned, makes MORE money than the Men’s team does, but they cry and whine and lie that they actually don’t.
 
Matter of fact, a spokeswoman for the Women’s team said that the USSF’s “fact check” was a “ruse” and a “sad attempt” at thwarting the lawsuit: “The USSF fact sheet is not a ‘clarification’. It is a ruse. Here is what they cannot deny. For every game a man plays on the MNT, he makes a higher base salary payment than a woman on the WNT. For every comparable win or tie, his bonus is higher. That is the very definition of gender discrimination.”
 
It certainly would be the very definition of gender discrimination if anything she said was actually true.
 
First, the Men’s team does not actually make more in base salary than a woman. They don’t make ANY base salary, as was just discussed.
 
Second, I highly doubt this is a ruse. USSF President Carlos Cordeiro wrote an open letter in which he stated that he ordered U.S. Soccer staff to perform “an extensive analysis of the past 10 years of U.S. Soccer’s financials.” This is what the fact sheet eventually turned into. He also said that the analysis was “reviewed by an independent accounting firm.” So while the USSF did an internal analysis of the organization’s financials over the last decade (largely because they are pretty much the only ones who can do that apart from a government agency), the analysis was also reviewed by an independent party, allowing for objectivity.
 
However, what does appear to be a “ruse”, or at least highly illegitimate and wrong is the U.S. Women’s suit against the USSF. They are suing under the claim that they are being paid less than the men are, but USSF financials show a completely different story – one where the Women’s team is actually paid MORE than the Men’s team due to having a base salary to accompany other bonuses that the men don’t get. And sure, while the men get paid more in bonuses than the women do, the reason for that is because they don’t receive a base salary.
 
Apart from the USSF, the Women’s team doesn’t have much of a case regarding gender discrimination in their wages either. As I discussed in the other article regarding the U.S. Women’s team, the only reason FIFA pays the women less money is because the Women’s division generates less revenue for FIFA than the men do.
 
The Women’s World Cup that took place in Vancouver four years ago only generated around $73 million in revenue, 13% of which went to the players. The 2010 Men’s World Cup in South Africa generated $4 billion in revenue, of which 9% went to the players. The Men’s World Cup in Russia back in 2018 generated $6 billion, while this year’s Women’s World Cup made roughly $131 million.
 
Over the last World Cups that were played, the Women’s World Cup only made a little over 2% of what the Men’s World Cup made. So in what world could the Women’s team at all be able to make anywhere near as much as the Men could? The Women already get paid a larger portion of the revenue from their World Cup than the Men do.
 
But getting back to the USSF, they are actually rather nice to the women, all things considered. The Women’s division tends to bring losses for the organization, but the idea of having a program for women who wish to become professional soccer players is noble enough to accept these losses, so long as they can offset them with the Men’s revenue (and the Women do sometimes bring in profits anyway).
 
The USSF pays women more than they do men, they tend to LOSE money regarding their Women’s team, give women more benefits and a base salary which they do not give to men, and the Women’s team, in their self-righteous and toxic mentality of victimhood still believe they are being discriminated against when NONE of the statistics show that to be the case?
 
Not a good look for the U.S. Women’s team.
 
1 Timothy 6:9-10
“But those who desire to be rich fall into temptation, into a snare, into many senseless and harmful desires that plunge people into ruin and destruction. For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evils. It is through this craving that some have wandered away from the faith and pierced themselves with many pangs.”
 
And please make sure to check out our free weekly newsletter. As the name suggests, it is a newsletter that comes completely free of charge. What you get is a compilation of the week’s articles sent right into your inbox. So make sure to check it out today!