Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:XCountry and oboe are for losers. Girls like guitar players and basketball/soccer players. It good to have both.

Cross country stars usually are tall with low body fat - hard to run blisteringly fast and not have a six pack for example. I can attest there are women that prefer that physique to the outside linebacker type.

NO, NO, and NO. Women prefer soccer players over XC stars.

I can't believe a discussion can turn so stupid. It might be true that - statistically speaking - more women are attracted to soccer players. That doesn't mean that your XC star struggles to attract women because the XC star does not compete with the soccer players for the same pool of women. Simple minds, simple thoughts.

Women will overwhelmingly choose soccer/baseball/tennis players over XC superstars. Think of it like this: XC is like a violinist, while soccer/baseball/tennis players are like lead singer/guitarist. You can be the most famous violinist, Joshua Bell, play the most difficult piece at the metro station and 99% of the people would not know who you are. On the other hand, if you are Shawn Mendes or Bruno Mars, play the guitar and sing at the metro station, the women will mob you, for good reasons. FWIW, Joshua Bell played 45 minutes and got $32, LOL.... In summary, XC is for losers.

Soccer/baseball/tennis?
What weird world do you live in?

I don't think this is a good reason to do a sport but if girls are a driving factor, basketball is probably at the top followed closely by a starting position on the football team.
These are pretty much the only sports that the students watch unless the team makes it to district or something like that.

And that's pretty much it. Noone goes to the baseball/soccer games and noone goes to the tennis matches, sometimes not even parents.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This might be new to some of you, but most people eventually find a partner, despite playing a less popular sport, and despite girls flocking around the star athletes. Your star athlete - despite the multiple options they have in life - may still end up as a loser paying child support. Many of the kids that you call losers on this thread will end up with great jobs, happy families, and raising successful kids. It's not the kids who are losers, it's you who judge the kids based on the sports they are playing.

Yes dorks have sex and procreate. In other news…

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This might be new to some of you, but most people eventually find a partner, despite playing a less popular sport, and despite girls flocking around the star athletes. Your star athlete - despite the multiple options they have in life - may still end up as a loser paying child support. Many of the kids that you call losers on this thread will end up with great jobs, happy families, and raising successful kids. It's not the kids who are losers, it's you who judge the kids based on the sports they are playing.

This^^^ Worshipping athletes as “rock stars” creates a bubble of entitlement and arrogance that works against their ability to be a good teammate, employee, and romantic partner. At worst, it can lead to dark places such as bullying, sexual assault, date rape, partner violence, and binge drinking. There’s a reason that these behaviors tend to cluster around certain sports and not others.

Anonymous wrote:This might be new to some of you, but most people eventually find a partner, despite playing a less popular sport, and despite girls flocking around the star athletes. Your star athlete - despite the multiple options they have in life - may still end up as a loser paying child support. Many of the kids that you call losers on this thread will end up with great jobs, happy families, and raising successful kids. It's not the kids who are losers, it's you who judge the kids based on the sports they are playing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:XCountry and oboe are for losers. Girls like guitar players and basketball/soccer players. It good to have both.

Cross country stars usually are tall with low body fat - hard to run blisteringly fast and not have a six pack for example. I can attest there are women that prefer that physique to the outside linebacker type.

NO, NO, and NO. Women prefer soccer players over XC stars.

I can't believe a discussion can turn so stupid. It might be true that - statistically speaking - more women are attracted to soccer players. That doesn't mean that your XC star struggles to attract women because the XC star does not compete with the soccer players for the same pool of women. Simple minds, simple thoughts.

Women will overwhelmingly choose soccer/baseball/tennis players over XC superstars. Think of it like this: XC is like a violinist, while soccer/baseball/tennis players are like lead singer/guitarist. You can be the most famous violinist, Joshua Bell, play the most difficult piece at the metro station and 99% of the people would not know who you are. On the other hand, if you are Shawn Mendes or Bruno Mars, play the guitar and sing at the metro station, the women will mob you, for good reasons. FWIW, Joshua Bell played 45 minutes and got $32, LOL.... In summary, XC is for losers.

You are making such strange references. No high school soccer or tennis player has any more cachet vs a XC runner.

It’s football and basketball…then far behind that baseball…then there is 10 miles of shit and there is every other sport.

In no universe is a high school tennis player considered a rock star.

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware that XC is probably one of a very few no-cut sports? It means that kids that get cut from other cut sports go over to XC. Football is another no-cut sport at McLean HS, where my kids attend, but parents here recognize the dangers of football (i.e. CTE) so they don't let their kids play football.

Anonymous wrote:This might be new to some of you, but most people eventually find a partner, despite playing a less popular sport, and despite girls flocking around the star athletes. Your star athlete - despite the multiple options they have in life - may still end up as a loser paying child support. Many of the kids that you call losers on this thread will end up with great jobs, happy families, and raising successful kids. It's not the kids who are losers, it's you who judge the kids based on the sports they are playing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And when my XC son, who is quite handsome, gets selected for a top college, I hope he avoids people like you that thought of him and his teammates as losers.

I hope they go for higher quality girls, unlike you.

He’s handsome and not a dork only in your eyes

Lots of "dork" on the XC team at Langley high school, according to my DD.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware that XC is probably one of a very few no-cut sports? It means that kids that get cut from other cut sports go over to XC. Football is another no-cut sport at McLean HS, where my kids attend, but parents here recognize the dangers of football (i.e. CTE) so they don't let their kids play football.

Are you aware that XC doesn’t need your permission to exist?

Anonymous wrote:Are you aware that XC is probably one of a very few no-cut sports? It means that kids that get cut from other cut sports go over to XC. Football is another no-cut sport at McLean HS, where my kids attend, but parents here recognize the dangers of football (i.e. CTE) so they don't let their kids play football.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And when my XC son, who is quite handsome, gets selected for a top college, I hope he avoids people like you that thought of him and his teammates as losers.

I hope they go for higher quality girls, unlike you.

He’s handsome and not a dork only in your eyes