You know, some forum software allows for people to start threads and then ban various individuals from participation in them.

I would actually like to start a serious, rational discussion of issues like this and ban the likes of Johnson from participation in them.  I'm interested in discussing issues rationally, applying definitions and logic and distinctions ... according to a scholastic definition.  And, no, the intention isn't to limit it to people who agree with me.  That would be boring.  You can sometimes best arrive at the truth when people who disagree actually help you elicit the proper distinctions.  I'm sick and tired of the irrational emoting and huffing-and-puffing.

I'm this close to insisting that someone actually format their argument into a syllogism before I bother responding.

From the beginning, people blurring together the concerns of modesty and competition and physical exertion (that evidently excites the passions).  [PS most moral theologians recommend strenuous physical activity precisely in order to TAME and CONTROL and to QUELL the passions]. 

I do hold that direct competition between boys and girls is wrong.

So, for instance, there should be no spelling bee that includes boy and girls competing against one another.  Girls should not compete against boys.

But I do not hold that it's necessarily wrong for girls to compete against one another.

Nor do I hold that vigorous physical activity is wrong for girls either.

But, now, the current argument is that vigorous physical activity combined with competition is wrong because it excites the passions.

But, then, to the contrary, any kind of competition can excite the passions, get people worked up against one another, hostile, etc. ... shirt-removal notwithstanding.

You know, some forum software allows for people to start threads and then ban various individuals from participation in them.

I would actually like to start a serious, rational discussion of issues like this and ban the likes of Johnson from participation in them.  I'm interested in discussing issues rationally, applying definitions and logic and distinctions ... according to a scholastic definition.  And, no, the intention isn't to limit it to people who agree with me.  That would be boring.  You can sometimes best arrive at the truth when people who disagree actually help you elicit the proper distinctions.  I'm sick and tired of the irrational emoting and huffing-and-puffing.

I'm this close to insisting that someone actually format their argument into a syllogism before I bother responding.

From the beginning, people blurring together the concerns of modesty and competition and physical exertion (that evidently excites the passions).  [PS most moral theologians recommend strenuous physical activity precisely in order to TAME and CONTROL and to QUELL the passions].

:baby: 

...and is not a sport, but a recreation.

In your opinion is playing tennis a "sport" or "recreation"?

…It’s the striving for mastery or winning over a competitor that contains the potential abuse of releasing the darker side, in men as well.

But Sean already stipulated that the competition of playing card and board games is acceptable even though someone wins and someone loses.

Yes, the pink is a hormone blocker and feminizes you.

Then by the same logic, one would have to conclude women participating in masculine endeavors like sports (vs recreation) become masculinized (as was shown earlier in the TIA article excerpt).  
This also explains the disproportionately high incidence of lesbianism in women’s sports:
The feminine psyche is damaged.

Sport:
When Bishop Williamson was sequestered in a Wimbledon attic, he wrote an EC on the “Gladiatrixes.”

I'd be interested in that column (but not interested enough to search for it).
I recall playing tennis with women modestly dressed and the spirit was recreational. Same with bicycling.
I think there are objective issues, e.g., the modesty of dress, and subjective issues, e.g., the intensity and motive of the competition, that determine whether or not there is any sinfulness. The inner forum plays a key role here.