Syndicate
Special Thanks To...
The following organizations were early supporters of Mensactivism.org, and we thank them for their support. If you'd like to trade links with us, see our Mensactivism.org supporters page.
Less Men = Equality, Less Women = Travesty
Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 2006-09-27 16:04
A recent human-rights ruling in Canada found that barring two twin girls from trying out for a boy's hockey team is discriminatory. Since the ruling the girls have tried out and didn't make the cut.
According to this article as a result of the ruling there have been cases of boys attempting to try out for the girl's teams.
The final paragraph of the article quotes the executive director of the Manitoba High Schools Athletic Association as saying:
"Everything that our organization has done … is based gender-equal. And if we all of a sudden get an influx of males participating, it could affect female participation and that would be a travesty."
- Log in to post comments
Comments
Same True in Reverse
The statement that every boy who joins the girls' team takes away from a girl's ability to join is also true in reverse - for every girl who joins the boys' team, there is a boy (even if otherwise barely qualifying, perhaps), who cannot join. Their focus is one-sided as usual.
At least the twins did not make the team
This whole idea is rather silly. There are real (no matter how much femnuts whale) differences physically between boys and girls at the age of puberty and beyond. That's why boys and girls have different teams.
Kids leagues it's fine, young boys and young girls are physically about the same size and at young ages it's more about fundimental skill and teamwork then the real competativeness that ensues in older kids.
Boys should be on boys teams and girls should be on girls teams by the time they reach high school if not a couple years before. If the girls feel they are good enough to play with the boys then they should persue the lucrative careers in female pro leagues where they ought do quite well.
What is good for the Goose Is Not good for the Gander
"We worked very, very hard to promote and build up female participation in sports," Glimcher added."
And this is the whole problem with TitleIX in the USA.
Women, very generally, DO NOT have the same interest in sports as men (on a statistical basis).
oregon dad
The Ultimate Degradation of a Men's Team
If you want the most tragic example of what happens to a great men's team when women are legally mandated to join it ---
check out the United States military.
Why are all the studies that document the crippling consequences of females in war threatre being suppressed?
Our favorite allies in Israel gave up on the integration of women-in-combat twenty years ago.
Because it killed too many real soldiers.
Our CongressManginas need a wake up call!
I played sports in high school...
...and I am in agreement with boys' teams should be for boys and girls' teams for girls. Different strengths and physical abilties, different teams. You guys know as well as I do that while co-ed teams may be fun and offer socialization opportunities, they are not meant to be competitive, nor should they be. The women can play their guts out, but the men have to play down, or else someone gets hurt, angry...well, you know what I am saying. Personally, I'd rather be guaranteed a spot to play on the womens' team than be benched on the mens'.
I agree with Oregon Dad with the notion that boys are more interested in sports than girls, but the fact remains there *is* an interest among girls--and this is increasing. Title IX served a purpose long ago to provide the opportunities that were not available. It is probably outdated now. So what do you do if there is a strong interest but only one gender has a team? What if there is enough interested men/women, but not enough to make a separate team for both sides? A co-ed team for all? Or no team at all? Do we leave it up to the individual teams/leagues/schools etc? Or do we have a Title IX for all? Unfortunately I do not have an answer for that one.
As for the military remarks...poo. If a woman can pass the the same physical requirements as her male counterparts, let her in. If she can't pass, then tough tamales. I don't have a problem with this, the few women I am around on a daily basis do not either. There are a few women who can meet those requirements--and have the mental toughness to boot. I know one from my husband's former ROTC unit who flies Apache helicopters for the US Army. If someone wants to post a stat contrary to this fine--but there are always exceptions.