Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Title IX for Thee but Not for a He
The New American ^ | 15 May 2012 | Selwyn Duke

Posted on 05/15/2012 11:43:45 AM PDT by Paladins Prayer

You would think that after decades of Title IX enforcement, sex discrimination in school sports would be a thing of the past. But this isn’t the case in Suffolk County, New York, where a skilled student-athlete is being denied the right to compete in sports based solely on sex.

The child is 13-year-old Keeling Pilaro, who for the last two years has been a member of Southampton High School girls’ field hockey team. He tried out for it and was allowed to play because there are no boys’ field hockey teams anywhere in the county. So what’s the problem now?

He’s too good, say Suffolk officials.

(Translation: he’s a boy who is too good.)

To many, Keeling’s exclusion may seem entirely intuitive and just. This is why we have separate sports categories for men and women, boys and girls, right? Not so fast.

Title IX, the federal legislation mandating equal opportunity for the sexes in schools, has long been interpreted to mean that a student must be allowed to try out for an opposite-sex team if there’s no corresponding team for his sex. Because of this, girls have occasionally appeared on boys’ teams. In fact, a traditionalist Catholic Arizona high school just forfeited the Arizona Charter Athletic Association championship because of the presence of a female player on the opposing team.

(Excerpt) Read more at thenewamerican.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: boy; discrimination; school; titleix
This is women's version of fairness, I suppose.
1 posted on 05/15/2012 11:44:03 AM PDT by Paladins Prayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer

A 40 year old male couch potato can snap the arm off a 25 year old female body builder. And the couch potato can’t conceive. Men and women are different. Deal with it, folks.

I exaggerate, but not by much.


2 posted on 05/15/2012 11:46:59 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer

Before everyone jumps ugly on this kid for playing a “girls” sport, you need to do your homework.

In places where men play field hockey, it is an exciting and sometimes brutal sport. The ball moves faster, the men are more physical, and the game is just all around better.

Its too bad more American men do not play, as it provides a great alternative to baseball in the summer.


3 posted on 05/15/2012 11:47:53 AM PDT by Vermont Lt (I just don't like anything about the President. And I don't think he's a nice guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

We already have a fast, physical spring/summer alternative to baseball called lacrosse. As a bonus it is native to this continent.


4 posted on 05/15/2012 11:55:35 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer
People need to wake up... equality is not the goal of all of these laws, mandates and restrictions. Getting an unfair advantage is.
5 posted on 05/15/2012 12:01:01 PM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

Baseball has a alternative. It’s called Lacrosse. It’s a game for those who like the speed and brutality of hockey without the game slowing penalties.


6 posted on 05/15/2012 12:03:18 PM PDT by massgopguy (I owe everything to George Bailey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

Oh, I have no argument with that. I just wanted to check the comments about a boy playing a girls game.

Field Hockey, when played by adult men, is as exciting as Lacrosse. I know its hard to believe. But its true.

And Lacrosse is my favorite spring sport (I photograph sports for a living.)


7 posted on 05/15/2012 12:03:50 PM PDT by Vermont Lt (I just don't like anything about the President. And I don't think he's a nice guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer

Title IX: because a small group of liberals are convinced that someone, somewhere wants to watch women’s crew.


8 posted on 05/15/2012 12:06:03 PM PDT by relictele (We are officially OUT of other people's money!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vermont Lt

Irish Hurling comes to mind.


9 posted on 05/15/2012 12:06:15 PM PDT by Perdogg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy
Baseball has a alternative. It’s called Lacrosse. It’s a game for those who like the speed and brutality of hockey without the game slowing penalties.

Or game slowing fights.

10 posted on 05/15/2012 12:08:38 PM PDT by Labyrinthos
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: massgopguy

See my answer on #7....


11 posted on 05/15/2012 12:10:07 PM PDT by Vermont Lt (I just don't like anything about the President. And I don't think he's a nice guy.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

If anything, those differences, which are very real, actually almost make the case for the asymmetric treatment women seem to want here:

If a girl is big and strong and ‘good’ enough to safely have compete on the boys’ team for a sport and there’s no equivalent girls’ team, they let her play.

If a boy is small and weak and ‘bad’ enough to safely have compete on the girls’ team, they let him play.

Having small, weak, ‘bad’ girls play on the boys’ team or having big, strong, ‘good’ boys play on the girls’ team makes no sense.


12 posted on 05/15/2012 12:11:18 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: skeeter

Identity Politics only matters when you serve The Party. Just ask Sarah Palin and Clarence Thomas.


13 posted on 05/15/2012 12:13:49 PM PDT by a fool in paradise (Barack Obama has cut and run from what he called "the right war".)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

—Having small, weak, ‘bad’ girls play on the boys’ team or having big, strong, ‘good’ boys play on the girls’ team makes no sense.—

I strongly agree. They need to get over trying to “overequalize” us.


14 posted on 05/15/2012 12:14:31 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

I have often said that if I were Czar, and I mean real Czar and not a wimpy Obama czar, I would ban K-12 soccer, issue everyone lacrosse gear, and make it the official alternate Spring sport to baseball. Lacrosse has everything soccer does not - action, contact, scoring, and it requires opposable thumbs.


15 posted on 05/15/2012 12:19:04 PM PDT by FreedomPoster (Islam delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Really there’s no way to test that a boy is ‘bad’ enough to play with the girls, so I simply wouldn’t allow it.

I could see a case made for the freakish girl who’s good enough to play on the boys team, when there’s no equivalent team for her. After all, she can try out and make it or not make it just like any of the boys.

But that asymmetry is problematic, so I’d understand scratching that too.


16 posted on 05/15/2012 12:20:22 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster
Lacrosse has everything soccer does not - action

You obviously didn't watch Sunday's Manchester City-QPR match.

17 posted on 05/15/2012 12:21:03 PM PDT by dfwgator
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

—After all, she can try out and make it or not make it just like any of the boys.—

Though I consider it a “camel’s nose” issue, that might be a good way to do it.

The problem is that if you do it across the board (good girl plays with boys and bad boy plays with girls, you end up with one of those “rose by any name” scenarios:

You end up with the “good team” (which is mostly boys) and the “bad team” (which is mostly girls). I’m not sure how people would react to that.


18 posted on 05/15/2012 12:23:31 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: relictele

Like all liberal policies,

it’s not about bringing up those without,

but about bringing down those with.


19 posted on 05/15/2012 12:24:03 PM PDT by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Yeah, I agree. I think the usual case is made just for girls playing on boys’ teams when there is no girls’ team in that sport. With more boys often playing sports, there may well be more choices among the boys’ teams.

But I just think it’s hard to do without someone somewhere thinking it’s unfair, so it probably just should be scratched. The old-fashioned ‘segregation’ is probably good enough for all but non-competitive intramural-type sports.


20 posted on 05/15/2012 12:36:50 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

Wrong. There should be no mixing of the sexes whatsoever in sports. To do so blurs the distinctions between them and is part of a very destructive agenda.

Besides, it isn’t just in the area of size and strength that boys are superior. They also, in general, have more talent and therefore can develop greater skill. So just because a boy is small and relatively weak doesn’t mean that he wouldn’t have an advantage in girls’ sports.


21 posted on 05/15/2012 12:42:46 PM PDT by Paladins Prayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

—The old-fashioned ‘segregation’ is probably good enough for all but non-competitive intramural-type sports.—

I think that is especially true when you consider why there are those kinds of sports in school to begin with: To give kids an outlet that keeps them from getting too up close and personal with each other.

Girls and boys playing together defeats the whole purpose of why there are school sports.


22 posted on 05/15/2012 12:42:53 PM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: cuban leaf

Yes, good point. Also, though, another higher purpose of sports is to instill character and mold boys into men. This is undermined when you include females.

Boys have a right to a masculine environment without a feminist agenda intruding and making a mockery of it.


23 posted on 05/15/2012 12:48:26 PM PDT by Paladins Prayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“it’s about bringing down those WITH”

You win the thread.


24 posted on 05/15/2012 1:03:02 PM PDT by conservatism_IS_compassion (The idea around which “liberalism" coheres is that NOTHING actually matters except PR.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer

What are you talking about? I came down on the side of keeping them segregated, except for the slightest of non-competitive intramural sports.

That’s adult life: co-ed volleyball and the like, and it’s how girls and boys sometimes play sports outside of a school context.


25 posted on 05/15/2012 1:23:14 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FreedomPoster

Lacrosse is scary, with those hard little balls zooming around at head level!


26 posted on 05/15/2012 1:25:51 PM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator
You obviously didn't watch Sunday's Manchester City-QPR match.

Why would an American watch euro trash playing mullet ball?
27 posted on 05/15/2012 2:30:24 PM PDT by Goldsborough
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: 9YearLurker

I apologize. I think I got your post confused with someone else’s.

Having said that, I oppose the mixing of the sexes at all levels in sports. I have my reasons, of course.

But we can agree to disagree on that.


28 posted on 05/15/2012 7:00:14 PM PDT by Paladins Prayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer

Fair enough. I’d consider the mildest of coed sports to be like organized school dances—a managed environment for boys and girls to interact. But everyone might not support that.


29 posted on 05/16/2012 12:00:39 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Paladins Prayer

—Boys have a right to a masculine environment without a feminist agenda intruding and making a mockery of it.—

Yeah. Sometimes, with a lot of stuff going on, I would like to see our leaders and politicians (and public) respond thusly:

Homosexual marriage? No. It’s a stupid idea. Now, what’s for dinner...


30 posted on 05/16/2012 4:43:48 AM PDT by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson