.

Should Boys Be Allowed to Play Girls' Sports?

A Yonkers boy loses the ability to play on the girls' volleyball team; Patch wants your opinion.

 

Who made the varsity squad, and who got cut, isn't the zenith of high school athletics controversy anymore.

Instead, it's a difficult question: should boys be allowed to play on girls' sports teams? And vice versa?

The latest controversial installment comes out of Yonkers High School. Jenson Daniels, the only male to play on the school's otherwise all-female volleyball team, has been cut from the squad.

But it has more to do with gender than athleticism.

The 17-year-old senior was told by state officials he couldn't play this season; he performed too well on the physical exam and was deemed too strong, according to reports by CBS News.

Yonkers High School has no boys volleyball team. And while Jenson is off the floor for the time being, he's battling in court to regain his spot on the squad.

Earlier this year, Patch readers sounded off on the converse—a girl playing second base on a boys' baseball team.

Patch wants to know: should mixed-gender sports be allowed in high schools if there's no other solution? Or does it upset the game?

Jill Gertz October 17, 2012 at 10:19 PM
No - girls and boys should be able to play their own sports and not try to tip the whole system to suit their own aims (selfish). The problem is mostly with girls because women by nature resent men's greater strength and superiority (men do most things better than women because they are stronger, have bigger brains, are less emotional thinkers etc). Many women resent being locked out of male things and have a tendency to want to tip the cart, take over etc (and too many men let them out of weakness). West Point and other academies are good example of women pushing themselves into places they dont belong. Same with football, wrestling etc teams. I know the guy wanting to play girls volleyball (selfish) but tis almost always the girls doing the cart tipping.
Rasheed Oluwa (Editor) October 17, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Wow Jill! You have some pretty strong feelings regarding this issue.
Jill Gertz October 17, 2012 at 11:08 PM
Alexis de Tocqueville (Democracy in America) wrote that he attributed America's greatness to its women - and the fact that they and America on the whole respected the sexes equally but realized they were different (unlike Europe). Now you see these ludicrous theories that men and women are not only equal but the same - and that only artificial, social stereotypes create an "illusion" of difference. That is insanity and traces back to neo-Marxist ideas intended to de-stabilze society. Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci taught that economic struggle was not enough. The values of capitalist society has to be changed. He wrote of what he called "a long march through culture" where social subgroups could be used to militate against core cultural values. This is where cultural neo-Marxism ("New Left" etc) and political correctness get their origins. Political correctness uses minorities, immigrants, women, homosexuals, criminals etc - any subgroups that can be made militant - and turns them against the core society. The family unit and religion were specifically targeted for elimination Women are always a first target because they are easier to manipulate, and once they are pulled in the men follow . Its no accident the women's movement is driven mostly by male hating women who want to resentfully turn society inside out. This is why the feminists hate the military (has nothing to do with "peace").
Walden Macnair October 18, 2012 at 11:47 AM
In this instance, if he was "too strong" it begs the question; If a girl was too strong, would she be banned? The other question which has been answered many times is, is there a team for the other gender to play on? Unfortunately, I don't know the answer to the first question because you would have to see the history of the athletic program at the school. I do however, think that you will find that no female was ever banned because she was too strong or too good so they need to go back to the drawing board and figure this one out without discriminating on the basis of gender.
Deborah October 18, 2012 at 01:16 PM
let him play
Deborah October 18, 2012 at 01:17 PM
so you actually know the boy and dont support him?
Liz Claire October 18, 2012 at 01:51 PM
When I was growing up, my neighborhood friends enjoyed co-ed volleyball games, and co-ed games of all sorts. It didn’t put us on the slippery slope to moral relativism. IT WAS FUN, PURE AND SIMPLE. Ms. Gertz misses the point. No one can dispute that men and women are biologically different. But we live under a Constitution that guarantees Equal Protection under the law. When the State tries to discriminate based on gender, it must show that the classification is substantially related to the achievement of an important governmental objective. The only objective Ms. Gertz suggests is that it offends her personal sensibility. Of course, protecting protecting public sensibilities can be a legitimate goal for legislation. But when sensibility is invoked to justify gender classifications based on social prejudices, serious attention must be paid. The Equal Protection Clause exists to make certain that public sensibilities grounded in archaic prejudices and unexamined stereotypes do not become part of the official policy of government. No game is upset by high quality athletes playing. People who like sport enjoy the game, and don’t get worked up about gender; that brings extra-athletic criteria into play. The game is the thing. The ironic reductio ad absurdum of Ms. Gertz’s remarks is that women should be barefoot, pregnant, and silent. Given her outspoken posts, she seems to be at odds with her own argument. As Deborah says, let the kid play.
Rexford Tugwell, III October 18, 2012 at 01:56 PM
When I played Little League, there was this huge hoosier mama who pitched for an opposing team. She must have weighed 200 pounds and had a wicked fastball. It was impossible to get a hit and you feared for your life when you went up to bat. I complained to the League that she should not be allowed to play. Somehow word got back to her and the next time we faced them, she threw me a beanball. I charged the mound. Big mistake. She basically threw her entire cattle frame on me and stomped me into the ground. Both teams' coaches had to pull her off me. It was humiliating. I never played another game and am still in therapy.
Liz Claire October 18, 2012 at 02:23 PM
Rex, I take it your post is tongue-in-cheek. If not, by now your therapist should have taught you that your reaction was based on some flaw within you that preceded the incident. Confronting a powerful woman merely unmasked an existing weakness within you. Higher education goes a long way in erasing such fears, as you would have had an opportunity to learn that you have no reason to feel threatened by powerful women. Power has its own prerogatives that are independent of gender.
Deborah October 18, 2012 at 03:11 PM
well put Liz
Rexford Tugwell, III October 18, 2012 at 04:04 PM
It's only partly t-i-c. The girl and all her attributes did exist and it's true I was terrified but I never actually got into a fight with her. You're right about the existing weaknesses. But it's not just powerful women I'm afraid of. It's pretty much powerful anybody. And they don't even have to have that much power. I'm pretty much afraid of everybody. I have to work on that. My grandfather, who was an advisor to FDR, would have been appalled. I've shamed the family.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »