Musings on Muses
Friday, September 17, 2004
 
More Thoughts
I didn't intend to open up the can of worms regards which sports women should or should not play. I still am working through that and don't have anything consistent or coherant yet to say on that topic. There is however something brought up in commentary in the post below that I would like to address further.

Proposition: If there is nothing inherantly different between men and women, then there is no reason for violence against women to be a concern to feminists.

What is the connection you may say. If the only reason to prevent coed sports is the typical physical differences between men`and women, then once we level the playing field, choosing men and women of equal physical size and strength, there should be nothing wrong. What is the lesson we are teaching men when we put women on the playing field in a contact sport. Not only that they can tackle women but should for the sake of the game. How then do we teach men that in sports they should consider women fair game and treat them as roughly as they would any opponent but that off the playing field they should be restrain themselves especially with women. If men and women are truly equal, men should not make the distinction. Again, let's level or even slant the playing field. Should a man be allowed to hit his wife if she is taller and stronger than him and only begin restraining himself once they hit equilibrium.


Wednesday, September 15, 2004
 
The Daily Assortment
Keeping watch on Ivan the Terrible. If you can spare a few prayers for my brother at the Pensacola Naval Airstation and all the folks in New Orleans. I'm hoping the eye goes for one of the more deserted parts of the Gulf Coast but at the moment it seems to be heading for Mobile Bay.

I heard a news item on the radio yesterday that I had been planning to blog about. The draft is full of screedy goodness and therefore will not be resurrected even if I do find a link to it. (The lack of link to the story prevented me from posting.) The long and short of the story is that a girl is being prevented from playing on her Catholic high school football team by the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. The ling and short of my rant was "What girl in her right mind wants to play coed tackle football?" Aside from the very pertinent issue of being a liability to the team by forcing both teammates and opponents to choose between being sportsmen and gentlemen (roles that ought to reinforce each other, not conflict), there is the very real question of physical danger. I played ladies soccer when I was younger. As a fullback, I often took hits and prevented the balls advance by throwing myself in the way of oncoming opposition. At a tournament game once, honor overcame common sense and I blocked a pair of forwards who I knew were bigger and probably older than me. It took me about a minute before I recovered my wind. If my peers can hurt me, how much more danger is there in playing against larger, stronger, probably older boys in a full contact sport?

But I digress. What I really want to know is what possesses young women that they desire to play traditionally male sports on the same playing field as men. I wonder if some of it is not mixed messages sent early on. I was publically educated and all of my gym classes, elementary through high school, were coed. Only the locker rooms were segregated. And we had to compete with the boys in all activities. Of course the teachers weren't completely nuts. They knew that there were different idweals for body composition and different expectations for tests of strength and endurence. But the fact remained that we played coed football, soccer, volleyball, dodgeball, pingpong, jai alai, lacrosse, tennis, and what-have-you. Why could we do this in gym class but not in competition. Why were girls taught football if we were never to have a chance to play it on a real team. Notice that they never attempted to teach boys field hockey. If we are going to be sensible and not let girls play a sport that are not physically suited to, should we at least do them the service of not raising expectations?

Also, coming soon, a more organized series of posts on modesty. Stay tuned!
Friday, September 03, 2004
 
Flambeaux says
upon disappointment of a dull blogging day:
"They're no longer clever and amusing. They're not dancing for my amusement. Off with their blogs."


<< # St. Blog's Parish ? >>