<p>Not too awfully long ago, the thread came up about the fairness of a girl joining a boys’ sports team. Most here hailed that as fair play, avoided denying her because of her gender(gender discrimination), and in general felt if she was good enough to make the team, then good for her!
I had a slight disagreement with that perspective and suggested- what if a boy joined a girls team? As I remember, some conveniently chose not to address that, but rather chose instead to accept/praise the girl good enough to make the team. Her right to play was discussed.</p>
<p>Well, here are a couple real-life examples now of what I postulated
Horace Greely High School in New York and
Southampton High School in Suffolk County, New York
both now have boys on girls’ teams, and some don’t like it. It is said the young fellow at Greely is not such a dominant player. But he could be. What if he was? Does that affect his right to play?</p>
<p>How do people here feel about it? Will many of those here still say- if they’re good enough to make the team then let them play? Will those that pushed the girl’s right to play push here for the boys’ right to play?</p>
<p>As a mom of boy soccer players I don’t like mixing the sexes unless it’s just a recreational kind of team. When a boy plays a girl he can’t win. If he plays tough & physical (which he would against another boy) he’s accused of “picking on” the girl. If he DOESN’T and the girl beats him then he’s humiliated.</p>
<p>Lose-lose.</p>
<p>My boys were both wrestlers and this continues to be a hotly debated topic. Some kids use speed and skill to win wrestling matches and wrestling a girl doesn’t change the game. Some kids use strength to beat an opponent into submission and hate having females involved.</p>
<p>A softball or field hockey team of all HS guys would not be fair and wouldn’t say much for us as a society.</p>
<p>Ideally, sports for single sexes would be equally supported financially and with respect. We may be getting there. I think in high school, if a girl wants to play on a football team, and she’s capable, it should be allowed because there is no equivalent female team. On the other hand, if a school has a softball team, I don’t think a girl should be allowed to be on the boy’s baseball team, or vice-versa. Most sports in high school do have teams for each sex, but if there isn’t enough interest at that particular school for a given sport (wrestling may be an example), some accommodations could be made for a girl who wants to play. If the school is large enough, ideally they could organize a girl’s team. </p>
<pre><code>Our kids’ high school had a very talented female athlete on their football team. She held her own and then some. Small school.
</code></pre>
<p>It happens so rarely, that a decision on a case-by-case basis is probably the way to go.</p>
<p>therein lies some of the trouble, moonchild. As I’m sure you read in articles about the 2 players, the boy volleyballer does not have a boys team to join. But the article says he is not a dominant player. Is dominance a part of defining gender discrimination? Or, does Title 9 mention how good a player is? To do it case-by-case would hint a top notch boy volleyballer or 2, or 6, might essentially take over a girls’ team might be unacceptable, yet 1 not-so-dominant player is. Some are ok, some are not. That defies the logic behind gender discrimination, to say- ok the opposite sex player can play, but not if it’s a boy far better than a girl.
“Let her play if she’s good enough to play” is fine, but doesn’t that also mean “let him play if he’s good enough to play”?</p>
<p>
But if the school had 6 top notch boys, shouldn’t they start a BOYS team? It seems to me like the cases we hear about with girls on boys teams, it’s ONE girl and there is no corresponding girls team. If there are 10 fabulous girl football players at one school, maybe they should call up the NFL. </p>
<p>I say, let him play.</p>
<p>There are commonly 12 on a volleyball team and typically six on court at a time.
So no, six boys interested would not be enough to form a team. Others would have to be recruited to have a team. What if 4 boys were on the girls team? What if they were good enough to be starters?
Strongly agree we usually hear about a girl on a boys team. My compliments to you, sylvan for your consistency. There are those that feel if a boy is really good, then it’s not fair.</p>
<p>My Ds field hockey teams have played teams with boys over the years. There has been some parent pressure in the state to stop it. I do think the dominance of the player can make a difference . I didn’t mind the teams with a male goalie, or one player on the field at a time, although in those cases we encountered the boys were not dominant players. Serious injury can occur if a player is hit with the ball, they are very hard plastic. I think the possibility of injury should be taken into account, it will vary by sport.</p>
<p>There is a team in the area that plays 3 boys at a time, even in overtime when there are fewer players on the field. I am glad we never played against them.</p>
<p>There are schools that have dropped male swim teams. Could a male swimmer join the girls swim team if he had the times to do so? Doubt it since the female team goes against other females and the numbers pretty clearly show that men are so much faster in this sport. So it is in a number of other sports. No clear answer to this. The way it usually works, is that the group of people who as a whole are not given the opportunity, are the underdogs, get the extra privileges It doesn’t go both ways.</p>
<p>My son played competitive soccer for a very long time; he started after practicing on his sisters rec rec team, and she is three years older. To me, at the competitive level , it is almost a different game. Now he is in college, and plays on co ed intramural teams, with rules about how many men or women can be on a team. Again, not the same game, but it sort of satisfies a need. FWIW, he also plays intramural basketball, and those teams do not seem to be co-ed.</p>