Most parents I know did not have their kids in sports because they thought they would get a scholarship or play professionally. In our district, recognition was given to the teams that won and there would be something in the paper and now online for kids playing in college - be it D1 or D3. However, the kids that got top SAT/ACT scores were also recognized. The honor roll kids were listed as well. Model UN and Youth and government programs were recognized with articles. And the theater productions were all given recognition of the shows and when they were nominated for awards. Were some activities not recognized? Probably, donât remember the quiz bowl team or debate (which one of mine did) getting much notice.
My kids were in theater and in sports, along with MUN and other activities. Some of the theater kids went on to very expensive colleges to study theater. Of those, only a couple have had very minor success. Most have pivoted to other careers.
Parents spend money for their kids to play on club sports teams, often because the kid is good enough at that age to play at a competitive level and the kid wants to play with other kids that are serious about the sport and to challenge his/her self. Sports are not inherently bad. They teach perseverance, sportsmanship, teamwork and are good exercise. Parents also spend money on acting and voice lessons, for kids that will never make it Broadway (or even a local, professional theater), for instrument lessons and youth orchestra costs for kids that will put down their instrument at the end of HS and never pick it up again or for dance classes and competition costs for a kid that will not do anything with that activity. And for expensive academic camps or programs in the hope of making their kid stand out to a top 20 college, which is generally not effective.
The somewhat constant attack on sports as a negative thing and sports parents as delusional is overblown in my opinion. Are there parents who are not realistic? Yes, but I would argue parents in any activity may have unrealistic expectations about how high their kid will rise in that arena or how valuable the activity is for college admission. Why is playing at a high level in a sport so devalued vs other pursuits?
No one here is attacking sports. FWIW one of my kids played travel soccer for several years. My H was a high school varsity athlete ( including football captain) as were my brothers. All were high achievers in careers which had nothing to do with athletics.
My experience is very different than yours. While my sonâs magnet school recognized all of the activities above, the HS my daughter attended elevated sports over other activities including academics. The middle school and high school culture was absolutely brutal to boys who were not athletic and that is , I believe an issue that is very detrimental to the boys.
I have personally known a number of parents who were very invested ( including financially) in their child (especially males) qualifying for a sports scholarship. They even admitted it. Their investment in academics- not so much.
I think your post brings up a wider point that is relevant to the main discussion: that subcultures and cultural pressures can vary considerably, even within a geographic area. For example, there can exist schools where non-athletic or non-traditionally masculine boys are treated like losers, and then nearby there may be schools where these boysâ gifts are celebrated. But for a kid who is immersed in a certain setting, what they are experiencing may feel like âThe Truthâ because it is the only culture they know.
I am a huge proponent of kids doing activities/sports especially while in HS. I always said idle time for kids was when things go bad and 3PM-6PM a lot of bad things can happen if parents are still at work. But the way we did it was if sports/activities got in the way of grades then those would be the first to go. We knew the best opportunity to make college cheaper was to get academic scholarships.
Parents who spend money on private coaching/training or high travel team costs would be better off spending some of that money on tutors. Much better return on investment. Sports scholarships are closer to a lottery compared to academic scholarships.
Iâm really glad my brothers and I just did our own things growing up. Our parents supported us when we needed it, but they didnât orchestrate our lives. People are really overly involved in what their kids are doing, and I think it adds pressure that may backfire.
Ick. A popular Christian author conducted an informal survey that showed while âwomen desire love, men need respect.â An Evangelical Christian named Sheila Gregoire looked into it and found that the study was flawed. She did her own peer-reviewed study and found that women need respect just as much as men. I love her writing - she debunks all the stereotypes about what it means to be a Christian woman and spouse.
âHaving an array of celebrated heroic characters for men to fill, that are bound to the greater Good, is an absolute must for a functional societyâ rescue workers, military, carpenters, engineers, husbands, fathers, backhoe operators, truckers, etc.â
Huh, so where does that leave me as a female engineer? This is nonsense.
Men heroes. Women make heroesâ babies and care for their homes. Got it.
And woman better treat man like hero or he will go violent and she will deserve it
I continue to be surprised about how some of you jump to the wrong conclusion.
Letâs backup a bit. These days, young women go to college far more often than men, and in many metro areas, young women earn more than young men. Yet when it comes to dating apps, young women overwhelmingly choose to âswipe rightâ on men that are taller, appear fit, and have high incomes. Why does that continue to happen at a time when young women can certainly be the primary breadwinner in the family, and physical strength is no longer necessary?
I believe the answer to that is evolutionary biology. Out of the 300K+ years that homo sapiens have existed, itâs only been the very recent past that society has gotten to the point that physical strength is not required for activities such as building shelter, hunting, and protecting the family from predators (both animal and other people). Or alternatively, having enough money to hire others to do that physical work for them. Thatâs a pretty powerful evolutionary drive, and it doesnât just shut off right away because itâs not necessary today.
Likewise, I think thereâs a similar evolutionary drive for many men to be the type of man that were highly selected by women in the past. But in a society that no longer needs that as much, they feel lost.
Iâll admit my response was a bit of hyperbole. It shouldnât be âAnd woman better treat man like hero or he will go violent and she will deserve itâ because No True Man should ever harm a female. So it shouldnât be âshe will deserve itâ but more like âand what did she expect?â Because evolution.
Fundamentalist Christian authors (almost always male, of course) go on and on about how you need to treat your husband as a hero and leader, but then talk about how weak men are âin the fleshâ and need your support. ?!? You canât have it both ways.
And that list of occupations, really? Women are perfectly capable of a lot of those roles. Am I a âheroic characterâ for being a structural engineer?
And the relevance to Chris Arnade who wrote that article is what exactly? Heâs a socialist and broadly speaking an atheist. But above all else he believes in supporting communities over individualism.
The key piece of the article:
People donât simply want what the modern Liberal project believes they want, which is ever increasing material wealth and a Libertarian individuality whose end point is emancipation from any and all communal norms.
People do want material wealth, but that alone isnât enough, because they also need to feel a sense of purpose aligned to the Good, and for men that means some version of being a hero, which is especially incoherent to the modern academic worldview that emphasizes individuality, because it requires being a part of a community, since it is an act of selflessness, where the hero trades their physical suffering for communal praise and status. You canât be a hero if you are alone, because there is nobody to save or protect, and nobody to then sing your song.
I know that was a rhetorical question, but it brought up a theme that my husband and I talk about frequently. My husband works in engineering, teaches engineering tech classes as an adjunct, and mentors a lot of woman students and early career women engineers. One of the ideas that he has about the cause of the âleaky pipelineâ for women in STEM is actually the lack of being treated as a hero. He believes that all humans, no matter the gender, like to feel like a hero sometimes. And the path to a STEM career is hard and can feel discouraging at many steps along the way. A little hero treatment can go a long way as a reward. And when male STEM students pull off something excellent, they tend to get some hero treatment. But when female STEM students do, they get less hero treatment, and what hero treatment they do get is often mixed with messages that they are unnatural, unfeminine, less attractive for their success, intimidating. This differential treatment is maybe improving, but itâs not gone. The stereotypes are still there even for full fledged experienced engineers: the male engineers are respected as âgood providersâ, sort of heroes to their families. The women engineers still come up against questions about whether they feel guilty for sticking their kids in daycare because of their careerism.
Not sure about how any of this can help young men who may be struggling. But maybe one place to start would be to teach young men that we have a lot more in common as humans then some people would like us to believe, and that women are not some alien race motivated by totally different factors.
Your husband has good points. Iâll never forget when a contractor mocked me when he realized I worked only three (LONG) days a week, saying, âYou must be a moooooommmm,â his voice dripping with sarcasm. What?!?
And Iâve probably shared that at parties, people always ask my HUSBAND what he does, and donât address any question to me. Iâve trained DH to answer that weâre both engineers and co-own our company. Iâm glad women can at least become engineers, now, but itâs still hard. Why should a man be treated more as a hero than a woman when we are equally capable of designing buildings?
What exactly is the modern Liberal project? I know lots of people who have liberal leanings, and ever increasing material wealth is not what any of us desire.
My SisIL is a dermatologist and worked 3days/week for nearly her whole career and made excellent money. Her S chose to become a dermatologist like her instead of an ophthamologist like his dad. So far he seems very happy. His wife is a GI.
