www.azcentral.com/.../20101111deer-valley-unified-school-district-title-IX-investigation.html
Why do we continue to point to lower participating numbers of women in sports to justify the assertion that society is persecuting women? I was a part of a state high school championship team in Colorado and we never cut anybody. My daughters' teams in this very school (Deer Valley) district were regional champions 11 years running. Nobody on their teams got cut. I would assert that the opportunities are there even with the good teams/schools. Is it possible that overall less women are interested in sports? Badminton would put us in compliance??? Swell.
And for what it's worth, I think Hogshead got touched out in the 84 Olympics.
Fort, it's been awhile, please educate me again.:)
(@smontaro): If you look at youth sports (the ones where girls have as much an opportunity to play as boys) I think the numbers are at least equal in most sports. It's pretty disingenuous to include football in your statistics. Unless you want to include something that is pretty much exclusively a girls' activity, like dance or cheer when deciding if girls are as interested in sport as boys.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to include football and cheer, and dance and gymnastics and hockey (see below) and any other sport. My impression is that even today more boys than girls participate in sports at an early age. It doesn't really matter what the sport is. I think in general, even after decades of Title IX that more boys approach high school having previously played sports and think they will play sports in high school. I don't know at what level Title IX becomes a mandate. I would guess by high school.
My youngest son started playing hockey at around age 9-10. (We were late arrivers to the Chicago area where it's widely played. Many kids start playing at 5 or 6 just as you see for other organized age group sports.) By that age most teams only had one or two girls still playing. This is still completely no-check, next to no contact hockey. The girls who did play could be as competitive as the boys. As the kids move up through the age groups fewer and fewer girls continue to play hockey. (Boys drop out as well, but not at nearly the rate as girls.) Some are siphoned off to girls teams (of which there are far fewer than boys teams). Some go play other sports. Some, I imagine, stop playing organized sports.
(@smontaro): If you look at youth sports (the ones where girls have as much an opportunity to play as boys) I think the numbers are at least equal in most sports. It's pretty disingenuous to include football in your statistics. Unless you want to include something that is pretty much exclusively a girls' activity, like dance or cheer when deciding if girls are as interested in sport as boys.
I think it's perfectly reasonable to include football and cheer, and dance and gymnastics and hockey (see below) and any other sport. My impression is that even today more boys than girls participate in sports at an early age. It doesn't really matter what the sport is. I think in general, even after decades of Title IX that more boys approach high school having previously played sports and think they will play sports in high school. I don't know at what level Title IX becomes a mandate. I would guess by high school.
My youngest son started playing hockey at around age 9-10. (We were late arrivers to the Chicago area where it's widely played. Many kids start playing at 5 or 6 just as you see for other organized age group sports.) By that age most teams only had one or two girls still playing. This is still completely no-check, next to no contact hockey. The girls who did play could be as competitive as the boys. As the kids move up through the age groups fewer and fewer girls continue to play hockey. (Boys drop out as well, but not at nearly the rate as girls.) Some are siphoned off to girls teams (of which there are far fewer than boys teams). Some go play other sports. Some, I imagine, stop playing organized sports.
