more title IX madness

i guess i am resuming my regular blogging duties now. anyways, a wisconsin boy recently lost his title IX case, where he was suing so that he could compete on a girls' gymnastics team. at his school, there wasn't a boys' team because there wasn't enough interest and in his quest to become the next paul hamm, he wanted an opportunity to compete. he actually ended up losing on technical grounds with the court ruling that the athletic federation that administers high school sports in wisconsin is not technically an arm of the state. in other words, it technically doesn't get any government money.

i'm actually a little torn on this. on the one hand, i can see that girls would lose out if this was allowed since 1) he's taking opportunities away from other girls and 2) he would have an unfair advantage in some competitions such as the vault, where his natural advantage in muscle mass would help him. but on the other hand, how is this different from the girld who wants to play football? i suppose the deciding factor is the greater good, which in my opinion is girls having opportunities to participate in sports that they didn't have before, over the individual good, this dude getting to prance around in tights (look at me reinforcing hegemonic masculinity!). either way, as we get closer to equity in sports, we can see that we still have a long way to go in terms of really figuring out gender equity.

No comments: