Bozell Column: Not Wrestling Girls
It's so easy to look at teenagers in general today and sigh. They’re more than a bit lazy, a bit spoiled, and more than a bit morally compromised. Two teenagers made national news. One showed common decency and sportsmanship, two virtues seemingly uncommon in that generation. Hope is restored.
Fifteen-year-old wrestler Joel Northrup faced a dilemma when he was scheduled to wrestle Cassy Herkelman, one of only two girls to make it to the state tournament. Even though he entered with a 35-4 record, Joel forfeited rather than violate his religious principles.
Cassy’s father, Bill Herkelman, praised the Northrup family: "That's their belief, and I praise them for sticking to it. This is the biggest stage in wrestling in the state, I would say, and they stuck to their beliefs when it probably tested it the most," he said. "It was probably a tough pill for him to swallow."
That’s putting it mildly. High-school wrestling is very popular in Iowa and other Midwestern states, where the state tournament is televised.
Joel Northrup then made the rounds of national TV talk shows to address the decision. “There’s no specific scripture or verse in the Bible that condemns wrestling girls,“ Joel told the “Fox & Friends” show. “It’s more of a Biblical principle of treating the opposite gender with respect… I don’t think wrestling should be a coed sport because of all the compromising holds and everything.”
Joel didn't say anything about discomfort over wrestling a girl because it was personally embarrassing, or sexual in any way. It wasn't about the bad publicity that would result if he gave her a broken forearm or a concussion. It was about elevating the woman: shoving a woman's face into the mat is undignified. He told CBS it gets “violent at times...I just don't feel it's right that a boy should engage a girl like this.”
Only in our stupid popular culture is such a position considered controversial. CBS put this question on screen: “Chivalry or Chauvinism?” But these aren't really opposites. For many years, the feminists have waged war on the idea that men would “stoop” to chivalry, like opening doors for women or giving up a seat on a subway train for them. Being a “gentleman” was another word for being a patronizer – a chauvinist.
Sadly, you knew some ink-stained wretch would think Joel's decision was sexist and demeaning and religiously obtuse. Enter ESPN.com columnist Rick Reilly, who slammed anyone and everyone who respected this moral decision, including Cassy Herkelman and her father: “Does any wrong-headed decision suddenly become right when defended with religious conviction? In this age, don't we know better? If my God told me to poke the elderly with sharp sticks, would that make it morally acceptable to others?”
In Reilly's moral universe, “Body slams and takedowns and gouges in the eye and elbows in the ribs are exactly how to respect Cassy Herkelman. This is what she lives for...She relishes the violence.” Cassy’s dad boasts: "She's my son...She's always been my son.”
Reilly then bizarrely claimed that it wasn't cruel to gouge her in the eye, it was cruel to send her into a “national media hurricane” -- identified as about 20 sports reporters and columnists -- to be asked not how she wrestled, but how she advanced without wrestling.
The ESPN columnist ended this sneering diatribe by suggesting this 15-year-old boy “wasted” his dream of a championship, and was just uncomfortable with girls being on Earth. After Joel was eliminated in an overtime match, Reilly wrote, “He was reportedly on his way back home to Marion, Iowa, where his mom was about to deliver her eighth child. For the kid's sake, I hope it's a boy.”
Joel Northrup didn’t deserve the wave of national abuse he received from so-called defenders of women. It was additionally unnecessary when his female opponent wasn’t offended. But it won’t be the first or the last time that sports writers from New York City come to Iowa to lecture the hayseeds.
No one, of course, seems willing to ask the other question: What was the Herkelman family doing encouraging their teenaged daughter for years to wrestle competitively with males – with every implication, physical and sexual.
- Brent Bozell's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
No one, of course, seems
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 10:30am.
No one, of course, seems willing to ask the other question: What was the Herkelman family doing encouraging their teenaged daughter for years to wrestle competitively with males – with every implication, physical and sexual.
Wow. You were doing so well, all the way until this paragraph. The only thing that makes what the kid did or people's attitudes towards it in any way sexist is THIS sentiment-- that girls have no place competing with men in a physical sport. Everything else in this post is spot-on, but it is hard to take your appreciation of the situation seriously when you close with this.
Thankfully, the fifteen year old seems to have a more mature view of the situation that Brent Bozell! He definitely didn't deserve the criticism he got, but this kind of crap deserves hefty criticism. To imply that there must be some alternative sexual motive to a girl wanting to wrestle is at least as bad as implying that her opponent had some sort of nefarious motive in refusing to wrestle her.
Girls probably enjoy wrestling for the same reason boys do. It's not gay when guys do it, so it isn't sexual when girls do it either. Man, the hypocrisy of this statement is mind-blowing! Good families encourage their teenagers to do healthy things they enjoy. Sports are healthy, Cassy enjoys it. There aren't any other questions to ask about why the family let her do it.
no wonder this kids decistion
Submitted by TruthMonger on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 10:47am.
no wonder this kids decistion is under attack by the dark - its really exposing interesting takes from everywhere - like yours - but as always God will make it speak volumes - the masses stand amazed
Congratulations Jimmy Carter!
Good post mamabear
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:17am.
Nothing wrong with the boy for sticking up for his own religious views, but don't demonize the girl for doing something she loves.Yes, by far the most
Submitted by misterbee241 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:46am.
Yes, by far the most important thing is that Cassie enjoy it. After all, the world revolves around her, her father has plainly taught that to her.
And no, I dont think girls should be competing in boys sports. Do I see any boys on the girl's basketball team or the softball team? No, but it's always girls who want to get into the boy's spaces.
So shoot me.
I don't want to shoot you
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:50am.
I disagree with you. The girl has done a remarkable achievement and has worked hard for it. Hardly she thinks the world reovles around herI tried
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:06am.
But they wouldn't let me. ;-)
The only coed sport is cheerleading. And even that sport has specific roles for the boys and the girls. You don't see a bunch of girls tossing a boy into the air for a reason.
We Are The 53%
mamabear, A Man wrestling a Woman.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:47am.
Girls probably enjoy wrestling for the same reason boys do. It's not gay when guys do it, so it isn't sexual when girls do it either.
Boy on boy wrestling and girl on girl wrestling is fine.
Boys and girls, go to elementary school.
If you can, insert some coed imagination when viewing these photos.
Where HIGH SCHOOL is the handling of young men and young women, outside the wrestling mat ok
Or this
You must be completly unaware that there is lots of female sweat and pheromones plus heavy breathing going on in the wrestling event?
Are you aware that there is sweat pheromones and breathing during forplay?
Name me another sport where males and females squeeze, push and lay on each other?
You Didn't Build That.
OMG, the dreaded bowling ball hold!
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:52am.
That's gotta hurt!
SOL
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:57am.
There was just such a problem recently in male wrestling involving the 1-hole bowling ball hold.
Imagine if that was committed while wrestling a female.
Horrific, Cool, just horrific
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:00pm.
Both should be banned IMO.
;)
Yup, puts a hole new spin on the fireman's carry.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:17pm.
You Didn't Build That.
"There was just such a
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:24pm.
Imagine if that was committed while wrestling a female."
I think it was called the bocce ball grip.
Um, what were we talking about again?
→ owwwoooooo
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:46pm.
Looks like Donkey Kong lost that one.
Another Sport.
Submitted by Buzzy on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:07pm.
Name me another sport where males and females squeeze, push and lay on each other?
I can't help myself on this one but Politics would be my answer.
I know! I know!
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:09pm.
Sex!
In your world, everyone is either gay or on the verge of it,
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:48am.
hence your conclusion "It's not gay when guys do it, so it isn't sexual when girls do it either."
No one could seriously argue that with a straight face, but have at it.
The reason I said that was
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:17pm.
The reason I said that was because wrestling is commonly mocked, or at least was when I was in high school (and someone else has made the exact kind of jokes I'm talking about elsewhere in this thread, so I don't think the mockery has stopped) as being "gay." That is frustrating to people who appreciate and respect the sport. So I'm pointing out that it is just as ridiculous to assume that a woman participating in this sport must have an ulterior sexual motive as it is to assume that men who participate must have an ulterior sexual motive.
I think it is fine for the man in this situation to decide that he isn't comfortable wrestling a woman, as I stated very clearly above. But Bozell is criticizing people for making the worst possible assumptions about his motives and then doing the exact same thing to Cassy with his implication that there are unasked questions about her motivations and her family's.
Hypocrisy.
You misunderstood then.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:14am.
But you do that a lot.
Bozell never said Cassy wanted to wrestle for sexual reasons. He questioned why the media is so willing to pounce of this boy for his beliefs but why (stick with me here) the MEDIA isn't questioning the ethics and reasons of a FAMILY that will encourage a teenage girl to roll around on a mat with a boy in public. And what that could possibly lead to in the future, physically and sexually.
We Are The 53%
But he does the exact same
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:54am.
But he does the exact same thing! He doesn't question Northrup's motives, and does question her and her family's! How is that any different?
What mamabear wants
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:54am.
Mamabear wants the boys to try out for the girls basketball, softball, and volleyball teams.
That way, only the best female athletes, and all the male second-rate athletes, get a chance to compete.
Brilliant, mamabear!
There is no women's wrestling
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:25pm.
There is no women's wrestling league in Iowa high schools. Therefore, the only way that Cassy gets to wrestle is if she wrestles men. In this story, she stated her preference :
Herkelman said it would be a "lot more fun and more exciting" if girls could wrestle other girls in Iowa instead of having to face boys. She had a 20-13 record at Cedar Falls High entering the tournament and thinks it would have been a close match between her and Northrup.
As long as there are opportunities for both sexes to compete amongst themselves, then it makes sense for men to play men and women to play women. That is true for all of the sports you so disingenuously listed above. But if a woman wants to wrestle and there isn't a league, she should get to compete with the men. No special treatment (ideally), just a chance to compete like anyone else. I'm sure she would have preferred to advance on the quality of her wrestling, not her gender, but she handled the controversy pretty maturely, as did Northrup. She seems to have a pretty non-entitled view of the whole thing.
mb,What a sad little story, government ain't big enough to care.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 2:08pm.
How about making them bureaucrats "invest in" this coed Olympic sport?
For every school, in every single county in every single state.
You Didn't Build That.
I'm not really sure what you
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 5:39pm.
I'm not really sure what you are talking about. I didn't say anything sad, or anything about the government, or anything about investing in sports or anything about curling.
Are you starting a little early this Saturday?!
mb, Nope
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 12:02am.
You are Government employed therefore government can never get too large. The bigger government is the more underlings you have control over.
Any restriction on full blown expansion in the volume of government is a sad moment for you.
Years ago the education dept. thought it would be a great idea to expose the entire Nation to soccer.
I'd thought you would jump at the chance to force the tax payer to be taxed and have the all knowing nanny state bureaucrats "invest" in a new national sport of curling.
Slippery one you are, mb
You Didn't Build That.
I'm not employed by the
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:34am.
I'm not employed by the government. I also giggle at the thought of having underlings. I do care about education, and as such the expansion of sports programs is just about LAST on my list of priorities.
So, wrong on all counts.
It still doesn't make sense
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:25am.
So there's no girls wresting, life is hard, move on. Start a league, we have no obligation to provide for every whim of every high schooler.
Uh oh we didn't get mamabear's approval!
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:09pm.
Do you ever stop and think about how you sound with comments like these? Wow. You were doing so well, all the way until this paragraph. Everything else in this post is spot-on, but it is hard to take your appreciation of the situation seriously when you close with this.
There are sexual implications in this type of activity. If it was done not in the context of a sport, the boy would be accused of sexual harrassment. It's naive to assume there are none in such a close contact sport. Societies make judgements on acceptable behavior, the fact that this is considered unacceptable to some of us should not make it hard to take us seriously, but it does say that you have no respect for opinions other than your own.Definitely, Rad
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:14pm.
If there is no sexual aspect to it, why do I keep thinking that I wouldn't wanna be "busting out" of those uniforms in public?
Fear of an arousal during the match may have weighed on this kid's mind as well.
Rad, Teacher gives Brent C–
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:15pm.
If only Brent had been honest and admitted two males in close contact leads to arousal just like when a male and female are in close contact.
→ I don't see it either
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:21pm.
Unless I count "violence against women" as an acceptable social moray.
Can we just move on to boxing and MMA and be done with it? That B#&ch is just asking for it. You know she is.
But leave me and mine out of it.
The reason that it is hard to
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:34pm.
The reason that it is hard to take Bozell's opinion seriously is not because I disagreed with it. I agreed with everything he said right up until that last paragraph. He expresses concern that Northrup is being treated unfairly, and that assumptions are being made about his motives that paint him in a bad light. That is a valid concern, Reilly's article sounds deplorable. But I find it hard to believe that concern for the kid is Bozell's actual motive when he can turn around and do the exact same thing to the woman in the picture!
It isn't about whether or not she should be there or Northrup shouldn't have wrestled her. Exactly as he said in the column, it is about making nasty judgements about a person's motives without cause. No, I don't respect people who do that. And people who decry nasty assumptions about people they agree with but make the very same nasty assumptions about people they don't are, in my book, hypocrites.
If you think she shouldn't wrestle, I can respect that. I disagree with you, but I can respect it. If you tell me that her desire to wrestle or her family's encouragement of her sport must reflect some sort of sordid underlying sexual weirdness, that isn't an opinion I particularly respect, because it is based only on assuming the worst about the people involved.
→ Nothing to gain mamabear
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:44pm.
I can't wait until a boy and a girl get into a fight over another girl. I'm sure NOW et. ilk will be jumping in with the argument that it's fine for a boy to beat up a girl under those circumstances.
You've come a long way, baby.
What on earth is your point?
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 5:42pm.
What on earth is your point? Fencing doesn't make it okay to shank somebody. Boxing doesn't make it okay to punch someone in the face outside of the ring. Wrestling doesn't make it okay for one man to grab another on the street and throw him to the ground, so why would it make it okay for a boy to beat up a girl?
mamabear
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:39pm.
But boys wrestling girls does make it easier for boys to see themselves fighting with girls outside the ring, in the same way seeing violence in movies and video games de-sensitives people and makes it easier for them to commit acts of real violence.
So then you think that sports
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:41am.
So then you think that sports make kids more violent? If so, why do we let any of them participate?
In any case, has everyone forgotten high school already? I think we should be worried about protecting boys from girl fights. At least when I was in high school, fights between guys consisted of lots of shoving and a few punches thrown before someone broke it up. Fights between girls destroyed the entire room they were in, and the women walked away with half of their hair missing, earrings torn out, eyes gouged, blood everywhere!
mamabear get a grip
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:19pm.
Try to be somewhat realistic here.
Rad---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:25pm.
grislybear is referring to fights between those strong, muscular, Amazonian girls who reguarly win laurels when competing against boys in the world of sports. They are scrappers, I tell ya! :o)But if sports in general do
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:00am.
But if sports in general do not affect a child's tendency to inflict real violence, then why would this sport in particular affect it? If you aren't saying that sports make kids more violent, then you need to provide some reasoning why you think they will in this one case but don't in any other.
I am realistically portraying fights between girls that I witnessed in high school. I was luckily never involved in one. And while they weren't all as bad as I described, they were on the whole much more likely to result in real injury than fights between guys. If the women in your home town were more restrained, that's great. It sounds nicer! I don't consider myself to have gone to school in a "bad" neighborhood, but there was some gang violence and some occasionally serious incidents, so maybe my experiences weren't typical.
Buzzzzz!!!
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 2:36am.
Wrong, wrong, wrong, on so many levels. I spent 8 years working security at a high school, after 27 years in law enforcement. I never, ever saw a girl-girl fight with the results you describe. I did, however, see many a black eye, lots of busted lips, bloody noses and scratches, rug burns, and one mangled ear on the guys.
But, to get to the main point, if guys can't join the girl's field hockey team, the girl's volleyball team, or the girl's softball team, why should a girl be allowed to wrestle on the boys wrestling team? Is it because it's socially necessary, or is it because it's another foot in the door of "equality". If it's equality, is equality a two way street, or only a one way street for the girls? After all, there aren't many boys softball teams, so why not let the boys play softball? I'm pretty sure there aren't any boys field hockey teams, so why not let the boys play field hockey, or volley ball?
If there isn't a boy's team
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:07pm.
If there isn't a boy's team available, then they absolutely should be allowed to play on the girl's team. And if enough boys want to play to make it anything other than an occasional nuisance for the women on those teams, then they should start a boy's team.
Maybe I went to a weird high school, I don't know. That wasn't exactly my main point in any case.
grislybear---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:29pm.
I see the problem. You matriculated at LHS. Liberal High School. Labeling it as maybe "weird" doesn't even begin to describe the horrors that academic institution has wreaked upon your thought processes.Butterflies and Unicorns.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 9:27pm.
There isn't a HighSchool in the country that will allow a boy to play on a girls team. (nor should they)
Equality is all good, but you have to realize that in some aspects boys and girls are NOT EQUAL.
At some things a woman is better, and at others a man is better.
We Are The 53%
I do realize that. What you
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:41am.
I do realize that. What you are ignoring is that not all men are the same and not all women are the same. We differ on AVERAGE. Not in total.
mb AKA il... It's wrestling for crying out loud, weight classes
Submitted by upcountrywater on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 6:34pm.
Cadets (young men ages 16–17; or age 15 with a medical certificate and parental authorization) competing in freestyle and Greco-Roman do so in one of the following 10 weight classes[2]:
Cadets (young women ages 16–17; or age 15 with a medical certificate and parental authorization) competing in freestyle wrestling do so in one of the following 10 weight classes[3]:
The AAU has their own weight classes for their tournaments.
So was there any handicapping going on at this coed HS WRESTLING event?
You Didn't Build That.
So the lower range of both
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 9:37pm.
So the lower range of both men and women's weight classes is almost the same, and women's weight classes go up to the fourth highest men's weight class. There is tons of overlap there. Why is it so hard to believe that there could be some women who match men and would be capable of wrestling them?
Not ignoring anything.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 8:53pm.
So do you think if a boy is too weak to play on the boys team, he should be allowed to play on the girls team? NO WAY, that's what JV is for, and if they can't make the cut. They are cut.
If there isn't a team for the girls. Then tough cookies. Life ain't fair. I wanted to play volleyball in HS, but I couldn't, because the only volleyball team was a girls team. Oh well, that's life.
(I'm lying about wanting to play on the girls team, just using it as an example)
We Are The 53%
mamabear
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:37pm.
I'm not sure when Bozell talked about implications he was referring to motivations. My take is that the motivations could be that she and/or her family wanted to her to be noticed by participating in a boy's sport (in the same way people whe let their children sail around the world solo are looking for attention for their child), but the implications are that she will be physically hurt or sexually looked at differently.
He's asking why they
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:46am.
He's asking why they encouraged her, which is motivation. I don't think you deal with the inevitable constant flak of being a female wrestler just to get attention. And when he says sexual implications, you read that as being worried she'll be "looked at" differently? That seems like an odd way to phrase it.
To say parents or the girl
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:24pm.
To say parents or the girl wouldn't participate in wrestling just to get attention isn't realistic. We live in a society of reality t.v., where people will sacrifice dignity and privacy for their 15 minutes of fame. It's incredibly disingenous, even odd, for you to say otherwise.
She's only on TV because
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:02am.
She's only on TV because someone else refused to wrestle her. She doesn't get attention for wrestling, she gets attention when someone else makes a decision that affects her. That doesn't seem manufactured to me.
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:59pm.
You honestly don't think that as a girl, in a boys contact sport, she wasn't getting attention before this? I've got a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to sell you...
When did you first hear about
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:42am.
When did you first hear about her?
I'm sure she got a lot of
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 11:20am.
I'm sure she got a lot of attention locally, then on an increasing outward spiral. You don't think a girl wanting to wrestle boys wasn't news on a smaller lever before it broke nationally do you?
Girls have been doing this at
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 9:54pm.
Girls have been doing this at least since I was in high school, and probably longer. I was actually surprised anyone cared about this specifc controversy. On a daily basis, I don't imagine she gets that much attention over it.
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 10:16pm.
Again, what kind of high school did you go to? Girls wrestled boys as a sport all the time and girls fights left rooms full of blood and destroyed?
You're jumping the shark again.
Not all the time. At least
Submitted by mamabear on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 6:38pm.
Not all the time. At least once that I know of. I think it has been rare throughout, but it isn't a new phenomenon.
No there aren't.
Submitted by Satchmo on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 12:27am.
No there aren't.
That's because Bozell has a
Submitted by Satchmo on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 12:23am.
That's because Bozell has a hard time minding his own business. He isn't for personal freedom and personal choice.
Incestmo
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:28pm.
This is Bozell's website. He's acting as a journalist. And as a commentator.
If he was going to mind his own business he wouldn't be running a website.
You are unbelievable stupid.
Whoops, I forgot, you're nothing more than a leafy green thing.
Wow what ignorance!!
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:48am.
You must be a woman, only a woman would say something so ignorant. You think a boy wrestling a girl is not sexual? Hah! If any 15 year old boy told you the truth, they would guess this girl won half her matches because the boy were getting excited. There is no way that it would not cross a boy's mind repeatedly, everytime he reached across her chest or grabbed the inside of her thigh, both typical wrestling moves.
And if you don't think it would mess with a boys concentration you don't know much about boys!
There is about 1 in a 1,000 girls that could even compete, yet alone win if there was no mental element and if any of the boys were honest they would admit it. They may brag about it in the locker room!
What kind of monster would willingly put their daughter in this situation? There are plenty of girls sports, lifes tough you have to compromise sometimes, play softball, volleyball, track etc. It's not like there is collegiate women's wrestling.
You must be a woman, only a
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:08pm.
You must be a woman, only a woman would say something so ignorant.
Classy
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:57pm.
Maybe Stan should have called you "naive", but his point is well taken. The male sex drive in the teen years is very very strong.
Yes. I clearly had no idea
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:43am.
Yes. I clearly had no idea that male teenagers think a lot about sex. How womanly of me!
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 11:23am.
Surely you've seen this before in your scientific pursuits http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_YGKnhZ-e51s/TU3Ta628MeI/AAAAAAAAA18/x45A9AkzSW...
However I would postulate that in the teenage male the sex area are larger.
It's funny because it's
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 9:55pm.
It's funny because it's true!
Hey Radical
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 10:22pm.
This is why women shouldn't wrestle with the boys.
We Are The 53%
Denny
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 10:28pm.
My brain scan was a little different than the one you showed. I actually think my chocolate and shopping centers are larger than shown, but here it is http://www.btinternet.com/~homepage/Imaged/female.gif
Good one Rad
Submitted by Denny Crane on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 6:17am.
Although I think the listening center is a bit big, no?
We Are The 53%
Denny
Submitted by Radical1979 on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 2:47pm.
Listenting depends on the context. When my darling children turned into monstrous teens my listening center became enlarged as I tried to overhear plans being made and hear if they were trying to sneak out of the house...
From Reilly's Column
Submitted by Tugboat Phil on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 10:49am.
I don't feel as bad for Cassy as I do for Joel. He was the fifth-ranked wrestler in the state at 112 pounds. He was 35-4. He had a chance to win the whole thing. In Iowa, that means a lifetime of people buying you lunch. It's corn-state royalty. To give all that up to protect a girl who loathes being protected? What a waste of a dream.
The last I saw Northrup, he was crying. After the default, he entered the consolation round, where he won his first match, then lost a heartbreaker in overtime, 3-2. He jogged past the scrum of reporters waiting to talk to Cassy, tears streaming down his face, unnoticed. He was done, with no chance to medal.
Neither he, nor his coaches, nor his dad, had any comment. He was reportedly on his way back home to Marion, Iowa, where his mom was about to deliver her eighth child.
For the kid's sake, I hope it's a boy.
I read his bio and Reilly is a year younger than me. A lot must have changed from 1957 to 58. He's blaming a 17 year old for creating a "media hurricane". Not content with that, he feels the need to savage the kid about his manhood. Very classy.
I'd never heard of this guy who has devoted his adult life to writing about sports, because in the big scheme of things I don't rank sports all that high. If this is a routine sample of his "talent" then I'm the better man for not having read him prior to this.
I don't know Reilly or really even care about him. But if this is an indication of his character, I'd hope none of his kids are girls that marry an abusive man. If she doesn't get anything worse than a broken collarbone he'd probably not notice.
While reading about him I discovered that he had something to do with getting mosquito nets for kids in Africa where malaria is a real problem again. I wonder if he was also one of the liberal do gooders that got DDT banned, which helped malaria become a threat to human life again after almost elimiating it?
Reilly should show same class as wrestlers, families
Submitted by nkviking75 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:01am.
As an Iowan, I can tell you that everything I read in the local papers suggested that all parties involved conducted themselves with class and dignity. It's too bad Mr. Reilly couldn't do that. I suspect Reilly's real problem was with Northrup's conservative religious beliefs. I seriously doubt that Northrup hates women
Girls who wrestle in Iowa wrestle boys because there aren't enough female wrestlers to compete against. I'd love to know if these girls would be so willing to wrestle boys if they could compete against their own sex.
“Always love your country — but never trust your government!" -- Bob Novak (1931-2009)
When you put the clowns in charge, don't be surprised when a circus breaks out.
Just to prove I'm a 21st century kind of guy ...
Submitted by Newsbubba on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:03am.
I hereby publicly announce that I will wrestle Paris Hilton and Lindsay Lohan at the same time! I will also take on the entire female, on air staff of Fox News anytime, anywhere!
Call me a bigot, will you? Bring it on, ladies.
Thx for taking one for the team Bubba
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:13am.
I'm sure you would not mind getting piledrived either. ;-)How about a Megyn Kelly
Submitted by stratman on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:37pm.
How about a Megyn Kelly catfight?
Meow.
Rrrrrowr!
Submitted by Rukus on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 6:08pm.
Megyn, cheerleader uniform, catfight? I'd pay good money for that vid! Oink! : )
LMAO
Submitted by MacWell on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:44am.
That brought a tear to my eye...snif
Maybe...just maybe...
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:18am.
The girl likes to wrestle, which last I checked was not a crime in the US. So this girl excels in her sport, goes all the way to the state championship, and her competitor bows out for religious reasons, suddenly invalidating her trip to the title match.
Poor him. When I was 15 I would't have wanted to wrestle a girl either. As for Reilly's article, he's an idiot looking to stir up more trouble than it's worth. They're kids after all, so leave them the f*** alone.
And as for Tugboat Phil's comments above regarding his relation to the banning of DDT in 1972, Reilly was 14 at the time.
Troll is living up to it's name.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:34am.
suddenly invalidating her trip to the title match.
What on earth are you rushing to judgement about? She was eliminated 2 rounds later. She didn't make it to the tilte match, because she LOST, not because one of her opponents forfeited.
We Are The 53%
It's very encouraging to see
Submitted by tampamom25 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:33am.
It's very encouraging to see a young man who is so convinced of his faith and so committed to his God that he would set aside what he obviously loves to show that commitment. It really doesn't matter if you agree with his faith (btw, I do agree with him), but you really have to admire someone who has set a standard and will not violate it. That is an astonishing thing for even an adult to do, especially in this day and age.
What do you think about the girl?
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:38am.
Who wrestled her way both literally and metaphorically to the top of a historically all-male sport?
good for her
Submitted by Agnostic on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:42am.
Her accomplishments should not be diminished by someone elses beliefs. But I thought we weren't supposed to be worried about it because they were just kids.
Perhaps that was someone else's post - memory is not what it used to be.
Is that what you got from my comments?
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:52am.
I'll clarify. It's fine to report the story because it is newsworthy, but an opinion piece bashing a 15 year old for his religious beliefs is simply wrong.
But this is a dialogue concerning just that.
RtJ,
Submitted by Agnostic on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:10pm.
I don't mind the concept of the article as much as the very unprofessional way it is written, IMHO. Reilly sounds more like a child being told he has to go to Sunday school when he want to go play with his friends than he does a professional journalist. An article showing the merits and the negatives of a male wrestler entering a match with a female and then stating an opinion would have been at least proper. His condescending rant/tantrum wouldn't make it at a high school paper ironically enough.
The author is entitiled to his opinion but I question the professionalism of an editor who whould allow it to print written in such a way.
The event itself is at best a public interest story that probably should be covered from several angles that I have not seen: The Place of Chivalry in Competition, The Separation of the Sexes in Sports (thought this was covered in tennis), Crossing the line between Sportsmanship and Chivalry, etc.
Disclaimer as to why I'm hesitant to comment on the event itself:
I may be a bit tainted because to this day I remember playing in a state little league tournament and causing an injury to a young girl from a district that allowed females on male teams - I was not used to it and though the injury was in truth her coaches fault (he was later removed from the tournament for telling his players to try to get hit by pitches)- the event, both the coaches actions and seeing the young girl injured, did leave its mark on my attitude toward playing the game.
I get it
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:19pm.
And I think we actually agree. There is no denying women can not physically compete with men in certain sports, but in the case of wrestling which has always been weight classed experience and strength are the advantage, not size or sex. But I'm not in that situation either.
I always felt women had no place is baseball. Have you SEEN them throw???
Sorry ladies, I couldn't resist.
R2J
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:21pm.
Hey, this isn't a girl http://binsidetv.net/wp-content/uploads/2009/07/obama-pitch.jpg it's supposed to be a guy.
Have you ever seen a girl's softball game? Unlike the POTUS, they can throw.
Yes, that was ridiculous and embarrassing
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:28pm.
That's why I still practice my pitching skills against a wall in the backyard. NEVER know when I'll be called upon to throw that opening pitch.
All joking aside, I always felt girls looked like they were throwing with the wrong arm, or stepping forward with the wrong foot...something was off.
Now girl's softball - seriously hurts my shoulder. They're talented.
Umm . . . headline
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:01am.
Boys have far denser muscles and quicker twitch muscles than girls. The only sport girls could conceivably compete with boys are distance events. Not to diminish girls sports, they're fun for the girls and the fans. If strong girls can go on boys wrestling, can weak boys go on the girls wrestling team?
EVERY boy that wrestles against a girl will be distracted! Every one! Some more than others, but they all have to overcome a cultural (if not natural) response to not touch a girl on the core of her body, and of course not commit physical violence upon a girl. With of course the wrestling, fighting, contact sports are done with boys all the time.
I've seen girls pitch in Little League and some do OK, but as soon as the boys hormones hit, it's all over.
Why are people constantly trying to pretend that girls and boys are the same?
Agnostic,
Submitted by Ashrak on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:59am.
Please think about what you just said.
How about his accomplishments should not be diminished because of her beliefs?
You bust yourself, as arguing the point from a biased (one sided) point of view, with your own words, and probably didn't even realize it.
How about we make all sports coed, and then watch all the women's rights champions scream bloody murder about how wrong it is to do so, how unfair it is, how the playing field wouldn;t be level.
This madness has got to stop.
Ashrak
Submitted by Agnostic on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:47pm.
I was responding to a post questioning thoughts on her accomplishments and therefore never addressed anything about the young man.
The individuals involved both made personal decisions that were indicative of their own beliefs and their beliefs only. Mixing the two would be an insult to both of them. The event and the circumstances that lead up to it are thought provoking and could make for a good story but to use either side of this story against the other is wrong IMO.
I'm waiting for the man that
Submitted by misterbee241 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:48am.
I'm waiting for the man that does the same thing in an all female sport.
He is *gasp* HOME-SCHOOLED!
Submitted by mang on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:39am.
ABC felt the need to mention at the very beginning of their story that he is home-schooled. Any more that is a way for the Left to say that he is socially backward. I applaud his decision although I hope it was truly his and not solely his parents'. Regardless, I think he's being raised right.
A wrestler's point of view
Submitted by Ashrak on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 11:51am.
First, let me say that this is a Title 9 created debacle and it is quite intentional. Wrestling is popular in the midwest but shool after school has closed down their programs over the years over Title 9. Where it remains, because local culture refused to submit to federal programs designed to shut them down, this situation will only become more common. I recall drama with coed wrestling almost 30 years ago here in the midwest. Luckily for me, weight class removed me from facing what this boy did.
I am all for girls facing a baseball instead of a softball. I will even support a female runningback taking a goal line hit and pile on or subjecting themselves to a crushing Ronnie Lott type hit going over the middle to catch a pass. But we must face this fact, wrestling is different. It is just different.
Wrestling, especially folk style, is a form of direct one on one close quarters combat. Inflicting pain with the aim of submission is a staple. This is not true in any other school age sport. Even in boxing, kick boxing and martial arts, below the belt is off limits and considered a foul. In wrestling, between the legs, regarding both hands and legs, is not only fair game, but moves involving this area of the body are an integral part of the sport. It is impossible to remove the sexual nature of this. In any other context, sexual harrassment and even sexual assault would apply. Forcing a boy into that situation is quite ridiculous.
I stand firm that men and women are equals. However, I am not willing to take that sentiment to the uropian based level that we do not have differences between us that matter, substantially, sometimes. We are not less than equal because men cannot birth younguns. Nor would we be less than equal because girls can't engage boys on the wrestling mat.
This wasn't about being scared to lose to a girl. This isn't about bible thumping. This isn't about making a particular girl an example. This is about a moral compass of a fine young man making a personal sacrifice in the face of a system that has lost all common sense. This young man respected the female body, the gender itself, and the very real line of separation that exists between us. The one disrespecting that line by crossing it is the female who uses, who is being taught to use, her gender as a tool.
The sport of wrestling has been under attack in this country just the same way firearms rights have been. All things self-defense have been targeted for destruction by complication, especially via government regulation. Obstacles have been built on every path that a good moral compass points to.
No matter what a male does in this situation, he is a focus of wrongdoing. If this boy doesn't engage her, he is wrong (in media's eyes). If he does, he is wrong (in media's eyes). This is by design with the endgame being shutting down wrestling itself.
The wussification of America continues and in this example, there is no way to avoid it. That is the progressive's agenda. Forfeiture has to be deemed a win. That is the message progressives send in all walks of life. A refusal to fight is is what they seek.
What they do not understand as that this boy demonstrates that even when in a lose-lose situation - there is a still a way to fight back. When it comes right down to it, this boy stood taller than any mountain, on his principles, and came out a hero in my eyes. He won and led us all down the proper path by doing what he did. He chose personal sacrifice over personal gain to keep his principle, his honor, intact. A boy became a man, and a very good one the instant he made this decision.
I urge every wrestling family across the country to learn the lesson he presented. When every boy stands up the way he did, when boys simply refuse to wrestle girls because some things are indeed off limits, the light will shine brightly. You know why? Some girl will be more than happy, at the insistance of her corrupt minded parents, to accept forfeits all the way to a state championship. Nothing will show how foolish this is until that happens.
To be sure, a girl has a right to want to engage boys on the mat, nowhere is there a better opportunity to show that choices have consequences. This boy showed that girl, and the rest of us, that this is true. I hope she someday realizes that she used her gender as a tool, degrading herself along with all other females as a result, and that she now has to live with that for the rest of her life. She can live with her denial of that shame as she now embarks on using her gender as a tool throughout her adult life. Why wouldn't she? She was rewarded for doing so here and will expect it going forward.
And folks actually have to ask why this country is in such dire straights today? Really?
While I agree with most of what you said;
Submitted by hobie on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:33pm.
I have a few counterpoints.
The girl wrestler did not create Title 9, nor should she be seen as using her gender as a tool if she abides by Title 9's rules. Your problem with Title 9 should not be exercised on her.
In my opinion Title 9 is offensive if it only provides a one-way street. Boys should be allowed to play traditionally girl oriented sports against girls and compete in exactly the same way that this female wrestler competed in a traditionally boy oriented sport.
She was playing by the rules that someone else gave her. It is unfortunate that the rules were written in such a way as to create this potential situation. This is the law of unintended consequences.
Getting to the boy; he was given options based on the implementation of Title 9. Wrestle a girl, or forfeit. Most likely, he made his choice the best way he knew how, and completely based on his past experience and best thought processes. Don't try to get in his head, no one can. He alone was in the arena trying to make this decision.
I applaud both parties.
Rick Reilly is a pud. Leave it to a sports reporter to know the hearts and minds of both parties, or at least think he does.
It did provide a one-way
Submitted by Ashrak on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 4:45pm.
It did provide a one-way street. The girl won and the boy lost, strictly and entirely because of the fact she was a girl. Can you really say you do not see that?
As for financial issues being the point, have you ever heard of unintended consequences? OH wait, you mention them just as you ignore them. How is that working out for mens gymnastics? Not so good, huh?
I would applaud both parties if she had refused to accept the victory. Did she? Nope? Imagine that.
You seem plently willing to put it to the boy, but then excuse the girl. Your words speak for themselves on that point.
Excellent point
Submitted by Lord-come-soon-... on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:52pm.
This subject came up earlier this week, and the real issue was, and still is, that wrestling is DIFFERENT from other sports. I'm all for girls competing in any activity they choose, but wrestling is different. The fact that this kid felt uncomfortable enough to throw away his chance for a state title shouldn't be disparaged, it should be applauded. Rick Reilly is a very good sports writer, but he's in uncharted territory when he starts mouthing off about religious views. He obviously hasn't a clue. As far as Title IX goes, an even playing field from a financial point of view is really the only fair way to approach school sports programs. Girls deserve the same opportunities as the guys. That was the intent of Title IX. The fact that schools are terminating sports programs all over the country is more of a function of state budgets in the red than it is of a consequence of Title IX.
It's not just budget
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:18am.
It requires EQUAL participation, so therefore sports like wrestling, and men's gymnastics have to get cut to make room for girls. If more sports are added for men then more for women will need to be added.
Pfft
Submitted by ckc1227 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 6:05pm.
"It is impossible to remove the sexual nature of this. In any other context, sexual harrassment and even sexual assault would apply. Forcing a boy into that situation is quite ridiculous."
So, basically, you're saying it is sexual in nature when guys wrestle other guys.
Please...there is nothing sexual about it. It's wrestling, not sex. In any other context, sexual harrassment and sexual assault would apply if the opponent was another guy as well. Furthermore, boxing in any other context would be assault, or worse. So would a football tackle.
There is nothing to celebrate here. The kid was most likely scared he would lose to a girl. And he was far from respecting this girl, or the female body. If anything he disrespected both. Whatever his reasons though, let's not make it more than it is. He isn't some hero who should be placed on a pedestal. It was a wrestling match, not a gang rape.
Did you write PFFFT?
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:10am.
The kid was scared of losing to the girl? Thank you for using your psychic powers on the kid. I think if you look at her overall record and his overall record, you'd have called Miss Cleo for a better insight than you gave. Also, I'd love for you to explain how he disrespected the female body in this instance?
How about
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:33am.
the fact that boys wrestling boys is not gay, because 98% of boys are not gay! It is perhaps not "sexual" to a boy, but it most definitely has a sexual and socio-sexual element to every boy that wrestles a girl.
OT, but WTH: "Scientist" Quote of the Week:
Submitted by SickofLibs on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:25pm.
"in evolutionary terms same-sex mating seems to reduce the birds' chances of reproductive success."
Is Grizzlybear moonlighting?
It's a neat study. The next
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:45pm.
It's a neat study. The next step is to look at polyandrous shorebirds and see if you find the same pattern in females there that you do in polygynous species with the males. Interesting that you left the very next sentence out of your quote of the week: "But that's not necessarily so, according to a new study."
Yea, kinda like your gay
Submitted by Boudin on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 5:57pm.
Monkeys
Ain't no penetration just like wrestling a great way to exercise
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 2:29pm.
You Didn't Build That.
You mean the "butt drag"?
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 2:37pm.
Pretty sick, but evidently it does occur.
Humm How old is man on man wrestling,maybe "bd" happened before.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 7:34pm.
You Didn't Build That.
Thank you, mamabear
Submitted by Bosco1123 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 12:42pm.
I admire both Cassy and Joel. They both worked and sweated to get to the state championship. They both stood on their principles. They were both supported by their families.
The more you read of Reilly, the more you see the risks he takes, and the more you see he welcomes all responses. He's thought-provoking, like many of the posters here. Demeaning Todd in any way is wrong. And Todd is strong enough to know that without Reilly's support.
And Cassy? You go, you 'rassler. Any wrestler has spent part of their career eating mat and she's come back for more, if you can do it. If you can't, it's because she won't let you.
Competition builds excellence. The goal is a level playing field that is not always available. If there's a girls' team but not a boys' team somewhere, then a boy gets to play. And in state sanctioned activity, the reverse is true as well. To argue "separate but equal" is as flawed as Jim Crow. Title IX aimed for fairness of opportunity. Some of one gender suffered while an entire gender benefited. In the long run, I'd say we all benefited.
These two kids are fine, and I know there's plenty more like them. Had they wrestled, I'll bet they would shake hands afterwards, no hard feelings.
Ramifications of sports equality
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:19pm.
What would happen if do to this kind of thinking, a school decided to have one basketball team for girls and boys? Because boys have average heights greater than females, they have a distinct advantage. As a result, the basketball would be primarily, if not completely male. Girls, or at least the majority of them, would be denied the opportunity to participate in the sport. Is this really where we want to go?
Isn't it better to allow girls and boys different sports teams so more of them can play? And isn't it sexist for the girls to feel the need to compete with the boys team? Aren't girls tough enough to compete against?
It's PC run amok, Rad
Submitted by Blonde on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:33pm.
There really aren't alot of sports where men and women can compete on an equal basis. About the only two I can think of would be equestrian events and shooting.
Yet due to pc nonsense, it's not okay to say that men and women are physically different, and not capable of doing the same things. It's a physiological fact, yet the liberal pc nonsense allows situations like this idiot wrestling match.
Agree with you Rad...sports and competition are important for both sexes. But this nonsense of direct competition is just that, nonsense.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
Do you know that Pat
Submitted by Satchmo on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 12:38am.
Do you know that Pat Summit has her women's bball team scrimmage against men? Do you think there is any correlation to her winning 8 national titles, 16 conference championships, and 14 conference tournaments?
Incestmo brings a straw man to the conversation.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:51am.
Just proving the point. She scrimmages against men because they are on average bigger, stronger, ect..
Her womens BBall team has won 8 national titles, 16 conf.. and 14 conf.. tourn.. against other WOMEN teams.
We Are The 53%
Yeah that's right
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:10am.
but the question is what men? I know that the women's olypmic soccer team scrimmages against high school club teams. I will guarantee that a regionally competitive high school boys team would dominate the WNBA. What's that mean? Nothing, the boys are taller, stronger and faster, it's totally unfair to the women.
Pat Summit is smart, it's a good way for her to get her team agressive and it apparently works.
That's just plain ignorance.
Submitted by Satchmo on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 9:42am.
That's just plain ignorance.How is it, Satchmo-SatchelMouth-Pervmo-Incestmo---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:43pm.
as your entire post consisted of the words - "That's just plain ignorance" -
which shows you are aware of the existence of these words; that you just don't seem to grasp the significant applicability of those very words to your collosally ignorant statement regarding "consensual sex" between a father and daughter?
MD
Sure, and the top women's tennis players practice vs. men
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:47pm.
It's always an advantage to practice against superior opponents.
So your point would be?
Incestmo....just get lost. You are totally out of your depth here. I feel bad, kicking your ass, day after day, week after week.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
But isn't it strange
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:12am.
that those are two sports where they don't compete! Same with women's pool and darts! What's that about?
Isn't it better to allow
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 1:50pm.
Isn't it better to allow girls and boys different sports teams so more of them can play? And isn't it sexist for the girls to feel the need to compete with the boys team? Aren't girls tough enough to compete against?
How are you getting this from this story? There is no women's league for her to compete in. She's stated that she would much rather wrestle against other women, but it isn't a popular sport among women and so there aren't other women for her to wrestle against. No one (at least no one here) is arguing that we should do away with separate men's and women's sports-- just that if another option doesn't exist for women (or for men, for that matter) they should be allowed to compete with the other gender.Then what you're saying is . . .
Submitted by Cool Arrow on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 2:39pm.
Then what you're saying is that she is absolutely the only female wrestler?
Crown her champ of the Female Wrestlers League and move on.
"Allowed" to use their gender as a tool......
Submitted by Ashrak on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 4:51pm.
"...it isn't a popular sport among women and so there aren't other women for her to wrestle against."
I would offer that while this statement hold truth, it is not this boy's fault that it contains that truth and that he should not face being punished in this way because of it. Therein rests the problem with Title 9 itself. This isn't a situation where lack of money is stopping any programs, lack of interest stops them and because of it boy's programs, where interest is present, are affected negatively and seriously. Title 9, like so many other government enforced blanket mandates, does far more damage than it attempts to avoid.He's not being punished. He
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 5:54pm.
He's not being punished. He has the decision to wrestle or to decline. It sucks that this situation exists, but the two choices here are one teenager has to skip the occasional match, or one is denied completely the chance to practice the sport. There are two individuals whose rights are at stake here, not one. Given that there are very few women interested in the sport, he will probably have to deal with the discomfort on rare occasion. She deals with it every time she gets on the mat, which I think shows some pretty impressive dedication to her sport. I bet it isn't easy.
20 wins 13 losses
Submitted by Bosco1123 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:03pm.
The lady 'rassler apparently met at least 33 Iowa lads willing to step on the mat with her in matches far less daunting in consequence than what Todd faced. 33 sets of parents, 33 other teams, 33 high schools. And people in Iowa are from the heartland of the United States, they're not shy about their rights. Or about respecting the rights of others.
mamabear
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:48pm.
Let's get over this idea that everything has to be completely fair and equal, because that just isn't reality. Schools should be required to spend the same amount of money on girls and boys sports. The school should be allowed to determine how the money is spent, where the interest lies among it's student body and spend money on that. No, not everyone will be able to play every sport. So adapt to what's available or do it one your own.
I go back to the idea that sports aren't the function of a school. It's an extra. Every time some pain in the @ss thing like this happens I lean towards getting sports out of schools entirely. Let 'em compete for academic prizes.
Where on earth am I saying
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 9:59am.
Where on earth am I saying everything has to be fair and equal? I'm not. I don't even think that schools should be required to spend the same on boys and girls sports. Does that surprise you?
I was involved in a Title IX suit in college, and I got to see how ridiculous it was. Like most schools, the one I attended spent vast sums of money on its football team. There was no women's football team, so when you added up what was spent on men's vs. women's vs. coed sports it was far from even.
And while as someone playing a sport with very little support from the school, it was frustrating to see the budget the football team had for extra backup shoes and hotel rooms, it was also clear that spending equally ridiculous sums on all of the other sports was not the answer.
I think that when there is interest, women's sports should be supported as well as men's, but while equal amounts of money is probably the easiest way to quantify that, it isn't the most useful. Volleyball doesn't cost as much as football. Trying to make them both equal is stupid. I think equal amounts of money is an imperfect measure and we should think about other ways to provide support.
And adapting to what's available is exactly what Cassy is doing-- if women are interested in sports that aren't available to them, instead of making the school invest in a whole new team when they have other real, educational priorities, those women should be allowed to compete on men's teams if they are able. Sports are an extra. This compromise avoids expenditures beyond the interest level, but allows individuals to find a place to compete where they want to. It is sometimes awkward, but no one has proposed a better way of doing it. At least, not one that doesn't treat a man's right to wrestle as inalienable while telling a woman she's lucky we even tolerate her weird desire to do the same thing!
That's not true
Submitted by StanO360 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:39am.
Most schools football and men's basketball pays for most other sports. It has nothing to do with budget, it's based on participation. The UC Berkeley mens rugby team had to shut down even though they raised their own funds.
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:34pm.
Let's keep this on high school o.k.? College sports differ for several reasons. They have the potential to generate revenue and interest in a school in a way high school sports don't (whenever my alma matter makes into the Sweet Sixteen during March Madness, applications and alumni donations increase dramatically, increasing as the team advances). Also, high school sports provide a way to acheive status in high school for students who are not academically strong. So, college and high school sports are different arenas in my book.
What happens if a boy wants to play a girls sport, such as field hockey? Do we let him? Because in general boys are stronger and faster, it's extremely likely he will deprive a girl of the chance to be on the team. Yet if girls are allowed to be on a boy's team how can we tell the boy he cannot be on a girl's team?
What about the locker room situation? When a team travels to another school they are usually given the locker room of the opposite sex. Won't work if one of the teams has a mixed gender team. I'm sure you'll think it's a small problem when in the giant scheme of things, it would allow this one girl to play on a boy's team. I disagree. Why make all the extra work when there are other opportunities she can explore? Why, as a society, do we have to gratify every individual's every whim?
I thihk guys should get to
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:18pm.
I thihk guys should get to play girl's sports too, and if there are enough guys interested to make it a major problem, then you create a team! Maybe several schools have to group together to field a men's field hockey team, but it's not impossible. These aren't kids asking for anything unreasonable-- they want to play a sport. And any guy willing to put up with the ridicule of playing a girl's sport must love it, I say let him play! Logistical issues can be dealt with, it really doesn't need to be a big deal if you don't make it one!
Why is it, grislybear---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:53pm.
that you can seem to recognize a guy being "ridiculed" for playing a girl's sport with girl's, as the norm, but when a girl wants to play boy's sports with the boys, it is somehow ennobling?
MD
Um, because I don't think
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:45am.
Um, because I don't think either of them should be hassled about it? I know it is going to happen. I don't think it's right. Despite your impression, I don't think I live in a perfect world!
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 7:22pm.
I couldn't disagree more. High school is a difficult enough time in the lives of kids. Girls are very aware of boys, and how boys view them. Many girls don't want to compete with a guy in a sport because they are afraid it will reduce their appeal. Go back to biology, males are the protectors, and although we have, for the most part risen above that view, high school is different. Also, many girls want an activity in which boys don't participate. It provides them the chance to compete without social repurcussions, and a chance to bond with girls.
Guys are the same way, they bond over sports in a "guy" way. Why do we have to interfere in this for a few random girls?
You are talking about
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:48am.
You are talking about averages and "mosts." Which is fine and true, and is the reason why our whole high school system isn't going to collapse into coed chaos because of this. Most boys and girls fit into the roles we expect them to. But not everyone fits the norm, and I think if we like the idea that this is a country that lets people be their best and use their unique talents, we can't tell them during the formative years that they'd better fit into the cookie cutter or we don't want to hear about it.
I'm not talking about chaos,
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 10:09pm.
I'm not talking about chaos, I'm talking about reasonable. Schools don't have the responsibility to cater to every interest every student might have. It's difficult enough for schools to meet the academic needs of students. It's ridiculous to expect schools to have to accomodate the desire of a girl to compete in a boy's sport.
Don't forget, these things are funded by tax dollars, and while you might argue that means everyone's desire should be met, I argue they should be used sparingly, at least in regards to extra curricular activities.
We need Sharia law
Submitted by paussend on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 4:26pm.
They don't have this problem in Iran. Obviously Brent Bozo has identified the real problem; we need more religious fundamentalism in this country. Can't wrestle when she is wearing a Burka right Brent? Let the kids do what they want, wrestle or not, and stop trying to make it into some national cause.
Brent Bozo?
Submitted by shawn. on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 4:45pm.
You do know this is his site and you can disagree with him without resorting to namecalling right?Cut him some slack, shawn...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 4:50pm.
Those HuffPo, DU and Daily Kos habits are hard to break... ;-)
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Welcome to NewsBusters, troll
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 6:27pm.
Jerk much?
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
correction
Submitted by bigbill1961 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 4:56pm.
Actually he defaulted, he did not forfeit. He will be allowed to wrestle in the consolation matches.
Highschool wrestling between males and females will end...
Submitted by Dave. on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 6:50pm.
...when the first sexual assault/improper touching/molestation, and God only knows what other charges, are made.
Then the lawyers are going to get involved and bill everybody involved into bankruptcy.
They will then hang the male wrestler out to dry, and that, as they say, will be that.
It's only a matter of time.
-Dave
Vote for the American in November
Exactly...This whole coed wrestling thing...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:50pm.
is beyond stupid. If girls want to wrestle (although why they would want to I'll never understand), then they should organize an all girls wrestling team, and until and unless they have the numbers to field a team, they don't wrestle...It's that simple. Women are able and should be able to do the same things as men most of the time, but coed wrestling should not be one of them. I would never let my daughter wrestle a guy, ever. There are just too many potential "issues" attached to this situation...It's just a really bad idea for everyone, all the way around.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Prairie
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:50pm.
The problem is, not many girls want to wrestle. We have become such an entitlement society that it seems no one can hear the word "no" anymore. So they let her wrestle instead of trying to find some other sport for her to participate in.
My thoughts too, Rad...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 9:03pm.
My first thought when I heard this story was, how many girls really want to wrestle, anyway? Not many, I would guess. That said, all it takes is one girl who decides, probably as a result of being egged on by her idiot, lefty parents, that she wants to wrestle, and away we go with the nonsense. The whole thing is just stupid.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
As an idiot lefty, with many
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:04am.
As an idiot lefty, with many idiot lefty parent friends, I think I can reliably assure you that encouraging daughters to wrestle is not an idea we would come up with on our own! Encouraging our daughters to become fortune 500 CEOs and the President of the US, yes. Wrestling? No. My guess would be that wrestling was Cassy's idea, and her parents just had the idiot lefty audacity not to explain to her that she couldn't do that because she's a girl.
Okay, idiot lefty...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:17pm.
(You said it, not me)...Girls shouldn't wrestle boys, but not just because they're girls...This isn't a sexist issue...This is a safety issue. There are those who refuse to believe and acknowledge that it is a biological and physiological fact that boys/men are, almost without exception, physically stronger than girls/women. And in a sport such as wrestling, that difference in physical strength could well be dangerous for the girl.
As I said in my intital post on this thread, women and girls are able and should be able and allowed to do the same things as men and boys, most of the time, but this is an example of when that doesn't apply. If a girl wants to wrestle, then more power to her, but she should only be allowed to wrestle other girls, and if she can't accept that, then she should find another sport to participate in. As for the parents of this girl, they must both be a few bricks short of a load to have allowed her to pursue this folly in the first place.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Prairie
Submitted by Radical1979 on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:22pm.
I'm really liking the new name mamabear gave herself. She accused me of not being creative and there she goes solving the problem for me.
Rad...LOL! It is interesting isn't it...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:45pm.
that she saw herself (and then admitted to it) in my use of "idiot lefty" in my post...Based on her response, she appears to be proud of being an "idiot lefty," although why, only she knows...I certainly didn't mean it as a compliment! ;-)
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
She accused me of not being
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:06am.
She accused me of not being creative and there she goes solving the problem for me.
Well, that's what you have to do when other people aren't creative! Are you going to answer my post about Title IX up above, or is that too substantive for you?
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:36pm.
Good grief I missed your post last night! I'm so very sorry I didn't reply to you immediatly. But have no fear, nothing you say is to substantive for me! I replied above.
Thanks!
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:18pm.
Thanks!
I agree that a woman should
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:10am.
I agree that a woman should not be allowed to compete if she isn't able to be safe.
But while women are on average smaller and weaker than men, all women are not smaller and weaker than all men. Variation is the norm, and if there is a woman who can hold her own, then she should be allowed to participate with men if there isn't an option for her to compete against her own gender.
I don't like separate standards for men and women-- I think, for instance, that there should be standards for physical ability related to being, say, a firefighter. Those standards should be the same for both men and women. If that means there are no women firefighters, so be it. But when a woman shows up who can meet those standards, you shut up and let her save your life, right? You don't whine that it could be dangerous for her because she's a girl.
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:38pm.
Then how do you feel about the army having different strength requirements for men and women? It seems quite often that women clamor for equality, then, once they get it, they want the bar lowered for themselves.
I don't like it. I
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:22pm.
I don't like it. I understand why it is done, but I don't believe that equality should be about equal numbers of men and women getting to do things. I believe it should be about equal opportunity on a level playing field, but in the end you have to step up and be good enough.
But this is part of the reason I want women to be able to play the sports they are good at and enjoy. Because there are cultural as well as physical reasons why women end up not being able to compete against men. Maybe if we encourage women to enjoy their strength and work on their physicality when they are younger, we'll have more of them up on ladder trucks and defending their country without needing any special rules to get them in.
We are simply bound to
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 7:11pm.
We are simply bound to disagree on the subject of girl's playing a boy's contact sport. There are plenty of other ways for girls to increase their strength as they grow up. My daughter played softball, ran, took karate lessons, and regularly worked out (all these interests at various times, not all at once), and still does some of these activities. Had she requested to joing a boy's wrestling team I would have redirected her interest. It's something a parent does on a daily basis when a child is doing, or wants to do, something that is not acceptable.
Okay, so how do you propose that it would be...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:42pm.
determined that a girl who wants to wrestle boys is strong enough to do so? You said that "...if there is a woman who can hold her own, then she should be allowed to participate with men if there isn't an option for her to compete against her own gender."
Alright, just how would you go about finding out who can "hold their own"??? I don't care for separate standards for men and women either, but sometimes, like it or not, they are necessary.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Don't you have try-outs for
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:23pm.
Don't you have try-outs for things like wrestling? There are also probably men that shouldn't wrestle other men because they aren't big enough or strong enough. We seem to do an okay job of dealing with that situation. I don't think women need to be treated any differently.
Yes, there could be tryouts...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 7:58pm.
But I believe that wrestling is not the same as other traditionally male sports that girls, in some cases, have successfully managed to join...This is not soccer, baseball, basketball, golf, etc. Wrestling is a physically intense, full body contact sport, and I still believe that a girl could be injured when wrestling a boy even though he is deemed to be roughly on her level as far as strength and weight are concerned. And almost more importantly, because wrestling is a physically intense, full body contact sport, I feel that it is completely inappropriate for school-aged girls and boys to be engaging in such an activity.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
I understand why wrestling in
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:51am.
I understand why wrestling in particular makes people more uncomfortable than other sports for this issue. I just think our assumption that these teenagers won't be able to handle the situation is misplaced. So far, they seem to be handling it very well.
For the reasons that I have enumerated...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 12:27pm.
I would not allow my son or daughter to wrestle another student of the opposite sex...I think it's inappropriate and there are other sports to choose from, coed and otherwise, that don't involve the issues that coed wrestling does. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
I'm fine with people having
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 9:59pm.
I'm fine with people having different opinions than me! My problem with Bozell's article was not that he disagrees with me about whether Cassy should be wrestling. What I don't like is the assumption that someone who disagrees with you must have nefarious motives. Sometimes reasonable people wth good intentions come to different conclusions about a situation.
I'm glad to hear it, and I agree...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 3:29pm.
What a boring world this would be if we all agreed on all subjects.
That said, there are times when people do have "nefarious" agendas and motives behind their arguments. This may not be one of them, but it does happen.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Competitive wrestling is divided up by---
Submitted by matthewdean on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 11:29pm.
weight classifications, not strength or size. Those men who probably shouldn't wrestle other men because they aren't big enough or strong enough, end up either wearing tutu's like Rahm Emmanuel, or becoming metrosexual liberal Democrat Party politicos.Apparently the weight classes
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 10:00pm.
Apparently the weight classes go down to 86 lbs for 16 year old men! So maybe we're wrong about there being guys too small to wrestle.
mb, Guess what, the 86 lbs wrestles another person at 86 lbs.
Submitted by upcountrywater on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 3:57pm.
What part of WRESTLING weight classes do you NOT GET? sheesh
You Didn't Build That.
upcountry---
Submitted by matthewdean on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 2:08am.
the weight class designation did not compute, apparently.I get it. Others have
Submitted by mamabear on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 6:35pm.
I get it. Others have suggested that women are too small and weak to wrestle. If 86 pound guys can wrestle other 86 pound guys, then there is no reason to think women are too small and weak to wrestle. You match everyone by weight class, and what's the problem?
Were you trying to make some other point with that information?
It appeared you did not understand---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:49am.
the distinction inherent in the reason for weight classifications; meaning, "little" wrestlers do not wrestle "big" ones.I'm not an idiot, I know what
Submitted by mamabear on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:03am.
I'm not an idiot, I know what weight classifications are!
Your statement, grislybear---
Submitted by matthewdean on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:42pm.
seemed to indicate otherwise.just add jello
Submitted by Agnostic on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 8:52pm.
to womens college wrestling and you may have a sport that would rival football in creating revenue for the colleges.
(joking)
That's funny
Submitted by Blonde on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:51pm.
....and very true.
Handy Reference Guide to Obama's Gaffes and Goofs ~ Currently Numbering 200 (and Counting)
LOL
Submitted by Denny Crane on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 8:56pm.
Except the Sororities would never let you take the their secret revenue source away.
We Are The 53%
The basic take on this subject should be that until---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 9:10pm.
a male athlete can engage and compete in any and all sports activities that heretofore involved only the distaff side, this brouhaha over a female wrestler's trials, tribulations, or triumphs, against males, is absolutely, positively, and completely, nothing more than politically correct bullsh*t.
MD
I'm not sure how I would have
Submitted by bkeyser on Sat, 02/26/2011 - 9:26pm.
I'm not sure how I would have reacted at age 17, but I can say that at age 45, I don't think a boy should wrestle a girl. I don't care how good she thinks she is, or how strong she thinks she is, or how quick she thinks she is- most, if not all of her male opponents did not go all out on the mat with her.
But the question still remains- I asked this the other day- what happens when she gets her arm broken by a male opponent?
Girls should stop trying to be boys but if they can't resist, than there should be no quarter given them in competition. Guaranteed she doesn't have a male prom date.
what happens when she gets
Submitted by Satchmo on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 12:41am.
what happens when she gets her arm broken by a male opponent?
She'll see a doctor, have it set, and get a cast. What do you think is going to happen?
What's that in the sky?
Submitted by sentry_99 on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 3:37am.
It's a bird? It's a plane? NO!! It's........
CAPTAIN OBVIOUS!!!!!
Yeah, you're probably right.
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:27am.
Yeah, you're probably right. No one will accuse the boy of working her over. No one will accuse him of being too tough on her. No one will consider it a battery if he hadn't also broken other boys' arms.
It's a no-win situation for her male opponents. If they lose, they lose to a girl and he'll probably have to claim he didn't want to hurt her -and he may be telling the truth. If he wins, it's a tainted win because he beat a girl. If he hurts her, he's the devil.
Get real.
I agree: no one will do any
Submitted by Satchmo on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:12pm.
I agree: no one will do any of those things.Denial is a stinky
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:37pm.
Denial is a stinky cologne.
[Sniff]
Ewww.
But, will it
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 2:55am.
be consensual, Incestmo? Inquiring minds want to know.
And, you know, as well as the rest of us know, there'll be lawsuits, investigations, and editorials, and who'll ge blamed? The male wrestler. You know it, you just won't admit it.
Zing!
Submitted by Rukus on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 3:44am.
.
Are you saying that
Submitted by Satchmo on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 9:46am.
Are you saying that wrestlers, male or female, are being forced against their will to participate in a sport? You're trying to be funny or clever, but you're failing miserably. And no, there wouldn't be lawsuits. This may be because you don't understand free will, which is one reason why your previous joke fails.The only fail
Submitted by UpNorth on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 1:43pm.
is hiding under the name, Incestmo. Where did I say anyone was competing against their will? And, yes, there will be lawsuits. Failure to properly supervise, placing an athlete in danger, are just two of the things that come immediately come to mind.
Guaranteed she doesn't have a
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 10:07am.
Guaranteed she doesn't have a male prom date.
Really? That's where you felt the need to go with this?
Unless he's on the wrestling
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 11:23am.
Unless he's on the wrestling team, I would think most high school boys wouldn't want to date a wrestler. That's fairly obvious, don't you think? And no, it was not a statement about her sexuality.
I didn't think it was a
Submitted by mamabear on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 6:08pm.
I didn't think it was a statement about her seuxality. What it appears to be is a statement about how being strong, tough, and competitive makes a woman unattractive. Say it ain't so!
Unless I seriously misremember wrestling, wrestlers are not noticably different from the rest of the population when they aren't wrestling. They don't walk funny, talk funny, have noticably different bodies, other than being athletic, and they don't go around throwing people during random conversations.
So why would a girl who wrestles be any less likely to have a date than one who doesn't?
Maybe because the object of
Submitted by bkeyser on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 6:17pm.
Maybe because the object of her sporting passion is to fight with -and subdue boys. Unless the teenage world has changed to something that no longer resembles that in which I grew up, (and I have an 18 y.o. son so I'm somewhat familiar with today's teenagers) most high school boys aren't romantically interested in girls that have a desire be tougher than they are. This isn't even arguable.
15 years ago I would agree.
Submitted by Denny Crane on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 12:58am.
But the left is turning young men into metrosexuals. There probably a lot of boys out there that might not have a problem being considered the weaker sex.
We Are The 53%
Women athletes are perfectly
Submitted by mamabear on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:29pm.
Women athletes are perfectly capable of being girly, just like everyone else. It is likely that in the rest of her life, Cassy is not particularly different from the other girls she goes to high school with. Maybe some young men are intimidated by her, but that sounds like a pretty convenient way to weed out the losers! I don't think it is so out of the realm of possibility that she can find a nice guy secure enough in his masculinity to deal with her hobby.
So I make a supposition based
Submitted by bkeyser on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 8:30pm.
So I make a supposition based upon what I know of boys and get called out for it. You suppose that Cassy is likely a ballet dancer on the nights she doesn't roll on a mat engaged in combat with boys, which is -by the way- merely a hobby...
but I'll let it go. ;-)
I think it is more okay to
Submitted by mamabear on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:53am.
I think it is more okay to make a nice assumption about someone than a mean one, but that's just me. You are right that we were both making assumptions.
Rose-colored glasses and all
Submitted by bkeyser on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 7:57pm.
Rose-colored glasses and all that...
idiot lefty
Submitted by Radical1979 on Tue, 03/01/2011 - 10:11pm.
BK's assumption wasn't mean, it was realistic. It was based on his knowledge of himself an the teens in his life. It's not necessary to put everyone down for their opinions and ideas. Oh, I forgot, that's what you do.
"Guaranteed she doesn't have
Submitted by mamabear on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:07am.
"Guaranteed she doesn't have a male prom date" is not a statement of opinion. If it was intended as a statement of opinion, that's fine, but then you start it with "I think" or some similar phrase instead of "guaranteed."
It was a mean thing to say. You don't have to mind people saying mean things, and I know you are fond of them yourself, but it's perfectly appropriate for me to express that I thought it was unfair.
mamabear
Submitted by bkeyser on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:56pm.
Actually -and to be completely honest- it was a snarky thing to say. Which, according to the urban dictionary, definition number 3 (which is how I meant my "guaranteed" comment) means:
You may have found my comment mean, but where I live the "guaranteed" phrase is commonly used to emphasize a point. It's colloquial; not at all literal. It may also explain why Rad didn't find it overly "mean" either, as we're similarly located. Substitute the phrase, "I have my doubts" and see if it still reads the same.
I think she is going to hunt you down, Satchmo---
Submitted by matthewdean on Sun, 02/27/2011 - 3:26am.
and use that cast to whack you in the nugget for that stupid "What if it was consensual" remark that you are (in)famous for.
MD
I usually dont offer opinions
Submitted by Boudin on Mon, 02/28/2011 - 6:33pm.
On social issues such as these, but.
Everyone makes good points, from the decency issues to the safety first issues. But I personally always have difficulty not siding on the side of Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. These things always have a way of working themselves out, she will come to realize that she is in over her head, or (more likely) simply get cut from the team for not being good enough, and it will be done.
I recall, in my youth:
We had a young lady try-out and play on my ~12year old Football team. She was a rough and tumble girl, always playing ball with us boys. She played hard in practice and in games, she was good. With her uniform on, you couldnt even tell she was a girl. Until the one game she got hurt, not serous, but the wind knocked out her. When she caught her breath, is was obvious to everyone she was a girl. Her cries were unmistakeably, and nobody ever played "all-out" against her again. Nobody wanted to here her cries of pain again, it was different, call it chivalry or what ever you want. It made all the difference in the world to us. I also remember liking her very much.
This is another aspect as to why it's problematic for girls...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 3:07pm.
to be involved in contact sports with boys. I think there is an inherent and likely instinctive tendency for males (most of them anyway) to be protective of females, and your post illustrates that...After this girl was hurt, the rest of the team went easy on her, for fear of her getting hurt again. I am certain, that if one of the guys had been similarly hurt, the same "take it easy" attitude would not have been taken with him.
This concern is undoubtedly in the back of the minds of many boys involved in certain sports with girls, and no doubt impacts how they play, or if they play, that sport. Contact sports, especially one like wrestling, are problematic just for this reason, and I don't believe, for all the reasons that we have all discussed here on this thread, that girls should be allowed or even encouraged to participate in full contact sports with boys...There are plenty of other options available.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
You had me until the last comment
Submitted by Iowan77 on Wed, 03/02/2011 - 6:00pm.
Brent, I finally thought I had an intelligent article to show my liberal friends as a rebutal to the mean spirited Reily ESPN article. Then I got to your judgemental last paragragh. I know the Herkelman family and they are good people. You obviously don't understand a wrestlers state of mind while competing. Whether you're wrestling a boy or girl, the farthest things from your mind are sexual implications. What you are concentrating on is how to defeat your opponent. With your rationel, two boys would have to consider that because they're wrestling another boy they might be gay. If you never wrestled, I don't expect you to understand that there is NOTHING sexual about wrestling, and people that do think this way obviously are ignorant to the sport.
As far as considering the physical implications...Believe me Brent, every kid thinking about going out for wrestling considers the physical implications. Video games are much easier. It's not a sport for the weak, and Cassy (and her family) sure as heck know this.
This is not a subject that we have to choose the side of the Northrup's or the Herkelman's. I respect both kids and their families for the decisions they've made.
Other then this, I respect your work. Keep up the good work keeping the libs in check. America needs people like you.
failurebear is the official President.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 3:12am.
failurebear - President, Frotteurism Society of the United States.
You go failurebear. Good luck trying to get contributions here.
I would google that to find
Submitted by mamabear on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 6:42pm.
I would google that to find out what it means, but I fear it may be the kind of word one should avoid typing into their web browser. Whatever you are talking about, consider me appropriately insulted.
Paraphilia Word Games
Submitted by stratman on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 7:25pm.
Mamabear:
I'm guessing you are a teleiophilic androphiliac - one who loves adult men. :-)
The Vet:
Maybe now we know why Biden likes to ride Amtrak so much. Yuck!
You got me!
Submitted by mamabear on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:11am.
You got me!
Whatever. Idiot spends 2 weeks pushing for frotteurism.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 10:19pm.
Then whines because it has to look it up.
Ask me if I care.
I'm not whining! I'm just
Submitted by mamabear on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:10am.
I'm not whining! I'm just suggesting that since I'm not going to look it up, we all assume that you have just delivered a grave insult to me. You can feel good about yourself, and I can go happily about my life without knowing what frotteurism is. Everyone wins.
No way you didn't look it up.
Submitted by SickofLibs on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 11:15am.
No way.
I didn't! But I did click on
Submitted by mamabear on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 9:07pm.
I didn't! But I did click on the link below, not realizing that that would answer the question for me. So now I do know what it means, but I also practiced safe browsing by not looking it up for myself. Once again, everyone wins.
Hey failed teacher.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 12:21pm.
What do they teach about exclamation points? Is this the way you teach your children to write? By riddling their every single paragraph with exclamation points? Make every single sentence the most exciting evah! Eleventy-seven! Idiot. Stay the hell away from my children. Oh look, that sentence did not need an exclamation point. It stood alone well. Idiot. Stay the hell away from all of our children. Worst teacher evah.
23 friggin' exclamation points on one page worth of posts. U just mose exzitable trollie world ovahz ain't U trolliez?
Idiot. Fail Fail Fail. And to think you teach our children.
Writing (Communications): Avoid exclamation points.Unless you are writing a children's book or cartoon strip, exclamation points should be avoided. They suggest effusiveness, not a prized quality in business writing. The period is the mark you need for almost all the writing you do--especially business writing. Remember, the exclamation point should be reserved for those rare occasions when you needs to express surprise or excitement.
If this were business
Submitted by mamabear on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 9:37pm.
If this were business writing, you would have a point. Here, I often express surprise or excitement.
By the way, what does your source have to say about all caps? Or strange baby voices? Or scatological references? Or abbreviating "you" to "U"? Or using the word "ain't?" Or pluralizing words with a "z?" What about capitalizing random words in a sentence because you think they are important? How does the FAQ feel about sentence fragments?
Fortunately, we are all writing informally here. I'll do you the courtesy of presuming that the way you write here bears little to no resemblence to the way you address formal communication in a professional setting.
Whatever failureber the failed teacher.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 10:24pm.
Stay away from our kids. You are too STUPID to teach. What the hell does the word ESPECIALLY mean, huh STUPID?
Once again, PACK SAND. Pack it tight. Pack it hard. You waste my time. The worst of the worst trolls here never made me feel I was wasting my time. Stay away from me.
I try to tell you to interact with people like you want to be respected and as usual, you think it is time to argue.
Pack sand.
And don't respond to me, whatever interaction we had once again is completely finished.
Hah! You are so sulky!
Submitted by mamabear on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 10:16am.
Hah! You are so sulky! (those exclamation points are intended to express surprise and a small amount of delight)
Are you really going to claim that you came here calling me a failed teacher who doesn't know how to write and I was the one who started the argument? Ridiculous. You didn't say "Hey, if you want to be taken more seriously, you might want to stop using so many exclamation points." That might be how I would approach a student on the issue when they, say, used an exclamation point in a scientific paper. Actually what I do is just say "Exclamation points don't belong in formal writing." What you did was call me an idiot and the worst teacher ever. Sorry, evah. I wonder, do you realize how ridiculous you sound trying to pretend that you wrote something different that you did when anyone can see both posts on the same page? Or are you really so deluded that you convince yourself as soon as your attack fails that what you were really trying to do was give me some sage advice?
If you want to stay away from me, you are free to do so. Or, you could try and come after me again and then immediately declare that we will never interact again as soon as I respond. You can, if you want, keep doing that forever, because it's been fun so far! (that exclamation point indicates that I'm laughing at you while typing)
Pack
Submitted by The Vet on Sat, 03/05/2011 - 12:32pm.
Sand.
You hit it!
Submitted by Rukus on Thu, 03/03/2011 - 11:42pm.
Mr. Tyrrell agrees with you.
Edit: Was supposed to be a reply to The Vet above. Frellin' NB 2.0! : (
Thanks.
Submitted by The Vet on Fri, 03/04/2011 - 1:27am.
How come failurebear, the President of the Frotteurism Society of the United States has not remarked there.