You spent a lot of time and took heat from a lot of different directions to get on your school’s Coed Baseball team: now what? If you think I have the answers – then stop reading this. But if you want to hash this one out – venting with outrage if you need to and find that helpful, too – making contributions as you can, please read further…
One boy who tried out for the school Baseball team didn’t make the cut – for the past two years. After long negotiations, he was appointed Manager. He is responsible for the score book among other tasks. His very supportive mother can be found in the stands simultaneously tracking everything on the field, all plays, both teams; her son sits in the dugout tracking really just his own team. I wonder how he feels when his supportive mom walks down from the stands, leaning over the rails and talks to him on the field – at all – let alone about something relevant like confirming what the other team just did.
I can’t even wave or say hello to my kids – they just scoff at me and if they don’t get on base I won’t hear the end of it for a week that I jinxed them. If someone else wants to hoot and holler for them fine – but if they hear my atrocious voice, forget about it.
Title IX seems to have a double edge to it. If you raise the case to the authorities the athletic directors and coaches feign ignorance and cave. But do they also have to play you or your kid? It seems that getting on the team has nothing to do with the asset the player provides. Hey, they don’t care if the player is a boy or girl; young or old. If they perform well or show progress they will be permitted to develop. Guess what: Title IX is there to protect the boy’s right to succeed, too. – another edge to the sword.
Each year the school’s district-affiliated Inter-mural sports handout sheet goes out in the Spring, just before Summer break, allowing the kids and their families the chance to consider what sports to come out for in the Fall. Each year, for the past three that has been of keen interest to us, when we receive this sheet our family goes into a tizzy: it says “Boys Baseball” – rather than JUST “Baseball” – and “Girls Softball.”
This business about Girls Sports is rationalized in one distinctive way in our community – in the California Interscholastic Federation’s (CIF) purview: boys overpower girls, so: create divisions – leagues – that prevent that from happening. Hence: all-girls sports. There is a lot of support for this in the Free World; heck, our daughter will be playing in an all-girls and all-women’s Baseball tournament very soon and fortunately it is there for her to attend, participate and flourish. Guess what: it is a TOURNAMENT and each girl there understands they are there to win so they will probably sit on the bench when they appear to not be contributing toward that goal.
If i was a regular team mate or their supportive family member I might take exception to that approach. If each coach was on the same page that they were to play not (just) to win but to the balance of the teams – with respect and dignity; with control and subtlety. Comparison to an abstraction seems questionable.
This will seem like a tangent…
I’ve written about this before trying to not punch a hole in a wall when our daughter was treated badly in a highly competitive situation that took precedence over the opportunity to share in the experience. Who doesn’t want to win, right? In that situation, the separation between the administration and coaching didn’t exists and, even though our daughter was there to play; had the skills to contribute the organization stacked the team at the last minute with insiders who were given the opportunity to develop in the game regardless of their actual skills.
“Regardless of their actual skills” has a double meaning and I don’t want it to be misconstrued.
The players did demonstrate their abilities well in their local league of all-girls. Out of respect for the coaches, who were exposed to the other girls’ skills far more than the unknown skills of our own daughter, and they needed to hedge their success (while not alienating their own community members) it is entirely understandable that the two players were given preferential treatment, as catchers and pitchers both, trading places game to game.
The all-girls team only squeaked in one win – and it was on a rainy day; with a significant delay; tied going into the final innings; the opponent not particularly high in the rankings among the 95 teams in the running that week. So, the argument that the players were there to win is questionable.
Any bad coaching decisions aside, our daughter was not given equal access to demonstrate her abilities and was not treated fairly by a private organization that sold itself and the opportunities it provided to support girls playing Baseball: they had much self-interest at the heart of their efforts: their OWN self-interests, among the coaches and in support of their own future efforts to improve the opportunities for girls who are intent on playing Baseball.
Clearly, they have the best interest of the game and advancing opportunities for girls to play Baseball somewhere in their hearts and minds.
Sounds like a paradox: it is…
Each person who is involved in the enterprise to “support” girls in sports and specifically Baseball, in this case, seem to triangulate among three discrete intentions:
1) Appear to be concerned that the girls are disenfranchised; define a violation of rights to access; present findings to overriding organization exposed to Title IX violation enforcement and any punitive damages;
2) Upon guarantees from the overriding organization that they support remedies: lay out an ideal scenario for providing access and resources to girls: with the explicit goal of the girls having the opportunity to excel to the greatest heights possible in the field.
3) Set expectations for families and girls that they can achieve the level of success experienced by their male counterparts, that all resources are in place and now they will be assessed for skill – based on prior involvement in the given sport, outside of the newly formed team or league supported by overriding organization.
With each piece in place, interacting with one another continuously, new opportunities flourish for communities, players (read: students); their families – AND professional athletic administrators, directors and coaches. It increases opportunities that simply didn’t exist before.
Our daughter can play Baseball as well as any individual on her Middle School team. She can play any position; she can hit and get on base; she can pitch and catch well. She can do more on her Baseball team than any individual who has been conformed to a specialization as soon as the coaches were able to define – even though the players are in Middle School…
Specialization seems to be the means by which a coach and athletic director can find an out to achieving parity – either on a Coed team or a Single-sex team.
Yet, if a new Softball team forms, which was the case just last year – the first year – and there are no girls who have played it before then no one can assert skill as a factor in defining positions or amount of time in the game: they simply make their way. By the time skills have developed the kids have moved on into High School and are no longer a variable: their well-developed skills are not applicable.
What about the team after one or two years, where a 6th Grade player develops those skills in 7th and then as a Star in 8th?
In sympathy with the Image Builders for a given school’s Athletics Department – as a way to stimulate interest in attending the given school, they run into a daunting situation when their previous 8th Grade leaves and need to rebuild the team over the next three years.
But this is the exact moment when the athletic director can set expectations at each grade level without sacrificing a beneficial system. In our case, it seems, our expectations of 8th Grade glory were crushed under the cleats of the incoming 6th and 7th Graders…
Regardless of gender or sport: the highly skilled players pose the greatest challenge to Title IX execution or evaluation IMHO. As Poster Children of What Can Be Achieved under the best of circumstances any opportunity for the less innately talented or physically distinct child is significantly diminished – and will have a hard time making a case that they have been mistreated or disenfranchised.
In conversations with the head or the CIS – local chapter – when our daughter was not selected for the 6th Grade team – for no apparent reason – it was clarified that we were up against a philosophical argument preventing her participation – not an equity argument…
Her team was formed 10 years ago on a premise of Competition – not Inclusion. These are options – not directives from the Equity departments in the school district – that a given school, athletic director and coach – and PTA – come to an agreement upon. No individual school is required to be inclusionary or be competitive. It doesn’t even matter if your child is approaching the team’s leadership with the intention of advocating one over the other: if the leadership chooses Competition over Inclusion and you can’t demonstrate ability based on select criteria (i.e., speed on the base paths, coordination, power, quickness of the bat, intelligence, etc.) during tryouts – or – more – impacting once selected during regular pre-game practices: you will not be selected for the team or you will sit on the bench.
Or, to make certain that the child who has used the Title IX trump card to get on the team; practices regularly, does get to play a reasonable quantity of games: what of the QUALITY of the games to be had: the opportunity to grow and develop?
In a terrific article published in the San Francisco Examiner sfgate.com web site:
A WOMAN’S PLACE – Female athletes don’t need to be ‘protected,’ they need to grow” by Gwen Knapp – sfgate.com – Thursday, February 16, 2006
Ms. Knapp stresses the most important point of all:
“… In the Olympic Games, evolving women’s sports usually run into two obstacles: the talent gap and the fear factor. In hockey, body-checking is forbidden, partly because the two North American teams are so much faster and stronger, they might knock an opponent into the rafters.
Mostly, though, it’s because some of the men who run Olympic sports are too squeamish. They no longer believe that a woman will be rendered barren if she runs 200 meters, or if they do, they don’t say so out loud. But when it comes to blood and guts and eviscerated cartilage, they cling to double standards….”
If our younger daughters – with seemingly the SAME LEVEL OF SKILL GOING IN – are not provided the SAME opportunities as the boys to struggle on the mound; throwing down the runner at Second Base behind the plate; getting stuck in Right Field paying their dues and in strategic positions in the batting line up:
they won’t be able to demonstrate to the world that the arbitrary decisions made by career professionals, semi-pro coaches and volunteer PTA-subsidized parent volunteer coaches – in cahoots with school administrations everywhere – are interfering with the evolution of the sport, and redefining all roles and distribution of tasks in our society.
Reflecting on the Middle School Baseball team manager – a boy who didn’t make the team, while a girl did:
his opportunity to become a General Manager, securing a position with a Minor or Major League Baseball team when he matriculates from college in few years is TODAY far greater than the opportunity of the girl to ever play in the Minor or Major League as an equal to one of her Male peers.
OK – you’re on the team: now what?!? – A rant…
October 11, 2007 — girlsplaybaseballYou spent a lot of time and took heat from a lot of different directions to get on your school’s Coed Baseball team: now what? If you think I have the answers – then stop reading this. But if you want to hash this one out – venting with outrage if you need to and find that helpful, too – making contributions as you can, please read further…
One boy who tried out for the school Baseball team didn’t make the cut – for the past two years. After long negotiations, he was appointed Manager. He is responsible for the score book among other tasks. His very supportive mother can be found in the stands simultaneously tracking everything on the field, all plays, both teams; her son sits in the dugout tracking really just his own team. I wonder how he feels when his supportive mom walks down from the stands, leaning over the rails and talks to him on the field – at all – let alone about something relevant like confirming what the other team just did.
I can’t even wave or say hello to my kids – they just scoff at me and if they don’t get on base I won’t hear the end of it for a week that I jinxed them. If someone else wants to hoot and holler for them fine – but if they hear my atrocious voice, forget about it.
Title IX seems to have a double edge to it. If you raise the case to the authorities the athletic directors and coaches feign ignorance and cave. But do they also have to play you or your kid? It seems that getting on the team has nothing to do with the asset the player provides. Hey, they don’t care if the player is a boy or girl; young or old. If they perform well or show progress they will be permitted to develop. Guess what: Title IX is there to protect the boy’s right to succeed, too. – another edge to the sword.
Each year the school’s district-affiliated Inter-mural sports handout sheet goes out in the Spring, just before Summer break, allowing the kids and their families the chance to consider what sports to come out for in the Fall. Each year, for the past three that has been of keen interest to us, when we receive this sheet our family goes into a tizzy: it says “Boys Baseball” – rather than JUST “Baseball” – and “Girls Softball.”
This business about Girls Sports is rationalized in one distinctive way in our community – in the California Interscholastic Federation’s (CIF) purview: boys overpower girls, so: create divisions – leagues – that prevent that from happening. Hence: all-girls sports. There is a lot of support for this in the Free World; heck, our daughter will be playing in an all-girls and all-women’s Baseball tournament very soon and fortunately it is there for her to attend, participate and flourish. Guess what: it is a TOURNAMENT and each girl there understands they are there to win so they will probably sit on the bench when they appear to not be contributing toward that goal.
If i was a regular team mate or their supportive family member I might take exception to that approach. If each coach was on the same page that they were to play not (just) to win but to the balance of the teams – with respect and dignity; with control and subtlety. Comparison to an abstraction seems questionable.
This will seem like a tangent…
I’ve written about this before trying to not punch a hole in a wall when our daughter was treated badly in a highly competitive situation that took precedence over the opportunity to share in the experience. Who doesn’t want to win, right? In that situation, the separation between the administration and coaching didn’t exists and, even though our daughter was there to play; had the skills to contribute the organization stacked the team at the last minute with insiders who were given the opportunity to develop in the game regardless of their actual skills.
“Regardless of their actual skills” has a double meaning and I don’t want it to be misconstrued.
The players did demonstrate their abilities well in their local league of all-girls. Out of respect for the coaches, who were exposed to the other girls’ skills far more than the unknown skills of our own daughter, and they needed to hedge their success (while not alienating their own community members) it is entirely understandable that the two players were given preferential treatment, as catchers and pitchers both, trading places game to game.
The all-girls team only squeaked in one win – and it was on a rainy day; with a significant delay; tied going into the final innings; the opponent not particularly high in the rankings among the 95 teams in the running that week. So, the argument that the players were there to win is questionable.
Any bad coaching decisions aside, our daughter was not given equal access to demonstrate her abilities and was not treated fairly by a private organization that sold itself and the opportunities it provided to support girls playing Baseball: they had much self-interest at the heart of their efforts: their OWN self-interests, among the coaches and in support of their own future efforts to improve the opportunities for girls who are intent on playing Baseball.
Clearly, they have the best interest of the game and advancing opportunities for girls to play Baseball somewhere in their hearts and minds.
Sounds like a paradox: it is…
Each person who is involved in the enterprise to “support” girls in sports and specifically Baseball, in this case, seem to triangulate among three discrete intentions:
1) Appear to be concerned that the girls are disenfranchised; define a violation of rights to access; present findings to overriding organization exposed to Title IX violation enforcement and any punitive damages;
2) Upon guarantees from the overriding organization that they support remedies: lay out an ideal scenario for providing access and resources to girls: with the explicit goal of the girls having the opportunity to excel to the greatest heights possible in the field.
3) Set expectations for families and girls that they can achieve the level of success experienced by their male counterparts, that all resources are in place and now they will be assessed for skill – based on prior involvement in the given sport, outside of the newly formed team or league supported by overriding organization.
With each piece in place, interacting with one another continuously, new opportunities flourish for communities, players (read: students); their families – AND professional athletic administrators, directors and coaches. It increases opportunities that simply didn’t exist before.
Our daughter can play Baseball as well as any individual on her Middle School team. She can play any position; she can hit and get on base; she can pitch and catch well. She can do more on her Baseball team than any individual who has been conformed to a specialization as soon as the coaches were able to define – even though the players are in Middle School…
Specialization seems to be the means by which a coach and athletic director can find an out to achieving parity – either on a Coed team or a Single-sex team.
Yet, if a new Softball team forms, which was the case just last year – the first year – and there are no girls who have played it before then no one can assert skill as a factor in defining positions or amount of time in the game: they simply make their way. By the time skills have developed the kids have moved on into High School and are no longer a variable: their well-developed skills are not applicable.
What about the team after one or two years, where a 6th Grade player develops those skills in 7th and then as a Star in 8th?
In sympathy with the Image Builders for a given school’s Athletics Department – as a way to stimulate interest in attending the given school, they run into a daunting situation when their previous 8th Grade leaves and need to rebuild the team over the next three years.
But this is the exact moment when the athletic director can set expectations at each grade level without sacrificing a beneficial system. In our case, it seems, our expectations of 8th Grade glory were crushed under the cleats of the incoming 6th and 7th Graders…
Regardless of gender or sport: the highly skilled players pose the greatest challenge to Title IX execution or evaluation IMHO. As Poster Children of What Can Be Achieved under the best of circumstances any opportunity for the less innately talented or physically distinct child is significantly diminished – and will have a hard time making a case that they have been mistreated or disenfranchised.
In conversations with the head or the CIS – local chapter – when our daughter was not selected for the 6th Grade team – for no apparent reason – it was clarified that we were up against a philosophical argument preventing her participation – not an equity argument…
Her team was formed 10 years ago on a premise of Competition – not Inclusion. These are options – not directives from the Equity departments in the school district – that a given school, athletic director and coach – and PTA – come to an agreement upon. No individual school is required to be inclusionary or be competitive. It doesn’t even matter if your child is approaching the team’s leadership with the intention of advocating one over the other: if the leadership chooses Competition over Inclusion and you can’t demonstrate ability based on select criteria (i.e., speed on the base paths, coordination, power, quickness of the bat, intelligence, etc.) during tryouts – or – more – impacting once selected during regular pre-game practices: you will not be selected for the team or you will sit on the bench.
Or, to make certain that the child who has used the Title IX trump card to get on the team; practices regularly, does get to play a reasonable quantity of games: what of the QUALITY of the games to be had: the opportunity to grow and develop?
In a terrific article published in the San Francisco Examiner sfgate.com web site:
A WOMAN’S PLACE – Female athletes don’t need to be ‘protected,’ they need to grow” by Gwen Knapp – sfgate.com – Thursday, February 16, 2006
Ms. Knapp stresses the most important point of all:
“… In the Olympic Games, evolving women’s sports usually run into two obstacles: the talent gap and the fear factor. In hockey, body-checking is forbidden, partly because the two North American teams are so much faster and stronger, they might knock an opponent into the rafters.
Mostly, though, it’s because some of the men who run Olympic sports are too squeamish. They no longer believe that a woman will be rendered barren if she runs 200 meters, or if they do, they don’t say so out loud. But when it comes to blood and guts and eviscerated cartilage, they cling to double standards….”
If our younger daughters – with seemingly the SAME LEVEL OF SKILL GOING IN – are not provided the SAME opportunities as the boys to struggle on the mound; throwing down the runner at Second Base behind the plate; getting stuck in Right Field paying their dues and in strategic positions in the batting line up:
they won’t be able to demonstrate to the world that the arbitrary decisions made by career professionals, semi-pro coaches and volunteer PTA-subsidized parent volunteer coaches – in cahoots with school administrations everywhere – are interfering with the evolution of the sport, and redefining all roles and distribution of tasks in our society.
Reflecting on the Middle School Baseball team manager – a boy who didn’t make the team, while a girl did:
his opportunity to become a General Manager, securing a position with a Minor or Major League Baseball team when he matriculates from college in few years is TODAY far greater than the opportunity of the girl to ever play in the Minor or Major League as an equal to one of her Male peers.