this post was submitted on 10 Mar 2024
745 points (93.2% liked)

News

35692 readers
2726 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.


Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.


7. No duplicate posts.


If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.


All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A 6th grade girls team from Kentucky was set to go for the year-end championship tournament, but was told they were banned due to fears boys teams might 'retaliate' if they lost to the girls team.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] DoctorSpocktopus@lemmy.ca 186 points 2 years ago (4 children)

Once again, girls are somehow responsible for boys’ inability to behave 🤦

[–] BananaTrifleViolin@lemmy.world 19 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Once again there appears to be more to this story than the poor quality article linked suggests.

[–] Pips@lemmy.sdf.org 58 points 2 years ago

Here's the quotes:

SWOB President Tom Sunderman expressed concern in a statement:

"Doing this for 28 years, what we have worried about is a boys team losing to a girls team (especially in the year end tourney), they may get frustrated and retaliate against a girl." "Then we have liability issues.” Prez, a social media user on X (Formerly Twitter), didn't buy it.

"What he meant to say was they can’t have their boys being emasculated by a better girls team… it would be a blow to their developing manhood to get beat by girls."

What context am I missing?

[–] CileTheSane@lemmy.ca 13 points 2 years ago

Retaliating against your opponents for beating you in a game isn't normal, but on Patriarchy it is.

Patriarchy, not even once.

[–] golli@lemm.ee -4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Once again, girls are somehow responsible for boys’ inability to behave

That's really not what i am getting from this article at all.

made the call because they believed that 11 to 12-year-old girls and boys competing against each other on the court could pose a liability risk leading to violence, even though the girls team had been winning 7-1 all season without incident.

they may get frustrated and retaliate against a girl.” "Then we have liability issues.”

McGraw said the girls were never in any real danger during the games, aside from the occasional side-eye.

"They got giggles, they got laughs, and people talked about them... you know, the looks."

[emphasis added]

Where "once again" is the boys inability to behave? All i see is adults wanting to dodge POTENTIAL liability.


Beyond that there is the question about their participation in the league itself. Here there are as i see it two sides:

  • They participated through deception (listing as mail AND apparently fielding a male team in the first game)

  • Or one can be on the side that the system is broken and they should have been allowed to participate in the first place.

Again something that adults decide. Not sure if we have enough information to judge this properly.


Not sure why i spend much time on this nonesense, especially since i find this to be a pretty poor article (as is any that just randomly quotes social media users to make its point).