Posted by Nicholas at September 26, 2007 08:35 AMI do wonder about these mixed leagues, though. The kids are at the age where the boys' aggressiveness is starting to assert itself, despite all efforts to the contrary; do we really want to teach them that it's fine to bash into girls? I have the feeling that if I raised an objection, however leisurely and off-handedly and amusedly and don't-think-I’m-like-Larry-Summers-or-anythingedly, it wouldn't be met well by all. The idea that boys will be stronger and more aggressive and should treat less strong, less physically aggressive people with restraint is oddly taboo. On one hand, I want my daughter to be able to give as good as she gets, and she's solid enough to hold her ground. But say she's a skinny-mini, one of those three-ounce kids, and gets knocked flat because Bruiser McLaddybuck barrels into her trying to get the ball. This we should applaud? It would be fine if Bruiser knocked over Master Simpy Milquewater, because he's a boy, and part of being a boy consists of getting dominated on the athletic field often enough as a child that you realize your future rests in academic or artistic pursuits, leading to a lifetime of sneering at the jocks and gnashing your teeth when the smartsy artsy girls go flouncing off with the broad-shoulder crowd. THERE IS NO GOD. But in the end, it all works out. Nature has its way. If I'm wrong, explain why pro football isn't co-ed.
I should note to newcomers that I was the fat kid who viewed gym as an endless session of torture and humiliation, so I side with Simpy.
James Lileks, The Bleat, 2007-09-26
Visitors since 17 August, 2004