Read this NYT article, which has a perspective — more should be done for women — but reveals much about "roster management" that should spark a discussion from many perspectives. Excerpt:
[A]s women have grown to 57 percent of American colleges’ enrollment, athletic programs have increasingly struggled to field a proportional number of female athletes. And instead of pouring money into new women’s teams or trimming the rosters of prized football teams, many colleges are turning to a sleight of hand known as roster management.... [M]any are padding women’s team rosters with underqualified, even unwitting, athletes. They are counting male practice players as women. And they are trimming the rosters of men’s teams....
Shrinking budgets also spur universities to use these tactics, said Jake Crouthamel, a former Syracuse athletic director. “It’s easier to add more people on a roster than it is to start a new sport,” he said.
Yet football, the pride of many universities and a draw for alumni, rarely faces cuts. The average Division I football team went from 95 players 30 years ago to 111 players in 2009-10.
“Football is the elephant in the whole thing,” Mr. Crouthamel said. “That’s the monster.”
So more and more women go to college, and that results in more pressure to limit men's sports and the immensely important activity of watching the men play sports. Isn't that a terrible downward spiral?
After South Florida added more than 100 football players... Lamar Daniel, a gender-equity consultant, ... recommended adding a women’s swimming team and warned that trying to comply with the proportionality option would be difficult because South Florida’s female participation numbers were too low.
But university officials tried anyway. A primary strategy was to expand the women’s running teams. Female runners can be a bonanza because a single athlete can be counted up to three times, as a member of the cross-country and the indoor and outdoor track teams.
In 2002, 21 South Florida women competed in cross-country. By 2008, the number had grown to 75 — more than quadruple the size of an average Division I cross-country team....
What an embarrassing farce!
Posts
134 comments:
It's about money, professor. It's not about watching men play a game.
I love the smell of unintended legislative consequences in the morning. Smells like...farce.
If I were King, (and really, I almost certainly should not be), I would disband the NCAA, and end this ridiculous madness. I love sports, and love to watch college sports, but the "college" part of college sports is a ___ joke.
Football may be the elephant in the room, but it also generates mega-millions in revenues. Very few college sports are revenue positive
Penn State's football program supports nearly the entire university athletic department.
So there's that.
"Ann Althouse said....
What an embarrassing farce!"
That pretty much sums up women's sports in one pithy sentance. Well done!
This is what happens when you try to do social engineering through stupid laws and tie the results to money.
People will always find a way around the law and ways to cheat.
Fact: there are less women as a percentage of the whole who want to participate in sports compared to the percentage of men who want to participate. All the Title IX manipulating in the world is not going to change that fact.
Affirmative action. Sounds good, but when you have to actually do it the internal contradictions start cropping up left and right.
If principles beget bizarre results when turned into action perhaps we should question the principle.
That pretty much sums up women's sports in one pithy sentance. Well done!
When the absolute pinnacle of a sport's elite contain both a 13-year-old and a pregnant person, I would have to agree (LPGA, I'm looking at you).
Patrick: ...disband the NCAA, and end this ridiculous madness. I love sports, and love to watch college sports, but the "college" part of college sports is a ___ joke.
Echo.
Football revenue is vital at most division one universities. It typically pays for itself and all other sports (except basketball which pays for itself). It also takes roughly 100 athletes to "man" a team.
Many colleges have had to eliminate "minor" men's programs such as swimming, wrestling, and sometimes baseball to meet Title IX numbers.
I say set Football aside, and then apply the Title IX parity requirements to the remaining sports.
Often the "letter of Title IX law" has trumped the "spirit of Title IX law." Not a big fan of Title IX, BTW.
Would that the promoters of this insanity were capable of embarassment.
I agree with Patrick.
In fact in the whole history of women's collegiate sports there has only been one positive accomplishment that we can point to......
They got Imus fired.
Football revenue is vital at most division one universities. It typically pays for itself and all other sports (except basketball which pays for itself). It also takes roughly 100 athletes to "man" a team.
Many colleges have had to eliminate "minor" men's programs such as swimming, wrestling, and sometimes baseball to meet Title IX numbers.
I say set Football aside, and then apply the Title IX parity requirements to the remaining sports.
Often the "letter of Title IX law" has trumped the "spirit of Title IX law." Not a big fan of Title IX, BTW.
Mark, you're exactly right.
Last fall, I attended the Big Ten CC championships, out at the new UW course (very cool, btw). What I noticed was the dramatic drop in the quality of female runners at, about, the bottom third of of the finishers - "padding" of rosters is exactly what crossed into my mind.
Gender Equity Consultant
Yeah. I like that the consultant is male.
I read someplace that they could solve a lot of these "numbers" problems simply by declaring cheerleading to be a sport, but apparently that's politically incorrect.
The real issue is that Title IX implicitly assumes that men and women are equally interested in playing varsity sports and that's simply not the case.
"What an embarrassing farce."
No, Ann. Give it a couple or several thousand years and the women basketball players will be as good as the men.
You're just being impatient with evolutionary forces.
What an embarrassing farce!
This is what democracy looks like.
Back in the mid-90s my community college men's cross-country team was cut due to Title IX. Not that this should be the sole reason to not drop a sport, but we were at the time a consistent national title contender.
One university picked up a women's equestrian team to beef up the numbers. I believe it was Fresno State. They even received a reward for complying with Title IX so well.
The colleges in Georgia with women's golf teams cannot find enough women to take their quota of 100% free ride 4 year scholarships. That does not compute, says the golf loving boys.
It also takes roughly 100 athletes to "man" a team.
Not so sure about this and have never understood it except from the money perspective.
You can easily, EASILY, find walkons, 1/4 scholarship and 1/2 scholarship punching dummies. You do not need an entire different 11 guys for all five or six situations. I can understand being three or four deep (there's your practice team) in most slots, but that's still not 100 people.
I say this having played Division 1-AA ball.
Where is the LPGA seniors' tour?
Why do people think they have a right to participate in college level athletics? You need two things to make a sports program worth having at a university: 1. consumer demand and 2. qualified athletes.
Most womens sports fail in at least one of these categories. Why force it? Does a women's life really change that much by being an average player on a made up team that shouldn't exist?
The real issue is that Title IX implicitly assumes that men and women are equally interested in playing varsity sports and that's simply not the case.
That's the second comment saying that. How do you/we know that to be true?
I'm surprised anybody spends anything on sports.
Why shouldn't sports that actually bring in money get more support?
The whole thing has gotten crazy.
Last fall, I attended the Big Ten CC championships, out at the new UW course (very cool, btw). What I noticed was the dramatic drop in the quality of female runners at, about, the bottom third of of the finishers
The daughter was on the West XC team, and is by no means a good runner, but she loved loved loved the camaraderie of the team. Maybe she'll be on the UW XC team as well for the same reason. There were lots of mediocre boy runners too (and some stellar ones), I think because (in part) they practice with the girls.
I agree about the new course, too. Fabulous for spectators.
Why shouldn't sports that actually bring in money get more support?
The whole thing has gotten crazy.
Because you're forgetting that the people that champion things like Title IX don't actually give a whip about competition and the positives therein. In fact, some of them are actively anti-competition. I had many profs like that. Got called out by one in class for wearing my jersey on the day we were supposed to wear our jerseys all day.
"Lamar Daniel, a gender-equity consultant"
The farce is that Lamar Daniel gets paid for his alleged gender-equity consultancy "skills".
Gender-equity consultant? Really? WTF?
Patrick is right...
That's the second comment saying that. How do you/we know that to be true?
If it were true that women are just as interested in playing sports as men (in the same percentages of population) they would do so. They aren't and they don't.
We wouldn't need a forced quota system like Title IX. The statistics and facts speak for themselves, whether YOU like it or not.
I will say, however, that Title IX when it was first conceived did have the positive effect of making schools fund some sports for women. Previously, almost all funding went to men's sports. Unfortunately, like every social engineering experiment that the liberals foist upon us, they went too far and created the monster that it is today.
That's the second comment saying that. How do you/we know that to be true?
Revealed preferences. If women were just as interested in playing sports as men, all these absurd workarounds wouldn't be necessary.
Gender-equity consultant.
Educational requirement:
Able to add numbers (up to tens column), and decide if X = Y.
With enough money, oversight, and coercion, leftists can bring Nature to heel.
Exactly who came up with these cockamamie ideas in the first place?
Must Rome always fall?
I was a female athlete at a Division I school, which was a great experience. My solution would be to eliminate all recruiting. I know that schools would still be able to field teams for all of their sports and I think there would be parity between similary situated schools, which would make the games very competitive and fun to watch. I think that fans would still be loyal to teams composed of walk-ons (UW has sold out the football stadium even with losing teams as long as the games were fun to watch and I think the Morton years weren't fun to watch because of the offensive system). Scholarships would be based solely on need. Of course, this would work only if the colleges' (and I would extend this to graduate schools too) admission processes were blind. By blind, I mean that applicants' names and home addresses (other than state) would not be known to the admissions officers and neither would the names of references (they would just be identified as mayor instead of Mayor Bloomberg, or elected politician instead of Senator Edward Kennedy or as basketball coach instead of Larry Byrd, etc.). Applications would identify a student's extra curricular activities that would include sports (i.e., lettered four years in a varsity sport and leadership roles), but would not specifically identify the sport. Scholarships would be based solely on need, which means that there could still be affirmative action programs but that students would be selected on the basis of their likelihood to succeed at college and not on their likelihood to perform well on the athletic field. The pro sports teams would have to figure out their own farm systems for atheletes that don't want to go to college, like baseball has now. The money saved on recruiting could fund a lot of scholarships. Also, the athletic facilities would not need to be as luxurious as they are (have you ever seen the basement of the McClain Center at the UW!!!!!), which would also save money.
Gender-equity consultant? That's a job?
How hard is it to count pointers and setters?
Carrie,
I appreciate what you're trying to say, but the reason most college sports are "fun" to watch is because you're watching, in most cases, the best of the best. Granted, football STILL DOESN'T HAVE A PLAYOFF SYSTEM, but that's another blog.
Given the abilities of the current division 1 players versus a grab-bag of blind entries, I think you'd be in for, on average, very mediocre play.
Aren't most of those female college athletes basically dudes anyway?
Not that there’s anything wrong with that!
The whole problem could be solved by having all college sports played naked. Women's teams would pay for themselves just fine, and the less-masculine women would get a fair chance at success. I see this creating a great deal of joy in our society, and who's against that?
My solution would be to eliminate all recruiting.
What is that a solution to, exactly?
My solution is to just admit a lot of people enjoy watching men's football and men's basketball. If women need more scholarships to engage in sissy-pants book learning, find a way to give them scholarships for that. They can choose to play sports or not.
It is indeed a farce, because it's based on the faulty assumption that women are the same as men, that they like to participate in sports as much as men, and that the only reason their teams are not as popular is sexism.
Behold the agonies of the collective.
Title IX, college campus life, public unions, gas prices, fast food, marriage, religion, welfare, health care, Hollywood, England, Russia, Vietnam, China.
Is there anything the left doesn't just completely fuck up?
Because you're forgetting that the people that champion things like Title IX don't actually give a whip about competition and the positives therein.
I actually think the idea of having more sports teams available is a good idea, but that doesn’t mean schools should have to ditch a football team because they can’t find enough water polo/soccer/lacrosse/whatever female students to match the football team in numbers.
Title IX helped bring the United States two female World Cup soccer titles, three Olympic golds in soccer, and countless other awards.
It also buried the University of Miami diving team, which had produced Greg Louganis, because they couldn't find enough female divers to justify a programme. So they shut both men's and women's down.
Grrrrrrr.
"[M]any are padding women’s team rosters with underqualified, even unwitting, athletes. They are counting male practice players as women."
If the bean-counters must be served, beans must be found for them to count; not unlike the office manager who had to make sure he had one of every Lefty-approved ethnic group, so he went down the line of cubes, tapping people on the shoulder, "You're Polynesian, you're Eskimo, you're Indian...".
Also love the line, "Female runners can be a bonanza". As bag notes, just have them run topless and they will pay for all the university's programs.
Is there anything the left doesn't just completely fuck up?
Nothing, zip, nada. All that they touch is for the best of reasons, and what we get is the worst of outcomes.
To drop the proverbial turd in the milk tank why not do the obvious and eliminate Title 1X?
Women's sports teams tits don't bounce much therefore I am not that into it.
They barely even have tits.
tits
Men's sports you can see arms and asses and packages.
Men's sports is good.
I love men's football teams who wear white pants. You see their jockstraps. That's hot.
OT: Title IX always makes me fondly think of "Plan 9 From Outer Space".
I love those old and really bad science fiction movies.
Titus needs to start watching women's tennis. Big titties as far as female athletes go. Just don't mind the granny pants.
To drop the proverbial turd in the milk tank why not do the obvious and eliminate Title 1X?
That would put hundreds of Gender Equity Consultants out of work! The Govt is all about creating jobs!
Why are there so many things involved in college that have nothing whatsoever to do with learning?
Keep the revenue generators. Anything else, let the kids put them together as extra-curriculars for fun if they want. Sports are a hobby, people.
- Lyssa
Why not do the obvious and eliminate football? It's an embarrassment anyway; most of the really good players aren't there for an education, and the coaches are waaaaay overpaid. No, I don't care that football pays for itself; it doesn't have anything to do with academics so it ought to go. I like Carrie's solutions. It's also the Ivy League solution. They have actual student-athletes and minimal corruption/criminal activity, and the coaches aren't paid millions. Good all around.
Serena and Venus have nice big tits but that's about it.
I want big tits and I want them now.
tits
No, I don't care that football pays for itself; it doesn't have anything to do with academics so it ought to go.
You do realize, of course, how much associated with college and student life this would gut that have zero to do with athletics, right?
Lyssa, I am pro-sports in college simply because it's UNHEARD OF in Europe and other places for professional athletes to have an university degree.
Ronaldo (Brazil's buck-toothed soccer wonder) was playing professionally at the age of _13_, whilst 16 is common in England, since that's when you can leave school. Counter that with the US Men's soccer team, who are college-educated athletes to a MAN. No contest.
University should be more than just about books.
There were lots of mediocre boy runners too (and some stellar ones), I think because (in part) they practice with the girls.
I agree. I was just a little surprised to see it, with the women, at the D1 level (BTW, I ran CC in HS, too, and got to watch our guys run against the Stinzi and Hacker's several times a fall. It's been fun following Sam Hacker's races b/c of that).
Maguro- I've read that about cheerleading, too.
With such a high percentage of college students now actually being female, it's easy enough to surmise that if women care about sports, and colleges care about attracting students, schools will offer women's sports if it is indeed important to women,
Title ix had it's moment but now competition for students/alumni dollars will do the trick.
cubanbob said...
To drop the proverbial turd in the milk tank why not do the obvious and eliminate Title 1X?
What's the matter with you?
You know better than to offer a logical, intelligent, money-saving solution.
Next thing, somebody will call you a Conservative.
In any case, it would tick off the feminazis and deprive the Feds (especially Congress) of the power to screw up people's lives.
Titus said...
Women's sports teams tits don't bounce much therefore I am not that into it.
They barely even have tits.
It's the sports bras. They hold everything in.
A well-endowed woman (and I live with one) can lose all the weight she can and she'll still be ample.
The ones with more bounce to the ounce don't like to run anyway.
They might get hit with a flying something.
Keep the revenue generators. Anything else, let the kids put them together as extra-curriculars for fun if they want. Sports are a hobby, people.
Not any more. There's too much money in it for that to be true. D1 athletic departments have become separate fiefdoms and act like heroine addicts - they just can't get enough. The point is, is that they provide scholarships to "student athletes" and Title IX is there to help support equall access to those scholarship dollars.
All of the "proportionality" issues are BS. A business can be sued if its diversity doesn't proportionally match the community's diversity. The business doesn't have enough blacks, or hispanics, or what have you but interest or qualifications in the position are non-existent, what does the company do?
In Florida there was a highschool boys baseball team where the parents got together and did a lot of fundraising and they built a great lighted field, concession stand, scoreboard, etc. They started playing. Then someone from the girls' softball team sued. The judge found for the girls' softball team and made the boys' team take out their totally parent funded improvements because it wasn't fair that the girls' didn't have an equivalent facility.
Sports are a hobby, people.
Tell that to the sports medicine, grounds keeping, vending, and merchandise companies. Not to mention the municipalities that reap tax revenue on all of that commerce.
Probably a dumb question: what would be the effect, Title IX-wise, if the NCAA were to declare football to be a coed sport, with all roster spots open to women, but awarded on the basis of competition?
Or (since most schools would sport rosters that were 99% or more male) would the courts use some variation of "disparate impact" to say it didn't count?
Being in college sports is like having a full time job.
My theory, never tested, was that the number of hours a student had to put in to be on a college team compared to the scholarship dollars gained was probably less than minimum wage.
While "a premium college [football] player generates over $500,000 in annual revenues for his team, " the rest of college sports seems to be negative.
D1 athletic departments have become separate fiefdoms and act like heroine addicts
I know it's a typo, but I'm cracking up at the visual of Barry Alvarez with a line of women out his office.
Being in college sports is like having a full time job.
A-floggin'-men. I left my dorm room at around 6am, got early breakfast, had to be at the arena for films of the previous day by 7. Class from 8-12, then lunch and back to the arena for practice and/or conditioning. Back to my dorm after dinner around 6pm.
Rinse. Repeat.
What an embarrassing farce!
A good T-shirt slogan for the feminists who dream up such idiotic laws in the name of "gender equity."
Tennis does not mean granny panties!
Whoever invented the bra should be shot.
Tits should be free to breath and live and bounce and love.
Bras restrain tits.
It's all about freedom.
I wish womyn would just revolt up against the bra and let them free.
In 2011 the University of Delaware celebrated it's 100th anniversary on Men's Track by dropping the team. The mealy-mouthed administrators offered diffuse and nonsensical reasons.
The track team has the highest GPA of all UD teams and probably comes the closet to the ideal of the student-athlete. Furthermore, it has historically been a tremendous incubator of high school coaches and teachers. Once again the UD shows disdain for Delaware public education.
Meanwhile the UD Athletic Department and football program nickles'n'dimes season ticket holders to pay ever increasing fees and surcharges. One of the most successful 1AA programs, UD Football has seen average attendance go from 23,500 to 17,000 in a mere 3 years. There has been repeated public outcry over the begging and hectoring coming from the Program. Like a good politician the AD brushes all public outcry aside with "it's the economy (stupid).
And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?
Why?
Why I ask you?
Why?
And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?
Why?
Why I ask you?
Why?
My guess is enough of them saw National Geographic pictures of women from cultures without bras.
(shudder)
Titus said...
And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?
So I can make more money. Shut up Titus.
And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?
Gravity
@Scott M - "You do realize, of course, how much associated with college and student life this would gut that have zero to do with athletics, right?"
OK, I amend my prior remarks. Get rid of any activity for which the coach is paid millions or for which non-students are recruited to participate.
All other extracurriculars, including drinking, all-night sex, and the debate team are allowed to stay.
Encouraged, even.
Dust Bunny Queen said...
And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?
Gravity
This is true. Otherwise they will have wasted all that money on the expensive shoes. Just sayn'
"'And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?' Gravity."
It's a popular misconception that wearing a bra keeps breasts from sagging. It is true that a bra can disguise the fact that a particular pair of breasts do sag, if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong.
"[A]s women have grown to 57 percent of American colleges’ enrollment," nothing is being done to address this obvious gender inequality against men who are refused admission so that more women can attend college. Numbers don't lie do they?
Trey
if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong.
Says the woman who undoubtedly doesn't wear an "DD" cup. Get back to me when you do.
When I was playing golf, I was once asked what my handicap was. I replied. "You are looking at them."
Sports are nothing. Why are men being denied a place in college because of their gender? That is the crime.
Trey
[M]any are padding women’s team rosters with underqualified, even unwitting, athletes.
Did anyone seriously expect another outcome?
Seriously? Was anyone blinkered enough to really believe that there was simply equal underlying demand for sporting activities between males and females and that the only thing Keeping Women Out Of Sports was the evils of the Colleges?
Remove Title IX. Do it yesterday.
(As an aside, I'm with Patrick - "college sports" are a bad joke as an alleged promotion or relation to a mission of education. They're purely about money - which is fine, but I'd prefer they just admit it.)
The feministas thru Title IX have ABSOLUTELY DESTROYED minor sports for men (swimming, tennis, wrestling, etc.) at the college level.
And the "proof" that women aren't as interested in sports as men? The well-documented MUCH lower level of voluntary participation in intramural athletics in ALL sports at ALL colleges and universities in the US.
Remove Title IX. Do it yesterday.
You do realize, don't you, that the ultimate effect of Title IX will be for every weight in every collegiate gym to stock nothing but 20's.
It's too expensive to make all the men wear weighted chains day in and out, after all.
Ann Althouse said...
"'And why do most women "conform" and wear bras?' Gravity."
It's a popular misconception that wearing a bra keeps breasts from sagging. It is true that a bra can disguise the fact that a particular pair of breasts do sag, if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong.
Or become a nurse and spend your working life lifting 300 pound little old ladies (or 500 pound lazy fat couch potatoes) in and out of bed.
(no, I'm not going to ask...)
How much does a bra cost?
It seems to me a waste of money, unless you buy one at Troops store, natch.
I remember when I was young I would go to my neighbor's house.
She was a big lady with big tits. You could see the wires coming out of her bra which was hanging out of her shirt.
That must be fucking painful.
Do women wear a different bra everyday? Is it like underwear and you wear a clean pair everyday or can you just slap on the one you wore the previous day?
What about when you sleep? Do you still wear a bra?
MaggotAtBroad&Wall said...
"Lamar Daniel, a gender-equity consultant"
The farce is that Lamar Daniel gets paid for his alleged gender-equity consultancy "skills".
Gender-equity consultant? Really? WTF?
You can't make this shit up.
He probably was hired by the Dean for Diversity and Queer Studies.
It would seem requiring schools to have the same proportion of male/female athletes as the school population is a poor way to look at sports. Just offer the same athletic options to girls as boys: you have a boys swim team? Offer a girls' swim team too. If few athletes show up, then you have a small team. Why is this hard?
"Titus said...
Do women wear a different bra everyday? Is it like underwear and you wear a clean pair everyday or can you just slap on the one you wore the previous day?
What about when you sleep? Do you still wear a bra?"
Yes, you should wear a different bra everyday. Women with large breasts often wear a bra to sleep in, but sleep-bras usually don't have underwires or other uncomfortable features.
How's that UW-Madison baseball team doing? Oh, nevermind. They got axed because they are men.
NCAA is run by idiots. Look at the bigotry they have against North Dakota.
AA:
"..if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong..."
Sorry, but I've seen pictures of bra-less from birth women in The National Geographic. Their tits are knocking their knees by 18.
This is stupid.
Big shock! Adult women aren't, as a population, as into playing sports as men.
Are we supposed to pretend that that isn't true?
Sometimes men get together as a group of just men. Sometimes women get together as a group of just women.
Which group is more likely to spend their group time out playing sports?
I know, I know. Such a difficult question.
My solution that will never happen is to separate sports from education from kindergarten on up.
"Adult women aren't, as a population, as into playing sports as men.
Are we supposed to pretend that that isn't true?"
Nature is racist and sexist and doesn't really exist, being mere cultural hegemony.
It must be silenced and remedied.
Coercion is required.
My solution that will never happen is to separate sports from education from kindergarten on up.
Amen.
Intertitle from Harold Lloyd's The Freshman (1925):
Tate University - A large football stadium, with a college attached.
(If you've never seen that movie, you should run out and get it right now.)
Big shock! Adult women aren't, as a population, as into playing sports as men.
And that's in big part because it's only in the last generation that it's become commonplace for a female not to be looked at like some kind of oddball, doing it. In short, for a long time we were kept out.
It's a popular misconception that wearing a bra keeps breasts from sagging. It is true that a bra can disguise the fact that a particular pair of breasts do sag, if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong.
Bullshit. Old men would be jowl-less if this were the case.
I do believe someone once invented a face bra somewhere.
WV: defyie — I am defyie-ing our beloved host's assertion.
And that's in big part because it's only in the last generation that it's become commonplace for a female not to be looked at like some kind of oddball, doing it.
No female from my generation (I'm 31.) felt the least bit odd competing in sports. Every single girl I knew played some kind of sport in elementary and middle school. It was expected. The odd ones were the girls who didn't play.
(Girls played at lower rates in junior high and high school when it was up to the girls to sign themselves up for sports rather than their parents doing it for them.)
The natural ligaments are weakened by the age-related changes to collagen and elastin in the soft tissues.
Genetics + Age + Gravity + Sun = Droop
Tell that to the sports medicine, grounds keeping, vending, and merchandise companies. Not to mention the municipalities that reap tax revenue on all of that commerce.
Yeah, those people aren't making money on ladies' golf or men's track and field. Like I said, it's fine to keep the revenue generators or the things that have real-world applications (like sports med, which is useful for non-athletes as well). If you can make money/value on people's hobbies, that's wonderful. But the stuff we're talking about is just a hobby for the athletes.
- Lyssa
LarsPorsena said...
AA:
"..if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong..."
Sorry, but I've seen pictures of bra-less from birth women in The National Geographic. Their tits are knocking their knees by 18.
Depends where and local custom. Some cultures will wetnurse a baby until it's 5 (years). In others, the baby just hangs on the breast unsupported.
Do women wear bras in space?
"Stress Analysis of a Strapless Evening Gown" needs to be updated with new physics.
There's that and the wet spot question.
Too little time is being spent in class.
From the local talk station top of the hour news:
"They're not 100% certain that they belong to whomever was on the plane" - Fox news, 1:02pm
"He said his stepdad was threatening he and his mother" - local news, 1:03pm
Or this might be case tunnelling, where the objective case travels across genre boundaries into other news items.
Title IX is based on two major false premises (or is that premesi): (i) that women like to play sports as much as men to; and (ii) that the "consumers" of college sports are the student athletes.
The funniest thing about college sports is people thinking there is any connection between the college and the sport.
As Pete the Streak points out football is one of the few sports that is self-supporting at most colleges. Men's basketball is another. At Tennessee, football supports almost all other sports except men's basketball and women's basketball. Very few collges have a women's basketball team that is self-supporting like Tennessee's (for obvious reasons if you follow the sport).
John Stossel has pointed out how at some colleges men's sports that are self-supporting have been banned/discontinued because of gender quotas. Completely stupid. But, completely stupid describes a large portion of the leftist agenda.
Then there's the fact that not the same proportion of females want to be athletes as do males.
I
"[A]s women have grown to 57 percent of American colleges’ enrollment," nothing is being done to address this obvious gender inequality
Indeed, Title IX is about access to education in general, not just sports.
So, Title IX could be used against the beneficiaries of Title IX.
God bless this country.
Wow, Therese, I admire your conciseness.
...if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong.
No, if you go braless the "natural ligaments" are not "strengthened and kept strong," they're stretched and made long. That's what causes sagging; strength has nothing to do with it. And that's why women don't burn bras anymore.
How do women "feel" when they see another woman not wearing a bra?
And that's why women don't burn bras anymore.
Pardon...but are you suggesting that the feminists were incorrect about something?
My daughter is a scholarship athlete at the University of Nebraska, and I am very impressed by NU's commitment to the spirit as well as the letter of Title IX. Football makes the money, but all the other teams get to spend it, and my daughter gets every single benefit the football players get (with the exception of a plane to fly them to away meets.) I also have a son who could not compete in Div. I because so many schools have eliminated their men's teams in his sport in order to comply with Title IX, so I can see both sides of the argument. One problem is, although the Title IX law gives schools three ways in which to comply, the courts have consistently ruled that only proportional representation fills the bill.
Dust Bunny Queen said.....
When I was playing golf, I was once asked what my handicap was. I replied. "You are looking at them."
You mean he was staring at them. Fixed.
I looked through the comments and noone wrote about the obvious example of the real purpose of title IX.
Cheerleading is a sport, except when it isn't. According to cheer squads of all ages, it's a sport, And if you've ever cheered, or had a sister, daughter, friend, who cheered, you know it's a sport. According Title IX accounting, it isn't. Gotta have a legal reason to disenfranchise the males of the species. If the folks who devised this had their way, men would be kept barefoot and pregnant.
@Titus. I liked the bra antics. But, you're not fooling anyone. You've had womenz frendz before who confided everything to you. You know more about the inner workings and hidden mechanisms of the womenz than any male on here.
WV: folati:
do ray mi fasolati, doh!
Althouse,
"... if you want to discourage sagging in the future, it's better to go braless, because the natural ligaments are strengthened and kept strong. "
My observations gained while spending 5 years living in rural Africa is that this is not remotely true.
LarsPorsena is totally wrong about the 18-year-olds, by the way, but by the time they reach 40...
LarsPorsena is totally wrong about the 18-year-olds, by the way, but by the time they reach 40...
In a state of nature 18-year-old girls need to attract male attention. When they're 40 that's no longer an issue. It's God's plan.
When the government strings cash along with its mandates then guess what, people or in this cause Title IX users will gladly suckle at its tit. Oh especially if there are women involved. Have to stop the utter subjugation of women in America. It's E-ville. It's not a farce professor, it's American women being sold a bill of goods while the American public funds this nonsense with our tax dollars to create the perception of an even playing field.
It's pretend equality.
Sort of like our current course of pretend capitalism, pretend education, pretend universal healthcare, pretend mortgage investments, pretend economic stimulus, pretend compassion, etc.
There are a lot of votes to be had in pretend.
That's the second comment saying that. How do you/we know that to be true?
Because it is.
Titus on 4/26/11 @ 10:42 a.m.
Titus on 4/26/11 @ 10:44 a.m.
Is Titus a he or a she?
"That pretty much sums up womens' sports in one pithy sentence. Well done!" - Trooper
I hope the Badgers Girls hockey team checks you into the boards... hard! ;)
"if you want to discourage sagging in the future" - AA
No matter what "position" women are in life, they have my full "support" (I love playing "bra").
"My observations gained while spending 5 years living in rural Africa is that this is not remotely true."
I'm sure there are a lot of nutritional issues involved there.
I read of a study done in Japan that tended to prove the point I'm asserting, and I have anecdotal evidence from American culture. But your results may vary. You won't know until it's too late, so I recommend wearing or not wearing a bra depending on your personal preference for the way it looks and feels. Don't worry about the sagging problem.
visit us on lifeandstylemag.com
http://whois.domaintasks.com/lifeandstylemag.com
Post a Comment