Jamie Reidy boos an Arizona high school baseball team that forfeited a championship game rather play against a girl.
They literally took their balls and went home.
ESPN reports on the lack of a championship game in the 1A-division of the Arizona Charter Athletic Association.
A Phoenix school that was scheduled to play Paige Sultzbach, a 15-year-old Mesa girl, and her male teammates forfeited the game rather than face a female player.
Our Lady of Sorrows bowed out of Thursday night’s game against Mesa Preparatory Academy in the Arizona Charter Athletic Association championship.
This isn’t a case of “Well, she should just stick to softball!” Paige’s school doesn’t offer softball, so she tried out for the baseball team and made it.
Officials at Our Lady of Sorrows declined comment. In a written statement Thursday, the school said the decision to forfeit was consistent with a policy prohibiting co-ed sports.
I bet the women who inspired the Geena Davis-Tom Hanks smash A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN are screaming from the top step of their dugout in heaven.
Take away yet another run from the Catholic side of the scoreboard! (To be fair, the Saint Pius X priests broke from the Catholic Church because it was too soft.)
It’s 2012, Fathers. Get your heads out of the sand.
Paige Sultzbach isn’t trying to be Jackie Robinson, here; she’s just trying to play second base and win a championship with her teammates. Last week Sports Illustrated ran a cover story celebrating the 40th anniversary of Title IX. Apparently, there’s still work to be done.
And how sad that doctrine prevented the Our Lady of Sorrows boys from competing for the title they’d pursued all season.
What do you think about the OLS decision to not play against a girl?
Photo by: Dave Hogg
If I remember the story correctly, the schools played each other twice in the regular season and each time the girl opted not to play, but because it was the championship, she wouldn’t be asked to sit by her team. The school that forfeited did state that had they known that they wouldn’t be able to make arrangements to not play her, they would have forfeited the previous game and the championship game would have been played. I wonder if the problem people have is that the one girl didn’t get a chance to play and they don’t really care… Read more »
“I wonder if the problem people have is that the one girl didn’t get a chance to play and they don’t really care that the 17 boys didn’t get a chance either.” I think people are frustrated, angry, etc that none of the kids got the chance to play. No, she shouldn’t have offered to sit the game out. And if all the genders were reversed, I’d be saying the same thing. Perhaps it made bigger news because it was the championship, and not just another game, but regardless my reaction would be the same. These are high school kids,… Read more »
I don’t think that she should have been asked to sit even the first two meetings, which ironically would have resulted in the team forfeiting the semi-final match instead of the championship. Not really a win unless the sole point was for the girl to be able to play. I don’t know that she shouldn’t have voluntarily elected not to play. She might feel better about things later, but I can’t envision her feeling anything but sad either way. She may actually feel a little guilty (not that she is or that it’s her fault). On the other hand if… Read more »
Booing the school administration’s decision to forfeit, not booing the boys. The headline doesn’t say “Boo these boys!”
“BOOOO! Boys Baseball Team Forfeits…” seems like the title is a slight against the TEAM, not the administration. Since it is a BOYS team then yes, the title is saying “Boo these boys!”
Unless a competition is co-ed for all teams then no, including a girl on a boys team is inappropriate.
Considering the people in charge of the team are not the boys themselves, booing an administrative decision made on behalf of the team is not ‘booing’ the team mates themselves.
1. No mention of administration. Furthermore, the boys voluntarily attend and play by those rules.
2. Why should boys be forced to play with girls but girls not forced to play with boys?
The BODY of the article notes it was the team administration the HEADLINE makes it clear the boys are being booed. A better headline would be “Boo! Boys baseball team ADMINISTRATION, makes them forfeit a game…”
The headline is deliberately chosen to single out the boys team, not the team’s administration.
If I read a headline that said – “Booo! Yankees Moving to Chicago,” or something, I wouldn’t assume that it was the players who made that decision. It’s the same thing. Not to mention, a title/headline is not going to have all the information. That’s what the article is for. The title is not explicit, perhaps, but it doesn’t actually imply that it was the kids themselves who made this decision. It doesn’t say “Boys on a Baseball Team…” or “Boys Forfeit…” Those two examples I gave would have been problematic, because those would have implied the boys themselves had… Read more »
HeatherN I see what you are saying, but I do not feel compelled to agree. You are simply making excuses for a deliberately inflammatory journalism style. Another feature of that style is called the 19th paragraph technique. Both are poor examples of what is alleged to be informative information presentation.
I’m not, though. I’ve voiced my dissatisfaction with GMP headlines in the past when I thought they were deliberately inflammatory. Actually, I’ve even voiced my dissatisfaction when I knew they weren’t deliberately inflammatory, but were problematic all the same. This is not one of those times.
Not even close to analagous. Yankees players are under binding contract for millions usually, and have no choice as to where the team plays nor any choice as to whether they play a particular team or not. Schools are not businesses, and kids play voluntarily and the entire team (the players) could choose to not play a given team or not. They have all the power. They aren’t under contract. RE: girls’ teams not including boys, I’ve never seen this site or anyone else BOOOO! a girls team for not permitting a boy to play, nor refusing to play a… Read more »
It boos the “Boys baseball team”(direct quote), which is comprised of boys.
No mention of “school administration.”
Why is gender enforcement wrong when boys and men choose it but right when women and girls do? Really not getting the double standards.
Because little ladies need a helping hand.
Nasty boys must suck it up !
Seriously, I am overjoyed feminism is an unloved child in my country.
“Because little ladies need a helping hand.
Nasty boys must suck it up !”
That, right there, is traditional gender norms at work. That’s not feminism. (Not all brands of feminism reject it, but it certainly didn’t originate with feminism).
““Because little ladies need a helping hand.”
“That, right there, is traditional gender norms at work. That’s not feminism.”
Are you kidding? All feminist legislature that feminist lobbyists have fought for that protects and provides for women in ways that it doesn’t protect and provide for men follow this EXACT script: that the little ladies need a helping hand.
You really can’t honestly deny that, you can try to explain it away but the fact still stands.
Then why are these boys being booed?
I think she meant that women shouldn’t be able to do this either.
As kids growing up on my block, we always played with everybody else (boy or girl) in stickball…it was just normal….
It wasn’t until I got to junior high school where girls’ gym class was separate from the boys’ ….in 7th grade, many of the girls were taller and stronger than some of the boys….in the schoolyard we played co-ed frisbee football and football (tag)….Why not?
They decided they’d rather do gender enforcement than play baseball. So they’re not really a baseball team, are they? They’re a gender enforcement team that also happens to play baseball. I mean, they’ve told us what their priorities are; the least we can do is take their word for it.
I’m sure the school would agree with you, and I’m sure they would phrase it differently. Freedom in America is still a good thing.
So, the stands can be co-ed, the church services can be co-ed, the fundraising dinners for the team can be co-ed, nuns can teach boys, and the victory party can be co-ed at a restaurant that serves boys and girls, but on the field, only boys? When the team wins the championship, do any female people get to run out onto the field, or is the grass strictly Y-chromosome only? I hope the ballpark has restrooms for girls and not just a restroom for boys…. Now, about that _League of Their Own_ reference in the article…. That was not a… Read more »
Jimmy, I don’t read this as the boy’ making the decision; I read this as the school simply refused to let them play.
And this is 9 boys against 8 boys and a girl; nobody’s gonna make fun of them for losing to a girl. After all, it’s the championship game. A lot of teams have already lost to her squad.
If this were wrestling, where it’s one boy v. one girl, I could see your argument.
Ok, I can see how maybe the school made that decision for the boys. But again, reading it this way, at the end of the day this school decided to exclude that girl from playing against their boys. I’m excluded from women’s sports, women’s gyms, women’s clubs, women’s scholarships… do I really need to go on? We don’t boo a women’s gym for excluding me, do we? Maybe it’s cheaper and closer to my house but I’m still not allowed in there. Call me crazy but I see equality in exclusion. If women can exclude men then men can exclude… Read more »
That’s because historically women were at a disadvantage with regards to sports, scholarships, etc. So because they couldn’t get access to the ‘normal’ ones, special ones were set up for them. That’s why something like Title IX is set up the way it is. Now normally I’m of the opinion that programs like Title IX have outlived their usefulness. However, stories like this make me re-think that.
So you’re saying that I’m not allowed to engage in women’s sports, join women’s gyms or women’s clubs, or compete for women’s scholarships but women should be allowed to engage in men’s sports, join men’s gyms and clubs, and compete for men’s scholarships (lolwut?) because “historically women were at a disadvantage with regards to sports, scholarships, etc.”?
I’m 27 years old and in the historical context of the past 30 years it has never been the case that women “were at a disadvantage with regards to sports, scholarships, etc.”.
So do you mind explaining that again?
I was explaining why such spaces were created. It’s similar to (though different from) the reason people created black-only spaces or lgbt-only spaces. At the time they were created it was specifically to fill in a gap that society as a whole had created. As I said, though, whether women-only sports and women-only gyms are still valid is up for debate.
so the solution is to exclude men from women’s stuff until women feel like they are comfy showing up to men’s stuff, in the mean time men are stuck with no place of their own? The problem is real but title IV isn’t fix, its a band-aid on a wound that needs air, otherwise its going to end up infected and not healing right.
No, that’s not what I said. I said I largely think Title IX is outdated. I’m actually for completely ungendered sports in schools, personally.
As much as I support equality, women would get destroyed playing against men. By all mean let them play but don’t complain when they get cut en masse.
Guys like playing sports with guys …. Ohhh let’s make it a level playing field and make it so women can be on the same team. What the heck is wrong with guys simply wanting to play sports with other guys? Why do people insist on changing that which isn’t broken for a few that don’t like the way it is? These are school age kids that guys bond with other guys, girls bond with other girls. Let them! Why force them to deal with issues that have nothing to do with the sport itself. Girl on the softball team… Read more »
A religious sect more conservative than the Catholic church doesn’t believe girls and boys should play sports together? Shocking. I don’t have a problem with them having that policy since it’s a private school where people who enroll there can choose if they’re okay with the policies. I don’t think they should expect or be allowed to force those policies on public schools by way of special conditions or forfeitures. If they aren’t willing to abide by public school policies when it comes to sports, exclude them from competing with them and let them play against other private schools who… Read more »
I fully respect these boy’s decision. It’s a lose-lose. If they beat the girl, they look like assholes and if they lose to the girl, they’ll never hear the end of it. I’d rather forfeit too. Also, as Danny highlighted boys and men are USUALLY excluded from things women enjoy. Women’s sports, women’s gyms, women’s scholarships, ad infinitum. So uh yea, we should get to exclude women and girls from our sports and clubs as well. And at the end of the day, it’s their fucking decision. Some young guys bucked up and decided to say fuck you to this… Read more »
I got the sense that this was the school’s decision, not the players’ decision. This sounds a little different than the Iowa boy who refused to wrestle with girl at his school’s wrestling match. I don’t know whether the boys themselves would have agreed with the decision or not, so I can’t say this was a choice based on conscience or not.
Geez. A few weeks ago a boy was kicked off the girls field hockey team after playing on it for two years. Apparently part of the worry was from two things: 1. The usual “he’s faster/stronger” argument. The kid in question said there were some girls that were faster and stronger than he was and had no problem playing with them. 2. There also seemed to be worry that boys would come in and take over the team….even though after at least the last two years there seems to have been only one boy on the team… So I’m left… Read more »
Dunno about other people, but I do. 🙂
Personally I think that, like with any societal change, it’s going to be like pulling teeth without novocaine.
well its pretty much all going to be broken until people pick one. Either we de – gender sports and make single ranks for all of them or we segregate it all without exception and then make either both or none available. This idea that we can do “both” is just stupid, and inherently breeds problems like the ones mentioned above.
I play a german sport called jugger, it’s always been an mixed sport and I think it adds to it. In all honesty, the men are faster and stronger, the three girl only teams that formed didn’t get very far in the Hamburg tournement they played in, but they had fun, played hard and so did their opponents. I gather they’ve reformed as mixed teams since. For me making sport about who is the fastest and strongest is missing the point. If that is the measure of greatness then, yes, men’s professional sports will probably dominate. It should be about… Read more »