It’s probably never occurred to most parents that there may be gender discrimination inherent in the traditional Father-Daughter dance or Mother-Son sporting event, but in one Rhode Island school district, these gender-specific events have been banned with the help of the ACLU.
As sweet as a Daddy-Daughter dance is, one need only imagine the little girl who, for whatever reason, does not have a father in her life. Maybe she’s being raised by a single mother because of a parental separation or death. Or maybe her father is serving overseas in the military. Perhaps she’s being raised in a two-mom family. Regardless, she is left out. The same, of course, is true for a son who wouldn’t be able to attend a mother-son event like a baseball game for any of the reasons listed above.
Even beyond the parental gender issues, there is the problem that boys wouldn’t be allowed to attend the father-daughter dance, and girls couldn’t go to the sporting event.
Newser explains the ACLU’s stance:
The ACLU hailed the change, which was instituted months ago, reports the Providence Journal. “Public schools have no business fostering the notion that girls prefer to go to formal dances while boys prefer baseball games,” said a prickly statement. “The time has long since passed for public school resources to encourage stereotyping from the days of Ozzie and Harriet. Not every girl today is interested in growing up to be Cinderella, not even in Cranston.”
What do you think of the ban? Is it all in the name of fairness and inclusion, or an overreaction to an obsessively politically-correct culture? Will something be lost if we ban gendered parent-child events?
Photo courtesy of USAG-Humphreys/Flickr
As sweet as a Daddy-Daughter dance is, one need only imagine the little girl who, for whatever reason, does not have a father in her life. Maybe she’s being raised by a single mother because of a parental separation or death. Or maybe her father is serving overseas in the military. Perhaps she’s being raised in a two-mom family. Regardless, she is left out. The same, of course, is true for a son who wouldn’t be able to attend a mother-son event like a baseball game for any of the reasons listed above. Let’s see if that works for having… Read more »
I say to this: Celebrate the kids and their parents, don’t make it a girly thing. Don’t make it a boyish thing. Make it a parent-child moment.
There is no reason that it is gendered. Same as many things who are entirely arbitrarily gendered (lace, ruffles, skirts, dress-like garments, tights, heels) many of those even went from one to the other (heels and tights for example – initially male-only garments).
Some school discrimination may simply be unavoidable. High school graduation ceremonies are clearly discriminatory – they only celebrate the students who completed their degree. Isn’t that discrimination against failing students and their families?
Yes, and Gay Pride is so discriminatory against straight people, right? Your argument makes as much sense.
Even if there’s a Mother-Son event and a Father-Daughter event, that still doesn’t include everyone. If you’re the daughter of a single mother, you and your mom don’t have a sponsored event. If you’re the son of a single father, you and your dad don’t have a sponsored event. There must be millions of kids in the U.S. in these situations.
“Parent-child” sounds really bland and vague. Maybe there’s a more interesting phrase someone can come up with?
No, that leaves out children with no parents, such as those raised by other relatives. Hence, that is discriminatory as well.
The only way to not discriminate against anyone is to do nothing.
What a wonderful thing this ant-male political correctness is.
I would like to speak the issue of “inclusiveness”. The problem I have with it is that it waters down the “specialness” of the event. This is a difference of opinion, IMO but every child needs the strong and tender love from a father FIGURE and mother FIGURE. Events like these should be special memories for each child. Is it narrow minded? Yes, one could view it that way, but realize that narrow isn’t always bad (again IMO). I love that one comment that referenced the South Park Christmas episode. Scary when life imitates art. I know that part of… Read more »
Is it about underlining the specialness of their femaleness? Because if that’s something important for the kid (not something other people deem important, but them personally), they can have other ways to signify it without those ways being exclusive me-only events. Same way you can wear clothing and signify your uniqueness without it being me-only clothing others get beaten up for wearing. Why does specialness need to mean exclusive (and completely arbitrary) access to social gender norms, in order to make SURE that they feel “special” and “unique” in a 50% way (ie not unique one bit)? We reward conformism… Read more »
My cynicism tingles.
I must admit that this is quite a surprise. Seeing someone wanting to get rid of something because their may not be a father to participate. Quite different from when the British Health Service removed all mentions of dads from their reading material and when that school in Scotland a few years ago stopped letting kids make Father’s Day cards in class. In those cases it was a matter of basically, “What about the mommies!!!!”
Are you KIDDING me, Danny?
What about the mommies?
This is about gender discrimination and inclusiveness. You’re turning this into a gender conspiracy theory.
You know how many kids in my son’s class make father’s or mother’s day cards and have no one to send them to? It’s terribly, terribly sad and you’re turning this into a soapbox for anti-feminist conspiracy theories. It’s boggling my mind.
How could it be about gender discrimination if there is also a mother-son outing? If they want more family configurations accommodated, just add them – don’t rob girls of special time with their fathers. That’s just wrong.
First off I said my cynicism tingles for a reason. As in I am probably thinking too much into this or that whole presumption of worst faith habit I have is kicking off again. Secondly: Are you KIDDING me, Danny? No I’m not. On the British Health Service bit: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/britain-abolishes-itself/ Fathers are already disappearing. At the end of May, the National Health Service, the largest employer in Britain—and the fifth largest in the world—took the decision to excise the six-letter f-word from a pamphlet on rearing children that it has been giving to mothers- and fathers-to-be for the past 14… Read more »
“What about the mommies”? Did you not mean that about feminism? Maybe you just meant society in general. If so, I apolgize.
In this particular article, we’re talking about ALL gendered events, including mother-son baseball game outings, etc.
So I just don’t see why you’re soapboxing about not making Father’s Day cards in the UK when what we’re talking about is an across-the-board ban in order to stop exclusion.
Lori had some great ideas about how to not necessarily ban an event, but to make it more inclusive, but your mostly-unrelated links seem to me like soapboxing an agenda.
Look Joanna I’ve already explained my thought process behind this. I openly announced my cynicism and explained it and even explained that it was more emotional than analytical. I have no agenda so quit trying to prescribe one to me so that you can have a reason to say I’m soap boxing. You asked was I kidding and I explained to you that no I wasn’t and called myself trying to save you the trouble of looking up those things I said (or at least saving you the trouble of asking for references). I said it, you questioned it, I… Read more »
Although I have never attended a Father-Daughter Dance, or even had the opportunity to, it is beyond absurd to ban fathers from a bonding experience with their daughters. Doesn’t the ACLU have anything better to do than harassing fathers who actually want to be a part of their daughters’ lives? Why doesn’t the ACLU go after the fathers who wanted children but don’t bother to be in their daughters’ lives. I mean, come the heck on. Let’s ban the basketball team because some kids are too short and slow to compete. Life doesn’t deal everyone the exact same hand. Unfortunately,… Read more »
Did you actually read my comment? Did I promote banning? I believe I promoted *broadening*. Is that a problem? Can traditions evolve over time in ways that make them better for more people?
I read it but note that I didn’t comment on it. Mine was a comment on the story in general. However, since you asked, I have no problem with the replacement dad, whether it be a grandfather, uncle, cousin or family friend. I have seen that done any number of times, and it’s entirely reasonable and compassionate. On the other hand, your point number four robs girls of something many like to do, dresstip. It does, in effect, bans the father daughter dress up dance. If you want to add a carnival or something for those who don’t want to… Read more »
Or you let gay kids bring dates and not shut proms down because of that.
Of the tens of thousands of proms, hhat doesnt solve the problem. Proms would need to go to a casual dress code and exclude
dancing.
My apologies, Eric. My new reading glasses have been ordered but have not arrived yet–seriously! It must have looked like that was a reply to my comment. So sorry. I’m all for options for boys and girls–the more the better. If a school can afford the time and money for multiple events, then I support different events. If only one can be afforded, I support whatever has the broadest appeal and leaves the fewest kids out. Julie, hear hear for gay kids going to proms! When they are shut out, that makes me want to see proms canceled! And if… Read more »
Speaking as someone who has worked in school administration for many years, and even ran a school for several years, I can share my experience with this. Cranston is not the first place it has come up. It has come up many times, many places, and until now, perhaps, has not gotten national attention. I will simply state my views as a school administrator who has dealt with this: 1. Many parents and children struggle with Mother/Son and Father/Daughter events, because they are painful when one parent is not in the picture. 2. A way around this is very simple:… Read more »
#1 – I agree with that point and sympathize with it, but I think it’s a terrible reason to do away with such events altogether. Every enjoyable activity or circumstance can be painful to people who can’t enjoy it or share that circumstance. Pandering to that in the name of empathy would have absurd results. #2 – I agree with your workaround involving sensitivity and accommodations to broaden the accessibility of the event to those who wish to participate. I think that’s much better than the “no one can have that fun if anyone can’t have that fun” approach. #3… Read more »
I don’t think they’re really that bad as long as there are equal events for girls and boys and each parent has an equal chance at participating. We have different teams for girls and boys. There are even different sports for girls and boys. @ John Schtoll “I highly doubt anyone would have gotten involved if there were ONLY Mother – Son events and no Father – Daughter events.” When people discussed Title IX, some people (a very small minority) argued that it should look at all the expenditures / extra curricular / student activities and student services when determining… Read more »
Everyone who reads this article and agrees that it is discriminatory should watch the “South Park Christmas Concert” Episode.
Folks, when South Park is realistic and actually reflects the world we live in, we have seriously gone off the tracks somewhere.
Overzealous political correctness, in my book. If something is banned because one (or several) people can’t attend, then we’ll end up doing nothing special, because there’ll always be an exception to the rule. Should we ban sports carnivals, because some kids can’t run due to medical conditions? And what about all the girls who actually enjoyed the dance? And the fathers who saw it as a highlight of their daughter’s childhood? And the mothers who wanted to go to the baseball game with their sons? They all miss out now on those events, instead replaced with another bland, equally-balanced “take… Read more »
I don’t know know Alister, you could have the same event without creating unnecessary barriers for others. Why not simply call it “Parent-child dance” and “Parent-child sporting event” and let people self-select without creating subtle messages about exactly who should be doing what.
Many men (and mothers of sons raised objections to “take your daughter to work day,” so much so that many employers changed it to “take your child to work day.” I agree that singling out one gender of kids for a special event seems discriminatory.
You mention “Mother – Son” events, but in fact, this was shut down by a mother complaining about the Father – Daughter events and quite frankly I highly doubt anyone would have gotten involved if there were ONLY Mother – Son events and no Father – Daughter events. Just another example of “We can’t have dads meaning anything special to their kids”