Saturday, February 16, 2008

MSM: Wrong Again

This post will require nuanced reading. So if you're incapable of that (you Lefty wonzos), just move along.

Here's the AP report:

Kansas activities officials are investigating a religious school's refusal to let a female referee call a boys' high school basketball game.

The Kansas State High School Activities Association said referees reported that Michelle Campbell was preparing to officiate at St. Mary's Academy near Topeka on Feb. 2 when a school official insisted that Campbell could not call the game.

The reason given, according to the referees: Campbell, as a woman, could not be put in a position of authority over boys because of the academy's beliefs.

The actualities: was reported that she couldn't ref the game because she would have authority over them. THAT IS NOT WHY. It is because the school has a policy of not playing sports with women (a ref on the basketball court is almost as involved as the players) They believe that because women are naturally weaker than men, they should be protected and treated better than men.

Here's the REAL kicker:

Just to clarify, the [female] ref was completely cool with it. When the AD explained quite simply that they prefer males to ref/coach the boys and females to ref/coach the girls she understood the situation completely. It was her fellow ref that made the big stink and misquoted or misrepresented the whole situation

The school issued a statement, too.

ST. MARY'S ACADEMY (in St. Mary’s, KS) policy is to have only men in their sports program for boys.

Sports for boys are seen as training for the battlefield of life where the boys will need to fight at times through great difficulties. As such, it is more appropriate that it be men who train and direct the boys in these sports programs for only men can teach the boys to be men, just as only women can truly teach girls to be women.

It is not a question of women having no authority over boys as the quote in the paper (if it was accurate) seem to indicate. It is a question in athletics of men training boys to be men.

I'm sympathetic to the "men officials for boys/women officials for girls" philosophy, and also sympathetic to the "women are NOT men and should be treated differently" philosophy. By and large those sentiments are wholly acceptable--and in the case that 'only men can teach boys to be men,' (and women/girls), there's no question that that is true.

Given that, I wouldn't necessarily impose that; often there are practical situations which make those ideals impossible to achieve.

So: my preference is one thing; my praxis is another.

As to the story reported by the MSM: too bad that the MSM can't find its ass with both hands, eh?

HT: American Papist


Amy said...

Great clarification. Something about that whole article didn't sit right with me...I forgot to subtract the prerequisite 150 IQ points you lose whenever the MSM talks about religious issues.

They *always* seem to get it wrong.

Anonymous said...

Tell it to St Joan.

What a crock. It shambling, shoddy dissembling to rationalize the irrational. If you want to say that girls have cooties go ahead and say it. Just spare those of us who have moved past this particular folly from your silliness.