Brings me back to 'Harrison Bergeron'. We can't have people being smarter than others, more talented than others; everything must be equal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvqsv1pP...
Nice catch, I was thinking of exactly the same thing. Now put your limb restriction dvices, the 46 pound weight, and the earphones back on before the Handicapper General catches wind...
The socialist answer - to maintain equality with the downtrodden masses, who cannot have imperialist boirgoise tasty, sweet desserts, you can have a bowl of fresh depleted dirt topped with sawdust. Bet you can't wait!!!
It would not be "fair" and "equal" and would be "morally denegrating" to the "financially anti-enabled" who lacked the "ability" and "needed" more... We have given them your truffles, because they were far more deserving of our charity... Oh Lookie, pine needles to go with your sawdust; my, aren't WE the lucky ones!
(Sorry, its hard to type while laughing this hard!)
If there was better seating for the boy's field than for the girl's field, I can definitely see why that would be an issue.
Though in my opinion, the correct solution to this problem would have been to build a second set of seats on the girl's field, rather than to tear down the seats that the boys had. They say the school didn't have money to build more seats, but apparently the seats for the boy's side weren't built with school money, either. They said the seats were built using money from donors. Why couldn't they get more donors to build seats for the girls? Or, better yet, why not simply have boys and girls use the same field? Why are their sports fields segregated by sex, anyway?
The complaint that the seats weren't handicapped accessible is a fair point, but building a ramp couldn't be that difficult, could it?
(know its wrong, but can't help it...) Clearly the separating the fields by sex is no longer required, since at least 50% girls playing softball are not into the boys playing baseball.
The girls seats don't particularly look ADA compliant either... Why can't the girl's parents do like the boys parents and raise money to build their own bleachers as well? Or would that somehow not be in line with good socialist public school policy?
All the more reason to make all the restrooms identical. It will make it less confusing to anyone that might be a little mixed up about their preferences.
You wonder what started this. My imagination has some loud mouthed parent bragging to a group of people about the size of his son's stadium and how it 'proved' that softball was second-rate. We have all known people like that, and we have all known people who will use their power to strike back without thought to collateral damage.
Just musing. Empress "Star's" example decision (at the end of Glory Road) of, "Take THAT man out and shoot him. Your problem will go away." does come to mind.
Why not let both teams share the two stadia until new bleachers can be funded by the girls teams. And why do girls teams play in a separate stadium in the first place? This sounds odd to me.
Jan, not into team sports or children but quite puzzled nonetheless
pretty much. When kids are younger you will see more girls playing baseball (little league) but in high school most go play softball, and boys all play baseball (not sure if guys ever even could play softball as a highschool sport) Some girls play baseball, but not common, similar to the way some girls play football but not often.
I particularly enjoyed the school officials statement..."our goal here is to comply with Federal law..." WHAT THE HELL....I thought the goal was to educate the kiddies???? Not perform the appropriate worshipful absolutions to our Federal Masters.
Wouldn't this court order be a precedent for a claim that the "government of the people by the people" can not be treated better than the people? Therefore, I want the same same pay, benefits, illegal bank deposits, illegal and highly advantageous real estate deals, prostitutes and ObamaCare subsidies as the jerks in congress and the administration. Oh, wait, the proletariat can't have that! Maybe the patricians shouldn't have it either? I know, I know, the NSA is keeping track of the heretics.
a hundred years or so ago, my HS soccer team was 22-0. The football team was 1-12. Who got the better field (stadium actually), equipment, uniforms, etc? Who cares? We got to play! We actually had two girls on the team, because there weren't enough girl players for a girls team. They were just great. They got to play. Who would want to take away the football stadium so we all had to play in mud? Socialists, is who. Driving us to the lowest common denominator.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tvqsv1pP...
(Sorry, its hard to type while laughing this hard!)
Though in my opinion, the correct solution to this problem would have been to build a second set of seats on the girl's field, rather than to tear down the seats that the boys had. They say the school didn't have money to build more seats, but apparently the seats for the boy's side weren't built with school money, either. They said the seats were built using money from donors. Why couldn't they get more donors to build seats for the girls? Or, better yet, why not simply have boys and girls use the same field? Why are their sports fields segregated by sex, anyway?
The complaint that the seats weren't handicapped accessible is a fair point, but building a ramp couldn't be that difficult, could it?
Clearly the separating the fields by sex is no longer required, since at least 50% girls playing softball are not into the boys playing baseball.
Just musing. Empress "Star's" example decision (at the end of Glory Road) of, "Take THAT man out and shoot him. Your problem will go away." does come to mind.
Jan
Jan, not into team sports or children but quite puzzled nonetheless
baseball =/= Softball
So: Girls do not play baseball and boys do not play softball?
Jan, now better informed
Some girls play baseball, but not common, similar to the way some girls play football but not often.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcN392H2...