Girls Flag Football

I can't say I expected my next blog post to be about girls flag football, but reading about it in the NY Times today made me want to comment. First, I should point out that I don't really have any interest in watching women sports (maybe a passing interest in Women's World Cup soccer) but I am still nevertheless a strong supporter of Title IX. I don't think funding for sports in HS programs and college programs should be overwhelmingly favoring male sports even if they are overwhelmingly more exciting to watch (sorry ladies). The point of sports programs, if we take them at face value at educational institutions (which I do), is to encourage young people to develop some of the skills and character traits we value highly in society - teamwork, camaraderie, ambition, fair play, mutual respect, etc. It is also important that these kids have fun! If the kids aren't having fun, for whatever reason, the point of the sports program is essentially lost. That's why I find almost all of the perspectives concerning female flag football teams in this article to be so misguided. First, I need to admit that I had no idea that high schools had female flag football teams. But I'm glad that they do and, from appearances in this article, so do all of the girls who participate. That's why its infuriating to read about how all of these high-minded flag football advocates and critics alike, have lit upon the position that these teams have no worth or deserve to be eliminated because colleges don't offer scholarships or higher division opportunities for these girls beyond club sports. Excuse my blunt language but that is HOGWASH! Yeah, I said it! HOGWASH! It's disappointing the our society has come to determine an athletic program's worth by its abilities to produce professional athletes but, I repeat, that is NOT the purpose of educational athletics! It's not...I'm sorry. The suggestion that these programs be cut because, as some people advocate because - they don't offer higher ed opportunities; they "steal" athletes from other scholarship sports like swimming and gymnastics; they have not increased the total proportion of female athletes - is insane. In this article we have both well-intentioned and ill-intentioned actors looking to cut the program in the name of the female athletes they supposedly represent. But you know who doesn't actually have a voice in this NY Times article? The female players themselves! Ask them if they want their flag football team cut because they don't offer Division I scholarships. While I haven't conducted an official poll on the question, I'm pretty sure I can guess their response. Additionally, history suggests that, in time, colleges could begin to form Division I-III flag football teams when demand is sufficient to warrant them (as it's done in legions of sports before it). That's why statements like this one, from a supposed advocate for women's sports, are so infuriating:

Ms. Hogshead-Makar, who also serves as the senior director for advocacy at the Women’s Sports Foundation, said girls missed the educational benefits if they did not take a sport seriously.“That’s one of the things that makes sports such an important experience,” she said. “You’re always striving to get to that next rung.”Ms. Hogshead-Makar said flag football’s time should be up.“We’ve had 10 years of girls who have not been given other sports opportunities,” she said. But she said she would be open to changing her stance if she saw commitment by universities or the National Collegiate Athletic Association.

It would be impossible for me to disagree with a statement more completely. If people at the top of sports foundations, both male and female, are actually thinking like this, they need to be summarily dismissed. Given the percentage of athletes that are good enough to make it to the highest rung in a given sport (you know, something like 0.001%), its embarrassing to think that this is the way our leadership really thinks. These people are actively missing the point of athletic competition and shouldn't be in any position to influence policy or speak on its behalf.