It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Court Says Boy Cannot Compete On Girls Squad

page: 1
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Keith Michael Bukowski, a student at Stevens Point Area High School filed a law suit in 2004, seeking to be allowed to compete on the school's girls gymnastics team. Wisconsin state appeals court rejected the law suit against Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association on Thursday.
 



sportsillustrated.cnn.com
The District 4 Court of Appeals upheld a judge's dismissal of Keith Michael Bukowski's lawsuit against the Wisconsin Interscholastic Athletic Association, which has a rule prohibiting boys from competing in girls' sports.

Bukowski filed the lawsuit as a junior at Stevens Point Area High School in 2004. He argued the WIAA rule preventing him from trying out for and competing on the girl's gymnastics team discriminated against him because his school did not have a boys' team.

Bukowski argued that the rule violated the equal protection clause of the U.S. Constitution as well as a federal law known as Title IX, which was meant to prohibit sex discrimination in sports.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


So whats the problem here? I'll tell you, he should be allowed to join the girls team in my opinion.

I'll bet if it was a girl wanting to play football they'd let her.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:01 PM
link   
well, he is a man and has an unfair advantage due to his strength. They allow girls to compete on male teams because they are actually at a disadvantage, so if that is what girls really want to do, they let them.

pretty simple really.

Why the hell does he want to compete against the girls anyway?


[edit on 30-11-2006 by XphilesPhan]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
If the school did not have a boy's team, then the school is at fault.
Appoint a coach, let him train as the newly designated boys team, and go from there.
Why involve lawyers ?
Anyone smell the money ?

Just my 2 cent,
Lex



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:04 PM
link   
I see this more as a principal thing, he showed that the law has double standards and that it is hypocritical and not equally and fairly applied.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:07 PM
link   
Again, easily solved. Create the team.
If he competes against himself, he wins twice.

Lex



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:14 PM
link   
I need to start competing against myself.

How could I loose?



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
I have an idea.

Get rid of segregated teams, and have girls and boys
on the same team.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:15 PM
link   
ED ? Omg....I just had to....

Ashamed,
Lex



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Iori,
We have boys and girls sports. Why ? No idea. Just how we are.
Now, swim teams ( which I participated in ) were coed. Again, no idea why.

Lex



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:18 PM
link   
Simply create a team? Is it that easy?

So he was wanting to perform in gymnastics, which his school obviously was not able to offer except for the one group that had the commonality to be inclusive of females.

If there was a boys team, or enough boys to make a team, would this have ever been an issue? Doubtful.

To the person that had the "females are at a disadvantage thats why they are allowed" syndrome, let me ask you this:

If a male was to join an all-female team, would the male not be at the same "disadvantage" that you proposed? His "strength" would mean that he would have to "lessen" his abilities to perform, right?
How ridiculous does that logic sound now?

Girls are weaker than boys is an outdated argument.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:21 PM
link   
You have voted niteboy82 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.

Lex

Edited to add the reason I gave a WATS :
Girls are weaker than boys is an outdated argument.
Thank you.

[edit on 30-11-2006 by Lexion]



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:21 PM
link   
The boy just wanted to compete on a girls team so he's with the girls. As for finding a way to publicize this into the media for attention and making a difference.

7A



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:23 PM
link   


Girls are weaker than boys is an outdated argument.


I really have to agree here.

I'm 5'11 and 157lbs, so I'm not a twig, but I'm not big either,
anyways, there are girls who are smaller than me in my
body mech. (weight lifting) class, and they can lift a whole
heck of a lot more weight than me.

Point is, just because a girl looks weaker, does'nt mean
they are.

And of course in general females are equal to males in strength
when they both do something.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by niteboy82
Girls are weaker than boys is an outdated argument.


I didnt mean it to be the sole basis of my argument, I was speaking in general.

In Gymnastics, you may be right.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
And of course in general females are equal to males in strength.


Huh? I think you will find that every single scientific study goes against that. Not trying to play up that argument because the issue is more complex but the statement above simply isn't true.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by iori_komei
And of course in general females are equal to males in strength.


Huh? I think you will find that every single scientific study goes against that. Not trying to play up that argument because the issue is more complex but the statement above simply isn't true.


Indeed, I agree. It's natural for men to be physically strong so they can protect the mother and there children, as for hunting and having a better chance at mating by there manly attributes.

7A



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:20 PM
link   


Huh? I think you will find that every single scientific study goes against that. Not trying to play up that argument because the issue is more complex but the statement above simply isn't true.



Indeed, I agree. It's natural for men to be physically strong so they can protect the mother and there children, as for hunting and having a better chance at mating by there manly attributes.


*Sigh*

You completely left off the second half of the sentence.
I said


And of course in general females are equal to males in strength when they
both do something.


In other words, if a male and female the same age do the same
training for something for the same amount of time, they will be
equal and strength and ability in it.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
In other words, if a male and female the same age do the same
training for something for the same amount of time, they will be
equal and strength and ability in it.


That is still wrong, and does not make sense. In general men are naturally stronger due to the fact that we have more muscle mass. So if they both train the same way and do the same things there is no way you would be able to compensate for that missing muscle mass.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
That is still wrong, and does not make sense. In general men are naturally stronger due to the fact that we have more muscle mass. So if they both train the same way and do the same things there is no way you would be able to compensate for that missing muscle mass.


Well that does'nt make alot of sense based on what I've
seen witnessed.

And besides that, wo's to say that trait has'nt or is'nt
evolving out, through either females becoming stronger
or, more likely, males becoming weaker.



posted on Nov, 30 2006 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei

Originally posted by WestPoint23
That is still wrong, and does not make sense. In general men are naturally stronger due to the fact that we have more muscle mass. So if they both train the same way and do the same things there is no way you would be able to compensate for that missing muscle mass.


Well that does'nt make alot of sense based on what I've
seen witnessed.

And besides that, wo's to say that trait has'nt or is'nt
evolving out, through either females becoming stronger
or, more likely, males becoming weaker.


Oh please, it's in our nature, it's in the heterosexual nature for a woman to be aroused by a strong physicaly fit man. As for men, there attracted to woman who take care of there body and look gorgious. Really, a woman who is a body builder, just isn't a turn on, it is sick looking.. Google how they look, ew. So backwards.

7A

[edit on 30-11-2006 by 7Ayreon]



new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join