Home | About | RSS Feed | Contact and Publicity Guidelines | Comment Policy the Law, the Universe, and Everything 

Search


Concurring Opinions is a
general-interest legal blog
operated by Concurring
Opinions LLC, a Pennsylvania
Limited Liability Corporation.

jr_114_9780195367195_bnr

jr_114_9780195383768_bnr

advertise-here4


FC-CO(SS)

Our Podcast

Subscribe to Law Talk

law-rev-contents2.jpg


  • Posts by Author

  • Categories

  • Archives


  • Recent Comments

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Mike Rich on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • anon on Privacy and Tattletales

    • orly lobel on At CELS, Hoping to Blog

    • harry brooks on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • RJ on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Michael H Schneider on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • flood pictures on Public opinion on same-sex marriage

    • gtownstudent on And Justache For All at GW Law

    • AF on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • RJ on Ricci and Briscoe as Disparate Impact Cases

    • Maryland Conservatarian on Ricci: Color-Blind Standards in a Race Conscious Society?

    • Daniel S. Goldberg on Negligent Corpse Mishandling

    • PrometheeFeu on KSM on Trial

  •  

    Site Meter

Cheerleaders for girls and for geeks

posted by Michael Abramowicz

The N.Y. Times has an interesting article by Winnie Hu on movements to have cheerleaders cheer equally for boys and girls teams. The legal theory is that girls’ sports, deprived of cheerleaders, are receiving less support from their schools than boys’ sports receive. The unsurprising reality in many cases is that the equal cheering makes no one happy — including the players on the girls’ teams that receive the cheers.

Will the next move be equal cheering for the coed academic teams? I did receive a varsity letter in high school — for my participation on the math team. Our team coach was able to convince the administration that we needed to be treated equally with the sports teams. You will not be surprised to hear that I put the big orange “M” in the bottom of the dresser instead of sewing it onto a jacket.

I can just imagine what math team might have been like if we had cheerleaders: “Calculate the area, hooray, hooray; pi-r-squared, that’s the way.” That would have been enough to get me to quit the math team, although thinking with all of the cheering going on might have created some additional challenge. Plus, I suppose that I might have gotten to know some of the cheerleaders on the bus rides to competitions. This could have made a great ’80s movie.

On the merits of the curernt dispute, my own view is that having (almost exclusively) girls cheering the boys does not send the right messages about our idealized views of sex roles. But it probably doesn’t make things much worse either, and the new interpretation seems like a stretch of Title IX. My preferred solution would be to turn cheerleading into a sport in its own right, if there remains enough demand for it, with squads competing against each other while not disturbing other athletic contests. Some will say that to cheer, you need something to cheer. But I saw “Bring It On,” so I know better.


 January 14, 2007 at 7:24 am   Posted in: Feminism and Gender   Print This Post Print This Post

Responses (11)

  1. not an MIT beaver myself - January 14, 2007 at 10:30 am

    E to the u du dx,

    E to the x, dx.

    Cosine, secant, tangent, sine,

    3 point 1 4 1 5 9.

    Integral, radical, mu, dv

    Slipstick, sliderule, MIT!

  2. matt - January 14, 2007 at 11:54 am

    When my high school’s mock trial team went to the national tournament, the school rented a limo to drive them to the airport and had the cheerleading squad see them off with cheers.

    I don’t think cheerleading for academic teams would be a bad thing.

  3. Ann Bartow - January 14, 2007 at 2:46 pm

    Cheerleading is already characterized as a sport at some institutions. Note the part of the NYT articel that reports:

    Cheerleading has long been a source of contention. Some women’s sports advocates complain that schools count it as a varsity sport as a sneaky way to increase the numbers of the female side of the athletic department balance sheet without changing historic disparities. Others see the varsity letters as a mark of respect for the athletic and acrobatic feats the squads perform.

    Also, I was curious as to why some of the problems that supposedly occurred when the cheerleaders went to girls’ basketball games (according to the article:

    Several cheerleaders there recalled a game two years ago, long before the complaint, when the squad decided at the last minute to cheer for the girls’ team because a boys’ game was canceled.

    The cheers drowned out directions from the girls’ coach, frustrated the players, and created so much tension that the cheerleaders left before halftime.

    Why don’t they annoy the boys’ teams just as much, I wonder?

    At the South Carolina basketball games I attend, the announcers, our mascot “Cocky” and the pep band do most of the crowd enthusiasm generating. Heck, for better seats I’d consider holding up signs that say “Go Cocks!” and jabbing my fist in the air during timeouts. I don’t know how much money is spent on college cheerleadering squads, but there has to be a better use for it. Away teams don’t bring their cheerleaders with them to our coliseum and they still often play very well indeed, unfortunately :>)

  4. Ann Bartow - January 14, 2007 at 2:49 pm

    Huh, screwed up the html tags somehow in the previous comment. This sentence:

    The cheers drowned out directions from the girls’ coach, frustrated the players, and created so much tension that the cheerleaders left before halftime.

    …is a quote from the NYT article.

    I have some addition observations here:

    http://feministlawprofs.law.sc.edu/?p=1390

  5. Maryland Conservatarian - January 15, 2007 at 12:00 am

    “…my own view is that having (almost exclusively) girls cheering the boys does not send the right messages about our idealized views of sex roles.”

    cheerleaders probably want be where the people are…which usually means going to cheer on the guys…once again the market works in inconvienent ways, doesn’t it?

  6. Ann Bartow - January 15, 2007 at 10:11 am

    When a University decrees that the “Cheerleading Team” will have 24 female and 6 male members, and that the women must be below 110 pound but the men can be any weight at all, the “market” is indeed working in inconvenient ways, of course. When a high school decrees that all cheeleaders must be comprised of females, again, market inconvenience, obviously. When a school sends cheerleaders to basketball games but not to soccer games, even though spectator attendance at soccer games is higher, of course its market failure, what else could possibly be going on.

  7. Maryland Conservatarian - January 15, 2007 at 12:12 pm

    first, the market does’t “fail”, it reflects…that it doesn’t reflect leftist sensibilities enough to suit a lot of people may be seen as a failure to them but is just a source of amusement to many of us.

    …and if Ms. Bartow is implyiong that the market isn’t allowed to work in certain instances, well, I am all for those schools opening the process up to a more “market-oriented” approach – you know, like sports teams are chosen – usually the most skilled, however defined, are chosen – the rest of us watch from the sidelines.

    So I’m all for letting the market dictate which sports the cheerleaders show up for…although I continue to believe that making such decisions explicitly market-based would just re-emphasize how inconvienent the market can be for those who “know” what’s best for the rest of us.

  8. Alex R - January 15, 2007 at 1:24 pm

    Premise: Cheerleading is a sport.

    Premise: All sports are entitled to have cheerleaders rooting for them.

    Conclusion: :-)

  9. Maryland Conservatarian - January 15, 2007 at 3:37 pm

    The NY Times: “Thirty girls signed up for the cheerleading squad this winter at Whitney Point High School in upstate New York. But upon learning they would be waving their pompoms for the girls’ basketball team as well as the boys’, more than half of the aspiring cheerleaders dropped out.” http://www.nytimes.com/2007/01/14/nyregion/14title.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1

    I blame society

    (H/T – NRO)

  10. Jennifer Hendricks - January 17, 2007 at 10:05 am

    Well, I was a cheerleader and on the math team. (I wore my academic letter on my cheerleading jacket.) On math team we always made flamboyant entrances to intimidate the opposition, and having the rest of the cheerleading squad along would have been a definite plus.

    I’m shocked that equal scheduling of cheerleaders is still an issue. We cheered for girls’ games but not nearly as extensively, or with as large a squad, as for the boys’ games. In Montana, where I practiced, there is a 20-year-old consent decree that addresses equal cheerleading support, and I assumed that was now standard practice.

  11. charlene bates - January 26, 2009 at 6:42 pm

    At our local high school, the varsity cheerleaders only cheer for the varsity boys basketball team. Varsity cheerleaders in the surrounding schools cheer for both the girls and boys basketball teams. Our girls team is undefeated in our district. The season is well over half over and this past weekend the varsity cheerleaders hopped on the girls bus and rode to the game with them instead of the boys. If they weren’t supporting them last year and for over half the season this year – why go now. I believe they’re riding on some coattails. The girls basketball team is getting a lot of attention and some even think we may make it to state. I think it’s too little too late and is an insult to women everywhere.

Leave a Reply

*
To prove you're a person (not a spam script), type the security word shown in the picture. Click on the picture to hear an audio file of the word.
Click to hear an audio file of the anti-spam word


  • « Previous post
  • Next post »

Authors

Daniel J. Solove

Website
Understanding Privacy

Kaimipono Wenger

Website
SSRN Page

Dave Hoffman

Website
SSRN Page

Nate Oman

Website
SSRN Page

Frank Pasquale

Website
SSRN Page

Deven Desai

Website
SSRN Page

Danielle Citron

Website
SSRN Page

Lawrence Cunningham

Website
SSRN Page

Sarah Waldeck

Website
SSRN Page

Jaya Ramji-Nogales

Website
SSRN Page

Solangel Maldonado

Website
SSRN Page

Gerard Magliocca

Website
SSRN Page


Guests

Rachel Godsil
Alex Kreit
Anita Krishnakumar
Matthew Sag
Michael Zimmer






Previous Guests

Michael Abramowicz
Michelle Adams
Robert Ahdieh
Michelle Anderson
Laura Appleman
Ann Bartow
Francesca Bignami
Jeremy Blumenthal
Kathleen Boozang
Bruce Boyden
Donald Braman
Al Brophy
Neil H. Buchanan
Bill Burke-White
Scott Burris
Paul Butler
Naomi Cahn
Anupam Chander
Miriam Cherry
Jack Chin
Jennifer Collins
Allison Danner
Brannon Denning
Deven Desai
Mike Dimino
Mark Edwards
David Fagundes
Christine Haight Farley
Kim Ferzan
Dan Filler
Michael Froomkin
Amanda Frost
Timothy Glynn
Rachel Godsil
Eric Goldman
David Gray
Craig Green
Tristin Green
Jeffrey Harrison
Erica Hashimoto
Carissa Hessick
Laura Heymann
Robert Hillman
Christine Hurt
Darian Ibrahim
John Ip
Kevin Johnson
Dan Kahan
Brian Kalt
Sam Kamin
Michael Kang
Chimène Keitner
Orin Kerr
Nancy Kim
Heidi Kitrosser
Adam Kolber
Russell Korobkin
Anita S. Krishnakumar
Susan Kuo
Greg Lastowka
Sarah Lawsky
Erik Lillquist
Jeff Lipshaw
Jonathan Lipson
Jacqueline Lipton
Joseph Liu
Michael Madison
Solangel Maldonado
Jason Mazzone
Linda McClain
William McGeveran
Salil Mehra
Carrie Menkel-Meadow
Max Minzner
Scott Moss
Eric Muller
Jaya Ramji-Nogales
Helen Norton
Elizabeth Nowicki
Paul Ohm
Michael O'Shea
David Opderback
Kristen Osenga
Rafael Pardo
Marcy Peek
Eduardo Peñalver
Robert Percival
David Post
Shruti Rana
Geoffrey Rapp
Neil Richards
Lori Ringhand
Alice Ristroph
Susan Scafidi
Paul Secunda
Jonathan Siegel
Jessica Silbey
Peter Smith
Charles Sullivan
Rick Swedloff
Steph Tai
Andrew Taslitz
Robert Tsai
Jenia Turner
Steve Vladeck
Sarah Waldeck
Melissa Waters
Alfred Yen
David Zaring
Timothy Zick
Spencer Weber Waller
Howard Wasserman
Frank Wu
Corey Yung
Jonathan Zittrain

Blogroll

Above the Law
ACS Blog
Althouse
Balkinization
Becker-Posner Blog
BlackProf
BoingBoing
Chicago Law Faculty Blog
Conglomerate
CrimLaw
Crime & Federalism
CrimProf Blog
Crooked Timber
Discourse.net
Dorf on Law
Election Law
Emergent Chaos
The Faculty Lounge
Feminist Law Profs
43(B)log
Freakonomics Blog
Freedom to Tinker
Google Blogoscoped
How Appealing
Ideoblog
Info/Law
Instapundit.com
Juris Novus
Jurisdynamics
Law and Humanities Blog
Law and Letters
Law Librarian Blog
Legal Profession Blog
Legal Theory Blog
Legal Times Blog
Leiter Reports
Brian Leiter's Law School Reports
Lessig Blog
Madisonian Theory
Media Law Blog
Mirror of Justice
The Moderate Voice
National Security Advisors
Opinio Juris
Point of Law
PrawfsBlawg
ProfessorBainbridge.com
Property Prof Blog
Red Tape Chronicles
The Right Coast
Schneier on Security
SCOTUSBlog
Security Dilemmas
Sentencing Law and Policy
Simple Justice
Sivacracy.net
The Situationist
Susan Crawford
TalkLeft
Talking Points Memo
TaxProf Blog
Tech & Marketing Law
Truth on the Market
Volokh Conspiracy
WorkPlace Prof Blog
WSJ Law Blog
Wonkette
The Yin Blog


© Concurring Opinions

Powered by WordPress