Cheerleaders at girls games

I like to watch, too.

 

I don't think they can pull the cheerleaders out of school to attend a game; that's why you rarely see cheerleaders during the day games of state championships.

 

Cadet, they can pull cheerleaders out of school for games, at least where we are. They leave when the footbal/basketball team leaves.

Our cheerleaders don't generally cheer for girls games, but will if it's a big game.

And Buck is right on. My daughter is a high school softball player. I could not care less if the boys have a better scoreboard than the girls. I do care when we are told that parents will have to drive because the boys needed both buses that were available as the JV and varsity were going to different places. (It's not always easy to get parents for softball games, many of which have a 3:30 start, for driving duty. They work at that time of day)

I do care when we are told to come up with some more fundraising for our team because the money we were promised for equipment isn't there anymore, "because the football teams needed new uniforms this year."

Both of the above have happened to my kids team in the last 4 years. Is it a violation? Probably. Would it be difficult to prove? Absolutley. Is it worth fight over, probably not, as there are much bigger educational battles to fight.

But it happens, it's annoying, and I have no idea how to fix it. Again, Buck is right. It's about opportunity.

 

Opportunity for a basketball team is in no way affected by whether or not there are cheerleaders there. Anyone who argues otherwise is a brainwashed, sap from the school of political correctness. Until one team gets points on the scoreboard for its cheerleaders outcheering the other team's cheerleaders, cheerleaders have nothing to do with the sport or "opportunity." I don't care what some fucking idiot with a robe says. There's a thing called common sense.

 

Sorry, Buck, but it's not about equal opportunity to be supported, it's about equal opportunity TO PLAY. I'm all for making sure that equipment and facilities and such are equal. But to legislate that cheerleaders have to be there is complete and utter bull.

 

What about common scents?

 

I'm all for cheerleaders with common scents and some uncommon scents.

 

The law says:

Cheerleading, being a school-sanctioned extracurricular activity, with that school receiving Federal financial assistance, does indeed fall under equal opportunity laws when it comes to "the benefits of" athletic participation as applied to discrimination between boys and girls teams.

Any benefit or service provided by the school, with that school receiving Federal financial assistance, must be equal. The school cannot provide cheerleaders cheering for boys teams and not for girls teams. The school cannot provide trainers for boys teams and not for girls teams. The school cannot provide buses taking boys teams to away games and not girls teams. It's got to be equal opportunity. Not equal playing opportunity, equal opportunity.

Otherwise, it is discrimination and it is against the law.

 

Taking your thinking to it's logical conclusion, then if a student is only doing C work and another student is doing A work, then I think the student doing C work should sue because the teacher isn't equally reaching him/her. Because, you know, we're not worried about opportunity here, we're worried about outcome. Every student is entitled to a teacher that will teach them to do A work.

 

Equal opportunity, Buck. Every student deserves it.

 

Do you really expect logic from him? Besides, he says it's wrong so by God it is, regardless of what the law actually says.

 

You don't have to play, Buck. I'm trying to use absurdity to demonstrate another absurdity. I remember playing sports in high school and during the game I didn't even have a clue whether or not the cheerleaders were there. If you're playing, they're not even there to you.