to think this is unacceptable

[mileend2bermondsey]

Just found out that in my hometown high school PE activities are still split by gender. The boys do football and rugby, the girls do netball and hockey. When the girls do dance, the boys do tennis. I cant believe this seperation is still going on without question.

Apparantly if a child 'kicks up a fuss' about wanting to do a sport of the opposite gender they will be allowed to do it but would be the only boy or girl in the class, hence hardly any do.

I think this is outrageous, all children should be taught all sports available as standard. Why is a seperation based on gender neccessary, and why is this still going on?

sportsinjuryscotland.co.uk/

I saw an advert for either this or a similar charity on the back of a bus recently. The strapless was something about how every few minutes someone incurs a sports injury.

And the idea that it's the cool kids who don't play sport is laughable.

I won't be entering into a debate on this subject (you can't debate with the uneducated that don't want to hear other points of view - and keep changing their own), but suffice to say, OP, I think you are absolutely correct.

How charming- you won't debate this because you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is stupid.

Too much choice and nobody ever gets any good at anything and it's very expensive, will require more staff and facilities and your PE teachers are unlikely to be able to teach all sports well. No choice and you should not include full contact sports in the list of compulsory activities.

Should children who have no interest in or aptitude for classical music be forced to work their way through the entire orchestra until they find one which is suitable?

No one is forcing anyone to do anything outside of the curriculum.

But the curriculum has sports on it along with all sorts of other subjects that many kids wouldn't want to do unless made to (maths, physics, woodwork).

If kids were being forced to join out of school sports clubs then I could possibly see where lass is coming from. But there's no harm in kids having a couple of PE sessions per week.

And if the boys play rugby then there should be an option for the girls to play rugby - and vice versa with all the sports

How do they know if they're musical if they never get the chance? FWIW I do think all children should be able to try different instruments/learn to play an instrument.

Sport is different in that physical activity is necessary in order for children to be healthy. Many parents don't do much physical activity with their children (the Xbox/playstation generation) so it's even more important that children are doing PE at school. Nobody is expecting everyone to be good at it, but they do need to participate.

I had no idea sport at school was still split into 'sports girls do' and 'sports boys do'. It's outrageous. Of course everyone should be able to do all sports if they wish.

Those trying to say that the OP is saying that girls and boys should do sport together, learn to read properly and/or stop being fucking obtuse.

I'd just like to take issue with the 'Touch rugby is just rugby adapted for girls' comment.

Touch Rugby is gaining in popularity all the time. I have a friend who's a coach with the RFU and he's involved in teams all over the region.

One of the great things about it is that males and females of all ages and abilities can play together.

My friend also works in schools, perhaps he needs to pay some of yours a visit. And perhaps other sports could learn something from the RFU about how to make theirs more inclusive.

It was nothing to do with coolness!
I hated pe with a passion. It was embarrassing.
The cool kids loved PE so i think you maybe wrong there.

Yes, at my school the cool kids loved PE and bullied the rest of us.

I was the one who 'forgot' my kit with monotonous regularity and spent PE classes lurking gratefully in the library like the worst kind of geek.

Like EverythingsShiny I attended school in a Muslim country. The school was an international one, using the British curriculum, and both sexes did PE together from reception to final year of secondary. We covered most sports over the years. There was the shortlived line-dancing phase in year 4, some gymnastics now and again, baseball, basketball, touch rugby, hockey, netball (yes, boys did that too!), and lots of football. Maybe it was because none of us knew any different, but there wasn't any protesting about playing a "boys sport" or "girl sport". Our British/Australian/South African teachers never said anything to make us think of it either. Sure, there were sports you didn't like and would try get out of (netball! Whyyyy?!!) but it was still a school subject, and like history or math you had to do it.

So having grown up playing against boys/alongside boys, I was baffled and - tbh, outraged that sports was segregated in a lot of schools here in "modern, forward-thinking UK". I have a young son and I hate the thought of him doing separate sports to the girls in his class and hearing him say "but that's for girls", or "girls don't play that", or not being used to playing football with a girl.

Reading this post with great interest!

When I was starting secondary school in 1991 I was part of a group of girls who kicked up a fuss about not being allowed to play football, rugby and cricket. The boys played those sports but girls had to stick to netball and hockey.

Thankfully we had great teachers who listened and set up those sports for the girls who wanted to have a go. I loved playing football, and a couple of my friends really took to cricket and became rather good at it.

One of my fellow pupils who kicked up the fuss with me is still really big in to her football and is now DS's football coach.

I still feel very proud that we made a stand and got the teachers to listen.

The cool kids loved PE so i think you maybe wrong there.

Yeah but now I'm earning wods more than them & hire them to fix things around my house....

Swings & roundabouts....

How charming- you won't debate this because you are right and anyone who disagrees with you is stupid.

Lass, calm your tits. I'm talking about one specific person on this thread, who I have had several "debates" with before, who:

• changes their viewpoints to be as contrary as possible
• doesn't answer basic questions about why they feel a certain way
• gets very PA when argued with
• is, for all of the reasons just mentioned, impossible to have a logical conversation with.

I refuse to even try and debate with this person anymore. I'm not talking about you.

Anyway, in comment to a PP, I think PE should continue until 18. If I recall, at 16 we were able to choose which sport we wanted to do post-16. We chose bowling - it was great fun.

I'm not sporty at all, but as an adult I recognise the importance of regular physical exercise, and I'm glad I was made to do something, even though as a teen I found PE to be embarrassing beyond belief (slow, never won, always picked nearly last). It wasn't cruel to make me do PE - there are worse things. As another PP said, if kids could opt out of stuff they don't like doing, a lot of basic math and english classes would get binned asap.

Until, you've just made me feel very, very old ! My DD would be surprised to be seen as one of the 'cool kids', it seems to be sporty boys who are seen as 'cool'. Girls seem to not see sporty girls as 'cool'. She's brainy, sporty, musical and pretty, she's not in the 'populars' (as she calls them), who are into clothes/make-up/boys (but she doesn't care ).

It is nonsense forcing children to continue with PE until they are 18. The importance of regular exercise is always trotted out as if just walking or cycling isn't exercise. The likelihood of injury however never gets a mention.

Why is it so impossible for those of you who love sports to understand other people and other people's children don't ? I don't have to have tried every single one before I come to that conclusion -team games especially are all just a variation on a theme.

As another PP said, if kids could opt out of stuff they don't like doing, a lot of basic math and english classes would get binned asap

No-one said these should be dropped. These are compulsory up to a certain age but after that age it is pointless forcing children who have no aptitude beyond a basic level to keep doing them. My son got as far as he was ever going to get with Maths in his 4th year (Scottish secondary) and scraped a pass in the exam at that level.It would have been utterly pointless insisting he kept on with Maths instead of the Arts based based subjects he was good at.

It's really hard to get girls to do any sports though isn't it? So surely whatever they want to join in with is best? I remember Lacrosse in particular was an absolute nightmare for me, and that was our winter sport. I was short so I couldn't really join in play. And I was skinny so I really felt the cold. It was ridiculous, they used to send us out in sports kilts which are basically tiny mini skirts, and socks. No adult would go out in January dressed like that, it's madness young teenagers were expected to. And they made us wear athletics knickers in summer which were hugely embarrassing. I hated all PE. Then I went to a sixth form where we were offered a choice and had things like dancing, ice skating, riding or the gym as options and it all changed. I loved doing that. Very, very few people took up the option of competitive sports when other things were offered.

I mean, in my own experience, things like 3 football pitches being used by boys, I think if you gave one to girls for sport, 9 times out of ten, you'd end up with that pitch left empty and not every boy that wanted to play able to due to lack of space.

It's a nice idea in theory, but in practice it's not really fair to force girls into something they feel uncomfortable for the sake of a few girls.

Lass funnily enough, the sixth form I went to did include walking and cycling. Girls would go out in groups, sometimes with a teacher, sometimes without.

These are compulsory up to a certain age but after that age it is pointless forcing children who have no aptitude beyond a basic level to keep doing them.

I agree, that's why children are allowed to pick their own subjects at A Level. They of course have the option not to continue with education at all, but signing up to continue education means that learning new things (or attempting to) is compulsory.

As I keep saying, I'm not sporty. I hate sports. I hate exercise. I don't even watch sport on TV (except that I'm forced to watch by my DH sharing the TV). But I do not think going to bowling one day a week aged 16-18 scarred me for life. Neither do I think doing PE 11-16 scarred me for life, even though I had no interest in it, and my PE teachers had shitty attitudes.

Lass, a lot of children hardly walk at all, they get lifts everywhere, same for cycling. Walking and cycling (unless done fast, over distance) aren't the same as doing a sustained sport that gets your heart pumping/really works all your muscles. I get that a lot of people aren't keen on sport, particularly team games, but the alternative to compulsory PE unfortunately is that children will become even more unfit. We're seeing obesity and related health conditions rising in children. Schools do also need to find ways for children to do exercise that are less threatening to children e.g. zumba, badminton, fencing, aerobics. Not doing anything is not a good option.

Dawn, my 'little princess' is not built like a tank and plays rugby. She's just very quick/wiley, and very stubborn. I love that she's got the chance, it was unheard of in my day. Boxing is great too, good for a whole - body workout (and lots of skipping).

Yes Dawn, but that kind of ignores the fact that even if all the options are open they're not always viable if most girls choose not to use them. I guess it would be pretty hard to have a rugby or football match with 3 people! Perhaps the answer would be more collaboration between schools to ensure that those who want those sports have them available by combining the numbers at different schools? Maybe slightly difficult logistically, but IMO better than forcing girls into doing things they don't want to do and putting them off exercise for life.

Yes but the only reason girls dont want to do 'boys sports' is because they are told they shouldnt.

On a basic level whats so very different about trying to whack a ball around a pitch and into the net using a stick as opposed to using your leg? But girls love hockey and hate football apparently.

I suppose its better to decide in advance what people will like rather than actually giving them the opportunity to experience it for themseleves and make a decision on an individual basis.