Mixed gender race at sports day

[littlegreydevil]

Hi, long time lurker but first post and I’m aware I am stepping in with a particularly hot topic but here goes…
Our primary school organised its annual sports day this week and for unknown reasons, decided to mix boys and girls for the sprints. Teams are usually mixed genders for the less competitive activities like the sack race, egg and spoon race, etc. but this is the first time they’ve mixed genders for the competitive races. Of course this has resulted in only 2 girls making the podium across all the year groups and both “only” hitting third place.
I’m really bothered by this as I thought sports day was about celebrating sporting achievements and encouraging kids to enjoy sports (I know this can be disputed but that’s a whole other debate) and today, I have watched a ream of very sporty, very talented female runners lose to their male counterparts and I can’t see how that fits in the ethos of sports day.
I am planning to speak to the head to question their motives in making this odd decision.
imo sport is gendered for a reason and it should be about equity rather than equality. You might be able to argue that younger age groups could be mixed as supposedly their physical ability is the same up to age 7 or 8 (need to find the references for this) but from year 2 onwards, it doesn’t work anymore. Girls start going through puberty from as young as 9 so by that point, it should be gendered.
For full transparency, I have 2 children, a boy and a girl, neither of which is talented in athletics (they are very good in other sports) and usually come in at a solid bottom 3rd place so this is not about my kids being slighted.
If you were me, what questions would you ask from the head and, seeing as they have a track record of being quite obstinate, what arguments would you produce?

<breathes deeply>

Right Hippy.
I have often suspected the reason some women denied dimorphism in humans was because they thought we couldn't have equal pay without sacrificing female athletes. Seems I'm right. As usual. Unlike your reasoning, awareness of sport or awareness of H&S, which are all faulty.

At this point in time, we have separate athletics for disabled people. Do disabled people now have to accept lower pay as a condition of having the Paralympics?

We also, within the Men's Olympic weightlifting, have separate categories depending on weight. Do you think male employees under 55kg have to accept being paid less at my workplace than men over 80kg, because they can't lift as much?

Oh, and it's standard to have different age bandings in many sports. Children don't have to compete with adults, and over 50s don't have to compete with 21 year olds. So does this mean that men over 50 have to accept a pay cut compared to younger employees?

Or is it just women you single out for this treatment?

Back in the real world, the first rule of moving objects is use the equipment provided. No-one is issuing you with medals for lifting things by hand. It is your responsibility to avoid incurring injury and your employer's responsibility to give you the equipment to avoid it. That applies whether you're a 4 foot 11 woman, or an elderly man.

For Pete's sake, at my current job everything over 15kg has stickers on it saying two-person lift! Now I'll be honest with you, if it weighs less than I can bench press, I will feel very stupid getting another person to help me, because I don't need to. But if a manager sees you lifting a two-person object alone, they won't be happy, because it against regs for employees to override the site's H&S rules. It's not enough for you to think you know better because you go to the gym outside work.

Incidentally, if pay should be dictated by who lifts the most, all those women working as nurses and healthcare assistants definitely need to be paid more.

These are female-dominated professions in which staff lift people, you know.

@AuntieHippy If it shocks you that much that you are in the tiny minority that you automatically assume people are sock puppeting, why not report those you suspect and let Mumsnet sort it out? Many on here have been here for years and are well-known on the site. You just can't handle the fact that your ignorance and misinformation has been called into question. Grow up. I find that those who complain the most about sock puppeting are usually the ones most guilty.
And you are still going on with your desperate, pitiful whataboutery. I feel so sorry for you flailing about in utter desperation. Comparing left handedness to the PHYSICAL DIFFERENCES BETWEEN MALE AND FEMALE BODIES. You are embarrassing yourself.

This is all nonsense Hippy. I'm sorry you struggle with the idea that multiple people whose work history isn't solely laptop based may post on MN.

If you're done with denying other posters' existence, let me draw your attention to some unaddressed points: namely whether the existence of weight classes or age bands means lighter men and older men have to have a pay cut. Do disabled people have to give up the Paralympics?

You've switched to left-handedness instead as allegedly irrelevant, so I suppose you think schools shouldn't provide left-handed scissors for left-handed pupils either? Incidentally, at work, I use a tool that can be converted from right-handed to a left-handed device. Presumably you think lefthanded employees shouldn't have such provisions made for them.

I mean who cares about lefthanded people potentially suffering greater rates of workplace injury, eh?

I don't care if some girls miss out on a couple of medals,

Obviously. Well, lots of other women - and men - do.

… and they’re only girls so they need to get used to being unimportant ….

Oh noes!! Did it miss some excellent accusations? I can tell sock puppetry was mentioned. So, we have one poster who accuses of sock puppetry and one poster who thinks we all meld into one another. Brilliant.

We don't have that poster any more.

Hippy's post now says: This reply has been deleted
This has been deleted by MNHQ for breaking our Talk Guidelines - previously banned poster.

previously banned poster.

Well well well. What do ya know? I bet they were sock puppeting too.

BathroomOnTheRight called it. She gets to say I told you so now. <applauds Bathroom>

Ahhhh! Even better an unhinged accusation from a PBP! But I missed it!

All because an OP wanted to know about sex segregation of children’s races, the thread attracted a PBP. No wonder it was all so bizarre.

However, in saying that, I have seen that bizarre rhetoric before. From both Men’s Rights Activists and from Liberal Feminists who have completely misunderstood second wave feminism. And mistakenly believe that acknowledging sex differences is biological essentialism.

Did we get an answer though, that the PBP thought that a female primary school child could overpower a male child determined to harm her? And that was what they taught their child?

What's a pbd?

I repeatedly won physical fights against larger male bullies as a very small girl at primary school, so I know for certain that's possible.

Surely the definition of biological essentialism is acknowledging sex differences? My issue is with gender essentialism and my concern is that a lot (the majority) of people conflate the two. For example, I know primary school teachers who insist that it's a biological fact that boys need more physical activity; these teachers then encourage more physical activity in the boys they teach than in the girls (it's easy to see how that could affect results of studies such as the Australian one, which doesn't mention factoring in social factors like this, the effects of which are well-researched).

PBP = Previously Banned Poster.

Biological essentialism is saying that the physiological differences and statistical differences between the sexes should place limits on individuals' life choices.

For example, because weightlifting is more difficult for women, saying that women should be discouraged from pursuing it as an interest. Or saying that women should have children.

”Surely the definition of biological essentialism is acknowledging sex differences?”

Oxford definition

“The belief that ‘human nature’, an individual's personality, or some specific quality (such as intelligence, creativity, homosexuality, masculinity, femininity, or a male propensity to aggression) is an innate and natural ‘essence’ (rather than a product of circumstances, upbringing, and culture). The concept is typically invoked where there is a focus on difference, as where females are seen as essentially different from males: see”

I hope that helps

I can assure you that in Australia that most teachers do not treat boys and girls differently in regards to amount of training etc. They might be biased in the type of sports they train them in (eg netball for girls) but all children learn athletics together. They race separately.

I understand your concern. I have found that has been more prevalent in my child’s UK schools vs their Australian school. Concerningly so.

Thank you to everyone who has posted, with a particular thanks to @Helleofabore for all the links and carefully constructed arguments. I contacted the head today who said they had made the decision to mix sexes to make the race more inclusive for the kids (I had kind of half hoped she would say that it was a time saving thing). I pointed out that there must be ways to do that without making it at the detriment of half the school population. She did say that the lack of girls on the podium had been noted and discussed among staff and SLT. I know that other parents have also contacted her. Sadly, she ended the conversation by saying that she doesn’t know yet what next year’s event will look like i.e. she made no commitment. I will see if I can revisit the conversation with her later but she has form for sticking with her decisions regardless of the feedback from parents.

Is there actually a scientifically proven difference in ability before puberty?

I like the idea they can all race with their friends and arent pitted against eachother.

I like that they aren't sorted by their genitals at 5 years old and having it pointed out that they are different when they are little.

I like that the boys arent getting a subliminal message that boys are faster or that boys and girls should be separated. They are equal and all literally on a level playing field.

Is there actually a scientifically proven difference in ability before puberty?

Yes, if you've read the thread @Helleofabore has linked to a couple of studies. So they're not 'on a level playing field'.
They're not being 'sorted by their genitals' but simply because even from a young age humans are dimorphic.

Well that doesn’t fucking surprise me

their posts were a complete load of bollocks

That is the exact word I used, which prompted an accusation that I was posting "abuse". That post of theirs has now been deleted so none of you will ever know that I am Mr Flibble.

Well that seems a shame….

its utter bollocks…its not abuse, its stone cold facts

Hey, you should namechange to RufustheFactualReindeer!

done