Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

FFS. 1 in 4 schools offers "cheerleading" as a sport.

148 replies

HerBeatitude · 03/10/2010 21:51

wtf is going on in schools?

This article says it all for me.

How can we make these schools stop it and encourage girls to take part in sport for their own achievement instead of to cheerlead for the boys?

OP posts:
HerBeatitude · 04/10/2010 22:19

Clary that was obviously a light hearted quip.

And I think it's a good thing to focus on the scummy behaviour of the overpaid professional footballers of the premier league. I'm fed up of being told that the only thing that matters is how they play. Not to me it isn't, I'm not interested in how they play, I'm interested in how their behaviour and image and place in our national life, fits in with the porn culture and the backlash against feminism. It seems to me that they are the living embodiment of Nuts. Given their over-inflated presence in our national discourse, that is really very important - more important than how many goals they score.

OP posts:
Clary · 04/10/2010 22:38

Yes OK, fair enough, feeling a bit ranty tonight it would seem.

FWIW tho, for my 7yo DS2, the only thing that matters is how many goals they score. And he's the footballer in this house.

Frank Sinatra wasn't exactly an angel off the stage but he sang like one on it.

In any case, the vast majority of pro footie players are not in the NotW and "the living embodiment of Nuts". I am sure DS2's footballing hero see here is a good guy.

vesuvia · 05/10/2010 13:52

MillyR, thanks for your interesting response from which I have learned quite a lot. I am glad that there is at least one film about cheerleading that passes the Bechdel test.

Sakura · 05/10/2010 14:15

MillyR there is no double standard on this thread. Football is not about the objectification of male bodies, it's "about" scoring goals.
You've put forward a good enough argument to show why cheerleading, [a term coined to represent an supporting act to the main game] is okay for girls.
But it has connotations that leave a bad taste in my mouth.

You have not persuaded me. For me it goes in the same bracket as modelling [I'm sure there are lots of good reasons why modelling is a good job for women- good pay, travel etc].

tyler80 · 05/10/2010 21:52

I'd have more of a problem with my children doing cheerleading from the dangerous nature of it than any worries about it having sexual connotations.

I'm not sure how much it differs in the UK from a safety perspective as I'm familiar with cheerleading from living in the US.

Sakura · 06/10/2010 04:12

Nah, not bothered about danger, me

MillyR · 06/10/2010 15:12

Sakura, well of course football isn't about the objectification of men - sexual objectification is a negative female stereotype, not a male one. Negative male stereotypes are violence, gang mentality, aggression towards otherness, and sexual predator type behaviour. All of these things have been associated with either football fans, premier football players or general behaviour at football matches.

I wouldn't approve of children seeing the Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders but it won't injure them. Children have been injured or died in crowds at football matches in the UK. Consider recent threads about the government posters that have gone up about the spike in domestic violence during the world cup. The culture of football has an immediate impact on my life - there are nearby towns that I would not dare go into on match days, and the levels of racism are horrifying and interact with the rise of the BNP in those towns. To worry more about feminine stereotypes in cheerleading than the dangerous masculinity associated with football is bizarre.

Fortunately, we can teach children both football and cheerleading as sports at school without putting any of these connotations on them, and hopefully help a new generation have good associations with those sports. Of course we have to be aware that there are negative connotations of both sports in wider society.

But to treat a 'masculine' sport like football as neutral while a 'feminine' sport like cheerleading is critiqued, that is sexism. Hopefully we can make the future more gender neutral, but getting rid of all the 'feminine' things in society by making out that they are somehow entirely silly, flimsy and pointless and picking the 'masculine' things as if they were somehow inherently superior has nothing to do with being gender neutral. That principle is far wider and more important than the quibble over cheerleading.

Sakura · 07/10/2010 03:00

Sorry, but you are twisting my words. I am the MN poster-child for "female things should be celebrated"

On our first few encounters on MN I tried to get the point accross to you that I am a SAHM because I want to invest female roles with prestige and you told me I had been socially conditioned !!

SO I felt I had to start a new thread about the division of spheres and about how the female/feminine should not be regarded as lesser than the male/masculine. SOme people got it.

Now you do an about turn, throw aside your own argument when it suits you, and are now teaching me that female things should be celebrated Shock

So I first want to say that you're preaching to the choir in that respect.

And your "gender neutral" argument doesn't count here, because cheer-leading came about as a by-product to the main event.

Sakura · 07/10/2010 08:07

sorry, my post was stronger than I wanted it to be. I realise we both have completely different world views, and that's why we misunderstand each other.
YOu believe a gender-neutral society is possible, even desirable
I disagree on that point.
I think that biological, innate differences are extremely powerful (my own desire to raise and nurture my children myself, for example) and that in light of this, women should aim to develop female/feminine areas. That is not to say they should adhere to the feminine stereotype, not at all, but create a society where the female is valued just like the male/

Cheerleading is at odds with that because it is a by-product of the main event, it seems to me it was not female-created but male-created. There may be the odd male participating but I wouldn't want my son to become a cheerleader to the Alpha males on the pitch either. I think weak males and women doing cheerleading does zilch to alter the status quo, and in fact encourages it. And the main thing I don'T like about it is the "in-group" connotations.

MillyR · 07/10/2010 23:49

Sorry about the length of this post.

Sakura, it is not that have not thrown aside my argument; you argued with me on previous threads and I changed my mind because of it. I agree with you that female things should be celebrated. I see this as one of the most positive things that has happened to me on MN and has given me a totally different and more ethical perspective on many issues. I have a much better understanding of how women are damned if they do and damned if they don't in terms of a number of issues of behaviour, such as stereotyping of SAHMs but also things like what makes a credible rape victim.

But that still leaves the thorny issue of things that are not inherently female but are traditionally feminine. While men may have determined what is feminine and what is masculine, once pushed into those feminine categories, women have put much energy into those cultural traditions. So women have put much creative effort into developing things like cheerleading and we shouldn't be dismissing it simply because it is sterotypically feminine (which is not to say that there aren't other issues with it, as you have pointed out). We shouldn't dismiss it as being on the sidelines, rather we should respect the efforts of all the participants who have taken it away from the sidelines and made it into a sport that they compete in at entirely separate events that have nothing to do with football or basketball or whatever.

But to put the whole issue of cheerleading to one side for a moment, because I think it is secondary to the more interesting discussion of feminine (as opposed to female) activities, we could look at something less problematic such as knitting. Knitting is sterotypically female, and as such we may not want to push girls into doing it and boys into not doing it, because we don't want girls or boys to be confined to solely doing gender specific activities.

But that doesn't mean that we should make out that knitting is somehow a lesser activity than say carpentry. And I think that feminine activities are denigrated by society, and as feminists we have to consider the merits and the pitfalls of feminine activities.

There are parts of activities done by women that have such negative connotations (lap dancing for example) that I would like to see them disappear, regardless of the efforts women have put into developing them.

There are other activities done by women that have both negative and positive connotations ( and I think cheerleading is such a case) where I don't think we should dismiss the positive efforts women have made, but I also think we should acknowledge the negative elements.

There are then activities women have done (knitting for example) which I would would consider wholly positive, but only if the acknowledgement of them as female developed traditions is understood in the context of women no longer being constrained by an expectation of them only doing the specifically feminine.

But the problem seems to be that a great many of our traditions do involve a mixture of positive and negative elements, and it is how we then deal with those traditions. And I don't know what the answer to that is. If it was simply a question of cheerleading I wouldn't be concerned, because we would just tell our daughters not to cheerlead, but negative masculine and feminine stereotypes and behaviours are threaded through so much of our culture that I don't see how we can throw out all of those activities - we have to find ways of changing them instead. These stereotypes are everywhere - if we got rid of all the problematic children's literature (for example), there would be almost nothing for children to read.

I think the problem you are bringing up is central - the idea of women being on the sidelines. But when women drop feminine activities and join men's activities, they are still then on the sidelines in a sense (certainly in terms of numbers, which alters the culture). One of the great things about having young children is that you can enter into a culture of women, but many women will spend a lot of their life not bringing up children. Whole sections of my life would fail the Bechdel test, and I think it is that which draws many girls into feminine activities.

So perhaps one possibility is that rather than prioritising masculine activities (where they will struggle to experience equality into a patriarchal society), we acknowledge that there are self-esteem benefits to girls sometimes doing feminine activities where girls traditionally dominate and can bond with each other in a sub-culture where most participants are girls. Although obviously there are feminine traditions that are less problematic than cheerleading.

Sakura · 08/10/2010 01:58

Well, yes. BUt you see I take it for granted that female things such as knitting are not lesser than male things. That is my world view, which I have been pushing since this feminist section opened. I don'T subscribe to the notion that women should emulate male activities.
So we are starting from different points.

BUt cheerleading is unique. I simply do not regard it as something that developed organically by women. Just like modelling. I see what you're saying, that women have managed, somehow, to make it their own. But cheerleading is lesser than knitting by far, because of the roots and connotations.

Being a SAHM, for example, does not mean a woman is a side-act or a bi-product. She is the centre of where life is, where the most important things are happening. And a man who pops out to the office could in many ways be on the sidelines of the family. A woman who knits, or makes clothes at home, is bringing intrinsic value to traditional female work.

BUt you also have to remember that when men begin doing female things, those things change. THink of a chef. Women have traditionally done all the cooking but "all the best chefs are men". SAHDs are heroes, but women are just doing what comes naturally.
SO you have to be careful- gender neutrality will never exist because when men adopt something, they make it their own, and people see it differently.

THe problem, I think, that I have with cheerleading that one route to liberation is for women to not care about men, the way that men don't care about women. I mean, if cheerleaders weren't there, men would play football anyway. If the footballers weren't there, cheerleading wouldn't exist.
Whereas knitting, or ballet, or breastfeeding a baby, or what have you can take place totally without the notion of men.

It's not anti-men, I just think that it's humiliating when women try to be like men, as you've pointed out, or to prove themselves to men, because, honestly, I truly believe men-as-a-group couldn'T care less what women were up to

thumbwitch · 08/10/2010 02:49

Sorry to sideline your discussion for a probably fairly trivial point, but "knitting" was actually not the best example, IMO. There has been a long tradition, perhaps particularly in Scotland, of men knitting. My first boyfriend's Scottish grandfather knitted sometimes; my Dad knows how (from the army). There are even websites devoted to men who knit - so I don't believe it's a "peculiarly female" hobby.

Now, if you'd said embroidery, I'd have shut up and said nothing Grin

MillyR · 08/10/2010 08:36

Sakura, but surely that is the point that has been made about cheerleading throughout this thread? Nobody on this thread has experienced a UK school where cheerleaders perform at football games; whether or not a UK school has a football team has no bearing on whether or not a school has cheerleaders. Most UK cheerleading groups are run not by schools but by dance centres, and they don't even have a connection to any organisation that runs a football team.

And that was HB's original post - that in UK schools cheerleaders cheer for boys' sports teams. It is simply untrue. They don't, at least as far as we can see from the experiences of people on this thread.

Sakura · 08/10/2010 10:38

Can they not change the NAME then! I'd let DD do it if it was called anything else and had NO connection to "leading the cheer"
The name is a big problem for me. I saw you mention on another thread that language is important, and it is.
And you cannot get away from the connotations. I was pretty shocked when I saw that Washington clip. It's as though you cannot escape the fact that body objectification is part the sports' history.

Thumbwich- I didn't know that about knitting!

vesuvia · 14/10/2010 14:45

Did anyone watch the television programme about boy cheerleaders on BBC2 last night?

vesuvia · 14/10/2010 14:52

The publicity shots on the BBC programme website are of several boy cheerleaders holding or waving pink pom poms.

twirlymum · 14/10/2010 14:55

I teach pom pom dance (not cheerleading) and baton twirling in primary schools, as part of an initiative to get girls participating in exercise.
I don't class it as a sport (not at this level, anyway) more of a hobby, but if the girls enjoy it, what's the problem?
I'm always very conscious of the music I use, so there are no overtly sexual references. The girls wear PE kit.

On another note though, I teach twirling at competitive levels outside school, and even at European and World Championship level, some of the best twirlers are boys/men.

It's about skill, practise, and enjoying what you do.

huddspur · 14/10/2010 23:03

Surely if the girls enjoy it and it allows them to be active then its good and I think people are reading too much into this.

Sakura · 15/10/2010 02:27

Pom pom dance...yes that sounds okay... Baton twirling sounds fine. Yes, I'd let my daughter do Baton twirling.

From what I've learned on these feminist threads, language really is important when it comes to cultural connotations. Cheerleading- no, wouldn't let DD do that because of the connotations.

Sakura · 15/10/2010 02:38

"but if the girls enjoy it, what's the problem?"

IN a feminist discussion, this sentence is loaded, twirlymum. We regularly have prostitutes coming on mumsnet to explain that they enjoy their job.
I'm not comparing cheerleading to prostitution, of course not, but I'm saying we're going into the realms of "choice feminism" here, where pole-dancing and high heels are regarded as "empowering".

From a very early age, girls are socially conditioned to regard themselves and their bodies as objects to be gazed and and judged by others. In other words, they are objectified. Talent, character, intelligence all become secondary.
Cheerleading is iffy because of the many connotations connected to it and the encouragement to regard the "body beautiful" as a goal to be reached itself.

Twirlymum's batonning and pom-poming sounds okay, and fun, and that's fine if the sport can be divorced from those Washington cheerleaders, and as long as there's no actual cheer-leading going on. IN other words that the girls are doing the sport for the intrinsic satisfaction that the sport/hobby itself brings- not to be in the "in-group", not because they managed to pass the body test, and certainly not to cheer on the boys Shock

whelker · 17/10/2010 10:32

I think anything that encourages girls to become more active should be encouraged

AliceWorld · 17/10/2010 12:41

Anything?? What about being sent up chimneys? What about being made to go in large hamster wheels to produce power for the national grid?

MrsFionaCharming · 25/10/2010 02:39

I was part of a competitive cheer leading squad last year, and didn't find the sport itself in anyway sexist.
The Uniforms are designed for safety ultimately as it's important to have bare legs during stunting. And the British regulatory board for the sport (BCA) have recently banned belly-baring uniforms. Our squad was also very strict on having hair tied back in neat ponytails and only natural make-up. However we often saw children competing in the junior section with hair down and wearing full-face make up, which I thought was quite sad.
However, I do feel that often the sport attracts a certain kind of person, due to the images portrayed in American films (Bring it On, etc.) For example, we did a lot of fund-raising, but most of it was in the forms of things such as a calendar.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that it's not the sport which is sexist (in fact, overly sexual routines as marked down at competition) - it's all the other stuff which comes with it which is.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page