I agree. There is nothing wrong with those professions or activities. Just because you are a cheerleader and/or pretty or a model or something doesn't mean that is ALL you are. People are multifaceted and more complicated than that.
Exactly. And it is not like the girls do not find the sweaty and strong footballers "hot" or whatever. "Objectification" is a natural human thing to do. Baning innocent activities makes no sense and is actually quite Stalinistic to say the least. OP thinks their daughters were so prude and nice for not involving in the "degenerated and slutty" activity of cheerleading but completely misses the fact that some boy in Chemistry probably got all "riled up" by their daughters too. Ban Chemistry? Obviously, putting pressure on your child to accomplish what you failed at and make up for you lack of success in that field is never good. If your daughter is not very "girly" and likes boxing more than ballet and toy cars more than dollies,you should let her do it and not force her to be a "girl". At the same time, if she is very "girly" and likes gymnastics, dancing, cheerleading make up and whatnot, you shouldn't try to control and correct that behavior either. I hate it when boring adults try to dictate childrens natural curiosity and playfulness by giving the, boring orders and direction; "Don't play with dolls! That will just cementate traditional and oppressive gender roles!" orn"Don't put on make up and join he cheerleading squad, that will result in objectification and turn you into a slut!" Just shut the f-k up, won'tchu?
[video=youtube;2Cp9ipnnvVs]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Cp9ipnnvVs[/video] Cheerleading is a competitive sport now, similar to gymnastics. It's not only about pretty girls rooting for their home team. When people think of cheerleading, they usually think of the old days with a squad of girls dancing around waving their arms in the air. Today, competitive cheerleading has evolved into something more than just that.[1] Competition has evolved in the world of cheerleading - it is not about how good looking someone is or how popular they are. Competitive cheerleading is scored subjectively based on many things including, but not limited to, the cheer itself, the dance section, pyramids, stunting, tumbling, and more. The "aesthetic build" of the cheerleader is also looked at, but of course, one with a weak build would not be able to do all of those things. In order to prevent injuries, there are certain rules that cheerleading teams have to follow according to their level (high school, all-star, or college). According to the Encyclopedia of Sports Medicine, there are two purposes of cheerleading - to cheer on the sidelines for other athletes and to be a "highly skilled competing athlete."
Definitely. Even back when I was a cheerleader, we had our share of acrobatics. I broke my arm in cheerleading doing a flip off a mound. You do have to be athletic to be a cheerleader, now so more than ever. It's also good exercise and it's always good to have your kids in activities that keep them busy and happy to keep them from being bored and getting into trouble. - - - Updated - - - I think a lot of times that type of interference would backfire on the parents. Of course, there are age appropriate things for all kids to do.
You do realize your post made Zero sense ? Think about it, skimpy attire has nothing to do with it at all ! I had thoughts about girls wearing prude dresses covering from neck to ankle when I was 10.
Step 1. Open your window. Step 2. Stick your head out. Step 3. Observe reality. Not all Liberals are intersectional goofvalls, but all intersectional goofballs are Liberal.
What's wrong with being a sex object for fun? As long as it is remembered that she is also a person with other dimensions to her. - - - Updated - - - Who cares if they make up genders? All names for things are made up to serve some purpose. Words have always been abstractions of how we experience things.
Great song. Great Great song. Did Grohl play on this one? I cant remember. Anyways, yea you know what, I think if it wasn't an option in the first place, it wouldn't be so coveted. Like, for example, if no male was circumcised, then it would be weird to be the one guy that was circumcised (ie Europe). But because it is an option, why are we backdoor making it illegal?
What if we were to make the cheer routines less sexual? Not sure how one would do that, but it's a possibility. That said, I don't think that nowadays cheerleaders are quite as popular as they once were, so there's less social pull to do it generally. Some? Sure. Not enough to demand social change? Likely. Just because it doesn't exist in the way you think it ought to doesn't mean it doesn't exist. The feeling is tthere. Whether it's a real difference of gender I don't know (leaning yes), but referring to someone by a different pronoun--or just using they--is not necessarily supporting them.
not true, science is now proving this, gender is not as cut and dry as once believed " Through the Wormhole | Season 7 Episode 3 | Are There More Than Two Sexes " [video=youtube;tjeX71hTK1E]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tjeX71hTK1E[/video] .
WJV, You are very very ill mentally and need Psychiatric help, perhaps hospitalization for a while, you have an abnormal sexual compulsion perhaps other disorders, you also indulge in delusions projected on other people, please seek help !!!!
Making any activity "Less Sexual" is not possible, sexual attraction is also Neurochemical and scent has much to do with it, and a normal teen thinks about sex constantly, even if a girl is covered from head to toe and walks like a paralyzed chicken, a normal boy will still have ideas about her naked unless he likes other boys. You will never be able to stop boys from thinking about girls, however, if you have a Frank talk about sex and responsibilities with both boys and girls, you will have far fewer pregnancies and STDs.
It is an interesting notion to consider that even indirect allusions to sex should be eliminated from society. Do you also think dresses should be banned as they are intended to advertise female sexuality and provide easy access? What if cheerleaders wore long underwear? If you ask me, part of what screws so many people up is a fear of sex and sexuality. It should be celebrated, not hid away like a dirty secret. Young men look at young women sexually and that's isn't going to change.
How are they even sexual as they stand today? Just because you can see skin, it does not mean it is sexual. It only becomes so when you want it to be so. Why not then go all-in and make everything "less sexual"? I just cannot stand people who want to ban completely harmless things like cheerleading, porn and marijuana. Social change can never come with force because then it is no longer social. Let it come naturally. If it has to, it will. Identity politics makes me ill.
No way... cheerleading is awesome. My high school and college gf was co-captain of the drill team. Fun.
Gotta love it, Ban cheerleading for girls who are watching how-to-give-bjs videos on YouTube. [I'm not making that up].
Same. We don't have cheerleaders, and sport is just a compulsory subject no one really wants to do. We don't see much in the way of turf wars or heavy competition, either. I think it's because we have school uniforms here, and they're very strictly enforced. Heavy makeup and obvious jewellery isn't allowed, even in public schools. You can't tell rich from poor. Also, high school kids here don't usually have drivers' licenses, but even those very few who do, don't have cars. That removes another source of competitiveness (car envy, etc). In other words, I don't think you 'didn't notice', I think it's just a very different high school culture. I'm always slightly shocked to see American high school kids in ordinary clothing, wearing makeup, and driving cars etc. To me it's all far too grown up, at too young an age.
Another point regarding how quickly American kids grow up. One of my kids went to a Prom this week. It was all the 16 year olds from a co-ed public school. Few kids attended as couples. Out of the 150 kids who went, only about a quarter went in a 'romantic' pair of boy/girl. There is very little dating in the school at this age, and those who do are seen as the oddity. By the time they go to 'senior prom', at age 18, not even half go as couples. There is absolutely no pressure or expectation to be dating. Even in senior year, the majority won't have dated. Most tend to start dating once they get to university. I get the distinct impression that in America there seems to be some sort of expectation that dating starts in high school.
With respect, that's nonsense. Do some research on the rates of STDs and teen pregnancies in cultures which don't discuss sex AT ALL. Teens don't avoid STDs and pregnancy because their parents talk about sex, they avoid them because they have enough self-respect not to engage in early or poorly considered sex. A culture which doesn't keeping talking about sex all the time sends the message that it's private, not to be engaged in lightly, and has a time and place (adulthood). It sends that message loud and clear, and that is the reason the majority of say, NE Asian, kids are less promiscuous than western kids. Regardless of the cultural imposts upon western teenagers, NE Asian parents in America STILL manage to raise their kids with high levels of self-respect, and much lower levels of teen pregnancy etc.
I do not think culture can ever outpower biology. Teenagers will always be curious and even in the most puritan of cultures, teenagers have sex in secret. I recall a lecture where mine social anthropology prof was talking about his fieldwork in an Ugandan village where - despite being a very traditiobal place - teenage boy and girls sometimes sneaked out to the woods to return back home the following morning. Most likely they were "doing the dirty" and most adults were probably aware, but as long as they pretended not to know their kid and fami,y was safe from stigmatisation. Lol.
