Parent
From: email@hidden (Women-in-Hockey Digest)
To: email@hidden
Subject: Women-in-Hockey Digest V1 #238
Reply-To: women-in-hockey
Sender: email@hidden
Errors-To: email@hidden
Precedence: bulk
Women-in-Hockey Digest Tuesday, June 30 1998 Volume 01 : Number 238
In this issue:
Re: New Coaching Staff for Team Canada
Coaching: Men vs Women
roller hockey skates
Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
English teams
Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
=======================================================================
Unsubscribe:
Help:
or
=======================================================================
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 09:09:18 +0000
From: email@hidden (Danielle Dufour)
Subject: Re: New Coaching Staff for Team Canada
Andria,
You mentionned Mel Davidson Head coach for the
National under 22 - the assistant coaches for this team are Julie
Healy and Wally Kozak. Congrats go out to all.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 15:24:24 EDT
From: email@hidden
Subject: Coaching: Men vs Women
There are absolutely the most assisine remarks coming out of this subject.
This is stupid. Telling a guy HAHA 'cause he was omited as a coach to let a
woman coach. To the woman who said this You nedd to call Gary Bettman about a
job in the NHL! Why is it that no one has asked anything about what the
players on that team want?
Two years ago I stepped up to help a team of women who went to a tourn.
without a coach and just barely a team. I offered more help in the future.
Iwas asked to attend the next TOURN. Although I was happy to do this I was
wondering why I was told in between the two tournaments not to try to show up
and help with practices. This doesn't make any sense why would not want a
coach that will be present for a game not there for a practice reguardless of
the mileage between cities.(5-6 hours drive time) The tourn. came we lost due
to the fact that the girls and women on the team were not all the same as
before. I was not familiar with women and could not pickup their styles in the
first two games. Not to mention the fact they had no idea who I was and didn't
care to listen to some guy from out of town that they couldn't verify any
qualifications about. After this tourn. I was asked not to return as the TEAM
felt I didn't have the qualifications to coach.
I didn't drop to my knee's and beg I set out a plan to start a new team
(hasn't happened as of today) and prove that my technics and style are
supperior to that of others.( aw hell I just want to win) I was told of bad
mouthing in the grapevine.
I have no bitterness about this but what I can't understand is why does
everyone want to start slinging ice shaveings and rubber wheels about women
over men, men over women? Who CARES! The game is not about what's between your
legs it's about what's between your ears. From the comment's on this list
things are not being dealt with properly and Gary Bettman should just take
over ALL GAMES OF HOCKEY. It should now be called Garyball and all rules will
change every year.
The point of all this is the game doesn't need to be changed because the
players do. If the coach is teaching someone anything at all then let them.
The more players and coaches learn the better they become. A women's team
isn't going to get better because a woman is coaching now unless that is what
the players want.
Another case in point is a friend of mine is now coaching a women's team
after they fired a WOMAN caoch because they all realized that she didn't know
what she was doing anymore than they did!
People I understand we all pay a lot of money to play this game and we want
what we pay for. But please think about this hockey is the most graceful game
there is it is not checking, slap shots, penalties, crashing the net, and
doing what the NHLer's do on tv. It is there for fun if you are not getting
paid to play, it is there for thought if you are just starting out, it is the
for peace and serenity if you life is chaotic hell. You it for what you need
don't abuse it for what others need.
One last thing for those people who don't understand what this message means
go find a kids game high school or younger where you don't know ANYONE AT ALL,
I mean nobody. Sit and whatch then maybe you can realize to that you may
change a lot of what is to come by being to forceful to get what you want now.
END OF LINE
the lion roars
Bryndlion
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:15:42 EDT
From: email@hidden
Subject: roller hockey skates
I think I may have finally realized just how much big skates affect your game.
I bought some Bauer H3 roller hockey skates last year that were on sale which
is the main reason I bought them, plus they were the only lace up inline
skates I could find that weren't 3 or 4 hundred dollars. I just played a game
this afternoon (which we lost 11-8) and after passing the puck off, I started
skating back to defense, and WHAM, I tripped with nobody even close to me. And
my feet were hurting after warm-ups. It has always bothered me, in Rec hockey
I used to actually unlace my skates at half just so they didn't hurt so bad. I
can't do that anymore since half is 2 minutes long and we have only had 7
skaters and a goalie, only enough for one line, and then someone has to double
shift. And it really has started to affect my game. So I guess I'll be looking
around for some new skates. Anyone have a roller hockey skate they really
like, or a brand? At this point comfortability is the main thing, well and
price, I just got out of a 287 dollar debt for league fees, gloves and a
helmet. and one other thing, anyone know how much I could get for my skates?
they're Bauer H3s, not too banged up or worn out, the bearings are still in
good condition, I still have 7 of the original wheels, a couple of them are
pretty worn down, but I can replace those. So if you can suggest something,
that'd be great. Thanks ahead of time.
Jennie
#8 (for now, I still want #29 though), of the Blackeyes
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 00:52:22 EDT
From: email@hidden
Subject: Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
In a message dated 98-06-29 15:35:59 EDT, email@hidden writes:
<< There are absolutely the most assisine remarks coming out of this subject.
This is stupid. Telling a guy HAHA 'cause he was omited as a coach to let a
woman coach. To the woman who said this You nedd to call Gary Bettman about a
job in the NHL! Why is it that no one has asked anything about what the
players on that team want?
>>
I totally agree. There is absolutely nothing "Ha Ha" funny about losing a
totally qualified coach who is the best for the job because he happens to be a
male coaching a women's team and the powers that be want a woman coach
basically as a token gesture.
People who say, - "your getting a taste of your own medicine" remind of the
people who are totally backing the fairly new legislation here in the U.S.
that is demanding that male and female sports programs be totally equal.
While there is NOTHING wrong with equality, the absolute OPPOSITE is occuring
with this new set of laws. They are basically "taking away" from male sports
to even things up. That is NOT the way to build equality. More males will
come out to join athletic teams than women and it will probably always be that
way, so why punish them in the guise of making things "equal". I am a female
Coach who coaches boys and a female hockey player for a women's travel team
who has a male coach. And in BOTH instances, we are both the best people for
the job. As a matter of fact, my male coach is a role model to me, both as
how I conduct myself as a player AND how I conduct myself as a Coach. Gender
has nothing to do with it. If someone tried to take our coach away just to
have a woman fill the position, you would have 15 very ANGRY woman!
Jackie - #22
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 1998 22:50:40 -0700
From: James and Jeanne Wade
Subject: Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
Jackie,
How old are you? Are you under the age of 30? Have you ever been told you simply
couldn't do sports because girls shouldn't be doing that type of activity, it's
not ladylike, it will ruin your reproductive system? I have been, and I was called
a number of very derogative sexually oriented terms because I wanted to play, now
get this, golf, when I was in high school. I didn;t get the chance to try
baseball or basketball or hockey not because the schools decided to take some
money away from men's athletic programs and give some of the money to women's
programs, but because it simply wan't allowed. If the pool of resouces is $100
and the number of women equal the number of men, then the equal number of dollars
flow into the each gender's program. Looking at the ability of individual players
and coaches and then trying to back into the equality of opportunity to
participate in sports programs, will at best produce an unsettled dynamic. If you
accept the proposition that women are allowed to physically exist in the world we
live in, then it seems to me you have to admit they should have the same freedom
of choice with respect to what they wish to do to their bodies in the normal
course of a hockey game. Do you have access to the same training facilites as the
males? Do you have the same opportunity for obtain scholarship funds based upon
your play as the men do? We won't even ask what are you possibilites to make a
living in sports? The important thing to think about is not only how these
questions apply to you, but how would they apply to each and every girl in the
school's population, as a group, as an opportunity set. I really don't wish to
hardass anyone on this topic. Whether it is because you can only see your
position through you own personal experiences, don't project you experience onto
others.
In the end, all I can really say is, MORE Hockey, less football, baseball,
basketball. By the way, we were in Canada when the US team won the woman's gold
medal, people came up to us to congratulate us. I was proud of all the team.
Jeanne Wade
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 01:14:03 -0500 (CDT)
From: email@hidden
Subject: Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
>who are totally backing the fairly new legislation here in the U.S.
>that is demanding that male and female sports programs be totally equal.
>While there is NOTHING wrong with equality, the absolute OPPOSITE is occuring
>with this new set of laws. They are basically "taking away" from male sports
>to even things up.
First off, the legislation has been out there for about 10 years now. If it weren't for Title IX
then my daughters college team would still have a locker room barely fit for habitation and the
men's team would have exclusive use of the weightroom and a huge locker room. Title IX only says
that if the school has 50% women then 50% of the dollars spent on sports should be for women, if
the school has 10% women, then 10% of the dollars. The budget for Athletics is just that, only so
much money is available and if 50% of the school is female, then why shouldn't half the money be
spent on women's sports. Even if it means that it has to be taken away from the men's program, so
be it, then it means that the women's tuition had been subsidizing it all along. Is this fair?
What they were realing doing is taking it away from the female sports to support the male sports
and the legislation is just bring it back into line.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 04:46:28 -0700 (PDT)
From: Michele D Ryan
Subject: English teams
> Andria Hunter has a list of teams in England.
> I have links to all of these teams on my page too, at:
>
> http://www.rhythm.com/~oblio/europe.html
> - -------------
> - -------------
> Basingstoke Lady Bison
I was under the impression that these teams were sort of
semi-professional. I'm not sure they'd have room for drop-in players.
Look for a publication called "Time Out". In their Sport listings, you
should be able to find a list of rinks, and I'm fairly certain I've seen
some notices of women's hockey--although off-hand I can't remember if it
was for roller or ice. You might need to wait to the fall to check the
listings, in case some groups aren't playing during the summer.
Are you sure you want to haul you gear all the way over there?? :)
- --Michele
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:59:55 -0400
From: "Cindy Goodman"
Subject: Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
Sir, while I basically agree with the notion that you should hire someone based on their ability and not their gendre there is something about this topic that you as a man will never understand or relate to. We as women have been told for generations that we could not, will not and shall not coach because we are female. While there obviously have been a few exceptions to that stand throughout the years, it is just that, the exception. So what would you have the organizations do? Men have had a huge head start in this area ahead of women. How will the women ever catch up? Look at it this way, if a man with no coaching experience at all applies to coach a team they let him based on the fact that he is a man and surely must know what he is doing. If the same scenerio existed and it was a woman applying that did have experience coaching, she is told she is not qualified because she is a woman. Is that right? No. Nor is it "right" to hire the guy because he is a guy.
There is no right way to do what needs to be done in order to make things fair and equal for women. I am not one of the ones who is saying to men "ha ha", after all most of my hockey career has been with male coaches, as has probably most women. However, I do believe that the pendulum is starting to swing the other way, as it must. I am grateful for all the time and effort all my male coaches have put into the womens game. But I look forward to seeing women have a fair chance at doing what the men have been allowed to do for years without any question of confidence. As one of my former male coaches would say "change is good", the sun will still come up in the east tomorrow. Ofcourse he would also say "suck it up and don't be such a baby" but then he was a man and who was going to question him?
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 08:41:06 -0400 (EDT)
From: Brian John Rodgers
Subject: Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
To assert the idea that men cannot understand the kind of discrimination
that women have experienced throughout the ages is both insulting and
absurd. While I a certain that some men lack the sensitivity to understand
the implications of gender politics, I am certain there are a great deal
of women that are equally unsensitive.
My concern in this issue is that, in society as a whole, we are still not
really making changes that count. The example of the woman being passed
over for a coaching position just because she is a woman in favour of a
man who gets it just because he is a man, is an inversion of the new
problem that has started to occur in ths sport.
Is it right then, to hire a woman coach now just because she is a
female in place of a qualified male coach? When this happens, a token
gesture to gender politics becomes a dangerous thing. If the quality
teaching that is required in the game during the ongoing nascent stages of
the sport becomes secondary to political positioning, in the end it is the
entire sport that suffers. Progress of the athletic kind slows down, and
the sport will start to lose the credibility that it has strived so hard
to achieve.
Qualification is what should matter most, as long as all persons
involved realise that in time females should be allowed to control their
own destiny, with all the tools necessary to do the job right and not have
to face criticism based on gender.
As a male coach of various female hockey teams, I know you woud
not be surprised about the kinds of comments one had to face daily about
coaching women. All of course from men, and usually sexual in
nature...this gets extremely tiresome.
I always got a kick out of men who watched a female game for the
first time and went away saying, "hey, they can really play", as though
this was some kind of miracle. But, none of these men would question the
skill of a tennis player like Stefi Graff; time has allowed the sport of
tennis played by females to be accepted into the eyes of sports fans.
Hockey has been such a male dominated domain for so long it is
going to take time to get the public to accept women playing the game and
playing it well. In regard to this topic, I would also like to point out
that very few women, beyond those that play the game actually support the
game. I have coached at the 2 highest echelons of women's hockey in
Canada, and attendance is still primarily made up from famly and friends.
More women still watch men play, and have very little interest in watching
women play. The field of these arguments are still very much internal, and
until the sport starts to become recognised beyond those people tthat are
directly involved, real change will continue to be slow in coming.
Sure the sport has garnered some recent attention as a result of
the olympics and the high profile of some of the prettier faces from the
national teams, but this interest still results more form the novelty
aspect of the game and is not fully based on the wuality product
demonstrated on the ice.
If the game is going to make strong headway, it must start to grab
the attention of people beyond those now involved in the sport. And, to
finish, token gestures like appointing women just because they are women,
are mere band-aid tactics that in the ong run may serve to undermine the
strides the game has made to date.
I believe strongly that women should be involved at all levels and
position in the sport, but people should be aware that some gestures by
the powers that be amount to giving placebos to certain ailments.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 30 Jun 1998 10:36:11 EDT
From: email@hidden
Subject: Re: Coaching: Men vs Women
In a message dated 98-06-30 01:49:38 EDT, email@hidden writes:
<< Jackie,
How old are you? Are you under the age of 30? Have you ever been told you
simply
couldn't do sports because girls shouldn't be doing that type of activity,
it's
not ladylike, it will ruin your reproductive system? I have been, and I was
called
a number of very derogative sexually oriented terms because I wanted to play,
now
get this, golf, when I was in high school. I didn;t get the chance to try
baseball or basketball or hockey not because the schools decided to take
some
money away from men's athletic programs and give some of the money to women's
programs, but because it simply wan't allowed.
Jeanne - I am over 30, 36 actually. I too did not get a chance to play any of
those sports because they did not even exist at my school. They did try a
basketball program the year I graduated, but they made us play half court,
which if you have ever tried that you know how ridiculous that is. I've also
weight trained for years and I too have been told that "it would hurt my
reproductive system" and a hundred other derogatory remarks. ( :
If the pool of resouces is $100 and the number of women equal the number of
men, then the equal number of dollars flow into the each gender's program.
If only that was how the law works, but it isn't. It is not about
distributing the resources equally based upon the number of participants. We
have a situation going on right now in Cincinnati (my home) where a men's
College Track team is about to be cancelled not due to lack of participants
(they have had a team for like 60 years or so) but because that program gives
males one more program than the females. It's not "equality" when you ditch a
sport that has enough participants just because you cannot get enough women to
field a similar team. Unfortunately that situation is occuring occuring all
over the country right now in High School and College Athletics.
Looking at the ability of individual players
and coaches and then trying to back into the equality of opportunity to
participate in sports programs, will at best produce an unsettled dynamic.
If you
accept the proposition that women are allowed to physically exist in the
world we
live in, then it seems to me you have to admit they should have the same
freedom
of choice with respect to what they wish to do to their bodies in the normal
course of a hockey game.
I could not agree with you more.
Do you have access to the same training facilites as the
males? Do you have the same opportunity for obtain scholarship funds based
upon
your play as the men do? We won't even ask what are you possibilites to make
a
living in sports? The important thing to think about is not only how these
questions apply to you, but how would they apply to each and every girl in
the
school's population, as a group, as an opportunity set. I really don't wish
to
hardass anyone on this topic. Whether it is because you can only see your
position through you own personal experiences, don't project you experience
onto
others.
I'm certainly am not trying to project my personal experiences on anyone else.
It just does not make economic sense to hand out the same number of
scholarships to woman as you do men when the number of participants is not the
same, i.e. more men than women in the sports programs. The football programs
at Colleges rake in an enormous amount of money and that money helps the
ENTIRE student body. No, it's not fair that the public is more interested in
watching men play football than women, but it's still the way it is and I
don't think that is ever gonna change.
In the end, all I can really say is, MORE Hockey, less football, baseball,
basketball. By the way, we were in Canada when the US team won the woman's
gold
medal, people came up to us to congratulate us. I was proud of all the team.
Jeanne Wade >>
I think you and I are both getting are wish there, hockey is growing by leaps
and bounds and at all levels, but NOTHING like the explosion that has been
going on with Women's hockey.
Jackie - #22
------------------------------
End of Women-in-Hockey Digest V1 #238
*************************************