I wrote a New York Times op/ed last week about the relationship between teaching math and coaching Little League. Several people wrote me to say that I shouldn’t have written the following passage:
My level of skill at baseball — actually, with every kind of ball — is pretty much the opposite of my mastery of math. I’ve reached 40 and I still throw in the way that we used to call, before they started showing college softball on TV, “like a girl.”
So obviously my goal here is to undercut the stereotype and present it as obsolete. But the people who wrote me argued that to use the force of a sexist phrase to give my sentence a little oomph is a problem, even if (as I once heard J. P. Serre say about a piece of notation) “I mention it only in order to object to it.”
So I asked about this on Facebook, and maybe 60% of people thought it was fine, and 40% said that they winced when they read it.
Which means it’s not fine. Because why write something that makes 40% of readers wince in annoyance? Especially when a) it’s in no way intrinsic to the piece, which is otherwise not about gender roles, and b) the piece itself ties math to baseball, a boy-coded activity, and has much more material about my son than it does about my daughter.
I think “like a girl” can be an OK place to go if you need to. But I didn’t need to. So I think I shouldn’t have.
One of my friends suggested I should have said instead that I throw “like a mathematician.” Better!