On Pucks For Purpose: The Subtle Sexism Behind The Cheers and The Charity
/If you’re an X student, you’ve seen the posters, the Instagram posts, and the anticipatory countdowns to game day. Pucks for Purpose, or P4P, is a milestone event here at X. For weeks prior to the event students sport laptops coated in Business or ArtSci stickers, and everyone cheers on their respective program. I remember looking out my window when I was living in Governor’s Hall second year to see the line for the P4P men’s game going all the way down to the Powers parking lot. I’ve never seen so many students come together in my time at STFX. Pucks for Purpose creates community, and this year they raised $200,000 for Special Olympics and The Canadian Cancer Society. They’re a great organization with many positives, and I couldn’t see anything wrong with this event bringing students together through sport for a good cause.
That was, until two weeks ago. I was in a conversation with a hockey player for the women’s team who lightheartedly mentioned that her team had only had three practices and wished she could feel more ready for game day. I asked her how often the men’s team practiced. She said she wasn’t certain, but she was pretty sure the men practiced more. She mentioned this potentially occurring due to a sponsorship for ice time exclusively for the men.
In an email Pucks for Purpose claimed that this allegation of unequal practice time was false with three practices total for all four teams, men and women. However, they also mentioned that if teams or players elect to hold additional sessions that are not booked by Pucks, that is their own choice.
Furthermore, when buying my tickets, I noticed something: the women’s game was on a Wednesday night, the 18th of March, while the men’s game was on the Friday the 20th. We all know which day of the week has more parties. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that the women’s game is on the Wednesday. It seems strange to not put both games on the weekend, such as a Friday and a Saturday. To quote a female player, “We get the Wing Night, they get the SuperSub.”
Perhaps there’s a logistical reason unbeknownst to me, but it still feels off-putting. P4P themselves claims that scheduling is challenging as X-Hockey takes priority. They also mention that with the structure of the games happening on Wednesday and Friday being a large success in the previous year, they decided to continue this set up for year two. However, as the Men’s game was on the Friday last year, shouldn’t the women have it on the Friday this year? Something else worth noting is the men’s game having three 18-minute periods, with the women’s game having three 15-minute periods. These kinds of discrepancies raise questions about the equity of P4P’s structural planning.
All of this aside, the thing that made me actually sit down and write this article was the fundraising incentives I learned about recently. If you don’t know, P4P players on all teams get incentives for how much they fundraise to motivate them in weekly emails. For example, in one email regarding fundraising updates, players were told that the first few to reach $250 by a certain date get a $50 Sobeys gift card. As time approaches closer to game day, these prizes or incentives become higher in value, with a higher fundraising goal to obtain to receive said prizes. Pretty straightforward, right?
However, as time went on, the prizes started becoming gendered. Coming as a surprise to players, instead of gender-neutral prizes that benefit everyone like a Sobeys gift card, P4P began to implement what they call team-based incentives. One example was the men’s team receiving a PS5 and the women’s team receiving five $100 gift cards, to Artizia, Lululemon, Dynamite, Sephora & Starbucks.
Furthermore, take a look at an excerpt from a real email one of the players received:
“Race to $400 by Saturday the 14th
Men's Team (Players + BAs)
Prize: 4 passes to Nish Golf Course
($250 value)
How to win: First person on the men's side to reach $400 total raised wins
Women's Team (Players + BAs)
Prize: $250 credit Laser Treatment to The Skin Clinic Antigonish
How to win: First person on the women's side to reach $400 total raised win”
In short, women’s team players who raise the same amount of money as the men get value for laser hair removal. Men? They get four passes to the golf course.
I’d imagine most women, myself included, could think of many other ways that they’d rather spend that money than an invasive, painful procedure. The blatant sexism here aside, let’s consider some other equity issues. A day at the golf course is accessible and fun to almost anyone, especially a female athlete playing for P4P. A lot of women though, may choose not to remove their hair for any kind of personal reason. That being said, for those that do choose to shave, wax, or whatever they so please, laser hair removal isn’t even possible for a large subset of women due to their hair being too light for it to work on them. More notably, when looking at the pricing on the Skin Clinic website, a full Brazilian laser hair removal treatment is $200. So, a woman would get one hair treatment (it takes 6-10 for effectiveness) whereas a man would get four days at the course.
Another example of how the women’s team are treated differently: the Top Male fundraiser on a given week won a brand-new Ultralight Srixon Golf Stand Bag. The Top Female fundraiser? She won a $100 Wilfred & Parker Boutique credit and a $25 Tall & Small Gift Card.
First of all, a quick google search tells me that this golf bag values at around $200-300 which does not match the $125 total credit the woman received. Additionally, I love Wilfred and Parker but $100 there gets you maybe 2-3 shirts. In defense of Pucks for Purpose, their email claims that they are “open to feedback from players regarding these prizes and take note of the concern around gender-stereotyping.” This article looks to provide said feedback.
By the same token, with respect to her teammates and planning committee who also are eligible to receive fundraising incentives, the female athlete I interviewed is choosing not to reveal any identifying information. Despite this, her general sentiment was that other players feel similarly to her; frustrated and disappointed. As said in her own words, “Especially in today’s world, with the PWHL and how far women’s hockey has come in the last three years, the sexist undertones present within P4P is a reminder that there are still changes to be made.”
All of this being said, I think the work that P4P is doing is fantastic. The money they raise, and the community building and memories they create for students and beyond is incredible. This is also nothing against the players, women or men. If anything, this article’s intention is to advocate for them. I also recognize the sheer amount of work and planning that P4P organizers put into this and this article is not to shame them, but rather to help them to understand some of the harms associated with their choices. As P4P is only in its second year, it is important to give them grace, especially as they replied to our email with respect, kindness, and genuine openness to feedback.
Overall, it seems to me female players for P4P are treated very differently than the men’s team, and this must change. They are subject to blatant sexism and discrimination in the form of differences in stereotypical fundraising incentives, potentially less practice and game time, and having their game on a weekday which hinders the overall experience of said game compared to the men. I hope that moving forwards, Pucks For Purpose will do better to work towards a more equitable system.
