@aidan,
For the record, I’m a 59-year-old man. Beginning in the fall of 1960 when I started the 4th-grade in the state of Texas, I (along with all other students) was required by the school district to take exclusively sports-centered P.E. classes. I have not exaggerated one bit in my posts above, either in regard to my own P.E. experience or those of other nonathletic middle-aged men who have told me about their own. I have my share of weaknesses, but lying is not one of them.
No, I did not have the experience of having only a single P.E. teacher or coach for five years who just happened to be bad. My experience was institutional, not an exception to the rule. I will repeat: The P.E. classes were only about sports. There was no effort to promote exercise programs for the unfit. And physically weak boys and overweight boys, who were either ignored or viewed with contempt by the coaches, were often bullied. I cited instances of physically handicapped boys who were forced to take sports-centered P.E. who were subjected to physical bullying, which the coaches tolerated (and, for all I know, may have actually condoned). (They should have been exempted because of their physical handicaps. This is just common sense.) This went on for years, and it left emotional scars on these men. If it had happened to you, it would have impacted you the same way.
Again, I have to state what should be obvious to thinking people: Learning a sport is not the same as getting on an exercise program. The most efficient way for a physically unfit person to get into shape is to get on an exercise program, not to have sports shoved down his throat. Any medical doctor would tell you that, yet seemingly most of those who push mandatory P.E. K through 12 refuse to recognize this very important distinction. For example, an obese boy needs to do exercise that involves constant movement. If he is forced to play baseball (for example), how much exercise does he get? The answer is “Not very much.” Why? The answer should be obvious. He is not engaged in constant movement. What does take place is that his teammates resent his very presence on the team because he is a drag on their chances of winning the game, while he becomes embittered towards his teammates (who seem to have forgotten that he had no choice in the matter; in other words, he was assigned to their team and had to play against his will). This is what traditional sports-centered P.E. is all about. Forcing nonathletic kids to participate with athletic kids in competitive team sports is like transferring basic math students to a calculus class and expecting them to understand calculus. Not to mention the fact that different students have different physical fitness needs. Why can’t more people see this? If you can’t understand why some nonathletic men don’t support mandatory P.E. or might even hate sports (horrors!), then you’re just not listening.
Again, I strongly support any movement to reform P.E. I believe that traditional sports-centered P.E. should be retained for the athletic kids and those who just want to participate in sports AS AN ELECTIVE. If the nonathletic kids are to be required to take P.E., physical fitness classes should be available. If such classes are not available, then their parents can send them to a health club.
Just an interesting observation: When the innovative PE4Life program was set up in the Titusville, Pennsylvania, school district (replacing the tired traditional approach), bullying went down. “Jocks” and “techies” (nerds) actually started socializing with one another, instead of remaining in their own separate groups. Imagine that.