Welcome Sports Haters!

Being Canadian this reminds me of what Trudeau said in 1967 "The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation". He was commenting on the government's proposal to overhaul Canadian criminal law, giving new recognition to individual rights in several areas, including sexual behavior.

The same should hold true as per "The state has no business in the organized sports of the nation". Further there is no doubt that the public education system in Canada is an extension of the state.

From what I've heard of Mr Trudeau I can see why he would say that.

The state is very involved in organised sport. You're spitting into a hurricane with that one Chum.

You like it when Cameron tells you how to tuck in your dickey?

If you'll explain what you mean by that I'll try to respond.

Cameron is your prime minister and "how you tuck in your dickey" is a euphuism for how one acts sexually. Cameron is more likely than Trudeau was to regulate sexual proclivities.

If you are not aware Chum that sexual proclivities stand in need of regulation you must have lead a somewhat sheltered life.

Your sexual proclivities stand in need?

It's not just me Chum.

"Can't we all just get along?"

Sure we can. For about 10 minutes. Longer than that and it gets really boring. An hour of it and our brains start that process which motor mowers get into when the grass stops growing for the winter. Six months of it and you need a comprehensive servicing.

Here is an interesting phrase that I had not heard before … “sports wound.”

I just came across a post by a clinical psychologist who uses this phrase. I have posted a link to the webpage that displays this post. Dr. William Van Ornum’s comments are quite relevant to this thread. Please click on the link and read the post so you will know what in the world I’m talking about.

http://americanmentalhealthfoundation.org/entry.php?id=135

Now I must make a disclaimer so I will not be misunderstood by sincere people or personally insulted by intolerant people who do not know me and would never even consider speaking to me privately. I have absolutely no problem with people who enjoy sports either as spectators or participants. I have always respected athletic participation, as I would any other endeavor requiring self-discipline. I am simply opposed to nonathletic boys being bullied simply because they have no interest in sports. There have been men of great courage who never participated in sports. The negative stereotype of nonathletic boys as having homosexual tendencies is particularly vile and ludicrous -- never mind that gay men have always participated in rough contact sports, just as they have participated in just about every other realm of human endeavor. I’m amazed that this vicious stereotype is still believed by many people today.

As I have said before, sports-centered P.E. should be retained for the school athletes and those students who want to participate in sports as an ELECTIVE, not as a mandatory course. If P.E. is to be mandatory for nonathletic students, genuine fitness classes should be provided for them. If such classes cannot be provided, send the nonathletic kids to a health club. Otherwise, leave the nonathletic kids alone.

I do not agree with Dr. Ornum, though, when he says that “many coaches and physical education teachers are sensitive to this (the bullying of nonathletic boys) and intervene.” I know that some of them are; but I think many more of them (probably the majority) view nonathletic boys with indifference or outright contempt.

I do not intend the following comment to be insulting, but someone needs to say this: Kuvasz and all the others like him -- who apparently see no difference between, say (to use kuvasz' example early in this thread), a high-school football player having trouble with trigonometry and a nonathletic boy being bullied and humiliated in a sport-centered mandatory P.E. class -- need to read Dr. Orum’s post and learn …

It finally occurred to me yesterday that the psychologist's last name is "Van Ornum," not just "Ornum." Stupid me.

Well said!

So those of you readers (few, though, you may be) who have arrived at the scene too late will not be confused: What Chumly was reacting to was not my posts, but a single post that had been submitted by an apparently naughty spammer and has since been deleted. The spammer had insincerely copied and pasted comments that Chumly agreed with, but that spammer is now history.

U know, Bill, I think that u were just a victim of bad luck.

In none of the schools that I have ever attended,
from Kindergarten (from which admittedly, I dropped out)
thru doctorate, did anyone ever express any interest
in whether any of the students participated in sports teams or not.

With better luck, these issues woud never have contacted your life.





David

Very interesting. Perhaps there are cultural differences in this country that are based on geography. After all, my home state of Texas is a bit mindless about football. (No offense intended, fans.) I still think, though, that Dr. Van Ornum has pointed out a problem that many nonathletic boys face as they are growing up. A problem that can only be dealt with by caring parents (especially fathers) and perhaps competent (and I do stress the word "competent") clinical psychologists. I don't live in the past. Besides, I know people who had far worse problems growing up than I did. I just have a strong identification with kids who are bullied.

Admittedly, my personal experience with education
was limited to NY and Arizona; whether,
or to what extent things were different elsewhere: I know not.

As I remember back,
I do not believe that I was ever witness to anyone being bullied.





David

Thanks for your response. I believe you. Cultural differences, I guess. Perhaps you were lucky.

Yeah. I feel lucky; happy.
I think that I 've gotten just about everything that I 've ever wanted from life.





David

The only exceptions to that being seeing parents bullying their children; an ugly sight.





David