Gee whiz, Chumly! I wasn't going to post again in this topic of mine, but now I'm going to have to get involved in this mess again. (Seriously, I do appreciate your support.)
Careful, Chumly! I'm sure your moderate statement would upset some of the other members, who would wrongly take it as a personal affront.
Needless to say, I completely agree with you.
I got angry because I had simply called attention to a book that was written to help a particular category of hurting kids, but one respondent in particular proceeded to tear the book to pieces simply because it didn't fit her agenda. The book was not intended to be a political or social discourse. It really wasn't dealing with school bullying in general. It was merely instructional
. The book wasn't written as a diatribe against school sports. After all, one of the interviewed author's own sons was a school athlete. The purpose of the book was to instruct the parents of these boys how to work around the popularity of school sports, not to rage against them. I'm sure they recommended ways their sons could feel better about themselves by increasing their self-esteem by means of excelling in some other endeavor. Possibly instruction about developing better social skills is also provided.
The negative reaction to this book expressed in this topic is irrelevant. I'm amazed by it all. Instead of addressing the problems of these boys, comments were made about different policies of schools regarding bullying. Those comments really had nothing to do with the subject of the book. In other words, they were beyond its scope. I suspect school policies were irrelevant to the authors of the book. I'm sure they were suggesting ways that these boys can help themselves without relying upon school policies. But the critic or critics of this book were only concerned about their own agenda and were not addressing the subject matter of the book. They sought to tear it down because it was of no use to them.
To repeat myself, I should have made my intentions clear in the OP. I was simply wanting to call attention to a book on parenting that would be of benefit to the parents of these boys. Not exactly a book of broad appeal, but necessary. I'm amazed at the negative reaction here.
The policy of compulsory sports in the schools never encouraged the nonathletic kids to become physically active. In fact, it discouraged them and frequently encouraged some of the worst bullying I've ever heard. Some members of this forum take this observation as a swipe at school sports. Nothing could be further from the truth. It's simply a critique of a system that really hurt some kids. I have no problem with the "old P.E." being retained as an elective.
I've noticed many of the members here (as well as the forums of many other websites) make no effort to understand someone else's point of view. If someone express a point of view they don't happen to share, the usual reaction is to post a snarky response. The assumption is made that the other person is a dummy. He couldn't possibly be intelligent or even decent; otherwise, he would agree with them. In other words, minds are already made up. Completely closed, not receptive to any new ideas. The attitude is not to learn from others, but to put them in their place for not conforming to the prevailing orthodoxy on the part of the majority of the members. (On the other hand, you and I probably have some sharp differences in other realms of thought; but I think we'd probably be able to discuss them civilly.)
By the way: Hey, Ceili, I suspect you've probably had a few hissy-fits of your own, wouldn't you say? I might as well say this now: In an old thread on a completely different subject, I said that the Catholic church did not change particular scriptures that did not conform to certain doctrines and practices of their own. My observation clearly was in the nature of a compliment, but you took it as an attack on Catholics and all but accused me of fomenting hatred against Catholics. What nonsense! I've always been concerned about human rights for all people, including Catholics when they were historically oppressed. I suggest you try to get to know someone personally (or at least ask for a clarification) before you make false assumptions about a complete stranger and go into attack mode. It gets to be quite tiresome. As the old cliche goes: When you point a finger at someone, three are pointing back at you.
Back to you, Chumly: Why is it that I have thrived in a health club atmosphere but dreaded mandatory P.E. with every fiber of my being? (Actually, I'm not asking you this question. It's directed to all those who support compulsory sports in the schools.)
Again, I apologize for losing my temper here (which is certainly more than can be said of some of the other members when they lose their
tempers in other threads). I even sent PMs to Boomerang and Joe Nation to offer apologies.
This is my last post in this topic. I swear this is addictive, but I've got to stop. I've got too many obligations in that realm we call real life. You guys can savage me all you want in my absence to your own satisfaction, but I won't be here to take the abuse.