Maybe I just have the SAT Verbal section on the brain this week, but I'm not sure Dave's entire column has a single sentence written in proper, gramatically correct English. Even the headline is awkwardly composed:
Targeting Dodge Ball and Other Inanities
What Dave means to say is that "secular liberals" are targeting dodge ball in public schools, and that his column will attack this and other inanities. But that headline sounds like he's actually planning to attack dodge ball, along with other dodge ball-related inanities. Maybe Human Events Online should hire some Copy Editors Offline.
(I don't want to get too off-topic, but as long as we're talking about publications that could use better fact-checking, do any of you happen to read the free publication LA Alternative? I didn't think so. If you did, you may have noticed the following egregious error from their "Calendar of Events" this week (emphasis mine):
When you think ’70s cool, you probably think of the obvious names-James Taylor, Warren Oates of Hall and Oates, Dennis Wilson of the Beach Boys. And for good reason, too: the three men starred in Two-Lane Blacktop, the drag-racing classic that inspired the Cannonball Run. Taylor, Wilson and Oates are never given names (rather, they’re referred to as “the Driver,” or “the Mechanic”) because the important things in this movie are the fast cars (a ‘55 Chevy and a Pontiac GTO), the hot girl (Laurie Bird) and the open road (Route 66 before the major interstates). Showing as part of a double feature with Cisco Pike, which stars troubadour Kris Kristofferson in his film debut. 7:30 p.m. New Beverly Cinema, 7165 Beverley Blvd., L.A. (Max Read)
Now, okay...They misspell Beverly Blvd...That's not such a big deal. But guys...WARREN OATES WAS NOT THE GUY IN HALL AND OATES! That was New York musician John Oates. Warren Oates is a totally significant, beloved 70's actor. That's not a casual kind of error - someone really really needed to catch that one.
Even worse, I wrote them an e-mail two days ago informing the editors of the mistake, and have not yet seen a response or a correction. If you check online, the mistake is still there. For me personally, I could give a shit less...But you would think a real paper would want to fix such an embarrassing mistake...)
Fortunately, Human Events Online doesn't have to worry about these sorts of issues. As the kind of outfit that will publish rants by Michael Reagan and Ann Coulter, they clearly don't see the publication of facts and accurate information as central to the business of running a news website. Let's face it...That stuff is BO-RING! We could all learn a simple lesson from our President: When you just make stuff up, everything turns out the way you want! It's like being your very own DECIDERER!
Anyway, on to David's column:
There was a time in this country when public school teachers could focus on teaching the basics. Today, unfortunately, they are all too often preoccupied with accommodating the silly concerns pervading our society.
To what concerns do I refer? Oh, those such as banning the innocent children's games of dodge ball, cops and robbers, musical chairs, steal the bacon and tag. You heard me right -- it's not just the allegedly sadistic and violent game of dodge ball that schools are trying to outlaw.
Actually, every time I eat a large, greasy breakfast, I wind up playing "pass the bacon" for the rest of the day...Here's a strategy tip - try and eat some roughage, perhaps some whole wheat toast on the side.
But seriously, folks...That first paragraph perfectly demonstrates the murky, shallow thinking that pervades David's entire piece. Because some school administrators have become concerned with the violent and cruel aspect of dodge ball (a rather large aspect of that particular game), somehow this eats up time that would otherwise be spent on education. How? Are teachers really interrupting class time to discuss the lasting traumatic effects of dodge ball games? Are school supplies that would otherwise be used by children instead diverted to laboratories where advanced experiments calculate the specific effects of dodge ball games on the child psyche? Or do you think David's just talking out of his ass, trying to invent a national crisis when really you just have some concerned teachers and parents?
Call me nostalgic for my childhood if you wish -- for the days of Beaver Cleaver and Andy Griffith -- but I long for the times when cockamamie ideas didn't pass for reasonable.
The sad thing is, Dave feels bittersweet nostalgia for the fictional environments presented to him on antiquated sitcoms. He's whistfully recalling "Leave it to Beaver" as if it was a reflection on his own life, instead of a TV show he used to watch as a kid. Unless your name is Ron Howard, I think I can safely say your childhood was nothing like "The Andy Griffith Show." He's nostalgic for an imaginary past that never was, kind of like Bill Murray in Scrooged. Hey, Dave, that wasn't you who scored the winning run, that was the kid on "The Courtship of Eddie's Father!"
Bring back the days when kids were allowed to have some harmless fun without certain hair-brained, social engineers coming unglued.
Not to belabor the SAT thing, but here's a guy who makes his living by writing and he can't put a simple sentence together. This would get knocked down on the Written portion of the SAT for three reasons - you don't need a comma between "hair-brained" and "social," you don't need the extraneous word "certain" and the use of the slang term "hair-brained" isn't really appropriate for professional writing.
Not to mention the most obvious point: Only a goober this bent out of shape over children playing dodge ball. Who cares? If they can't play dodge ball, kids will just come up with a different technique for identifying schoolmates who can't physically defend themselves as targets for future abuse. They may all smell and look kind of stupid, but some of these kids can be pretty wily.
Dodge ball is an easy target for the sourpusses because it involves students -- heaven forbid -- trying to hit other students with a dastardly rubber ball. And at least once in recorded history, one of those children was hurt.
Dave struggles mightily to miss the point here. As far as I can tell, the risk of serious injury isn't the #1 reason educators worry about dodge ball. I would think it's obvious that the controversial aspect of the game is its inherent exclusionism and innate cruelty. Players are singled out and made into targets and then are pelted by the other team with rubber balls. There's no strategy, it's less than ideal for exercize purposes and rather than fostering teamwork, it requires an aggressive, individual approach. In short, it's probably the worst game to push on children if the ultimate goal is physical fitness or confidence-building.
A reasonable counter-argument could certainly be made. "Playing effective dodge ball requires constant attention, both to the movements of the ball and to the opposing team, which in turn develops focus." Or "dodge ball fosters good sportsmanship, as children discover that it's more fun to play the game working in tandem with fellow players and trying to avoid hurting anyone." Or even just "kids like dodge ball and allowing them to play during school hours encourages physical fitness and keeps students active." I don't really agree with any of these points, but they are at least based on some kind of logical reasoning.
Dave apparently isn't clever enough to come up with any points like these, so he just sputters against invisible foes who want to ban dodge ball because someone could put an eye out.
For the record, we played the game all the time in Coach Russell's PE class at Franklin school, and I can't remember a single injury, even among the girls who played with us boys. Sure, when the ball hit you it stung slightly, but that was part of the fun of it. Real injuries were much more likely to occur in touch football or softball, which ought to tell you how likely they were.
Keep on fighting the good fight, Dave. That fictional person who believes that dodge ball threatens the lives of our young people won't know what hit him!
So, under the pretense that dodge ball is too dangerous, there is an increasing trend among school districts across the country to ban it. But this seems more of a convenient excuse, as does the objection that the game provides a poor cardiovascular workout.
Yeah, who cares if PE classes provide children with a good workout as part of a general promotion of robust health! It's far more important we allow them to hurl gymp equipment at one another for an hour each day! Cause, dammit, that's how it was for The Beav if I'm remembering that particular episode correctly!
Reading below the headlines we find that other reasons are motivating those who seek to purge these schoolyard games. One major reason, according to the Los Angeles Times, "is that the game can hurt children's feelings."
How does dodge ball cause this irreversible emotional trauma? Well, it is a contest of elimination where the last player to avoid being hit wins. So, like the perilous games of cutthroat in billiards and the heartless musical chairs, dodge ball is a game of exclusion -- a capital crime in these times of politically correct inclusion.
I recall how sad I was when my elementary school cancelled its long-running Billiards program.
Really, can any one man be so stupid? Dave, maybe the children have hurt feelings because other students are whipping large inflatable balls at their face? I mean, yes, it sucks to lose a game of pool (particularly if you've made a wager beforehand), but when you lose at ythat game, typically, no one maliciously chucks the 8 ball at your face.
(Note the throwaway reference to political correctness. What do concerned teachers and parents trying to prevent children from associating negative feelings with competitive sports have to do with being politically correct? Um...oh yeah, nothing...)
Unbelievably, Dave keeps bloviating for several more paragraphs about the evils of dodge ball bans before finally getting down to the real point:
These ideas are ludicrous on their face, but there is obviously something else at work here. While the secularists are paranoid lest any vestige of Western values remain in the classroom, they are eager to impose their own values at school.
Wow...so much stupidity...Where to begin...
Okay, first off, this name. "The secularists." Meaningless. Wanting to ban dodge ball in elementary schools has absolutely nothing to do with a person's spirituality or belief system. Identifying a lack of enthusiasm for pegging children with fast-moving airborne projectiles as a lack of enthusiasm for organized religion makes absoutely not sense at all. None. Not any. Less, even, than Dave's brother's excuses for fraudulently obtaining all that pain medication.
Next, if these teachers who want to ban dodge ball are from America, aren't their values as "Western" as Dave's? Dave's ego-centered view of Americanism, that his own personal worldview perfectly replicates a standard for traditional "Western" values is...wait for it..."ludicrous on [its] face."
Because there obviously isn't one set of "Western values," particularly when talking about minutae like the game of dodge ball. What are we, 12 years old?
They tell us they want to promote harmony, community and inclusiveness when what they really want is to push the notion of pacifism and discourage our traditions of competition and rugged individualism.
There you have it, in black and white. What this column is all about. Dave is a cruel man who likes the idea of children nursing emotional scars from years of forced participation in dodge ball games. He sees compassion for a child in any situation that's less than fatal to be a sign of personal weakness. I mean, the guy is so bitter, he's upset that teachers want to push the notion of pacifism on their students.
My professional diagnosis: Dave got his ass kicked a lot as a kid and he didn't have anyone to stand up for him or make him feel better. So he grew up associating PE class, and probably the schoolyard in general, with pain and abuse and victimhood. Now that he's older, he resents any attempts to make this situation easier for modern children. Hey, he had to put up with all the bullying and cruelty as a child...Why should the kids of today have it any better?
(Is PE really about teaching "rugged individualism" in the first place? Don't you mainly play team sports in PE class, thus learning about the exact opposite of rugged individualism? I had always assumed it was about instilling healthy exercize habits in people from a young age. If you teach them to love sport and to stay fit at 15, maybe those lessons will stick with them into adulthood. The best way to teach kids to love sports and exercize all the time? Make it fun and don't focus on intense, obsessive competition and cruelty.)
Of course, maybe that's just me. Perhaps I'm simply nostalgic for the days of my youth, a special time when Cliff Huxtable taught us all how to love, Alex Keaton demonstrated the joys of youthful conservatism and Danny Tanner proved to the world that the healthiest environment in which to raise young girls is a suburban home under the watchful eye of a nerd, a failed rock star and a doofus who does "Popeye" impressions.
Isn't it supposed to be "hare-brained," anyway?
ReplyDelete