Political correctness strikes back!

[meglamaniac]

Oh dear.
Just heard on Radio 1 that some primary school has dropped sports day because it fears the kids that loose will be humiliated, and is replacing it with "team building activities" which the government apparently approves of.


Riiiiiiiigggggghhhhhht.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by meglamaniac
Oh dear.
Just heard on Radio 1 that some primary school has dropped sports day because it fears the kids that loose will be humiliated, and is replacing it with "team building activities" which the government apparently approves of.


Riiiiiiiigggggghhhhhht.

I hear they're banning English tests because they fear the kids that spell 'lose' wrong will be humiliated.

o snap

[Dante Hicks]

How about they just stop forcing kids to do this kind of crap and let the Nieztschean psychos compete with each others if they so desire?

Or is individual freedom too politically correct?

[Deffeh]

Originally posted by meglamaniac
Oh dear.
Just heard on Radio 1 that some primary school has dropped sports day because it fears the kids that loose will be humiliated, and is replacing it with "team building activities" which the government apparently approves of.


Riiiiiiiigggggghhhhhht.

my secondary school gets round this by only allowing those that are semi competent to take part in the one fun day of the year, and allowing all the ****ters (inc myself) to sit in their school uniform and watch and feel fat.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Toccata & Fugue
I don't think political correctness is the right term.

As for the issue, whilst I enjoy competitive sports, and was always good at them at school, I often felt that school sports were often unnecessarily weighted to kids who were naturrally stronger or taller and thus I have often had my suspicions about the fascist overtones of school sports. Of course competition is fun, but there seems to be too much aggression involved and in America a bizzare adultion of athletic achievement. Perhaps being defeated on a regular basis in a does damage self esteem, it may be worth trying to concentrate on developing children physically rather than pitting them against each other in a Battle Royale.

I hear that failing exams and not doing as well as other children in class damages self esteem too.

[Nusselt]

the only good thing about sports day was the hot dog and ice cream van that was allowed onto the playing fields.

ps yes i was one of the ones that was crap at sports, but i didnt mind, all the thickos and retard bullys were the best at games, so i let them have their day, knowing full well that in the end id triumph oh yes i would.

pps i can kind of understand what the school is on about, everyone takes part in exams, but sports day is about those that cant watching those that can. Note i dont agree with them, but i can emphatise with the sentiment of trying to get everyone invoilved.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
How about they just stop forcing kids to do this kind of crap and let the Nieztschean psychos compete with each others if they so desire?

Or is individual freedom too politically correct?

this is one of the scariest things ive seen in ages

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Nodrog
I hear that failing exams and not doing as well as other children in class damages self esteem too.

I heard forcing minors to do countless hours of study in subjects they weren't interested in was an assault on their liberties.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Dante Hicks
I heard forcing minors to do countless hours of study in subjects they weren't interested in was an assault on their liberties.

I heard that allowing parents to withdraw their children from full time education at 12 and send them out to work and support the family might be classed as social regression.

[Mong]

I'm very smart indeed. However I was also good at sports (I represented the county for cross-country and played football and rugby (league) for my school). So the two are by no means mutually exclusive.

Believe it or not, school sports are good for any number of things. Not least keeping fat little nerds active and marginally healthy!

Of course I remember that it wasn't always great for the less physically inclined, but my school was good in that the teachers got everybody involved and motivated to the point that 99% of kids actually got something out of it (the "better" kids were encouraged to guide the "less gifted" ones). I was somewhere in between until about 14 when I suddenly got taller and faster.

All in all, I'd recommed it become law that kids do at least two hours of organised sport per week. Healthy body aids a healthy mind, and all that.

M.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by Nodrog
I heard that allowing parents to withdraw their children from full time education at 12 and send them out to work and support the family might be classed as social regression.

Even if this were the case, what does that have to do with forcing kids to do subjects/exams they don't wish to do?

And I'd advocate paying kids to go to school, for what it's worth.

[poshphil]

Sports Day is great!

I was crap, but it was still fun.

In fact, the only thing I ever won was 3rd place in the skipping race in primary school. I was well chuffed

[roadrunner_0]

I was always crap at organised sports, still liked to do them though, and at one point, i worked so hard at it that i nearly got on the school team, but then it disbanded
still had a good laugh though

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Toccata & Fugue
Yes but one can work at exams, and develop area's of expertise. Running out onto a cold football pitch to get sadistically beaten by people bigger than you is a cruel and unusual form of punishment. For instance basketball, whilst a shorter guy may be able to develop his dribbling technique and so forth I at 6 ft 3 can jump up and place the ball in the net with little real skill, I am thus a better person?

Its not the "removing sports day" that bothers me, its more the subtle agenda promotion that is lurking behind "lets replace individual achievement and competition with team sports and team games and team fun so kids will learn to team love and cooperate and collectively achieve and stop competing and work together in beautiful harmony and tolerance".

Why not just give children a choice about what sports/games they want to participate in? I personally hated team games at school, and far prefered things like badminton/tennis/athetlics/running/etc, while im sure others prefferred football/basketball and suchlike. The motivation behind making children do one, while banning the other, is incredibly blatent.

Originally posted by Mong
All in all, I'd recommed it become law that kids do at least two hours of organised sport per week. Healthy body aids a healthy mind, and all that.

gb2plato

Also, organised sport is shit.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Toccata & Fugue
I agree that people should be given a choice, furthermore as someone who was good at sports and exams and had a few good friends I still hated school and have been mildly traumatized by the experience, as has everyone I know. Maybe school sucks no matter what you do.

Well the current education/indoctrination system undoubtably sucks, but thats not really the point.

[meglamaniac]

Jesus christ, I step outside for a few mins (well ok, a few hours) after posting and come back to find Nod having a field day (very bad pun intended, yes).

So what if you get humiliated. Wouldn't you say that learning to deal with defeat is something best learned at an early age?
I was utterly **** at sports day because it was all "track and field" events at our school (relays, hurdles, sprinting, javalin etc) which ain't my thing, but it's all part of the experience.
At the end of the day, if you lose you're not the only one, and basicly its just a bit of fun.

I knew I could spank most of the sprinty type people when it came to tennis anyway so it didn't bother me too much.

This idea strikes me as drastically over-protective. You can't prevent your kid from suffering defeat for thier entire life - let them get a feel for what it can be like when it's in something not very important. Then if it comes to something that IS important, later in life, they're more likely to be able to cope.
Life isn't rosy fs.

Please note that I refrained from calling this idea "American" up until 3 words ago.

[huh]

Originally posted by Toccata & Fugue
Yes but one can work at exams, and develop area's of expertise.

Do you think skilled athletes are just born with their fitness?

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by meglamaniac
This idea strikes me as drastically over-protective. You can't prevent your kid from suffering defeat for thier entire life - let them get a feel for what it can be like when it's in something not very important. Then if it comes to something that IS important, later in life, they're more likely to be able to cope.

The issue isn't humilation suffered (although if we're advocating humiliating children as part of their growth then why not do it to everyone rather than just fat/skinny kids?).

Why should kids have to do things like this that they don't want to? (If they do, then the issue is null and void). What are we sadists "hahah, we can make you do things you don't want to do for no good reason"? We wouldn't treat adults like this, so I don't see any real justification for doing it to children.

As Bill Waterson put it : "One of my great pleasures in adulthood is I'm not forced to wrestle other guys"

[meglamaniac]

T&F: ****s sake, don't be so melodramatic.
Who's are you anyway?

Dante: Kids don't want to do maths. Kids don't want to do foreign languages. Kids don't want to go to school most of the time.
Follow that way of deciding what to make kids do and you'll end up with a country full of people with the abilities of the average Brixton lager lout.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by meglamaniac
Dante: Kids don't want to do maths. Kids don't want to do foreign languages. Kids don't want to go to school most of the time.

There is certainly no justification for forcing people to learn foriegn languages. In my case (and most people I know) it was utterly counter productive. 6 Years of German and what can I say? "Hallo, wie gehts?".

Basic numeracy and literacy are things which would be taught to young children during the compulsary stage of schooling (i.e. before 12ish)

As for kids not wanting to go to school, no ****. School is utterly appalling, and I certainly never wanted to go. Hours and hours of my time were wasted on things I had no interest in (music, art, PE, German). Not only that but the subjects I did enjoy were completley bastardised due to lack of time. As soon as they made it optional for myself (i.e. when I get older) I found going in much easier. All the current system seems to do is make a large group of people hate education. Well, what a result...

If education was more free, more optional (as it is in some more progressive institutions) the results would be better on all levels. The idea that if you give people freedom they will instantly do what's worst for themselves is based on a false authotarian premise.

[huh]

Originally posted by Toccata & Fugue
Yes, I think that although it is quite possible to develop skills and fitness, there is certainly an advantage in the UK to having an early ability, whether this is right or fair is not the point. For instance I had my growth spurt when I was 11, so when I joined secondary school I was a foot taller than everyone and was in all the sports teams.

Furthermore it would take alot more work for people who were already fat to become good at sport than someone who had a high motabolism.

I think that seems fair enough.

For Dante Hicks's sake I'm sure there is a fair amount of social conditioning etc as well.

I meant it is easily possible to improve at sports if you put a little effort in. Some people are naturally fitter, but that doesn't mean the average person can't achieve that fitness. Ofcourse if they'd rather not bother then they can't complain about being 'humilated'.

[roadrunner_0]

the english system is counter productive when it comes to languages though, it should be taught at primary level as it is in many other countries. Too long have we had the attitude 'well some of them will speak english so were ok'

[meglamaniac]

Compulsary schooling is until you're 16, whether you like it or not.
Have you ever considered that the reason a wide range of subjects are burtally force fed to the poor little kiddies is so that they get a chance to experience the subjects and make an informed decision on whether they want to carry them further (GCSE, A-level, beyond) rather than just going "nah, music, don't like the sound of that...".

Obviously everyone will have at least one subject they dislike, but to me the benefit of at least having a chance to try things outweighs maybe being stuck with the ones you don't like for a few hours a week.

Maybe its about perspective - I have no idea how old you are - but speaking as someone who's left the secondary and further education system (yes, for higher education) I'd prefer this approach to your utopian "absolute freedom" model.
This one, more or less, works the majority of the time. Somehow, I have doubts about yours.

Seeing as I was one of the kids who was supposedly having my life ruined by being ****e at sportsday and not good at most sports in general, I must have somehow managed not to notice the massive damage that was done to me.
Oh well, I never was that observant.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by huh
I meant it is easily possible to improve at sports if you put a little effort in. Some people are naturally fitter, but that doesn't mean the average person can't achieve that fitness. Ofcourse if they'd rather not bother then they can't complain about being 'humilated'.

Why should they bother? Let's say that you went to an institution where advanced mathematical skills were highly prized. You don't care about advanced maths, and so don't bother.

Then, on a weekly basis, you are trundled out, made to worn silly clothing (being a teenager, you probably hate your body so this is added humilitation, but still) and challenged against Math freaks. Every time you get something wrong, you are shouted at by various steroid taking idiots.

Competition between willing individuals is one of the funnest things you can do. It allows individuals to excel and can bring out the height of the human condition. But forcing people to compete in areas where they don't want to seems to verge on a mild form of sadism.

[Dante Hicks]

Originally posted by meglamaniac
Compulsary schooling is until you're 16, whether you like it or not.

Well, obviously I'm saying that I don't like that. If you're saying that the government have said so, so we can't argue, then sure.

Have you ever considered that the reason a wide range of subjects are burtally force fed to the poor little kiddies is so that they get a chance to experience the subjects and make an informed decision on whether they want to carry them further (GCSE, A-level, beyond) rather than just going "nah, music, don't like the sound of that..."

I have considered that, but there are more efficient ways of giving people a taster. I mean, I did subjects I disliked for well over 6 years in secondary education alone. How much of a bloody taster do I need?

Maybe its about perspective - I have no idea how old you are - but speaking as someone who's left the secondary and further education system (yes, for higher education) I'd prefer this approach to your utopian "absolute freedom" model.
This one, more or less, works the majority of the time. Somehow, I have doubts about yours.

For the record, I'm 22. I've finished my A-Levels and degree, and also started a masters degree earlier this year (which admittedly I quit due to finance). I've also applied for another Masters course starting next year. So maybe I'm too immature to see reality clearly, but I doubt that.

Seeing as I was one of the kids who was supposedly having my life ruined by being ****e at sportsday and not good at most sports in general, I must have somehow managed not to notice the massive damage that was done to me.
Oh well, I never was that observant.

I don't think anyone is suggesting that anyone's life is ruined. Although, having said that there are kids who undoubtedly do foolish things due to educational pressures, but I'm sure that'd happen under most systems.

Someone's life doesn't need to be ruined for it still to be a bad idea.

[Nusselt]

actually since this is a nice new argument (no war huzzah \O/ ) ive decided to rejoin, devils advocate a bit but nevermind.


What is the point of Sportsday? If you want a day in which teams compete with each other to test their sporting ability in front of the whole school and their parents, wouldnt it be fair to have something similar along more mentally rigorous lines?? how about all the kids have to do algebra on a massive blackboard, we can all laugh at the thickos who do sh*t, and give medals to the clever boffins. I can see the point of games, to increase fitness get people involved in sports etc, but why devote a day to sporting ability??? the story was about primary school, my primary school was a tad different from my secodary in terms of sports day. In my primary i HAD to compete, i think its because there werent enough pupils to have a selection type process. So basically everyone took part. Now if i had to run in last in front of my parents and the school and teachers in the obstacle race* surely i should be given the oppurtunity in a mental day of acing them with my supreme 7 times table. Note exams dont count as you dont do them in front of everyone.

*yes yes i know obstacle race was for the really really crappy people who could barely run, i was crap at this to (i couldnt eat a bananna fast enough),

[SbOlly]

I have to say I think the idea of cancelling sports day is rubbish.

I never competed and it didn't bother me (I was a fat kid. I'm now a fat man. No matter how much sport that was forced upon me, I made a life decision a long time ago that involved doing as little as physically possible).

As a good example, I didn't compete, like I said. T&F did compete. We had the same group of friends, and none of them respected us less or more because we had/hadn't competed.

Obviously we still hated our lives and school.

Erm...my point is.....erm......FAT KIDS RULE!

[KaneED]

LET'S TEACH OUR CHILDREN HOW NOT TO ACCEPT DEFEAT OR FAILURE.

[meglamaniac]

1) That is indeed what I'm saying. For the most part we have to work within the constraints we've been given.

2) If you happen to dislike a "core" subject (maths, english etc) then really it's just tough luck. Society and knowledge is advancing so that there are more and more prerequisits that are required to "fit in". It's not enough to be able to do your 11 times table and spell 5 letter words for the majority of today's society, so I see no reason why these subjects shouldn't be compulsary.
As for languages - well, I never did like french that much. Having said that, that was mainly because the teacher was a bitch.
However, even if you never use it again, it can be argued that learning a foreign languge helps you to further understand your native one - by highlighting differences in syntax and so forth, especially when translating documents and the like from one to the other.
You get to make some sort of reasonable decision on "non-core" subjects before you start your GCSEs so really its not that long that you're seriously tied.

2) I never stated or implied that you were immature. I was simply attempting to find out if your perspective was likely to skew your view one way or another.

3) So when you get down to it, do you support the original decision which is the topic of this thread? In my personal and not-very-humble opinion, the governers et al need to really rethink what is best for thier kids in the long run, and I can quite understand many of the parents being angry.
Maybe a look at it from a different angle would clarify my position?
Kids who are good at sports are often (but not allways) the disruptive ones in more academic classes. They get humiliated often enough in punishments for being overactive and making a pain in the arse of themselves, basicly. They probably don't like the subject any more than the kids being "protected" in this case like sports day.
Sports day, however, is thier one chance in the year to achieve something in front of thier peers and to excel at something they like.
Why take that change away for the sake of a few others who are probably just as good at the subjects the sporty kids hate as the sporty kids are at sport?
Why should recognition of achievement be limited to academic subjects?
Why should sport be any less important than other subjects? When you get right down to it, we're designed to be active even if the vast majority of us sit on our backsides all day, so surely sport should be MORE important?

[KaneED]

I never hated school.


I may not have liked the teachers, but I pissed them off as much as they did me.


I actually enjoyed school. It was easy, you got the occasional teachers that were brilliant and you got to see lots of different people.

I may have just liked school because my friends wouldn't see me otherwise.



That could be it...

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by meglamaniac
Seeing as I was one of the kids who was supposedly having my life ruined by being ****e at sportsday and not good at most sports in general, I must have somehow managed not to notice the massive damage that was done to me.
Oh well, I never was that observant.

On its own it might not ruin lives, but its a symptom of something that does (ie totalitarian education teaching submissiveness to authority, and subjugation of independant thought).

PS What was your masters in Dante? (curious)

[meglamaniac]

Indeed - putting people in adverse situations encourages them to make more connections with people in the same position as them anyway, even if only to gang up and grumble about "the establishment".
Where would we be without the angst phase anyway?


Unfortunately, as we for once seem to be having an interesting discussion, I must now go out and procure food - although this may be difficult as my finances seem to be approaching Dante's situation.
This was not helped by lending my mate some money to pay her hall fees. Damn her.

Hey ho...

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Nodrog
(ie totalitarian indoctrination, submissiveness to authority, and subjugation of independant thought).

All that from introducing team building activities in favour of comeptition?

[SbOlly]

Originally posted by Toccata & Fugue
As I recall you never actually went to Sports day.

Thats a lie!

I went to the one you won long jump* and I had my GameBoy nicked.

Harsh times.


*or some other pointless form of jumping for competition.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
All that from introducing team building activities in favour of comeptition?

No, all that from forced participation and stifling of individuality.

[Kyoto]

Whats wrong with competition? Isnt this a free capitalistic country? Isnt competition promoted?

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Kyoto
Whats wrong with competition? Isnt this a free capitalistic country? Isnt competition promoted?

Competition != forced competition

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Nodrog
No, all that from forced participation

A lot of other activites in life are based around forced participation. That doesn't make me think that there is some hippy-lefty conspiracy to pollute our bodily fluids going on, though.


You'll end up living in a caravan in Georgia, shooting at every government empolyee that dares approach if you keep thinking like this, young Nodmund.

Originally posted by Nodrog
and stifling of individuality.

How does it stifle individuality, incidentally?

Are you saying that groups automatically result in some sort of faceless socialist morass of collective action, thought, and opinion?

Actually, as I'm something of a believer in the Iron law of Oligarchy theorist, I take exception at that.

I don't see how groups will stifle individuality. All that'll happen will be that the bossy, arrogant and possibly even generally superior people will domineer and take control. (See PA Forumjs for deatails.)

Incidentally, I always hated working with twats and idiots when I was a child. Still do, actually.

[Kyoto]

Originally posted by Nodrog
Competition != forced competition

Really? What about BT?

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
A lot of other activites in life are based around forced participation.

Such as?

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson

How does it stifle individuality, incidentally?

Are you saying that groups automatically result in some sort of

Im saying that its part of a growing movement towards stifling individuality. Obviously banning tennis at school isnt going to result in a horde of children growing up to be mindless robots; however it can certainly be interpreted as being a (very) small part of a wider trend that is leaning that way.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Nodrog
Such as?

Consciption, taxes, even voting in some states.

Originally posted by Nodrog
Im saying that its part of a growing movement towards stifling individuality. Obviously banning tennis at school isnt going to result in a horde of children growing up to be mindless robots; however it can certainly be interpreted as being a (very) small part of a wider trend that is leaning that way.

I agree.

I don't think it's engineered by anyone to produce such an effect, though, I just think it's more based on societal drift and lack of real direction accompained with a general pandering to the lowest common denominator generally.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
Consciption, taxes, even voting in some states.

Because I support these things?

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
I don't think it's engineered by anyone to produce such an effect, though, I just think it's more based on societal drift and lack of real direction accompained with a general pandering to the lowest common denominator generally.

I havent mentioned any 'conspiracy' in this thread, simply that it was happening. Also, what exactly do you think influences/dictates social trends?

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Nodrog
Because I support these things?

So are these also equally dangerous and degrading, etc?

Originally posted by Nodrog
I havent mentioned any 'conspiracy' in this thread, simply that it was happening.

Your language seemed to indicate a belief in some sort of overarching intention behind it all.

Originally posted by Nodrog
Also, what exactly do you think influences/dictates social trends?

Government, ultimately. If not government, then I'm not sure societal trends can be influenced by any single, definite actor at all.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
So are these also equally dangerous and degrading, etc?

Not equally no, but your argument was essentially "you should support people being forced to do things, because that way theyll put up less resistance when you force them to do other things, even though you dont agree with them being forced to do aforementioned other things".

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson

Your language seemed to indicate a belief in some sort of overarching intention behind it

Government, ultimately. If not government, then I'm not sure societal trends can be influenced by any single, definite actor at all. all.

Well, I do believe that there is conscious effort behind it, however that doesnt necessitate a belief in some kind of worldwide government consipracy or whatever. Its more to do with academic/philosophical movements rather than state level ones. In any case, it makes no real difference whether its premeditated or not, simply that its happening.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Nodrog
Not equally no, but youre argument was essentially "you should support people being forced to do things, because that way theyll put up less resistance when you force them to do other things you dont agree with".

No, my argument was that not all forced participation were based around a terrible desire to destroy society and government as we know it.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
No, my argument was that not all forced participation were based around a terrible desire to destroy society and government as we know it.

And then to support your argument, you gave examples of forced participations that I obviously wouldnt support...

If I oppose adults being forced to do things, I'm obviously going to oppose children being forced to do things, as being conditioned to accept authority unquestioningly as a child is what generally leads to the same quality in adults.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by Nodrog
And then to support your argument, you gave examples of forced participations that I obviously wouldnt support...

You admitted that all of these were not of equal 'nastiness' or whatever. Which was sort of my point.

[Nodrog]

Originally posted by Marilyn Manson
You admitted that all of these were not of equal 'nastiness' or whatever. Which was sort of my point.

Well no, punching someone in the face doesnt exhibit the same degree of nastiness as cutting their foot off, but that doesnt mean im going to support conditioning children into accepting physical violence being perpetrated against them.

[queball]

Why do socialists always bring up intent? Intent isn't important. Unless you want to bring in some popular psychology. Systemic, systematic, whatever.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally posted by queball
Intent isn't important.

I can't imagine many circumstances where it isn't.