P.E. reform discussed in DU thread

[Earl]

Two days ago (Tuesday, November 2) under the username "bbdad," I raised the issue of P.E. reform in the Education discussion forum in a topic entitled "Boston schools go lacking in phys ed." I've posted a link to that webpage below.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/di ... =219x13762

I've noticed that the need to reform mandatory P.E. is not exactly a popular topic among "open-minded" liberals anymore than it is with so many other people. Liberals get upset over the bullying of gay students in the schools (as well they should!), but seem to care less about the bullying of nonathletic boys in mandatory "sports only" P.E. classes, which do ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to encourage them to become physically fit (but only condition them to fear coaches and athlete classmates). Some liberals have no problem with kids being bullied in schools, and actually defend the bullying with the morally vacuous "boys will be boys" mindset. This fact has perplexed me. Decades ago I had a higher opinion of liberals than I do now.

[recovering_fan]

Oh, I don't know, Earl. Perhaps I'm not seeing the whole thread or something, but you and "strategery" seem to have won the debate. You both answered Proud2b's two-line platitude with some terrific arguments. And thus far no one has answered you. Congrats!

You are definitely right about soi-disant "open-minded liberals", IMO. They reject conservative American beliefs like nationalism and theocracy, and they replace those with their own "truisms." I used to be a liberal fanatic when I was growing up. Then when I was 21, giant planes flew into to the World Trade Center. I got angry, and the armies of liberals who ran the school I was going to told me my anger was "unacceptable." (That is like a kid getting beaten up and then being told anger is the wrong response.) I fished around for a way to make sense of the escalating religious cold war between Islamists and the West, but no pre-packaged answer seemed satisfactory. It was at that point that I started to realise I was not meant to follow any herd, but rather to explore the realm of ideas and beliefs on my own.

Over time I decided there were some things I was going to take on faith, and that those beliefs constituted the core of who I was. Some of my beliefs are so "weird" that I have thus far only hinted at them on this site.

These days there are many things I dislike about the views of self-proclaimed "open-minded liberals."

Cheers,
RF

[Earl]

Oh, I don't know, Earl. Perhaps I'm not seeing the whole thread or something, but you and "strategery" seem to have won the debate. You both answered Proud2b's two-line platitude with some terrific arguments. And thus far no one has answered you. Congrats!

Thanks for the compliment. Strategery blunder's contribution was quite eloquent and extremely helpful.

You are definitely right about soi-disant "open-minded liberals", IMO. They reject conservative American beliefs like nationalism and theocracy, and they replace those with their own "truisms." I used to be a liberal fanatic when I was growing up. Then when I was 21, giant planes flew into to the World Trade Center. I got angry, and the armies of liberals who ran the school I was going to told me my anger was "unacceptable." (That is like a kid getting beaten up and then being told anger is the wrong response.) I fished around for a solution for dealing with the escalating religious cold war, but no answer seemed satisfactory. It was at that point that I started to realise I was not meant to follow any herd.

Wow! I hear you. We have more in common that I realized. I guess those who were running your school expected you-all to start singing, "All we are saying is give peas a chance." When I read your post the first time this afternoon, I recalled the sight of the people leaping to their deaths as the Twin Towers collapsed around them; and I thought of the young children who were on board the airliners, their lives cut horribly short. The thought still makes me angry. If I thought about it long enough, I'd weep. Many on the political left in this country today seem to be unaware of the threat that radical Islam poses to the West. Under an Islamofascist regime like the one in Iran, liberals would be among the first to get killed. When I was a college student, I considered myself to be quite liberal. I had grown up under Jim Crow and saw how terrible it was. But the issues are different today. In order to be accepted by liberals, one must not be pro-life. There was a time in this country when leading liberals were pro-life, and some conservatives were pro-choice! There are also certain ways in which conservatives really irritate me, too. I could go on and on about how politics have alienated me, but I'm too tired now. The fact is that I'm neither a Democrat nor a Republican, neither a conservative nor a liberal. In fact, I hardly ever vote; and, frankly, I don't care. I'm just a baaaaaaad boy. (That's a Lou Costello allusion from your grandparents' generation.) If I voted all the time, I'd have to violate my conscience.

You know what's really ironic? I've never had any desire to participate in any sport whatsover. But today I'm a health club fanatic; and since my bodybuilding is paying off, I'm beginning to look like a jock. Yet there are former high-school football players my age who are fat. Not that I'm chortling about it, because I'm not. It's just ironic, that's all. And the fact of the matter is that the traditional approach to P.E. victimized those who were the most physically unit, those who were the most in need of exercise. Those who did not benefit at all from traditional mandatory P.E.

[recovering_fan]

Many on the political left in this country today seem to be unaware of the threat that radical Islam poses to the West. Under an Islamofascist regime like the one in Iran, liberals would be among the first to get killed.

There are Leftists who realise that, and ironically many of them are immigrants from those same countries where radical Islam is spreading. (I remember a story about a Moroccan immigrant exhorting his colleagues in the Dutch parliament to stand up to the threat you mention.) I wonder whether the world couldn't learn a thing or two about controlling religious extremism (whether that extremism might be Islamic, Christian or Hindu in flavour) by looking at policies in post-1923 Turkey? (I'm no history major, so I'm unfamiliar with whatever dark side this NATO ally of ours may have--apart from the Armenian holocaust, which I think took place before Mustafa Kemal Ataturk came to power.) But then Turkey consists almost entirely of Muslims, so it might not be the most realistic example for us to follow. In any case, they have remained resolutely secular for over 80 years.

--RF