Political Correctness

[McLaren]

I'll never understand why they try to include everyone in sports at young ages. For all the kids that stick with the sport through their school years, they're just going to realize later on no one hands out trophies if you're not winning a division/conference/title.

You just kind of set them up for disappointment or a unexpected dose of reality.

 

[TenEightyOne]

I'll never understand why they try to include everyone in sports at young ages. For all the kids that stick with the sport through their school years, they're just going to realize later on no one hands out trophies if you're not winning a division/conference/title.

You just kind of set them up for disappointment or a unexpected dose of reality.

Nonsense, there's nothing wrong with encouraging children by showing them that you don't have to always be in the "top 5" to enjoy a sport or to progress to a better level.

 

[McLaren]

Nonsense, there's nothing wrong with encouraging children by showing them that you don't have to always be in the "top 5" to enjoy a sport or to progress to a better level.

Giving them a participation trophy for coming dead last is nonsense. You enjoy the sport by learning how to get better so you can eventually win a trophy at all.

Giving out trophies to everyone doesn't encourage improvement. It encourages everyone is a winner when everyone is not.

 

[TenEightyOne]

Giving out trophies to everyone doesn't encourage improvement.

Have you ever taught or are you coming from the "it's just obvious" position?

It encourages everyone is a winner when everyone is not.

When they're children they are. And they're all painters, actors, singers, dancers, writers, astronauts, dreamers and so on and so forth.

They'll have plenty of time to learn the full effects of winning and losing, no need to hammer them flat so early.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Giving out trophies to everyone doesn't encourage improvement.

I don't know about that - I have taken a few sports classes where getting kids to participate at all is an achievement in itself.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Nonsense, there's nothing wrong with encouraging children by showing them that you don't have to always be in the "top 5" to enjoy a sport or to progress to a better level.

Your assumption is that a kid who gets a ribbon or trophy for just showing up is encouraged by it. I've never seen a kid encouraged by a participation award and I've seen hundreds of them handed out over the years. Never been in a kid's bedroom where they were prominently displayed and I've been in quite a few. IMO participation awards are mainly for the parents, who feel the need to be a constant presence in the lives of their children and feel that constant support and encouragement and as little disappointment as possible, is required for raising a healthy child. Many people disagree and believe that dealing with failure is just as, if not more important, and artificial avoidance of it doesn't help the child at all.

My own son said to me when he was 6 or 7, "they're just participation ribbons Dad, everyone gets one".

 

[Scaff]

Giving them a participation trophy for coming dead last is nonsense. You enjoy the sport by learning how to get better so you can eventually win a trophy at all.

Giving out trophies to everyone doesn't encourage improvement. It encourages everyone is a winner when everyone is not.

One thing I've always wondered about those who have an issue with participation awards, how do you feel about campaign and service medals?

They get given to everyone for participation.

Not a direct analogy I know, but it's a similar enough to make me think. They are arguably both about getting involved, doing you part for the 'team', etc.

 

[McLaren]

What a disgraceful comparison. Men who put their lives on the line are given a medal for that very reason. If anything, many of them deserve more than just a medal for the sacrifices they make.

Have you ever taught or are you coming from the "it's just obvious" position?



When they're children they are. And they're all painters, actors, singers, dancers, writers, astronauts, dreamers and so on and so forth.

They'll have plenty of time to learn the full effects of winning and losing, no need to hammer them flat so early.

Zero teaching experience needed. Little kids are one thing, children who are on the cusp of entering middle school are another. By that age, they need to begin understanding not everyone is a winner when it comes to sports.

 

[Scaff]

What a disgraceful comparison. Men who put their lives on the line are given a medal for that very reason. If anything, many of them deserve more than just a medal for the sacrifices they make.

Except you don't.

My uncle was in the Royal Transport Corp and as a dozen or so campaign and service medals, never put his life on the line once (by his own admission). I also know someone who was an RAF postman, same deal.

My grandfather however got his front front line combat as a para, however he did get more for that reason as well.

As such while it's not a direct analogy (as I quite clearly said), it does have a similarity.

However I have also just thought of one that has been handed out in sport for over 100 years, Olympic participation medals, everyone involved gets one.

You then also have sporting 'caps' and 'jackets' that are handed out to national team members for participation.

It seems to have rather a lot of parallels.

Science also says that not only do they do no harm, but can be beneficial


http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/8054046

 

[McLaren]

Except you don't.

My uncle was in the Royal Transport Corp and as a dozen or so campaign and service medals, never put his life on the line once (by his own admission). I also know someone who was an RAF postman, same deal.

My grandfather however got his front front line combat as a para, however he did get more for that reason as well.

As such while it's not a direct analogy (as I quite clearly said), it does have a similarity.

More "well I know such and such so there" from you just like the other thread. Don't care who you know; my own father served over 2 decades in the military and spent a long time over in Vietnam. Have a strong grasp of what people still go through even if they're not on the front lines.

They get a medal for serving their country. Big difference between them and kids playing a sport.

 

[TRGTspecialist]

This is an interesting debate but I don't know what it has to do with relatively high-level, 1st division college sport - I hope that coach wasn't seriously suggesting "participation trophy culture" as an excuse for his team's loss - or political correctness. Are rewards handed out to avoid offending people? Or is it the "political correctness is anything I don't like" definition coming back again?

 

[Scaff]

More "well I know such and such so there" from you.

They get a medal for serving their country. Big difference between them and kids playing a sport.

Sorry are you saying that campaign and service medals are not award to everyone, regardless of rank or role who was in the theatre?

What about the national team ones, or Olympic participation ones?

It also seems odd that you don't care who I know, and then insist on sharing who you know? I posed a perfectly reasonable question (and that's what it is) around the fact that participation awards do exist in adulthood for a number if reasons. I would suggest that you don't take a perfectly valid question personally.

 

[huskeR32]

Or is it the "political correctness is anything I don't like" definition coming back again?

When did it ever go away?

 

[mustafur]

I want to thank everyone for participating in this thread you all deserve an award lolol.

 

[McLaren]

People in the military deserve a medal and then some; they're serving their country.

Olympic medals are likely given out bc getting there is a huge honor; you're representing your country on a global scale. They're medals to reward you for achieving that milestone, not for participating. Too bad none of those athletes care about that; they're after Golds. Same thing as national sports. Nobody wants Divison or Conference titles, they want the main title.

So there's nothing "perfectly valid" about this poor attempt to justify participation awards for kids by comaparing military/Olympic medals.

 

[TenEightyOne]

...none of those athletes care about that...

Citation required.

 

[JKgo]

Never been in a kid's bedroom where they were prominently displayed and I've been in quite a few.

Oh, wait a second. Do I need to call the cops here?

I'm hoping that this coach wasn't using the participation medal malarkey to somehow justify his team's lack of success, deflecting blame and all that.

 

[Scaff]

People in the military deserve a medal and then some; they're serving their country.

No one has said otherwise.

Olympic medals are likely given out bc getting there is a huge honor; you're representing your country on a global scale. They're medals to reward you for achieving that milestone, not for participating. Too bad none of those athletes care about that; they're after Golds. Same thing as national sports. Nobody wants Divison or Conference titles, they want the main title.

Olympic participation medals are not just given out to athletes, however that doesn't change the fact that they are given out for participation.

Now one point you make is important, you also have to have the awards for the highest levels if achievement as well.

However you do now seem to be ok with participation awards as a concept, just not for kids.

Science however disagrees and as per the source I cited they at worse do no harm and at best raise levels if effort and commitment.

So there's nothing "perfectly valid" about this poor attempt to justify participation awards for kids by comaparing military/Olympic medals.

And you get to make that decision because?

I'm simply posing a question and a point of debate, so far I see no justification or evidence to either invalidate it or to describe it as 'poor'.

 

[mustafur]

Like all Trophies, they mean what you think they mean.

At the end of the day it's just some plastic stuck or screwed onto wood(most trophys) it means nothing(unless you put a meaning to it) and is worth nothing in material value.

You might get a kid that hasn't been involved in a team sport before and got involved and was happy that he achieved a goal of doing it.

Then you might get another who didn't want to do the sport but his parents made him, and he didn't value it at all.

Same can apply to medals:

you might get someone who wanted to serve his or her country and was proud of achieving it.

and then you get someone who wanted to but then saw some things that he/she didn't want to be involved in and is disgusted at getting a medal for it.

 

[McLaren]

Citation required.

In contrast to wanting a Gold/Championship title? Yeah, you keep living in a fantasy land.

Athletes want titles because it distinguishes them, immortalizes them in history. It's why no one cares at all about the Warriors breaking the NBA record 73-9 because they didn't win a ring. It's a meaningless record now just like their division/conference award.

 

[BobK]

I was "awarded" the National Defense Service Medal. I put "awarded" in quotes because there was no formal award ceremony. Rather, I was directed by my division officer or leading petty officer (I forget which) to go down to the geedunk and buy one. And that's what we called it -- the "geedunk ribbon".

 

[Northstar]

You just kind of set them up for disappointment or a unexpected dose of reality.

I would guess the insane amount of spoiling that tends to go on for the first 18 years of a person's life probably does more damage than a participation award.

As for the awards themselves, I'm against them as I view them as a colossal waste of money. Their participation award should be the pizza party that most youth teams do at the end of the season anyways.

 

[McLaren]

I would guess the insane amount of spoiling that tends to go on for the first 18 years of a person's life probably does more damage than a participation award.

As for the awards themselves, I'm against them as I view them as a colossal waste of money. Their participation award should be the pizza party that most youth teams do at the end of the season anyways.

I agree with that as well. Too much coddling, no discipline, seeming to be just a real lack of actual parenting. I believe it was Louis CK or another comedian who joked you can't be friends with your kids; they lose their fear of you.

 

[Famine]

I believe it was Louis CK or another comedian who joked you can't be friends with your kids; they lose their fear of you.

It's actually rather easy - you just have to bring them up to be the sort of person you wouldn't mind being friends with, and the rest happens by itself.

And on that topic, my eldest has seen right through the concept of 'everyone's a winner' since she was about 6.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

They'll have plenty of time to learn the full effects of winning and losing, no need to hammer them flat so early.

And that's without considering the inverse - if you take away the culture that values participation, kids can start to get incredibly competitive; even unhealthily so. In my experience, that tends to bring out the worst in them. Admittedly, I am coming from an academic context rather than a sporting one, but I have seen what happens when kids start to treat assessment tasks and exams like a competition, and what happens when they put pressure on themselves to achieve unrealistic expectations. The short answer is nothing good.

So the question has to be asked - why do we give out participation trophies? Is it to be politically correct by rewarding kids for showing up? Or is it because kids are not necessarily mature enough to handle success or disappointment (especially in their social circles) and we are trying to teach them to take pride in what they do achieve?

 

[Imari]

You enjoy the sport by learning how to get better so you can eventually win a trophy at all.

Or, like, you enjoy the sport because it's actually a fun thing to do. It doesn't have to be just about winning all the time.

God forbid anyone plays any sports that they're not competing in at the national level.

What a disgraceful comparison.

Disgraceful because it's surprisingly accurate?

Yes, people who give great service to their country should be given more than a participation award, but that's basically what they get. Is it disgraceful because soldiers who put their lives on the line are all treated like children who can be given identical ribbons and sent home to bed instead of truly valued?

Olympic medals are likely given out bc getting there is a huge honor; you're representing your country on a global scale. They're medals to reward you for achieving that milestone, not for participating.

I see.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...nt-realize-he-had-qualified-for-the-olympics/

It's why no one cares at all about the Warriors breaking the NBA record 73-9 because they didn't win a ring.

The correct phrasing is you don't care at all. Some people still find that particular record to be an achievement, and one that's unlikely to be topped for a while considering how long the Bulls record stood for.

==========

My two cents, everyone being a winner is bollocks, but it's very important to acknowledge people when they work hard and try, regardless of results. Just because you're not the best ever, doesn't mean that what you did doesn't deserve recognition.

Myself, I prefer it when children are awarded for things that they actually have achieved. That means things that are sometimes outside being winners, and it also means that sometimes kids get nothing because they did nothing. But I think it's valuable at least early on to incentivise hard work so that they get into the habit, because later on the kids will need to learn how to motivate themselves when any potential rewards may be far away or non-existent.

 

[eran0004]

I'll never understand why they try to include everyone in sports at young ages. For all the kids that stick with the sport through their school years, they're just going to realize later on no one hands out trophies if you're not winning a division/conference/title.

You just kind of set them up for disappointment or a unexpected dose of reality.

Well, why were the stadium lights so important for officer Rodriguez?



Winning big titles and medals is just one aspect of sports, and it's one that doesn't even apply to children because it's not until the late teens where you actually can start competing for those.

There are several benefits for children to do sports, regardless of their skill:

• The exercise is healthy. Especially today where we tend to spend a lot of time sitting still in front of tablets or computers.
• It provides a social context and organised activities, which can help to include the shy kids and make them grow.
• It teaches you some important social skills, such as cooperation and teambuilding.
• It provides meaningful free time, and an option to other - sometimes destructive - activities.

Not everyone likes doing sports, but for those who do it's great. And from a purely athletic perspective, having a big pool of active children makes it more likely for big stars to eventually emerge, so excluding children at young age would have a long-term negative effect on the level of the athletic elite.

As for handing out trophies for everyone, if you get a trophy just for participating then I don't think it actually means that much to you, so I don't think it's something you'll be very disappointed about when you grow up. That being said, I don't really see the point on giving trophies to everyone. A souvenir for remembering the event can be nice (even professional clubs does that), but an actual trophy is inappropriate.

It's important to appreciate everyone for participating and doing their best - regardless of the outcome of the game, but there are better and more meaningful ways of doing that than to give everyone a trophy.

 

[McLaren]

Well, why were the stadium lights so important for officer Rodriguez?



Winning big titles and medals is just one aspect of sports, and it's one that doesn't even apply to children because it's not until the late teens where you actually can start competing for those.

There are several benefits for children to do sports, regardless of their skill:

• The exercise is healthy. Especially today where we tend to spend a lot of time sitting still in front of tablets or computers.
• It provides a social context and organised activities, which can help to include the shy kids and make them grow.
• It teaches you some important social skills, such as cooperation and teambuilding.
• It provides meaningful free time, and an option to other - sometimes destructive - activities.

Not everyone likes doing sports, but for those who do it's great. And from a purely athletic perspective, having a big pool of active children makes it more likely for big stars to eventually emerge, so excluding children at young age would have a long-term negative effect on the level of the athletic elite.

My comment was referring to including everyone by giving them all trophies. Whether kids want to participate at all is up to them or their folks.

As for handing out trophies for everyone, if you get a trophy just for participating then I don't think it actually means that much to you, so I don't think it's something you'll be very disappointed about when you grow up. That being said, I don't really see the point on giving trophies to everyone. A souvenir for remembering the event can be nice (even professional clubs does that), but an actual trophy is inappropriate.

It's important to appreciate everyone for participating and doing their best - regardless of the outcome of the game, but there are better and more meaningful ways of doing that than to give everyone a trophy.

Can agree with this.

 

[McLaren]

Double post on the phone; please merge.

The correct phrasing is you don't care at all. Some people still find that particular record to be an achievement, and one that's unlikely to be topped for a while considering how long the Bulls record stood for.

Only silly Warriors fans still want to tout that achievement but not even the team really cares because it didn't amount to anything in the end. You guys can keep pretending most professional sports achievements are still memorable without titles/rings behind them. The fact is, at the end of the day, only the diehard sports fan cares. People remember Michael, hardly anyone knows who Stockton is or what he's famous for.

As Scottie Pippen once said, "It don't mean a thing without the ring".

Not going to entertain the rest of the post trying to ride the coat tails of Scaff's.

 

[FoRiZon]

What people should realize though is that people's reaction to certain awards is different to others.

For example, teachers would much impressed seeing your achievement at 1st place on a competition rather than just a silly participation "award". Same for Job Seekers if the children grow up.