The Athletics Double Standard

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Many/most of us would applaud a pledge for standing up to a hazing regimen. Now an athlete does it and he's a punk.

At least that's what I figure the prevailing attitudes will be on the subject.

You're comparing two different things, the reaction of the sports news world (or just this one writer) and the reaction of people on Greekchat. Also, the attitude in the article, where he's just being a party pooper and should just go along with it, is one I have seen about Greek hazing, if less frequently on GC than other places.

I think he's well within his rights to not participate in a hazing sort of tradition. And he appeared to act very maturely and not make a big stink about it, just politely declining. Spot on.

(Also, my lack of understanding was with the snippet of the story you provided. Did you cut and paste bits of it or is it that poorly written?)

ETA: What is it with the use of punk in your post? You sound like our troll from last night.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

You're comparing two different things,

If I was comparing two things which were the same, that'd sort of take all the fun out of comparing them, wouldn't it?

the reaction of the sports news world (or just this one writer) and the reaction of people on Greekchat. Also, the attitude in the article, where he's just being a party pooper and should just go along with it, is one I have seen about Greek hazing, if less frequently on GC than other places.

So obviously true that I didn't think it need to be said...

I think he's well within his rights to not participate in a hazing sort of tradition. And he appeared to act very maturely and not make a big stink about it, just politely declining. Spot on.

Is he? Texas anti-hazing laws make a pretty big fuss about singling out collegiate organizations, particular GLOs. Professional athletes definitely fall outside the class of persons protected by the law. An interesting conversation could occur as to what exactly Bryant's employment at the Cowboys requires him to do.

(Also, my lack of understanding was with the snippet of the story you provided. Did you cut and paste bits of it or is it that poorly written?)

Just cut the first couple paragraphs or so. It never really explains what "level two" contemplates.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Kevin

If I was comparing two things which were the same, that'd sort of take all the fun out of comparing them, wouldn't it?

But you framed it in such a way that it didn't make sense.

So obviously true that I didn't think it need to be said...

But it did, because you suggested the audience was the same. It's either sloppy or deliberately manipulative.

Is he? Texas anti-hazing laws make a pretty big fuss about singling out collegiate organizations, particular GLOs. Professional athletes definitely fall outside the class of persons protected by the law. An interesting conversation could occur as to what exactly Bryant's employment at the Cowboys requires him to do.

How is he not "within his rights?" I don't think you need anti-hazing laws for employment since that's what employment law and in particular his contract is for. Laws aside, just as in GLOs, you are always within your rights to decline and walk away. You can accept losing your job or your membership or your best friend as a consequence if you choose to do so.

Just cut the first couple paragraphs or so. It never really explains what "level two" contemplates.

Poorly written then. I wasn't clear that the tradition was the rookie carrying the veterans' pads until multiple repeat readings.