labeling boys as "fags"

[Safety]

You should be required to take P.E. all years of High School, although I was only required to take it once in High School. It's better for your physical fitness.

[HugeFanOfBadReligion]

You should be required to take P.E. all years of High School, although I was only required to take it once in High School. It's better for your physical fitness.

I disagree (and certainly if it is based upon sports). Last school year was the last year I plan on taking P.E. classes. On the upcoming schedule, even if I had an interest in it, I'd have no room on my schedule for it. I only got three electives (electives are the classes that you have more freedom to choose from, such as the arts, tech classes, and P.E.) this upcoming year, and two of those are academically focused classes because I'm taking I.B. (an advanced type of class) classes, those classes being French and Grade 11 math (I'm going into grade 10), and the less academically focused class is art. When choosing what remaining one elective I would choose, it was between Tech Design (work with things such as blueprints, schematics, and Computer Aided Design, things like that) and art. I felt that both could contribute to the career I plan on pursuing in the field of architecture, and I was left with little time to decide, so I chose art. I most certainly had no room for P.E., and if it was mandatory, that would have had a large negative impact on my education.

[Earl]

You knew I was going to show up, since this is an issue I've felt strongly about even before I discovered this website in late December 2008. Historically mandatory P.E. was sports-centered, which means that the nonathletic students were shortchanged in more ways than one. In fact, the traditional approach has been a disgrace. It has promoted more bullying than all the academic classes combined, including acts of violence. As I experienced for myself when I was a boy, nonathletic students hardly got any exercise.

When are people finally going to use their minds to be able to make the observation that a sport is a contest, not a physical fitness program? Say, math classes were taught the way P.E. has been "taught" the traditional "sports only" approach. Basic math students, algebra students, and geometry students would be placed in a pre-cal or calculus class and be expected to understand the class subject and pass the course along with the calculus students, which would be absurd. But this is the way that mandatory
sports-centered P.E. classes have historically been taught.

The best and most efficient way to get into shape is by starting an exercise program, not by playing ball games. Say, a student is overweight. Is the best way for that student to lose weight by standing in a field somewhere watching someone throw a ball? No, the sort of exercise that an overweight person needs to do (in addition to modifying his diet) is to engage in constant movement. What sport does that? Why is it that all those who insist upon sports-centered P.E. being mandatory on all students are seemingly incapable of realizing that individual students have different physical fitness needs (in other words, they need to do different kinds of exercise)? Even a simple person can understand this. The answer is because all these people care about is promoting sports. They really don't care about providing a humane and efficient physical fitness program for nonathletic students.

P.E. is going through a period of reform in the United States. There are excellent innovative programs (the best of which is probably PE4Life) that actually promote physical fitness, instead of marginalizing nonathletic students and even frequently subjecting them to bullying. Donald is right: The most effective physical education class gives the students a choice. Different school districts have different P.E. programs. Unfortunately, the old P.E. is still used in some districts (way too many, I'm sure). As a nonathlete who works out on a bodybuilding program at a health club, I'm far more generous to the
sports-minded people than they ever were towards nonathletic boys, who were regarded as not deserving of any concern or consideration. I favor the traditonal sports-centered P.E. for the school athletes and those students who simply want to participate in sports as an ELECTIVE, not as a mandatory class. And just to be sure that neither critics of this website nor anyone else misunderstands me, I do not denigrate anyone's love of participating in a sport. I respect any endeavor that requires self-discipline -- whether it's athletics, art, or architecture. Respect for others is one of the moral principles both my parents taught me by their very example.

There is absolutely no rationale for forcing nonathletic boys who have no interest in them to participate in competitive sports in mandatory P.E. classes. Absolutely no rationale at all. Anyone can get into shape WITHOUT PARTICIPATING IN SPORTS. That's what exercise programs are for. There is not a single sport that exercises all the muscles of the body. I once read a newspaper article about a professional football player who took ballet lessons. When he started, he ended up with sore muscles! Is there any profession or line of work (outside of coaching or professional sports) that being forced to play a sport would be a necessity? No, there is not. Trigonometry, for example, is quite useful. It's used in chemistry and physics, and surely has other applications of which I'm not even aware. And why should a teenage boy who excels academically have his GPA lowered by a sports-minded coach in a mandatory sports-centered boys' P.E. class who looks down on him merely for not being an athlete? A class, which I might add, is totally USELESS to him.

It's my personal belief that the initial push for mandatory P.E. was not motivated by a truly genuine and sincere concern for physical fitness, but was motivated by anti-intellectualism (which has always been a component of American culture going all the way back to colonial times). (Yeah, I can just see it now. The wonderful folks who gave us mandatory sports-centered P.E. were setting up their curriculum when one of them said, "Hey, do you see that four-eyed sissy sitting over there with his nose stuck in a book? He's a feminized male. If we don't do something, he'll probably turn into a homosexual. I bet he thinks he's better than us since he's so smart. So, let's cut him down to size. Force him to play dodgeball with him as the target. Hit him harder! Knock his glasses off! Give him a bloody nose! That will make a man out of him!" ) Is it any great surprise that some of the most anti-intellectual places happen to be many of this nation's junior high and high schools?

I'm all for physical fitness. Again, I've been working on a bodybuilding program for over two years now. I enjoy my exhaustive workouts immensely. So, no one can say that the reason I'm critical of mandatory P.E. is because I'm sedentary. That bird won't fly. Lord willing, in a few more years of workouts, I will have a physique that will amaze former high-school classmates who haven't seen me in all these years. I will have (hopefully) achieved a dream NO THANKS TO THE SPORTS CULTURE.

[Fat Man]

You should be required to take P.E. all years of High School, although I was only required to take it once in High School. It's better for your physical fitness.

That's all I have to say!

[The Imperialist]

A healthy mind requires a healthy body (up to apoint), but this doesn't mean we need sports. It can be assault courses, field exercises, and well, military training. That is all. (Make sure one puts in firearms excercise, and signalling exercise, among others)

[i_like_1981]

You should be required to take P.E. all years of High School, although I was only required to take it once in High School. It's better for your physical fitness.

I don't agree. Frankly, as Earl is saying, the traditional approach to PE which basically involves competitive sports being the usual lesson routine (something that is also practiced here in the UK as well as the USA and probably many other countries worldwide) has been known to discourage students from physical activity althogether thanks to bullying and humiliations brought about by competitive sports. I would know about this from personal experiences, but I won't blather on about that here. For some people, PE has the ability to do far more harm than good, in an emotional and physical sense. And when you get into later years of high school, you really should be concentrating more on what career path you want to take and not having mandatory PE forced down your throat. People should just learn to exercise in their own free time by that point and not have the school throw exercise plans at them. If you want to concentrate on sports as a life path, that is fine, but WE'RE NOT ALL THE SAME. And these wonderful competitive sports like football and rugby everyone seems to enjoy so much... well, they weren't so kind to all of us.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[The Imperialist]

People can excel in sports, but with military training, everyone is in it together (if not, people like me will shout at you, and give you press ups because we don't like show-offs, or idiots who talk back thinking they are so great, or a combination.)

[Safety]

People can excel in sports, but with military training, everyone is in it together (if not, people like me will shout at you, and give you press ups because we don't like show-offs, or idiots who talk back thinking they are so great, or a combination.)

In sports, certain players on a team can be good, but it takes a team to win a championship. The only sport where that might not apply is basketball, and most of the time you still need someone almost as great to help win.

[The Imperialist]

Ah yes, people say that, but even as part of the team, people still want to show their ego, their skill, etc. Yes teamwork can happen (albeit with ulterior motives), but it is a different sort of teamwork from military training.

[Safety]

You should be required to take P.E. all years of High School, although I was only required to take it once in High School. It's better for your physical fitness.

That's all I have to say!

See Myron Rolle.

Ah yes, people say that, but even as part of the team, people still want to show their ego, their skill, etc. Yes teamwork can happen (albeit with ulterior motives), but it is a different sort of teamwork from military training.

I would assume that military training is more strict and more pincipled than most sports. And you know what they say, "If you've got it, flaunt it."

[i_like_1981]

Ah yes, people say that, but even as part of the team, people still want to show their ego, their skill, etc. Yes teamwork can happen (albeit with ulterior motives), but it is a different sort of teamwork from military training.

Military training is required in several European countries upon reaching the age of 18, such as Germany. Or you can choose to do civil service to help the local economy or workforce in some way. But I don't like the idea of having compulsory military service over here. Not everybody is cut out to be in the Army. The Army should be reserved for those who are mentally and physically strong and know how to withstand some severe emotional beatdowns, not those who are weak of mind and frame and will crack easily under pressure. Sports may encourage bullying but so can overly-harsh military instructors and stronger army cadets. We can't just have everybody doing the same thing over here and making it compulsory to do so. Everyone's different and would be better off not being pushed into things they can't handle.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

[The Imperialist]

Ah yes, people say that, but even as part of the team, people still want to show their ego, their skill, etc. Yes teamwork can happen (albeit with ulterior motives), but it is a different sort of teamwork from military training.

Military training is required in several European countries upon reaching the age of 18, such as Germany. Or you can choose to do civil service to help the local economy or workforce in some way. But I don't like the idea of having compulsory military service over here. Not everybody is cut out to be in the Army. The Army should be reserved for those who are mentally and physically strong and know how to withstand some severe emotional beatdowns, not those who are weak of mind and frame and will crack easily under pressure. Sports may encourage bullying but so can overly-harsh military instructors and stronger army cadets. We can't just have everybody doing the same thing over here and making it compulsory to do so. Everyone's different and would be better off not being pushed into things they can't handle.

Best regards,
i_like_1981

Ah, I agree with you here. However, in order to make a fully functional, and productive society, it is preferred if everyone is strong both in spirit and body. Ofcourse, direct military training is not necessarily good (gradual training is better).
In the real world, yes, bullying can happen from instructors and stronger cadets. However, those who are smart enough, will realise that there are higher ranking poeple who are not complete bastards (instructors to cadets are specifically picked to be nice at heart- and Regimental Sergeant Majors cannot be RSMs if they are bullying bastards, as officers will be able to tell very quickly) and so can have a word with them. In my view, if you do not have the brain to look for help (actively, instead of feeling sorry for yourself and entering a deflation spiral of self loathing), hope that you have luck and somebody like me will come around and give a good kicking into the bullies, (and give you a bit of advice, ad extra training if you wish for) or else, God(s) help you.
Stronger cadets (with no brains), it happens, always are made into cannon fodders, and used for rougher jobs (usually very obedient, but it depends on the category of 'nobrains'). Weaker cadets (with brains) are given still quite harsh jobs, but probably not as bad. Strong cadets (with brains) are given responsbility, and weak cadets (with no brains) are just left alone to their own devices unless they decide to help themselves (or are too much of a bastard to realise that the world doesn't revolve around him/her)
Another thing about military training is, if you do not help the weaker ones, the whole platoon (or section or whatever formation is considered the right size for punishment) is punished. If you leave people behind, God help you, as sergeants and above (including me) will force you to understand what it means to leave people behind in a real battle situation (with due physical punishment- we can only give them push ups sadly). If this person is dragging a section down on purpose, it is the person in charge's fault for not being able to fix the problem. It is all a problem of responsbility, so you have to have teamwork. Everybody works as a formation, and no deviation is allowed from it. (we are not special forces, so we not do things like individual survival)