The Courier

Scots Sports

9 February 2007
Volume 119, Issue 12

Faceoff: Professors discuss violence in sports

[Editor’s note: This series of debates between Professors Vivian and Gibson is meant to spur dialogue and discussion about sports on this campus, and in society in general.  Please remember that this is intended to serve as a venue which will increase and improve CIVIL discourse on this campus about a subject on which there is a spectrum of opinions.  Of course, any supporting or dissenting views about the columns are welcome.  Rather than address the professors individually, letters to the editor are welcome.

Thank you, 

The Editors 

By: Tobias Gibson
Contributing Writer

 

 

 

 

I had the opportunity to spend some time with a few dozen students two weekends ago. I had an interesting conversation with a few of them about the ways that modern technology have affected the personal interaction and relationships of today’s youth (by which I mean, for the most part 25 and younger). I learned a great deal about the ability of one to techno-stalk hundreds of Facebook “friends.” I was also able to talk to the students about IM and emailing their friends down the hall… even when both parties are in their rooms. It reminded me of a frustrating conversation I had with my wife a few years ago about why she called our neighbors instead of going by their house to speak with them face to face. I am now left yearning for the old days when people at least spoke to each other.

I bring all of this up because I am concerned about human interaction now and in the future. I am also worried that as people continue to seek “progress” old time notions like communication, personal contact, face to face dialogue and conversation will be pushed aside. How many families now eat in front of a TV or computer rather talk about their days, politics or faith? How many relationships are built around IM, text messages or emails and forego personal interaction? Too many, and the time approaches (or is it here now?) when it this will be the primary type of “relationship.”

What does this have to do with the tribe and sport? There exists a notion that sports allow the team to serve as a champion for the masses. Rather than a negative, as it is construed, I think that its conception of the champion being a step backward for society is dead wrong. One might argue that sports allows for an artificial conflict to built between two “tribes,” and that this conflict is unnatural. From the beginning of time humans have had conflict with their neighbors and have sent representatives of their tribe to settle the score, whether through battle or some sport or game that served in battle’s stead. Today’s equivalent, whether it is the Red Sox versus the Yankees or Monmouth versus Knox, is a natural extension of the conflicts that have arisen since we began to walk upright.

But the difference between sport and serious conflict is wide. A baseball game is a glorious event to behold, and fundamentally lacks the repercussions that violent combat would have upon those involved, their families and their societies. Today, sports are even seen as a “way out” of violent environments. Many of today’s best athletes come from countries or neighborhoods where true, genuine, destructive violence is the norm, not the exception. And, for many of them and their families, the ticket to a safe, protected area is through the arena of sport.

Some might focus on the “us against them” mentality of sports fans. This idea fundamentally overlooks, or perhaps even frowns upon the idea that sports create unity. I once drove through Nebraska with my friend John and stopped off at a small diner in Chappell for breakfast. The waitress and I discussed Nebraska football and the next thing I knew, I was being introduced to the cook and being given a tour of the kitchen, all because I told them that I was on my way to Memorial Stadium, the home of my beloved Cornhuskers. Sports bridge gaps between people. Sports afford a special opportunity for genders, races and classes to unite around a common goal… the victory of the team that you support. Love of the team serves as an ice breaker on the bus, in the airport, the sports bar or in the small Nebraska diner, allowing for the small talk that leads to friendship and community. It allows an avenue for parents to continue to have a relationship with their children even during the difficult teenage years, when the only thing the two seem to have in common is a shared passion for the Cubs.

Perhaps best of all, sports serve as the modern day campfire where people gather to interact, to speak face to face and communicate directly with one another. I have been able to forge a few friendships with fellow professors largely because of the common desire to enjoy a quality Monday Night Football game. In my short time at Monmouth College, sports have served to bring me together with faculty from whom I would otherwise remain distant. Tailgates and Super Bowl parties serve a bigger purpose than the commercial gain of the NFL and beer companies. Sports serve to bring people together in a day and age where technological “advancement” serves to distance us farther and farther from each other.

I say let the champions stand tall. I thank them for allowing us to reach out to each other in ways that society no longer seems willing to allow.

 

By: Craig Vivian
Contributing Writer

 

 

 

 

Sports are tribal in every sense of the word.  “Tribalism refers to the possession of a strong identity that separates oneself as a member of one group from the members of another, and is related to the concept of tribal society in that it is a precondition for members of a tribe to possess a strong feeling of identity” (Wikipedia).I wish to argue that tribalism in sports produces several negative results, the most detrimental being 1) sporting events become war events 2)  creating warriors 3) creating fanatics. 

The first problem, treating sports as war comes about due to the practice of having a team fight for the honor and reputation of a school, college, town, or state. Teams are representing a larger group of people and therefore must secure a victory to maintain the trust and confidence of the group. A tribal identity must be created that connects the team and the larger group. Depending on the results of a game, members of a college will feel the pain, joy, or sadness that is felt by the team even though the members of the college have no direct influence on the game’s outcome—they identify with the team. The team is put in the position of having to defend a challenge to the college’s integrity each time they engage with the opposing team in battle—they identify with the threat. Conditions of war must be created in order for the members of the tribe to form a single unified identity. If a war is to occur, there must be an enemy.

Let’s look at the Monmouth-Knox rivalry to see how a warlike atmosphere is created. First, look at the names of the combatants, the Fighting Scots and the Prairie Fire. Monmouth has chosen to explicitly draw upon a warrior image to represent it on the field. The Prairie Fire was an intimidating phenomenon in the early days of settling Illinois. Both these images are meant to impress the rival. I can only speak for Monmouth, but at certain levels of the college there is a stubborn insistence on describing Knox as the enemy. We have a distaste for all things Knox, and when people speak of them it is always with a hint of some unwholesome quality that we want to keep distant from our campus. In the past each side has vandalized the other and there have been incidents of violence, especially around the time of the yearly football game. I will be bold and assert that there is something akin to loathing for Knox that resembles the hatred that the citizens of a country might feel for another country with which they were at war. These negative feelings are the result of exaggeration and misplaced loyalty, what one might call a form of jingoism. The unsavoury result from this war we have with Knox is that many here feel antipathy for a group of people who are involved an education process very similar to our own. That is pathetic.
This same thing happens when someone becomes a fan(atic) of one the many professional teams. For some reason, a person identifies with a team. Suddenly the person becomes an appendage of the team. They are loyal to their team, much as a person is loyal to a country or religion. They may despise other teams or other players, just because they play on a rival team! In fact, there is nothing about any team that is unique or worthy of one’s loyalty. And yet, fan(atics) are willing to brutalize other rival fan(atics), are willing to humiliate another team’s players, are willing to take on as part of their identity a meaningless abstraction such as a Cub or a Red Sox, and fight with someone who has taken on another vacuous symbol to add to their personality. Fan(atics) can come dangerously close to worshipping elements of sports, (I’ll write at another time why I believe sports are found in huge numbers on Sunday) and this leads to the creation of the warrior.

Young athletes can be placed in positions of seeming importance when they defend the school or college from suffering defeat on the field week after week. These warriors have been entrusted with upholding the honor of the institution and they believe they fight for a worthy cause. But to what lengths are they willing to go to defend their alma mater? Some will ultimately sacrifice their bodies, their minds and their moral sensibilities to a sport. Look at the sport headlines over the past few weeks—professional players suffering mentally from too many concussions, others permanently debilitated from drugs that are becoming increasingly necessary to compete and the cult/curse of personality that enables athletes to destroy their and other’s lives through hubristic privilege.

Tribalism in sports affects our ability to see others as worthy, it damages our sense of self and it creates a group of people committed to fighting for the wrong causes. All this so that a few people feel connected to a team. I’d say it is time to bring in a sub.