BY MIKE CETERA
Are we creating future violent adults when we allow our children to play in youth sports? Can they simply turn the aggression off once the game is over, or does promoting the on-field "warrior" actually create the off-field wife beater?
Call the issue bunk, but new research suggests "that when youth are rewarded for on-the-field violence, there is a flawed expectation that these lessons will not be taken off-the field."
It's an interesting issue in light of all of the stories we hear about professional athletes' conduct off the field. It's also timely for this newspaper, because one of our local columnists on Saturday will tackle the issue of local football coaches promoting violence in what they say to their student athletes.
The study, from Pennsylvania State University, found that "male adolescent athletes who participate in contact sports such as football and wrestling face an increased likelihood of violence by over 40% compared to non-athletes."
Lead author Derek Kreager said the results are not surprising given the violent expectations set for high school athletes on the field:
He says, “On the one hand, parents, coaches, and communities expect athletes to abide by conventional rules, with the threat of team expulsion deterring misbehavior. On the other hand, these same groups provide contact-sport athletes with situational definitions that support violence as a means of attaining ‘battlefield’ victories, increasing peer status, and asserting ‘warrior’ identities.” Professor Kreager suggests that in the classroom, constraint and conformity are expected of contact-sports athletes, but in informal peer situations, power and aggression help male athletes to maintain their status within their peer groups and live up to their masculine reputations.
Read the full text of the study article here.
This is a very interesting subject. Is the problem caused by the violence (you used that word, not me) or is that we as a society extend certain privileges to the athlete? What goes on at home is very important. That probably can't be measured but it is very important. There are a lot athletes not getting into trouble. At first glance the study is an over simplification. Not to be cynical but it reads as if it was Masters or Doctoral thesus. Further reading would be required for anyone to really debate the issue. At first glance I would be hard pressed to say that I agree with the statistics cited.