To be clear, it's my premise that no sexual preference or sexual orientation has a monopoly on ethics or morals and though each sexual orientation has it's problems with pedophiles, I feel gender segregated coaching could create a dramatic reduction in sex abuse crimes.
According to demographer Judy Bradford of the Center for Population Research in LGBT Health, 3.8% of the population is either lesbian, gay, bisexual and/or transgender. That is a small percentage of the population. Hence, if the men coached the boys and the ladies coached the girls, instances of heterosexual sex abuse cases could drop more than 95%?
Of course this can't become a "law" but I see it as an opportunity or guideline to greatly reduce both sexual abuse crimes and civil litigation lawsuits. I also suspect it would open more doors and create more employment opportunities for female coaches as well.
Something for the local swim clubs to consider.
7 comments:
Unfortunately the rationale doesn't work because many times straight male pedophiles prey on pre-pubescent boys. This sexual problem is in many cases completely separate from their actual sexual orientation. What we need is better education of children and parents as well as organizations who take allegation and rumors seriously.
Granted my suggestion is not an absolute but the the crux of the premise is to greatly reduce or decimate the odds of abuse. I think my math works
I admit that your criticism definitely has added something to the conversation.
There was a comment above yours that only proffered a one word contribution. That word: "Absurdity". Hence, I just marked it as spam. consequently that person's IP address has been flagged and he/she may never be able to comment again.
I do not mind criticism or even insults but they should either offer something better or at the very least have some panache to them.
Hence, I am only going to publish comments that contribute
Marking the comment "absurdity" is dishonest. Dishonest in the sense that it was not an unsolicited message (you have a comment button and the message was a comment on your post). It's also dishonest in the sense that, if you think your proposal is in any way grounded in reality, you're not being honest to yourself. The idea is so crazy that I had to read it twice to determine whether you'd been reading too much Johnathan Swift.
Here's a few other options for your consideration:
1) All coaches should be castrated.
2) Coaches should be separated from swimmers by a giant plexiglas shield that should be erected on the pool deck.
3) Nobody can join a swim team until they reach the age of consent.
4) Swimmers should be forced to wear locked, metal swimsuits whose which are only to be unlocked when said swimmer is within the confined of his/her own home.
All that being said, since you're feeling so put out about the one word comment, I'll burn some additional words to underscore why the post is "absurdity"...
It's completely detached from the economic realities of swim teams and will limit the opportunity of many swimmers to have world class coaching.
> There is no way that the majority of swim teams can afford to hire 2x the coaches, or that current coaches have the capacity to coach 2x the number of training groups.
> How many Olympic swimers had an opposite gendered swim coach? I would bet they almost all did at some point in their development. The obvious current example is Missy Franklin. Does she exist without Todd Schmitz?
The reality is that there is no way to completely eliminate sexual abuse as a problem. It's a problem that can only be minimized through restrictions on one-on-one swimmer/coach interactions and an honest assesment and awareness by everyone from parents to administrators.
There is no way to completely solve it but I think my premise would greatly reduce theses incidents of abuse.
I have suggested other rules too like no-one-on-one policies like the Boy Scouts, but people in leadership positions such as John Leonard throw up their arms and shout: "Can't have that, Can't have that!" and then go on to support policies that Coaches can marry their swimmers. (See John Leonard's resume.)
Ironic that you don't attack my math. Both math and demographics are grounded in reality and it's my beief that was suggestion was too. You mileage may vary..
Finally, your 'reductio ad aburdum' play does NOT wash for those hyperbolic suggestions about "Plexiglass shields" have nothing to do with my original premise and more to do with what I presumed are your anger issues toward my suggestion.
As for evoking Missy Franklin, she would be be great no matter which gender coached her as long as that coach was a good coach.
To think of a club team having a group that must be split by gender and have a seperate, equally capable coach (essentially a 'head coach' for each) would rquires a tremendous amount of additional fees from each swimmer. Better would be 2 coaches (typical of most age group programs groups), one of each sex.
And these two coaches would create a witness for no one-on-one situations as well. :-)
I think it is wrong to label these crimes as paedophile crimes necessarily.
Most seem to me to be the actions of selfish and weak individuals who do not think that they are committing a crime, just taking advantage of an infatuation (or a series of them) and abusing their position of authority to enhance their egos by having sex with attractive young people.
Set boundaries. No sex between a coach and his/her swimmers at all, not ever. If a relationship starts to form then one or both should leave. If the relationship continues when the coach/swimmer relationship isn't there anymore then so be it but if the coach/swimmer relationship is ongoing then making it physical isn't love, it isn't dating, it isn't an affair, it is sexual abuse; rarely though is it paedophilia.
Post a Comment