Annapolis principal bans "Tag" on the playground.
April 25, 2001 8:14 AM   Subscribe

Annapolis principal bans "Tag" on the playground. If you take out the inflammatory rhetoric (I know, it affects this guy's credibility), the main point of this article is a little disturbing. Thoughts? Comments?
posted by jennaratrix (25 comments total)
Okay, let me rephrase. If you take out the inflammatory rhetoric, there isn't much left. I meant you might have to actively ignore it long enough to get to his point.
posted by jennaratrix at 8:21 AM on April 25, 2001

As far as I can tell, his point is 'keep the women out of the schools! They want to cut our male children's balls off!' If I didn't already have a stomach virus this morning, I would still want to throw up.
posted by darukaru at 8:23 AM on April 25, 2001

He's a Mason. That explains it. Warped dude.
posted by acridrabbit at 8:28 AM on April 25, 2001

From the link you've provided, there is simply no way to determine what went on in this case. It's possible that you had a group of kids who were beating each other up under the guise of a tag game and a principal who said "no more tag" as a form of punishment. When I was in elementary school, if the class misbehaved, we had privileges suspended. I don't think it was some part of a feminist conspiracy to emasculate me and the other boys.

I'd rather not waste my outrage on something that may not even have happened.
posted by anapestic at 8:34 AM on April 25, 2001

If school scrapes didn't play into the hands of over-litigious parents, heads and teachers wouldn't be forced to issue edits in an attempt to minimise their liability.

The man with the hat, though, was probably dropped on his head at school.
posted by holgate at 8:55 AM on April 25, 2001

First: I've googled my brains out, but I can't find another reference anywhere to "tag" being banned at this school. I'm not sure he's not making it up entirely.

Second: ...the principaless of West Annapolis Elementary... Anyone who invents words like "principaless" to mock women in positions of authority has got serious concerns about the size of his penis. And his page is a waste of perfectly good electrons.

Third: I think this guy has already gotten too many hits based on this thread. I suggest we do our best to ignore him. He'll go away once they find the corpses in his basement....
posted by jpoulos at 9:03 AM on April 25, 2001

I tried to get the original story here, but their archive only seems to go back a coupla days...
posted by owillis at 9:04 AM on April 25, 2001

This misogyny of this piece reminded me of the latest Dave Sim rant that was mentioned on LMG a couple of weeks ago. When Fred started blathering about "...a New Age man, apparently a transsexual who got stuck in mid passage," I fully expected him to start attributing all the evils of the world to the "feminist-homosexualist axis."
posted by harmful at 9:10 AM on April 25, 2001

Anapestic and Jpoulos - both good points, which occurred to me as well. I've been googling away myself to try to find an original story since posting the link. In future I'll do my background research first. If I happen to find anything, I'll post it, in the meantime I appreciate that rather than yelling at me, you've all been looking, too!
posted by jennaratrix at 9:20 AM on April 25, 2001

harmful: wasn't aware Dave Sim walked down that road again, while he's a talented writer and he's comic is cool - I can't help but to scan his essay and think he's off his rocker.

I mean, I'm guilty of thinking feminism snaps back the other way at times - but he's smacking around a ball of wax from some other convenience store.
posted by owillis at 9:33 AM on April 25, 2001

Okay, I have an answer, sort of. The story ran on March 26, 2001 under the headline "Playing Tag Banned At City School" and is archived in the online version of the Annapolis Capital. Unfortunately, the Annapolis Capital does not allow archived stories to be accessed for free, and I'm not about to pay $5.00 to read the story, which I then couldn't link to anyway. So it is apparently true, but doesn't answer Anapestic's question about the circumstances behind the banning.

I think I've spent enough time on this today, now I know why I rarely post links! If anyone is interested, here is the search page.
posted by jennaratrix at 9:52 AM on April 25, 2001

I think this is just an isolated incident (albeit it seems a rather silly one, but then we don't know any of the facts)

Here we have a guy who obviously has so many problems that his character (such as it is) absolutely overwhelms his subject. However should a more reasoned discourse be found, I still think that I would consider this to be an isolated incident, out of which nothing real or significant can be drawn about society’s mores and meandering, because there is none.
posted by lucien at 9:53 AM on April 25, 2001

I did a check of The Capital's archives, and there's a headline from 3/26/2001: "Tag Banned at City School." (Or "City School Bans Tag"; I forget which.) I'd have to pay $5 to get the actual story out of the archives, and it's not worth it. It doesn't look like any other news organization found the story worth picking up.

So he didn't entirely fabricate the incident. He's still a crackpot.

As for the general plot to feminize men, it doesn't sound like the "principaless[es]" that this guy whines about are doing anything that our mothers wouldn't have done. Presumably the only way to protect our fragile masculinity is to have us all raised by wolves. Male wolves, of course. Pass the prey.
posted by anapestic at 9:58 AM on April 25, 2001

If you turn to the bottom of the page (URL) given, and then go to "other articles" and read them , the pattern emerges:
Under the guise of being "just plain folks," he has a substanital number of essays (I read them ) against blacks, women, gays, Hispanics and clearly believes that the White Male is supreme and ought to be in charge.
He also cloaks his writing with numerous references to show he is educated, has been around, and is all for equity and fairness. Even pretends to know about Darwinian theory but is contemputous of it with a reference to a book written by a law prof out west who is anti-evolution and is dismissed by lelgitimate people in the field.
Tip: never trust a guy who writes as an opening "I reckon" cause he is posing as just plain folks. And never let your daughter go out with a guy who wears a hat like the one the author sports.
posted by Postroad at 10:02 AM on April 25, 2001

Benefits of working for a college - large databases on things most of the students find useless - Lexis-Nexis had the article. The story is pretty well summarized by the guy - it looks like it was just done because the principal noticed the kids were getting a bit too rough. Specifically, it says something about the game violating the school's "No Touching Policy" but goes on to state that it's not because of any sexual grounds. Didn't say what made the teacher suddenly realize it was a rough game. I wonder if red rover is gone too...

My guess is it's banned due to some bureaucratic hiccup.
posted by jwells at 10:12 AM on April 25, 2001


I managed to "find" the archived article. Some highlights:

The principal of his school, West Annapolis Elementary, outlawed the game in recess last fall because it violates the school's "no touching" policy.


"They would start up and inevitably it got too rough," Principal Joan Brisco said. "The reason we stopped tag was because we didn't want them getting hurt."


[Father of one of the students] said tag should be allowed because other sports with more contact are still played at West Annapolis.

"In her mind, it's a safety issue," he said. "But there's more physical interaction in a game of soccer than there is in tag."


Although the county's sexual harassment policy does prohibit "unwanted" touching, the concern with elementary school students is primarily rough-housing, which prompted Ms. Brisco to start her ["no touching"] policy several years ago.

"There are good touches and bad touches that children are taught," Mr. Cross said. "What we're constantly trying to do is use structured discipline policies and logical consequences to let youngsters know what the rules are."

posted by jpoulos at 10:14 AM on April 25, 2001

Valid points Postroad.

Well, I didn't really doubt that there was an incident where tag was banned from a school, for whatever reason. Because you don't have to make up weird stuff, in this crazy and wacky world, thing happen all the time which (being isolated from any real details about the incident) just seem rather strange, or can be made to seem so.

This guy doesn't have to reach far to find material, which he can warp to suit his personal delusions. Just look at the "What’s Weird" new wires, they are full of this sort of stuff all the time (this is an extrapolation, jenny I know you didn't get your story from there)

Which is why I dislike it when news stories from those sources find their way to Metafilter. Sometimes they are just an excuse for what turns out to be an amusing thread, which is fine. But sometimes people try to find "real" meaning in some of these random occurrences, which leads to threads which are at time different to this hardly lucid diatribe only by a matter of degree.
posted by lucien at 10:15 AM on April 25, 2001

The fellow looks like Imis smoking a mean strain of Indica. I found that in military towns, violence amongst children is very high, yet one doesnt hear about it to much. Perhaps the parents handle it internally. Some kids got rowdy, a school offical makes a comment, this guy slaps on women- this, women -that rhetoric and we have another "example" of American institutions like Tag, being destoyed.Umm..whos "it' again. Perhaps we can invent 'flag tag'
posted by clavdivs at 11:42 AM on April 25, 2001

My favourite line in the article: "Historically, mothers have been women." Really? Thanks for the stunning insight.
posted by jess at 12:18 PM on April 25, 2001

There is some solace in that boys are not required to wear training bras.

Jonathan Swift would be proud.
posted by swell at 12:34 PM on April 25, 2001

I have some sympathy for the guy; although he's obviously playing the cranky bastard, he's hardly the only one to have objected to the feminization of men. Obviously he's all about not being politically correct, but when you subtract that out, he's making the same point many others have made.
posted by kindall at 1:24 PM on April 25, 2001

I find it interesting that no one has recognized that -- regardless of whatever subversive or divergent views this guy might have on his agenda -- his article is at least a little humorous. I think he's clearly aware of what he's saying and how it will be taken, and there is a definite hint of tongue-in-cheek at times.

Good example: Jess, you mentioned "Historically, mothers have been women." I read that as intentionally obvious and silly, not as a braindead statement. Granted, the humor is tied to digging at some stereotypical Woman Type, but -- like I said -- that's apart from my point.

(tangent: Howdy, everybody. Been lurking for a couple months, decided to set up an account finally.)
posted by cortex at 1:31 PM on April 25, 2001 [1 favorite]

Welcome Cortex.

"Obviously he's all about not being politically correct, but when you subtract that out, he's making the same point many others have made."

I don't think anyone doubted that, although some didn't agree with it (the point)

Sometimes, the haulage of luggage becomes arduous after even a relatively short passage of time, and one seeks solace in the resplendent luxuries afforded by a moment of repose, although it often proves itself to be transient and bittersweet.
posted by lucien at 1:49 PM on April 25, 2001

Corex, hell dick Nixons funny, speilberg made aspects of holocaust funny(Factory execution scence) Howard Hughes bringing 60 tons of irratiated sand into a hollywood sound stage is funny, this Imis wanna-be is not funny. get off the 'see the message, not the messenger' stuff. More links to children and violence, how, historically, the media/hollywood tried to censor anything with a pulse. Now we have the nightmares to deal with. IT IS TO LATE FOR CENSORSHIP TO CURB THE HIDIOUS APPETITES OF THE YOUTH. I left my home city because a six year old shot and killed another six year old (plus a bonus murder two doors down) sorry for dandruff, but lets get to the point.
posted by clavdivs at 8:05 AM on April 26, 2001 [1 favorite]

Didn't mean to imply any validation of the guy's message. That is each person's own responsibility, I figure. But there are at least a few pot-shots taken at a "This Fucked-Up Guy" strawman that seem to depend on the notion that he's a tragically wrong-headed mutant or something, rather than a relatively cogent writer with some very strong views (which, so far as I can gather -- not having checked out the rest of his site -- I strongly disagree with).

But, yeah, I certainly didn't mean to defend the *content* of the article. I just object somewhat to the more dismissive indictments of, so far as I can tell, the package deal rather than just the message. Jess, lucian, holgate, jpoulos all took some cheap shots at him of the sort that, IMHO, qualify as "inflammatory rhetoric".

But I'm not filing an lawsuits, so, hey, peace.
posted by cortex at 9:49 AM on April 26, 2001

« Older May 1st Skiboot   |   Greenspun Redux. Newer »

This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments