Jr. Black Belt Test

[Steve]

I'm curious. What would happen if a long time student, say, deployed to Iraq and lost use of an arm. Would he be removed from the school?

This is an interesting twist to the thread. While I think that it's critical that kids have a venue to train, I can also see Doc's point in that there is a place for having schools for kids and schools for advanced study. Makes sense to me.

But even accredited universities have to obey the law, and while your school looks very impressive, I'm pretty sure it's not accredited and qualifies squarely as a business and not an educational institution.

But for this discussion, I guess what's relevant is should you be able to. The extension of this line of reasoning from having age appropriate curriculums to suggesting that a school owner can refuse service based upon protected categories doesn't sound right to me. To me, denying someone the ability to train based upon a disability is as wrong as denying someone the ability to train based upon their religion.

One qualifier here is to distinguish between training and advancing. I intend to train in BJJ as long as I can. I may never get a black belt, as I may never be able to meet the relatively rigid qualifications for that rank. That doesn't mean I can't train. If someone who, say, has dyslexia, cannot meet an objective standard for rank, so be it. Denying them entrance based strictly upon a medically recognized impairment is very different. A retail store can't deny access to people who are in wheelchairs, for example. In fact, where "reasonable," businesses are actually required to modify their existing policies to accomodate people with disabilities. A very common example of this is a no-pets policy. 30 years ago, many stores, restuarants and other businesses refused to allow animals on the premises. Now, seeing eye dogs are allowed in order to accomadate visually impaired people.

Tez, in the states under the American's with Disabilities Act, dyslexia may very well be covered depending upon the specific circumstances of the situation. It's never cut and dry. It can be medically diagnosed.

There are a lot of myths and misunderstandings about the ADA and employment, but the long and the short of it is that it protects people with disabilities from access to services and employment based not upon their individual abilities, but on blanket policy to discriminate.

 

[hongkongfooey]

To anyone who thinks it's being politically correct to 'allow' people with dyslexia to train in martial arts, to anyone who thinks dyslexia is an illness or a handicap or a disability. To anyone who has the mistaken idea that the millions of people who have dyslexia are inferior. To the arrogant and the dismissive, to the prats who think the inability to read and write is a pyhsical or mental handicap, to the plonkers who spout arrant nonsense about something they seem to know little about.

That answer the question?

Ps it's not a mental disorder either.

Well, I don't know of anyone that considers Dyslexia as a handicap or a mental disorder. I don't believe that Doc does either.

 

[Doc]

I just want to say that you might be opening yourself up to a lawsuit you would lose. While we are free in this country to discriminate on almost any citeria we choose, there are protected categories and disability is one. Saying you won't accept someone without an arm is functionally no different than saying you won't teach a woman or a caucasian. If you have a private club you might get away with it, but if you run a for-profit business, you could be asking for trouble.

I'm no lawyer, but I did stay at a holiday inn express. Seriously, though, and I know this advise will probably be ignored, if I were you, I'd consult my own attorny to find out if my admissions criteria is illegal. It sounds so based upon my experience. Again, though, I'm not an expert.

I have 5 attorney black belts, and one of them is on this forum. I am under no obligation to teach anyone I do not want to teach. No one has a right to my labor. I am allowed to set standards. I do not run a studio business, I run a "school." There are plenty of places that will babysit kids, take the handicapped, criminals, and people who just want to hang out. I don't do political correct. It produces the lowest common denominator that doesn't serve my teachers real art.

Thanks for looking out sir I appreciate it.

 

[terryl965]

I have 5 attorney black belts, and one of them is on this forum. I am under no obligation to teach anyone I do not want to teach. No one has a right to my labor. I am allowed to set standards. I do not run a studio business, I run a "school." There are plenty of places that will babysit kids, take the handicapped, criminals, and people who just want to hang out. I don't do political correct. It produces the lowest common denominator that doesn't serve my teachers real art.

Thanks for looking out sir I appreciate it.

Doc you are right you are able to teach who and what you would like to. Remember anybody can sue over anything whether they are right or wrong, society gives them that right. Just has you have the right to refuse your services to anyone. This is something that all of us need to remember.

 

[Doc]

I'm curious. What would happen if a long time student, say, deployed to Iraq and lost use of an arm. Would he be removed from the school?

This is an interesting twist to the thread. While I think that it's critical that kids have a venue to train, I can also see Doc's point in that there is a place for having schools for kids and schools for advanced study. Makes sense to me.

But even accredited universities have to obey the law, and while your school looks very impressive, I'm pretty sure it's not accredited and qualifies squarely as a business and not an educational institution.

But for this discussion, I guess what's relevant is should you be able to. The extension of this line of reasoning from having age appropriate curriculums to suggesting that a school owner can refuse service based upon protected categories doesn't sound right to me. To me, denying someone the ability to train based upon a disability is as wrong as denying someone the ability to train based upon their religion.

One qualifier here is to distinguish between training and advancing. I intend to train in BJJ as long as I can. I may never get a black belt, as I may never be able to meet the relatively rigid qualifications for that rank. That doesn't mean I can't train. If someone who, say, has dyslexia, cannot meet an objective standard for rank, so be it. Denying them entrance based strictly upon a medically recognized impairment is very different. A retail store can't deny access to people who are in wheelchairs, for example. In fact, where "reasonable," businesses are actually required to modify their existing policies to accomodate people with disabilities. A very common example of this is a no-pets policy. 30 years ago, many stores, restuarants and other businesses refused to allow animals on the premises. Now, seeing eye dogs are allowed in order to accomadate visually impaired people.

Tez, in the states under the American's with Disabilities Act, dyslexia may very well be covered depending upon the specific circumstances of the situation. It's never cut and dry. It can be medically diagnosed.

There are a lot of myths and misunderstandings about the ADA and employment, but the long and the short of it is that it protects people with disabilities from access to services and employment based not upon their individual abilities, but on blanket policy to discriminate.

My nephew is dyslexic. He has a master degree, played football, and his team won the Rose Bowl. He's currently employed as a police officer. he's one of my blue belts. It's all about meeting the standard. Even so, I discriminate against children, criminals and others. I won't take anyone who doesn't meet the standards. Yes I discriminate, just like you probably won't find people in wheel chairs in a TKD studio. You can't buy alcohol until you reach a certain age. You can't get a drivers license, you can't be a cop. Age discrimination? Yes, because they don't meet the standard, etc. The political correct world is blowing a fuse. "How could you?" Problem is, everyone does it everyday. they just won't say it.

 

[Doc]

Doc you are right you are able to teach who and what you would like to. Remember anybody can sue over anything whether they are right or wrong, society gives them that right. Just has you have the right to refuse your services to anyone. This is something that all of us need to remember.

I agree obviously sir. Political correct bullies did the same thing to my teacher because there were no women in the school in the old days. When they came to the classes and took one look at the blood on the floor, and the guys sweating and bruised, they left. He didn't keep them out, the standards of training did.

In California these same bullies are pushing for more women on the police departments, "just because" they say women are underrepresented. How is that? If women want to join, they should be able to join, but they should meet the standards like everyone else because lives are involved. Many can't, so what do they do? Lower the freeking standards so they can meet political goals, not actual. Cops are political footballs. The fire departments have physical standards most women can't meet either, but they don't lower their standards and there are few women firefighters, as it should be.

 

[terryl965]

I agree obviously sir. Political correct bullies did the same thing to my teacher because there were no women in the school in the old days. When they came to the classes and took one look at the blood on the floor, and the guys sweating and bruised, they left. He didn't keep them out, the standards of training did.

In California these same bullies are pushing for more women on the police departments, "just because" they say women are underrepresented. How is that? If women want to join, they should be able to join, but they should meet the standards like everyone else because lives are involved. Many can't, so what do they do? Lower the freeking standards so they can meet political goals, not actual. Cops are political footballs. The fire departments have physical standards most women can't meet either, but they don't lower their standards and there are few women firefighters, as it should be.

I agree totally with what you are saying.

 

[Doc]

I'm curious. What would happen if a long time student, say, deployed to Iraq and lost use of an arm. Would he be removed from the school?

This is an interesting twist to the thread. While I think that it's critical that kids have a venue to train, I can also see Doc's point in that there is a place for having schools for kids and schools for advanced study. Makes sense to me.

But even accredited universities have to obey the law, and while your school looks very impressive, I'm pretty sure it's not accredited and qualifies squarely as a business and not an educational institution.

But for this discussion, I guess what's relevant is should you be able to. The extension of this line of reasoning from having age appropriate curriculums to suggesting that a school owner can refuse service based upon protected categories doesn't sound right to me. To me, denying someone the ability to train based upon a disability is as wrong as denying someone the ability to train based upon their religion.

One qualifier here is to distinguish between training and advancing. I intend to train in BJJ as long as I can. I may never get a black belt, as I may never be able to meet the relatively rigid qualifications for that rank. That doesn't mean I can't train. If someone who, say, has dyslexia, cannot meet an objective standard for rank, so be it. Denying them entrance based strictly upon a medically recognized impairment is very different. A retail store can't deny access to people who are in wheelchairs, for example. In fact, where "reasonable," businesses are actually required to modify their existing policies to accomodate people with disabilities. A very common example of this is a no-pets policy. 30 years ago, many stores, restuarants and other businesses refused to allow animals on the premises. Now, seeing eye dogs are allowed in order to accomadate visually impaired people.

Tez, in the states under the American's with Disabilities Act, dyslexia may very well be covered depending upon the specific circumstances of the situation. It's never cut and dry. It can be medically diagnosed.

There are a lot of myths and misunderstandings about the ADA and employment, but the long and the short of it is that it protects people with disabilities from access to services and employment based not upon their individual abilities, but on blanket policy to discriminate.

All of your points are well taken and thought out. But there is difference between denying someone access to McDonald's, and training in a specific curriculum designed for a particular type of individual. The question is, will this person be harmed by not be able to train in what is essential a luxury activity, that only a small percentage of the population is interested in. There are no entitlements attached. You may have a right to McDonald's, but you don't a right to a particular curriculum whose standards you cannot meet, when there are a plethora of other entities that will meet and accept your needs gladly.

 

[Doc]

To anyone who thinks it's being politically correct to 'allow' people with dyslexia to train in martial arts, to anyone who thinks dyslexia is an illness or a handicap or a disability. To anyone who has the mistaken idea that the millions of people who have dyslexia are inferior. To the arrogant and the dismissive, to the prats who think the inability to read and write is a pyhsical or mental handicap, to the plonkers who spout arrant nonsense about something they seem to know little about.

That answer the question?

Ps it's not a mental disorder either.

Those are your words. I never said any of that. I said I have a standard, that everyone must meet. Those that meet the standard AND have the characteristics that demonstrate they can benefit from the instruction and atmosphere of an educational institution, and not be detrimental to the educational process, are welcome. Yeah, I know what it is, and Cher wouldn't be able to study with us either for different reasons. The cool thing is all of those people manage to be successful, without studying martial arts, with me. I think its great, that someone's success or failure doesn't depend upon little old me. One day I'm going to die - then what would they do? All of this I'm sure from someone who has turned down a guy or two for not meeting their arbitrary standards.

 

[Twin Fist]

The fire departments have physical standards most women can't meet either, but they don't lower their standards and there are few women firefighters, as it should be.

actually, the textbook method for taking someone out of a fire changed from the "fireman's carry" to the "heel drag" for that very reason, because women couldnt do the fireman's carry

 

[Doc]

actually, the textbook method for taking someone out of a fire changed from the "fireman's carry" to the "heel drag" for that very reason, because women couldnt do the fireman's carry

I have another nephew who is a Los Angeles Firefighter. They haven't "adjusted" their standards, and have few women. The ones they have, you wouldn't mind working with them. The majority of firefighters in this country are volunteer, so It wouldn't surprise me that some have relaxed a few standards here and there. But, I wouldn't go into a burning building with an "affirmative action" firefighter if my life depended on it - cause it does.

 

[Twin Fist]

yeah i dont know about LA, but a lot of departments have changed.

 

[Doc]

I'm curious. What would happen if a long time student, say, deployed to Iraq and lost use of an arm. Would he be removed from the school?

Sorry sir, just realized that I didn't respond to one of your inquiries. If one of my long time students were return from military service with a missing limb, they would be welcome as all my returning student have been. He would still be a member of the student body, and not an entering freshman student. He would have served myself, the institution, and our country well, and in no way would he be penalized for that.

As a matter of course, like many institutions, student body members take breaks and return. I recently had a student who had taken a 9 year hiatus to get married and have children.

He phoned in and made an appointment, had a re-entering interview, and had the required class audit session. He than showed up for attendance with a white belt and began class again. The white belt was his choice.

After three weeks he has refreshed himself through three ranks, and demonstrated competency (if not endurance. ). At the rate he's going he will be back up to rank level in another month. Although it is a requirement that all student be familiar with all material below their level, it is not a requirement that one removes their rank.

Most students do it by choice to feel comfortable and competent within their own peer group. It is a choice, and is demonstrable of the character of the student body, and the standards that they themselves set and uphold for the student body.

There's an old Groucho Marx joke where he says, "I wouldn't want to belong to any club, that would have me as a member." Ed Parker put it another way, "If everyone can join it isn't exclusive. If it isn't exclusive, how good can it be? if everyone can get in and is doing it, than it can't be the best."

The higher you go in any form of education or endeavor, the more demanding the curriculum, and the fewer the numbers. It's not discrimination, it's natural selection. You shouldn't be able to get into Harvard with lousy grades because you don't belong there. The good news is, there is an educational institution that not only will take you, but will serve you better in a less demanding environment, and allow you to work your way back to Harvard should decide to.

A so-called "kra-tee" school in the strip mall is McDonald's. They're full of kids, and anyone else that has the money. We have demonstrated that we turn down old, young, and everyone in-between if they don't fit the standard. Money can't buy your way in, and most can't even find us. We neither seek nor advertise to the masses. Most would be happy to be McDonald's, and the very lucrative numbers that go with it. The difference is, we're not McDonald's, and aren't trying to be sir.

 

[GBlues]

My final word for me is that, if you have earned it, you should recieve it. I personally don't see a difference between a jr. bb, and an adult bb. Both are black. My opinion on it. With that being said I will bow out of this discussion, as I don't care to get into the pc discussion.

 

[SL4Drew]

I just want to say that you might be opening yourself up to a lawsuit you would lose. While we are free in this country to discriminate on almost any citeria we choose, there are protected categories and disability is one. Saying you won't accept someone without an arm is functionally no different than saying you won't teach a woman or a caucasian. If you have a private club you might get away with it, but if you run a for-profit business, you could be asking for trouble.

I'm no lawyer, but I did stay at a holiday inn express. Seriously, though, and I know this advise will probably be ignored, if I were you, I'd consult my own attorny to find out if my admissions criteria is illegal. It sounds so based upon my experience. Again, though, I'm not an expert.

Speaking generally about the ADA and the state analogs, there are several reasons why martial arts schools are probably safe. One, they probably aren't places of public accommodation and thus exempt. Even if they were such places, safety is usually a specifically exempted consideration. Arguably people certain types of disabilities would present a danger to themselves and others, which again would make the law not applicable.

Usually the laws exempt certain 'places of public accommodation' if requring the place to offer the service would fundamentally alter the business. You can't walk into your ENT doctor and demand they treat your spinal cord injury under the ADA. Then even if arguably you may be required to make accommodations, you maybe excused or the change mitigated if the change is not readily achievable.

So, I would think Doc is pretty safe.

 

[Steve]

I have 5 attorney black belts, and one of them is on this forum. I am under no obligation to teach anyone I do not want to teach. No one has a right to my labor. I am allowed to set standards. I do not run a studio business, I run a "school." There are plenty of places that will babysit kids, take the handicapped, criminals, and people who just want to hang out. I don't do political correct. It produces the lowest common denominator that doesn't serve my teachers real art.

Thanks for looking out sir I appreciate it.

Doc, I've noticed that"sir" is a code name for a bad word around here so I'd prefer you use Steve or stevebjj.

I am sure you've got it all under control. At least, with 5 lawyers you'll be well represented when you are sued.

 

[Steve]

My nephew is dyslexic. He has a master degree, played football, and his team won the Rose Bowl. He's currently employed as a police officer. he's one of my blue belts. It's all about meeting the standard. Even so, I discriminate against children, criminals and others. I won't take anyone who doesn't meet the standards. Yes I discriminate, just like you probably won't find people in wheel chairs in a TKD studio. You can't buy alcohol until you reach a certain age. You can't get a drivers license, you can't be a cop. Age discrimination? Yes, because they don't meet the standard, etc. The political correct world is blowing a fuse. "How could you?" Problem is, everyone does it everyday. they just won't say it.

doc, i'm on my phone now. I have some thoughts to add to the discussion but need to wait until I have a real keyboard. Thank you, though, for taking the time to respond.

 

[Steve]

Doc and everyone else, I think that you've answered all of my questions. I don't disagree in any significant way. The only thing, Doc, is that you answered the question regarding the soldier who is now missing a limb, but I'm still unclear. If a guy who is missing a limb cannot accomplish the curriculum, you would still allow him to train at your school?

 

[MJS]

My final word for me is that, if you have earned it, you should recieve it. I personally don't see a difference between a jr. bb, and an adult bb. Both are black. My opinion on it. With that being said I will bow out of this discussion, as I don't care to get into the pc discussion.

So you see nothing wrong with a 10yr old 1st degree bb, a 12yo 2nd degree, and a 14yo 3rd degree? So its possible by the time this person is in their late 20s, early 30s, to be a high ranking bb, and you see nothing wrong with this?

I doubt that the average student, and yes, there may be 1 in the huge pool, will be able to have the technical skills of an adult bb.

 

[Tez3]

Doc, you posted plained that you don't take people with dyslexia, no amount of pompous verbiosity will disguise that. People with this condition can join the armed services and die for their country but musn't step foot over the threshold over your little school to pursue what is a hobby/sport because you chose to take only the people you want. This of course will be young able bodied and probably male. yeah right.

We aren't talking about the fire services, rights of the disabled or anything like this we are talking purely about people with dyslexia being though not good enough to train at one martial arts 'school'. Sure you have the choice over who you take but the sad thing is you'll never know what you're missing.