Thomas Plante, a professor of psychology at Santa Clara University, is on the case. Turns out it’s hard to reconcile outrageously rewarded brutality with civility.
Of course most sports aren’t like football. Hockey is; but most sports don’t demand absolutely insane intensities of aggression. Football does, and that’s why Nebraska and Oregon got to enjoy local heroes like Richie Incognito.
But – bottom line:
“More and more people have learned about the private lives of athletes, and they’re not surprised by these things. As athletes get in trouble and show questionable judgment, fans just become numb to it all. And they’re far more concerned about how it will affect their team’s play.”
April 15th, 2014 at 1:28PM
Does it occur to no one that military officers, whose job is not just to be aggressive but to actively be willing to kill,were nonetheless traditionally expected to be gentlemen? If one cannot distinguish between the playing field and the general society perhaps one is too brutishly stupid to benefit from or to deserve a college education.
This is putting to one side the total unacceptability of any institute of education including a sport known to cause long term brain damage in its activities at all.
April 15th, 2014 at 1:39PM
Rita: Yes – good point. Though given the high rate of military suicides and other forms of violence – against others and oneself – it looks as though a lot of people have trouble making the distinction.
April 15th, 2014 at 2:08PM
Per Rita’s comment, here’s C S Lewis on The Necessity of Chivalry:
http://yourdailycslewis.blogspot.com/2005/08/necessity-of-chivalry.html
April 15th, 2014 at 3:59PM
Of course. And college football was created by the immediate post-Civil-War generation, at institutions whose graduates had supplied much of the officer corps in that conflict.