Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Jeff Ream said:

or Crossmens guard last year. dozens of corps discriminate against cymbal players

and woodwind players

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jeff Ream said:

or Crossmens guard last year. dozens of corps discriminate against cymbal players

Which means millions of people who own a Chevy are discriminating against all the other vehicle manufacturers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Ghost said:

Which means millions of people who own a Chevy are discriminating against all the other vehicle manufacturers.

I’m ok with that 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, tesmusic said:

Are you then saying, that by design any organization that has parameters is discriminatory policies? Honest question here, did you participate in Greek life in college? I did not, but would then say that the whole fraternity/sorority concept is discriminatory? Is DCI discriminatory due to their age limits? I actually have zero issue with the corps going coed, but the notion that for 81 The corps was discriminatory, which seems to be something you may believe by stating that being all-male was discriminatory seems like a stretch to me.

I did not participate in Greek life, but I am a member of the freemasons... an organization that does discriminate against women. What you are suggesting is that some forms of discrimination are ok. I agree with that statement, but where the disconnect exists here is with the discomfort of the word "discrimination." Just like any aspect of any decision in life, you should weigh pros and cons and make a decision. In this particular instance, the issue of discrimination against women was weighed on many levels. One of the ways it was evaluated was among the directors and another was with the members themselves who felt like women should be included in the drum corps. This is the current member's drum corps of which they should take ownership. My time is past, just like most of the people commenting on this. The current members and the current directors came to a conclusion that discrimination based on gender wasn't acceptable for them. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, FlamMan said:

Hooters discriminates against Men!!! and The Rockettes too!!!

Yes, they do. And that's ok.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, GREENBLUE said:

Totally agree. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. The Madison Scouts would’ve never adopted the all inclusive, non discrimination female policy if they were consistently in the top twelve. To even place a slight blame on the “all male” aspect is ridiculous. All the females in DCI couldnt have fixed the show designs from the past few seasons.

It really doesn't matter if you say it 1 time or 100 times, you can still be wrong. The show design in recent years was below par. Most of us seem to agree on that. It held them back competitively. However, the statement you're making is not related to the competitiveness of the corps. You clearly don't know the leadership team if you make this statement. In fact, the issue of going co-ed goes back AT LEAST to my years in the corps in 2008-2011 and I would imagine it went back further considering that 2005 featured a female soloist... and so did 1971 with a few other female performers sprinkled in for exhibitions or parades between those years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, weedyweidenthal said:

It really doesn't matter if you say it 1 time or 100 times, you can still be wrong. The show design in recent years was below par. Most of us seem to agree on that. It held them back competitively. However, the statement you're making is not related to the competitiveness of the corps. You clearly don't know the leadership team if you make this statement. In fact, the issue of going co-ed goes back AT LEAST to my years in the corps in 2008-2011 and I would imagine it went back further considering that 2005 featured a female soloist... and so did 1971 with a few other female performers sprinkled in for exhibitions or parades between those years.

He's right about if they were top 12 this would be a non-starter.  Basing your conclusions on the exceptions in the past is like saying everyone has 3 fingers and a thumb because someone somewhere was born with them.  I mean seriously, if you look back at ALL the bad show design decisions the last few years you should be asking WTF are they smoking to think that would be good.  There is absolutely no way you can blame the talent of the corps on what they were given to compete with.  Talent is So overrated as to almost be a non starter if you know how to teach that is.  I hope the best for them but I have like almost NO optimism for them pulling out of this spiral.  I've never seen a corps try to run away from itself and it's amazing history,

temet nosce

 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For many years, what used to be called junior drum corps had coed corps, all boy corps, and all girl corps. In addition to competing against the all boy & coed corps, the all girl corps had their own competitions, including at major competitions like the World Open. Did anybody ever accuse the all girl corps of discriminating against boys? I seriously doubt it. My assumption is that the all girl corps gradually disappeared as the number of girls interested in joining such corps declined and the resulting financial repercussions of that lack of interest. Now we live in a politically correct culture where maintaining a decades long tradition, such as an all boy drum corps, is viewed as discriminatory, non-inclusive, and therefore bad. So the Scouts long tradition is gone. As the last hold out, I wonder if the Cavaliers are feeling pressure to board the non-discriminatory, inclusion train.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, WarriorHal said:

For many years, what used to be called junior drum corps had coed corps, all boy corps, and all girl corps. In addition to competing against the all boy & coed corps, the all girl corps had their own competitions, including at major competitions like the World Open. Did anybody ever accuse the all girl corps of discriminating against boys? I seriously doubt it. My assumption is that the all girl corps gradually disappeared as the number of girls interested in joining such corps declined and the resulting financial repercussions of that lack of interest. Now we live in a politically correct culture where maintaining a decades long tradition, such as an all boy drum corps, is viewed as discriminatory, non-inclusive, and therefore bad. So the Scouts long tradition is gone. As the last hold out, I wonder if the Cavaliers are feeling pressure to board the non-discriminatory, inclusion train.

Scouts went co-ed because they were no longer attracting the top talent among boys only. It really didn't have much to do with "political correctness', whatever that means (usually it means "not being a #### to people who are not white, heterosexual, fundamentalist Christians", but ymmv).

It was about survival as a competitive entity. But they couldn't say that, so they made it sound like it was about inclusiveness. Meh, it was a weak dodge, but probably less embarrassing than announcing that they were having a hard time getting Finalist level talent.

External pressure had nothing to do with it either, which is why The Cavaliers aren't facing any calls to change. They don't seem to have a problem recruiting talent requisite to be a consistent finalist.

Edited by MikeD
Filter circumvention

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Slingerland said:

Scouts went co-ed because they were no longer attracting the top talent among boys only. It really didn't have much to do with "political correctness', whatever that means (usually it means "not being a #### to people who are not white, heterosexual, fundamentalist Christians", but ymmv).

It was about survival as a competitive entity. But they couldn't say that, so they made it sound like it was about inclusiveness. Meh, it was a weak dodge, but probably less embarrassing than announcing that they were having a hard time getting Finalist level talent.

External pressure had nothing to do with it either, which is why The Cavaliers aren't facing any calls to change. They don't seem to have a problem recruiting talent requisite to be a consistent finalist.

"political correctness', whatever that means   

Political correctness is nothing more than living with the delusion that you can pick up a dog turd by the clean end.  🤣

Edited by MikeD
Filter circumvention
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.