Age, Attractiveness, and Social Status

[Touch Of Death]

Well, you'd never guess my parent's social status by the way they act, dress, where they live, or the cars they drive.......

No, they roll play the social status they are comfortable with. I think you are saying we would never guess how much money they make judging by...
Sean

 

[edhead2000]

If money is social status........which I still don't have a good definition on.
All I'm saying is I know quite a few people who live outside their means.

 

[lifewise]

Well, you'd never guess my parent's social status by the way they act, dress, where they live, or the cars they drive.......

I guess I should ask you how you define social status then.

 

[edhead2000]

I see it as a whole picture of a person.......
However, a lot of people define it in terms of money and connections.......it's not who you know, but what you know. And if you have the money you can buy "who you know".

I think of it more as a complete picture of a person.......which is probably not exactly social status.

My main point is that you can't really judge a person's "social status", whatever that may be, by their appearance. Personally, I'm bad at "perceiving" things like that, so I was just curious how others do -- if indeed it can be done.

 

[Seig]

The large majority of my students are either in Public School or College. Their age, to me, simply means I am a father figure/Uncle to most of them. As a result of that mindset, their looks have little meaning to me. I spent my early 20's after the military working with Juvenile Delinquents and Criminals from the inner cities. That time in my life taught me to look inside more than outside. When I grade a student, I am watching for technical precision and wether or not they are performing to their potential. It has also been my experience that most, not all, people that are attracted to the martial arts have social issues (geeks, loners, etc.). That is simply something to be worked on. So, while I cannot speak for many schools, I can say that within my domain, you get promoted on your merits, not your looks, age, or social status.

 

[tshadowchaser]

I Promote on a few things (both adult and children)
1 ability
2 attitude
3 how offten a student shows up for class and time in rank
4 knowledge of what is needed for rank and knowledge of other aspects of class.
5. Age plays a part ( we do not promot jr black belts)
6. Willingness to help pass on knowledge
7. social status( i could care less) yes it might help to promote the school but it dose not mean the student will be any good
8 familys money(nope I pay 98% of the rent on my studio all the time)
9 attractiveness Not sure most of my students are not glamor people
10 there are moe but these will do for now. I usualy dont think about such things until a thread like this pops up and mkes me think about it

 

[TonyM.]

Welcome to clicism.
In life in general you will be promoted according to your looks, family, friends, religious affiliations, political affiliations, race,sex or social status. Don't be fooled by small pockets of fairness or democracy. They are the exeptions, not the rule.

 

[lifewise]

I usualy dont think about such things until a thread like this pops up and mkes me think about it

Good. I hope all instructors think about this. :asian:

 

[lifewise]

Welcome to clicism.
In life in general you will be promoted according to your looks, family, friends, religious affiliations, political affiliations, race,sex or social status. Don't be fooled by small pockets of fairness or democracy. They are the exeptions, not the rule.

:asian: I like your style here Tony, you entice no arguement.
Can anyone here honestly say they have not been subject to this reality?

 

[Bammx2]

I promote all my students based on 75% mental and 25% physical.
This is based on the fact of my own expieriences in learning from various instructors.
One very popular school I was once associated with had one grade based solely in jumping techniques. I don't do jumping techniques. I have a pemanent injury that prohibits that, as well as a few high kicks.
The instructor wouldn't give.He said there was no chance for promotion..just because I couldn't DO the techniques,doesn't mean I can't TEACH them.
In my classes; I look for effort and knowledge of the syllabus.
One persons idea of "perfect execution" could be different from others and from mine,but the concept pretty much stays the same. I am also open to listening to my students to give them a chance to explain themselves when something seems "different"...doesn't mean it wrong...just different.
As for social status and "arrogance" and all that other negative stuff.....LEAVE IT AT THE DOOR! money and looks never saved somebody from an *** whoopin...knowledge has.
as for age......
"old age and treachery will always overcome youth and exhuberance"

 

[Kembudo-Kai Kempoka]

Interesting post to scroll through, particularly in the light of a past-life academic incarnation. Took a Masters in Communication Psych., which is the study...in a nutshell, of how cogntion is effected by communication, and communication by cognition. Principally, it's an amalgamation of cognitive psychology and speech communication, particularly as related to issues of persuasion. A large chunk of the research conducted by the academic community in this sub-discipline has been about what influences perception, thereby driving behavior. Lotsa stuff about courtroom juries.

One of the commonly conducted experiments that specifically addresses how people evaluate and decide about others based on Age, Attractiveness and apparent SES, is to have actors memorize a play, in which they are the judger, lawyers, witnesses, etc. The "ignorant masses" who are the subjects of the experiment are the jury members. One hearing will have the actor playing the defendant dressed down, presenting poorly. The next hearing, to a new set of jurors, will have the defendant dressed attractively, and presenting more "attentively".

In run after run, juries are substantially more likely to find favorably for attractive defendants, even when the evidence presented and testimony given is exactly the same as for the homely defendant.

Another interesting one...pictures are shown to newborns, who are monitored to determine how long they gaze at a picture. Attractive faces get significantly longer looks, even though the infant hasn't had the time to be enculturated to what society may try to teach is "attractive". (i.e., the heroin-chic model, etc).

The collective conclusion drawn form this sort of research is that we can't not be influenced by unspoken, biological cues relating to the looks of a person.

Social status definition? Yes, there is always room for people to fake it up or down, but generally, again, people presenting as well put together are percieved by research subjects as more capable, confident, etc., then people not percieved as coming from higher SES. (i.e., researcher shows a person multiple pictures, some of people in Mercedes's w/ Rolex watches, some of toothless hicks, and then asks questions like, "On a scale of 1-10, how capable is this person of dealing with challenges they face in life?").

Don't shoot the messenger; I'm just recounting some of the existing research on the effects of age, looks, and apparent social status on evaluations.

It may not be right, but certainly by being aware of the existence of bias, we may be better positioned to regulate it's effects in our own activities and decisions...to promote, or not to promote.

Dr. Dave

 

[Cruentus]

heh.

I was actually going to post the same thing as Dr. Dave, as I read about that study.

Nice Post Dave!
:asian:

 

[TigerWoman]

You didn't mention gender! I noticed in my school that while most students if they come regularly and do not have major problems (like form, breaking) will be able to test in about a 3-4 month span. They can also periodically lose their belt for a time for attitude, breaking the rules etc. Well, back to gender. I notice that women are given lower marks generally in testing than men. Maybe that's another thread.

I have also seen disadvantaged-poor-students who could not afford to test just stay at orange for a year or two then at green for two-three years. To his credit, the instructor gave free lessons to them but did not let them advance. I couldn't stand it and paid for them both a couple of times. The girl was so good at green belt however that he did double promote her. So I guess that is half and half.

But, the master instructor does encourage students to test especially those that can help him teach, open a new school, bring in new money. Those people get "breaks" in the norm for breaking or if forms are their problem. I leave the room and they are quickly passed. Or, if one woman has a problem with a knife hand or palm strike (which she did not practice/train for) after two weeks, was allowed to do an elbow strike. She became 1st dan and started teaching a new class.

But, it comes down to its his school and he runs it as he sees fit. But, I am not the only one who has noticed the discrepancies. Life is not fair and it is certainly shown in some schools.

With your situation, though, as a parent I would ask the instructor when he should test. And since you are also in martial arts, what is the reason(s) that he can't advance. As a parent when I was not in MA, just watching, I always questioned if they were really ready–3-4 months seemed so fast. Each belt teaches specific skills which should be learned fairly well THEN at that level or it becomes much more difficult later when it is all integrated. I don't think this is a race or competition with others to get to a black belt. Its a ladder of personal success. As they say, enjoy the journey.

 

[Phoenix44]

Great topic. We have ongoing problems with this concept at our school.

True, we're not all Bruce Lee, and so attitude, effort, and attendance should account for some part of advancement even in the absence of spectacular technique. That being said, I do think that the criteria for advancement should be clearly stated and consistent. If you need techniques 1-6 and Kata 1 for yellow belt, then except for really little kids, that should be the technique requirement for everyone. Plus attitude, attendance, and time on station. And this can be VERY difficult to explain to the parents, who often don't know what the instructors are really looking at. It's been truly vexing.

The way we solve the adult/kid situation is this: If you're under 18 when you test for black belt, then you become JUNIOR black belt. You have to retest at 18 for full status. That way a kid NEVER outranks an adult.

 

[kenpo tiger]

Great topic. We have ongoing problems with this concept at our school.

True, we're not all Bruce Lee, and so attitude, effort, and attendance should account for some part of advancement even in the absence of spectacular technique. That being said, I do think that the criteria for advancement should be clearly stated and consistent. If you need techniques 1-6 and Kata 1 for yellow belt, then except for really little kids, that should be the technique requirement for everyone. Plus attitude, attendance, and time on station. And this can be VERY difficult to explain to the parents, who often don't know what the instructors are really looking at. It's been truly vexing.

The way we solve the adult/kid situation is this: If you're under 18 when you test for black belt, then you become JUNIOR black belt. You have to retest at 18 for full status. That way a kid NEVER outranks an adult.

I HAD to reply to this one. I've taught from age 4 up in three different martial arts and in three very different schools. The first promoted basically the way this thread posits its theory - attractiveness, social status, AND whether the instructor likes you or your child. The second, if you had you $40, you tested and got a belt. I cannot tell you the number of tests I took and observed there where people, children included, were NOT ready to test and yet were promoted (and a number of those people are black belts in that school - scary.) My current school follows the stated quote above. There are set techniques, forms and sets a child (or adult) must have before being considered for testing.

The exception is with the four year olds. They are all white belts. They receive a stripe for being able to listen, but there are no belt promotions. They are there to learn basic skills for life as well as kenpo. They do not learn techniques or forms. Their classes consist of learning punching and kicking on pads, listening, respecting one another, and patience. As we all know, patience is NOT usually in a four year old's vocabulary. That my seven little ones are able to sit and watch each other during class is truly wonderful! Once they are old enough to move up to the next level of training for children, they begin techs and forms toward earning a belt.

Another thing I'm not sure was covered here. In my first school, from about age 6 the kids were encouraged to spar and to enter the tournaments run by the organization. I'm still not sure how I feel about that. As a parent, I'm horrified by the idea that these children are encouraged to hit each other. As an instructor who is concerned about my students' safety and well-being at school and in the outside world, I guess there's merit in it. My current dojo does not allow sparring for children until they reach age 18.

Thoughts?:asian:

 

[OC Kid]

In my system we have written requirements for each belt rank. These are the minimum requirements for a student to achieve his next rank. There are of course the intangibles which in many cases are a judgement call maturity of the student, attitude, does he/she make class regularly, do they show/exhibit enthusiasm towards the art.

There is a lot of things to take in consideration. For example I have student who knows all the required basics for his 1st stripe except his kata, Ishkumi a Jr. kata it is the 1st ten moves of pinion 2. He is one of the students who come to half the classes mentioned in my disciplne thread. Now should he be promoted (if he was attending regular he would be having a color belt by now.) But since he doesnt know the kata should I promote him over someone who makes all the classes.... No Im not. The requirements are their for a reason.
Another example the student may know all the basics forms and requirements for each rank. He knows what a front kick is but if his form or mechanics arent good enough for the instructor to promote him..should he..no

The school your child goes to should have written requirements to help you and the student know what is required for each rank.

 

[Flatlander]

Another thing I'm not sure was covered here. In my first school, from about age 6 the kids were encouraged to spar and to enter the tournaments run by the organization. I'm still not sure how I feel about that. As a parent, I'm horrified by the idea that these children are encouraged to hit each other. As an instructor who is concerned about my students' safety and well-being at school and in the outside world, I guess there's merit in it. My current dojo does not allow sparring for children until they reach age 18.

Thoughts?:asian:

I totally agree with this, though I personally feel that 18 is a little extreme. 16 maybe. And the decision to allow a teen to spar must be balaced with whether or not that particular student has the level of maturity to "only use their powers for good" i.e. not bullying.

I also think that this converges nicely with the differences in black belting between junior/adult. As we all know, the develpment of our skills is enhanced by the live spar, and so that experience can be reflected in the difference between the junior/adult BBelts, and help validate that difference.

I think that as the people who promote the arts and assist with its propagation, we have a responsibility to remain honest to its principles. I kind of disagree with people being promoted based upon knowing techniques only. I also don't think that time should be a factor either. I definitely don't think status, looks, or any of that garbage is should even be considered a bit, though I of course believe it's out there (great post Dr. Dave. Totally relevant to the question here, and obviously quite credible). I think that the primary factor should be application. Can the student apply the principles/techniques/etc.? Are they beginning to take ownership of the knowledge? I just think it needs to be more about excellence of skill.

 

[kenpo tiger]

In my system we have written requirements for each belt rank. These are the minimum requirements for a student to achieve his next rank. There are of course the intangibles which in many cases are a judgement call maturity of the student, attitude, does he/she make class regularly, do they show/exhibit enthusiasm towards the art.

There is a lot of things to take in consideration. For example I have student who knows all the required basics for his 1st stripe except his kata, Ishkumi a Jr. kata it is the 1st ten moves of pinion 2. He is one of the students who come to half the classes mentioned in my disciplne thread. Now should he be promoted (if he was attending regular he would be having a color belt by now.) But since he doesnt know the kata should I promote him over someone who makes all the classes.... No Im not. The requirements are their for a reason.
Another example the student may know all the basics forms and requirements for each rank. He knows what a front kick is but if his form or mechanics arent good enough for the instructor to promote him..should he..no

The school your child goes to should have written requirements to help you and the student know what is required for each rank.

Couldn't agree with you more.