Personal beliefs and who you train / train with?

[Andrew Green]

There is a thread in the Japanese arts section regarding the supposed practice of a Koryo instructor not to train people with Tatoo's.

Whether or not this is true aside, at what point should martial arts instructors be able to pick and choose who they train? Obviously being a private club they could basically do whatever they like, but putting that aside. I don't have a tatoo, but at the same time I wouldn't train under someone with a rule like that on principle.

But what, if anything, would you consider acceptable exclusion based on personal beliefs?

ex-cons?

Muslims? Fundamentalist Muslims?

Christians? Fundamentalist Christians?

Atheists?

Satanists? Scientologiests?

Communists? Fascists?

Hippies? Homosexuals?

Tattoos? Piercings? Well, piercing I can understand as a safety issue, take them out or don't train, if they don't come out and can't be secured, some systems are a safety risk, same for long nails.

Is there an acceptable point where it is ok to turn someone away for there personal political, religious, or lifestyle choices?

 

[CoryKS]

No mimes. Their kiais suck.

 

[Carol]

No mimes. Their kiais suck.

:lfao: :lfao:

 

[CoryKS]

Seriously though, I think it depends. It should be acceptable to choose your students using whatever criteria you want. Not sure what the legal ramifications are for a commercial facility, however. Shouldn't even have to tell them why, either. You could get a bad vibe off a thuggish sort, for example.

 

[Kacey]

Is there an acceptable point where it is ok to turn someone away for there personal political, religious, or lifestyle choices?

• If they are a danger to themselves or others for physical reasons; if they are unstable mentally or emotionally as demonstrated by outbursts, bullying-type behavior, etc.
• if they preach their personal choices as "the only way" in class (outside of class is their problem, unless it causes problems in class)
• if they have a history of violence-related problems that have not been addressed in any fashion (I have a couple of students in my class who told me up front that they have anger management problems and started class to learn to control their reactions - physical and emotional - after completing appropriate anger management programs - not a problem for me, and they're great students).
• if there is any other clear and clearly-demonstrated reason why being in the class would not be safe - for example, a friend of mine once had a very gung-ho student who had a medium case of brittle bones syndrome; after several weeks, he found out that every night after class she went home and soaked in a tub of cold water and ice because of injuries (mostly micro-fractures) line drills inflicted upon her, and no matter how much she wanted to be there, he couldn't stand putting her through that much pain; I also knew another students who had partial/absence seizures, and would suddenly lose his focus and wander off during class - annoying during line drills and patterns, but occasionally dangerous during sparring.

Other than issues like the ones given - your life choices are your own; keep them out of the dojang. I do, however, warn my students (especially those still in high school or younger) that if I find out they've used what I've taught them inappropriately, I will kick them out of class.

 

[Touch Of Death]

No Scientologists bouncing on the furniture.
Sean

 

[JBrainard]

No mimes. Their kiais suck.

:lol:

 

[Andrew Green]

A violent person is a safety risk in class, and I think that most people would accept that. What I am thinking is more things that wouldn't impact there training directly, but are simply differing views on other issues.

Sort of the same lines as doctors withholding birthcontrol on religious grounds. Is there a point where it is morally acceptable (I'm not suggesting I think those doctors are) to turn someone away because you disagree with there beliefs on unrelated issues?

 

[JBrainard]

My teacher has a very simple policy. He keeps the good people and sends the *******s who want to learn how to hurt people to SBG.
IMO, besides people with violent tendencies/intent, no one should be turned away from a dojo/school.

 

[Touch Of Death]

I trained in a school that turned a man away for being a Gypsy. It stuck in my craw a little; I found it was just a symptom of a larger problem with that instructor.
Sean

 

[Kacey]

Is there a point where it is morally acceptable (I'm not suggesting I think those doctors are) to turn someone away because you disagree with there beliefs on unrelated issues?

Not as long as they keep it out of class. As soon as someone's personal beliefs disrupts class, then there needs to be a discussion about why it needs to stop, and either the disruption ends, or the student's participation ends. There are a lot of things discussed during class - especially as related to when to use various levels of techniques, and the morality involved in doing so - but anything unrelated to class does not belong in class, especially if it disrupts training. If you want to preach your philosophy to your fellow students, there's a time for that outside of class - but not inside.

 

[Carol]

I'd have a difficult time with many old orthodox practices, such as not being allowed to look in to the eyes, or phsycally tough, a member of the opposite gender.

If someone is going to turn the school in to a captive audience for proselytizing the next meeting of Communist Gay Hippie Athiests for Buddha, then I'd have an issue with the proselytizing. If the class is (say) mostly fundamentalist somethingorothers that distract from class because a gay person joined up, then I'd have an issue with the fundamentalists.

IMO - it's not description of the person that would be an issue, it's whether they can get along without creating an unnecessary distraction.

 

[mrhnau]

ex-cons?

I know the Bujinkan does not allow criminals.

4. Those not upholding the guidelines of the Bujinkan, either as practitioners or as members of society, by committing disgraceful or reproachable acts shall be expelled. Until now, the Bujinkan was open to large numbers of people who came to Japan. Among them, unfortunately, were those committing violent drunken acts, the mentally ill, and trouble makers who thought only of themselves and failed to see how their actions might adversely affect others. Through their actions, such people were discarding the traditional righteous heart of the Bujinkan. From this day forward, all such people shall be expelled.

Muslims? Fundamentalist Muslims?

Christians? Fundamentalist Christians?

Atheists?

Satanists? Scientologiests?

Hard to do this with religion. I don't know many people that will go in and annouce "Teach me how to kill *insert favored enemy*". People also don't tend to declare their religions, especially if there might be potential conflict.

Communists? Fascists?

Hippies? Homosexuals?

again, hard to identify. Most don't wear name-tags "I'm Joe, a fascist"

Tattoos? Piercings? Well, piercing I can understand as a safety issue, take them out or don't train, if they don't come out and can't be secured, some systems are a safety risk, same for long nails.

agree with the piercings, assuming they could potentially cause a problem.

 

[Bigshadow]

The Bujinkan has guidelines set forth by the Soke. We follow those as guidelines. I am good with that.

My instructor has a sleeve (I think that is what it is called) or it could be just a huge tattoo on his arm and got a few odd looks from what he told me when he showed up at the hombu wearing a T-Shirt (until he was properly introduced).

What follows is my opinion based on personal opinions of some who are in Japan and others who have been, so it can all be taken with a grain of salt.

As for the Tattoos & Japanese Koryu (sp?), keep in mind that it is the Japanese culture they were talking about... I don't know how long that rule (if one would call it that) has been around or even if it is in effect. However, I think there is a perceived connection between tattoos and Yakuza. Yakuza from the documentary media I have seen do get tattoos and pretty much cover their bodies up to the point of not showing them in normal street clothes. It may be that tattoos in Japan have been long since attached to the criminal element.

Not that it is a credible source of information, but even on the old version of Zatoichi, the crime boss lady has a very large tattoo of a dragon on her back. So maybe there is something to be said of that with regards to the Japanese culture which is what the other thread was about.

Additionally, I understand that that mindset is fading as tattoos are becoming more popular with the younger generations.

 

[Blindside]

I do think there is something to be said for your students reflecting back upon the school. As an example, I don't like racism and wouldn't accept a white supremacist (or black, or blue) as a student, no matter how good a student he was. His actions and beliefs will reflect back upon me, and I don't want to be associated with that.

Lamont

 

[Ninjamom]

IMO - it's not description of the person that would be an issue, it's whether they can get along without creating an unnecessary distraction.

Bingo!

...and just for the record, I want to make it clear that I have nothing personal against Communist Gay Hippie Athiests for Buddha.

 

[Andrew Green]

Hard to do this with religion.

I imagine in places that it was a issue they might ask. Even some political offices have laws that prevent an atheist from holding the office. Whether those laws would hold up in court is another matter.

again, hard to identify. Most don't wear name-tags "I'm Joe, a fascist"

Let's say they are pretty outward about it. They come in wearing clothes that have Che on them, lots of socialist buttons and things.

Or lets say you have a student in class who's same sex partner drops them off and gives them a little kiss on the cheek. If they where opposite sex no one would care.

Or just ignore the how it was found out, just assume it is. Is turning students away based on there political / religious / lifestyle beliefs valid?

 

[Bigshadow]

Hard to do this with religion. I don't know many people that will go in and annouce "Teach me how to kill *insert favored enemy*". People also don't tend to declare their religions, especially if there might be potential conflict.

I think alot of it will come out in the wash. I can only speak based on my experience, but the training methodologies of the Bujinkan is such that it takes too long to learn. Those who are not sincere eventually just fade away or wander off to never be heard from again. It is strange how that works.

 

[CoryKS]

Or just ignore the how it was found out, just assume it is. Is turning students away based on there political / religious / lifestyle beliefs valid?

I believe it is valid. People don't simply disapprove of something for the sake of disapproving of it. They usually believe, correctly or not, that someone else's political/religious/lifestyle beliefs carry with them consequences toward that person and his beliefs. They disapprove of the cause for fear of the effect, and to tell them they must set aside their beliefs because one doesn't agree with them is just as much an imposition as what they are doing.

 

[Bigshadow]

Is turning students away based on there political / religious / lifestyle beliefs valid?

If their lifestyle is crime, yes. Political views and religious affiliation is not an issue, as long as it doesn't become a distraction. I mean, would you let a nudist train in the buff? :rofl: