Regulating Martial Arts Instruction

[Brian R. VanCise]

Ah, so now we see the source of the "administrative" costs...:barf:

The hurdles that I have to jump through every day would blow your mind.

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

But in fairness, I don't read EoK's comments as calling for a Politburo to oversee doctrinal purity in matters of technique---seems more like he's after a way to mandate high quality MA instruction, as vs. low-quality instruction that pretends to be high quality.

You are actually one of the few that understood what I wrote. Seems others are just a little too interested in villifying me personally to grasp this was all an intellectual exercise.

The Emperor

 

[Don Roley]

But in fairness, I don't read EoK's comments as calling for a Politburo to oversee doctrinal purity in matters of technique---seems more like he's after a way to mandate high quality MA instruction, as vs. low-quality instruction that pretends to be high quality.

Try reading some of his past posts and you will find a pattern that might convince you otherwise.

Nobody will really come out and say something that they know will be unpopular if they want something to be accomplished. The easiest way to get something done for them is to give a reason that involves something like saving children from criminals and from there expand their powers to tell folks how they can rank, etc from there. And that is the type of thing that would happen with any type of quasi-goverment orginization. Those that are given a mandate would soon find ways of making sure that everything is done to their own narrow tolerances.

And if you want people to be able to differentiate between high quality and low quality you instruct them, you do not look for a mandate- which is a form of control. You scream, yell and tell people what the truth is. You do not force anyone to do anything. You lay the facts out and let people do with it as they will. People have a right to be right and the right to be wrong and make decisions you think are wrong.

Take a look at me and the way I act. I scream a lot about idiots and frauds in the martial arts. The best efforts of people on one side like Bruce Calkins and the moderators on the other fail to get me to temper my words of scorn. I have helped people leave Konnigun and supported them as they were pursued by frivolous lawsuits. If you want my opinion, I will give it. If you don't want it, you probably still will get it.

Yet I will fight to the last for anyone to be able to control what is and is not "high quality" martial arts and what people can do, say or teach.

Mandate? Define mandate. I see it as a form of control. And after all I do to counter the bad influences of martial arts jerks I still would not give anyone any form of control over anyone else. Everyone wants the whip hand and nobody wants the whip used against them. What they don't realize is that as long as someone has the ability to use the whip against someone else it can come around to be used against them. And the people seeking that power are the ones you want least to have it.

People have the right to inform others about good quality martial arts as compared to poor quality. I do it myself. I just do not have any respect for people that will not do anything to inform people but instead want to jump straight into having a mandate to control what can and can't go on.

 

[exile]

If you want people to be able to differentiate between high quality and low quality you instruct them, you do not look for a mandate- which is a form of control. You scream, yell and tell people what the truth is. You do not force anyone to do anything. You lay the facts out and let people do with it as they will. People have a right to be right and the right to be wrong and make decisions you think are wrong.

I had the idea for a long time that someone could do very well by publishing an annual assessment of MA schools, sort of along the lines of Consumer Reports yearly issue on new model cars, or Phil Edmonston's Lemon-Aid guides, or that sort of thing (e.g., much dearer to my heart, the Campaign for Real Ale's guide to just about every pub in the UK that produces cask-conditioned ales). There are a huge number of people taking MAs or looking for a place to take it. But it's hard to figure out how to do it (not that that means it can't be done, and done well). There are tens of thousands of dojos, dojangs, CMA studios and so on all over the country. It's not like cars, where an outfit like CR can buy a large number of the available new models, run their engineering investigations and performance tests on them and publish the results---a single team of people going to MA schools for a week and publishing their considered impressions wouldn't be able to put a dent in the numbers. but if you had a nework of MAists in a large number of cities who provided input---you'd have to know them and trust their judgment and honesty---you might be able to at least get a project like that started. It would be a huge undertaking, but there's probably enough of a market out there that it might be sustainable...

 

[Makalakumu]

You are actually one of the few that understood what I wrote. Seems others are just a little too interested in villifying me personally to grasp this was all an intellectual exercise.

I'm not trying to villify. I just disagree with the concept that is proposed. I think that idealism like this always starts with good intentions, but pretty much always goes wrong in the end.

Let the McDojos exist. Make what you do what you want it to be.

 

[Kacey]

You are actually one of the few that understood what I wrote. Seems others are just a little too interested in villifying me personally to grasp this was all an intellectual exercise.

Disagreement with the proposed concept is not villification, and has nothing to do with you personally. Do I see potential merit in regulation? On some levels - for example, my association requires all instructors to be CPR and first aid certified, and to help ensure all its instructors meet this standard, it provides training on a regular basis at major events. We also require that instructors in each state work out regularly with the state technical director, who, in turn, works out regularly with the association's senior Master Instructor, to keep technique consistent and to provide clear guidelines for the continued growth and improvement of the instructors, and therefore of the students. I see merit in this form, and level, of regulation. Do I see sufficient merit to suggest that the government be providing the regulation? No, I don't believe so, for reasons already stated. This is not intended as villification of you or your idea - but neither is it agreement; the two can, and often do, exist separately from each other, as they do in this case, at least for myself.

 

[jks9199]

You are actually one of the few that understood what I wrote. Seems others are just a little too interested in villifying me personally to grasp this was all an intellectual exercise.

The Emperor

I don't recall seeing any personal attacks, just people who disagreed with you. YOU then seemed to decide that anyone who held a different view was wrong and attacking you...

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

I don't recall seeing any personal attacks... jks9199

Quote:
Originally Posted by EmperorOfKentukki
Yet there is something demeaning about having an activity that has become almost sacred to me be turned into playtime for 4 year olds. There is something about seeing an 8 year old Black Belt and a 14 year old Master that galls me and feels like a slap in the face of all the struggle and discipline I forced on myself to achieve these things.

Don Roley makes this post:

Tough.

You want someone to be able to push around martial arts schools just because it does not fit your idea of what martial arts should be?

Actually....I never make such an assertion.

The attitude you show is the exact thing I fear in any martial arts regulation.

I wan't aware I was showing an 'attitude'. I was expressing some feelings I experienced. Are you afraid of 'my feelings'. I don't see why? I'm not afraid of them.

Now you get people like you with your attitude..

You know....when you keep saying 'you' in response to a post someone makes....that sort of implies you are speaking directly to or about them. That would seem to make the statements 'personal' wouldn't you think?

I just do not have any respect for people that will not do anything to inform people but instead want to jump straight into having a mandate to control what can and can't go on

.

Well....that seems to be a clear statement of Mr. Roley's opinion of me. I guess you could understand it if I actually said the things he was so upset about....but...well...I don't recall ever using the word 'mandate' in my postings. I believe you have taken the words others have used and directed them to me. Put words in my mouth, so to speak, which I didn't say. I have to admit, Mr. Roley, you do seem to take exception to everything I ever post. I wonder where that directed hostility is coming from. Did I have sex with your wife?


The Emperor

 

[Brian R. VanCise]

Emperor of Kentukki, I do not think that anyone is villifying you but you do seem to have pointed words towards anyone that disagrees with your posts. You also seem to want to have an argument. Why that is I do not know. However, I would ask you and others to keep your comments on the topic at hand and debate the idea of regulating martial arts instruction.

Truthfully I do not think that regulation will work based on what I have seen in other fields. I think it would end up mismashed and be a mess in a very little time. Having said that I would not have a problem having a criminal history check on any business owner that involves the teaching of children. Even though I know how easily it is for someone to slip through the cracks of record checks. (I did alot of record checks in another time in my life)

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

but you do seem to have pointed words towards anyone that disagrees with your posts.

Actually....no. If you do the research you'll see that such a global statement is not accurate. I can tell the difference between disagreement with a postion...and taking a dislike to a person. But thanks for trying to apologize for him.

The Emperor

 

[Paul B]

Moderator Note.

Please keep the discussion at a mature, respectful level. Feel free to use the Ignore feature to ignore members whose posts you do not wish to read (it is at the bottom of each member's profile). Thank you.

-Paul Bladen
-MT Moderator-

 

[Don Roley]

I wan't aware I was showing an 'attitude'. I was expressing some feelings I experienced.

Which were in a thread you started about regulating martial arts. Regulation means control. And attitudes like the type you show does indeed scare me.

The very idea that people should be able to control and make determinations of what is and is not good martial arts in a quasi legal sense scares the heck out of me. The only people I know who could judge many arts would not have the time or interest in the matter. Those that do step forward would be those with an agenda.

Let me say that 99 percent of the stuff I see with katana on the internet makes me laugh. I am not even that good. But if things came around to regulating a difference in good swordsmanship and bad swordsmanship in a quasi goverment contest, the odds are that the numbskulls would be put in charge of determining what is good or not. I do not think most of the people here could really tell good kenjutsu from bad half as well as I. So how can they make an official status of their opinion.

How can anyone dare to say what is an acceptable level of skill in an official status? I will say that someone is not qualified to start their own art any day of the week. But to have the goverment regulate that type of thing galls me. The power of goverment is far more powerful than my single voice and can be a vicious master indeed. Who judges if the judges are worthy? People can ignore me if they wish and they have the right. Once things get into regulation they no longer have that option.

Control, regulation, madates...... they all will only work if the people in charge of holding the whip hand are perfect. And the people most worthy of controlling others do not want that job. You would instead get people who started their own art and tried to make a living off of teaching martial arts than the guys I respect.

Edit- oops, just noticed after all this typing that the emperer was suspended. Well, my points are still valid even though I feel like I am kicking a dead horse.

 

[midnight503]

Which were in a thread you started about regulating martial arts. Regulation means control. And attitudes like the type you show does indeed scare me.

Sigh* The thread was began at the request of another member. Simply starting a thread does not necessarily mean advocation of a process. You have missed the point. The point was to talk about the topic and throw out ideas. Pro and con....the point was the dialogue...not the administration of anything suggested. I don't necessarily advocate legislation that would regulate martial arts. I also don't suffer paranoia over the subject or the discussion of it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by exile
But in fairness, I don't read EoK's comments as calling for a Politburo to oversee doctrinal purity in matters of technique---seems more like he's after a way to mandate high quality MA instruction, as vs. low-quality instruction that pretends to be high quality.

In response you made this post:

Try reading some of his past posts and you will find a pattern that might convince you otherwise.

Nobody will really come out and say something that they know will be unpopular if they want something to be accomplished. The easiest way to get something done for them is to give a reason that involves something like saving children from criminals and from there expand their powers to tell folks how they can rank, etc from there. And that is the type of thing that would happen with any type of quasi-goverment orginization. Those that are given a mandate would soon find ways of making sure that everything is done to their own narrow tolerances.

Unfortunately, you began with a very large assumption...and proceeded erroneously from there in re several points. You assume I was looking to find support for regulation of the martial arts. I did state I was not afraid of 'some' forms of regulation. That does not mean I believe 'style or curriculum' should be regulated and I never stated it should. While I personally do feel the rank structure as it currently exist has been abused in some cases, rank is still very much a product of subjective evaluation. At no time did I ever suggest there should be regulation with regard to rank. The ranking of minors did come up in the thread and I have voiced an opinion that I would prefer Dan rank to be the reservation of adults with some other system for those under 18. These are not new opinions for either me nor for several others...including members of this message board. In my initial suggestion (which I was asked to come up with one to spur discussion) I never included 'rank' as a factor in licensing. Experience was a factor, but rank was never an issue with regard to the discussion of regulation. The subject of child protection was brought up in regard to the phenomena of martial art schools running 'after school' and 'day care' programs. I did express mixed feelings about how these activities effect the overall image of martial arts practice and instruction. But I never advocated closing such schools or that they weren't entitled to engage in such activities. In fact, I didn't even bring that up ... it was brought up by other posters. I did agree that as other 'centers' have to meet certain guidelines for childcare, it seems only appropriate that martial art schools engaging in the same of similar practices should too. But that was activity specific...and actually didn't have much to do with martial arts and thus could probably already be dealt with through existing laws (and I do believe at some point somewhere....it will be brought up in some jurisdiction leading to a precedence that will carry over into other jurisdictions).

I could go on...but the point is thus: THIS WAS AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE. One in which I played 'devils advocate' (obviously quite well...maybe too well for you Mr. Roley). But just so your concious will be clear...allow me to retort...and be clear.

I don't advocate Laws telling who can teach martial arts. But I do think a community does have the right to establish what types of businesses it allows to operate within its confines.

I don't advocate Laws providing bias toward any particular art or style.
PERIOD!

I don't advocate Law establishing rank or curriculum structures. But I do think a community can set standard for education and experience for ANY field or business they deem to regulate within their jurisdiction. I.E. YOu can't get a license as a Doctor...if you don't have a MEDICAL DEGREE. And no....it makes no difference where you got the degree...so long as you pass the licensing requirement of the jurisdiction you are in.

Do I think Martial Artists need to be licensed? NO. But I do see the right of a community to require a license of a BUSINESS within their community. If paying a small fee and getting a 'business license' is all they require...then that is fine. If they require a higher standard for a particular field (i.e. teacher) then that was the choice of the community.

Do I think one day the Martial Arts in the U.S. will be regulated. In some ways...it already is....but, YES, I do think it will happen. Maybe not to ALL schools, but to many who engage in certain activities that take them into other fields (i.e. education, day care). As a recreation, I don't see it ever being regulated. As a SPORT....it already is. Ergo...sanctioning. I believe the INSURANCE INDUSTRY will be the driving force behind any regulation that does occur. Why? There is already a lot of precedence of how INSURANCE has driven the licensing and regulation of many fields. Any where they reach...they influence...both in the private...and public sectors.

So there are my TRUE attitudes. If you feel a need to be belicose with me for my 'attitudes'....do so for these.

John Hancock

 

[midnight503]

I think I found the source of the rub.

You would instead get people who started their own art and tried to make a living off of teaching martial arts than the guys I respect. Don Roley

People like.....Ed Parker, Bruce Lee, Chuck Norris, Mas Oyama, Choi Yong Sool, Lee Won Kuk, Jigoro Kano, Hwang Kee, Funakoshi Ginchen, Itosu Yasutsune, Chojun Miyagi....or Hatsumi Masaaki? You mean people like these? People who all started their own martial arts? People who all make a living off of it? Are these the kinds of people you were thinking of?

John Hancock

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

Reports of my demise have been greatly exaggerated.

The Emperor lives.



JH

 

[jks9199]

Sigh* The thread was began at the request of another member. Simply starting a thread does not necessarily mean advocation of a process. You have missed the point. The point was to talk about the topic and throw out ideas. Pro and con....the point was the dialogue...not the administration of anything suggested. I don't necessarily advocate legislation that would regulate martial arts. I also don't suffer paranoia over the subject or the discussion of it.

And why, pray tell, was this other, unnamed member unable to start the thread themselves? And... Just for fun... why have you apparently switched your username so suddenly?

I personally get kind of suspicious about people who change their usernames often; I can't help but wonder why they can't stand behind their own opinions. (Note, please, that I am not advocating or suggesting that people list or provide their real name; I don't do so publicly, and wouldn't ask others to do so as a general rule. But you can find the same username on multiple boards... So far as I know, they're all me.)

You assume I was looking to find support for regulation of the martial arts. I did state I was not afraid of 'some' forms of regulation. That does not mean I believe 'style or curriculum' should be regulated and I never stated it should.

But you did create or posit an artificial structure based on hours of training to qualify as an instructor. And you have yet to answer my question on that issue; how are the hours to be measured and certified? Does an hour of solo training count as training? Who determines if that hour is good enough?

While I personally do feel the rank structure as it currently exist has been abused in some cases, rank is still very much a product of subjective evaluation.

Ranking will always be somewhat subjective, unless you remove human beings as those assessing rank. So will teaching quality.

I could go on...but the point is thus: THIS WAS AN INTELLECTUAL EXERCISE. One in which I played 'devils advocate' (obviously quite well...maybe too well for you Mr. Roley). But just so your concious will be clear...allow me to retort...and be clear.

But that's not how you presented it. You presented it in a way that effectively said "regulation is going to happen, this is how I think it should be." Very different than asking something like "How do you think the quality of martial arts instruction can be regulated and controlled? Here's one idea..."

I don't advocate Laws telling who can teach martial arts. But I do think a community does have the right to establish what types of businesses it allows to operate within its confines.

And most communities have created those regulations and licensing procedures. In fact, regulating some businesses is at least arguably one of the primary roles of the government.

But I (and others) feel that free market competition is a much better way to regulate the QUALITY of instructors than some imposed and artificial structure of training hours.

DDo I think one day the Martial Arts in the U.S. will be regulated. In some ways...it already is....but, YES, I do think it will happen. Maybe not to ALL schools, but to many who engage in certain activities that take them into other fields (i.e. education, day care). As a recreation, I don't see it ever being regulated. As a SPORT....it already is. Ergo...sanctioning. I believe the INSURANCE INDUSTRY will be the driving force behind any regulation that does occur. Why? There is already a lot of precedence of how INSURANCE has driven the licensing and regulation of many fields. Any where they reach...they influence...both in the private...and public sectors.

So there are my TRUE attitudes. If you feel a need to be belicose with me for my 'attitudes'....do so for these.

John Hancock[

Than why were they not the attitudes and ideas you presented in the first place?

FYI -- the insurance industry has already regulated martial arts in many ways, from rules for competitions to structure of classes.

 

[exile]

And why, pray tell, was this other, unnamed member unable to start the thread themselves? And... Just for fun... why have you apparently switched your username so suddenly?

JKS---I want to make it clear that what EoK is saying about how the thread started is quite true. There was another thread already in progress in which EoK had posted some comments, including some ideas in passing about how to respond to poor quality instruction, deceptive practices and so on, and I was also a participant in that thread. EoK clearly had been thinking about the issue quite a bit, but it was a little bit off the side of the thread topic we were on, so I suggested that he initiate a new thread completely devoted to just this issue. Since it was his issue and concern, it was natural for him to be the one to start the new thread, so...

 

[jks9199]

JKS---I want to make it clear that what EoK is saying about how the thread started is quite true. There was another thread already in progress in which EoK had posted some comments, including some ideas in passing about how to respond to poor quality instruction, deceptive practices and so on, and I was also a participant in that thread. EoK clearly had been thinking about the issue quite a bit, but it was a little bit off the side of the thread topic we were on, so I suggested that he initiate a new thread completely devoted to just this issue. Since it was his issue and concern, it was natural for him to be the one to start the new thread, so...

That's fine -- and it makes sense, now. But it's not quite what he said, is it? That little detail (it came up somewhere else, but was off topic there) is rather different than saying "someone asked me to start it..."

 

[exile]

That's fine -- and it makes sense, now. But it's not quite what he said, is it? That little detail (it came up somewhere else, but was off topic there) is rather different than saying "someone asked me to start it..."

I did offer encouragement for the new thread, thinking that it would be a kind of meaty issue in its own right and would provoke some intense discussion... I guess it did... :vu:

 

[EmperorOfKentukki]

jks9199, the confusion may lie in that this thread was moved from the TKD message board over to the general message board. However, it was spurred from a completely different thread which was not about the subject of this particular thread. I was asked to start a new thread on the subject...and I did...and then it got moved by the 'administrative team' I believe.

As to the name change. Apparently a few moderators feeling that my post were not to their liking moved rather quickly to have my account suspended before I could even respond to some of their 'snipes'. I was unable to even access the PM's sent to me by some. I next found I was banned entirely before I could even get a response from the site admin. Thus, I was left with having to re-register just so I could talk to the site admin about the delimna. I also did make a couple of post during that time which some of the moderators took exception to and moved to ban that account as well. The site administrator finally contacted me directly (I was totally unaware he lived where the blizzard hit and was not getting his messages) and he intervened to correct the problem. Wah Lah! The Emperor of Kentukki is once again reinstated, albeit, now I have my private info public so some of the grousing will end. It never dawned on me to consider that the majority of posters on this site are not familiar with Korean Martial arts nor Tang Soo Do in particular. Among the TSD community, I'm am known....and known as both midnight503 and as the infamous 'Emperor of Kentukki'. While other posters on MT did know who I was and while I did occasionally sign my real name to posts...it wasn't something at was offered on every post and now is. I believe this will make some posters to MT happy....other I'm sure it won't.

That is the real delimna with moderator boards. On the one hand they prevent a large number of just flamboyant posts. The cost is at the price of censorship. Some board operate with out moderators even if it means having to put up with or even overlook the occasional post or poster that makes the blood boil. Much as the criticism was directed at my suggestion of 'regulation of the martial arts'....MT occasionally suffers from the pitfalls of power abuse many of you voiced concerns about. Simply being a moderator will not remove bias. In fact, I discovered that there are posters on MT that aren't even martial artists that have moderator status.

As I've spent a great deal of time on this thread basically having to defend me...rather than a position or point....and the thread has now lost it luster, I think I'll leave it. Order having now been restored, I find the thread has taken up more time than I'm comfortable with giving it. When you start your day off with domestic violence, have a homocide for lunch, and watch your country get threatened with nuclear devices for dinner....it sort of make the bickering that has gone on here seem insignificant. Time I could have better spent on rehablitation of my knee, reading a book, researching a form.....petting a cat. So I'll go back to occasionally checking in on the TKD, TSD or Korean threads. Happy swimming to you in your ponds....wherever they are.

John Hancock
The Emperor of Kentukki