A week ago, I opened up my local newspaper's sports section and stumbled upon an article discussing the cancellation of a local high school's football team. Having been a member of a high school football team that teetered on the brink of collapse, I perused the article with great care. I expected a "run of the mill" story about a team struggling with low numbers, poor coaching or, at worst, drug use. However as I continued, the article revealed the horrific truth behind the cancellation. Several older football players sexually assaulted younger players during a heinous hazing rite at a summer football camp. When the story broke, the school board immediately cancelled the team's season. The crime was revolting. The community's response to it was even more nauseating.
The news sparked an emotional response by the community: football players, fans and parents alike. Many students walked out of class and onto the athletic fields in protest. Their parents lashed out acerbically at the injustice committed. In fact, some firebrands even threatened dramatic legal action. Was this a rally of support for the sexually assaulted students? No. The community protested the repercussions of their team's deplorable actions. Football players lamented their lost season. Fans feared the prospects of uneventful Saturday afternoons. The community banded together and placed blame on the school board for its "thoughtless" decision. Instead of supporting the victims of the assault, they chose to make issue out of the punishment. The community's response to the hazing incident and its punishment totally disrespects the victims, undercuts the board's decision and condones sexual assault. The punishment is indeed appropriate. I am ashamed of this community's actions.
Many protesters resented the school board's decision because it was a form of "collective punishment." Their logic was the cancellation would punish the football players not involved in the hazing. On the contrary, I feel that this sort of punishment is well suited for the crime. Hazing can only be committed if assailants received the broad support of the team. In this instance, it was reported that the hazing occurred through the week at the camp; it was not a one time aberration. It is true that the majority of the team did not physically harm the victims. However, their inaction served as a tacit agreement with the assailants. Athletes on sports teams surely understand that they are at least partially responsible for the actions of their teammates. Every football player who witnessed the hazing but did nothing is as culpable as those who assaulted the victims. In response to this argument, some teammates said they were vehemently against the hazing but were "intimidated" into silence. For one with fragile morals, the reasons they failed to speak up are almost fathomable: peer pressure, fear of retaliation, etc. However, if these adolescents do not learn to speak up against something so unmistakably immoral, how will they ever be able to sift through less clear-cut ethical dilemmas? Perhaps the cancellation will give them time to think about their situation and reflect. Unfortunately, this seems doubtful. In fact, days after the season's scrapping, the team could be on the school lawn carelessly tossing around the football. It's absolutely shocking how these teenagers could have such disregard for authority and their assaulted teammates. The parents of these football players, too, clearly failed to instill the most basic morals into their sons. In protesting, they yet again act as poor role models for their children. Have they ever considered that their sons could have been the ones assaulted? Would they still be out protesting the cancellation? What a prime example of abysmal parenting. The coaches, too, are affected by the termination of the football season. It was reported that the coaches warned the assailants prior to the incident several times. All the threats, however, were evidently useless. Coaches are still in charge of their athletes after the fourth quarter. Their failure to manage these thugs with a history of hazing had horrendous consequences, and they should be held accountable as well.
In this small Long Island town, the spirit of athleticism, respect and communal support has gone astray. Clearly, this assault was not an isolated incident, nor was it committed by a sole perpetrator. It does "take a whole village to raise a child," and this community has failed. They must deal with the consequences. Though the memory of one less football-filled autumn will eventually fade from the minds of the community members, the assault victim will never forget the torment of hazing.
