Revised Feb. 16, 2005
The Washington Post ran an article Jan. 24 (2003) depicting the state of affairs in colleges’ recruitment of student athletes.
Some antigay coaches for women’s teams are apparently running amok, telling prospective students that rival coaches are lesbians bent on "recruitment" of the non-sporting variety.
Parents in some cases are lapping up the propaganda, exerting heavy pressure on their 18-year-old children to avoid — or quit — schools with coaches who are alleged to be lesbian.
Unfortunately, the head of a division of Campus Crusade for Christ is quoted as if to encourage parents’ preoccupation with coaches’ private lives:
Parents have a responsibility to their daughters to learn everything they can about a coach, says Dennis Rainey, president of faith-based FamilyLife, a division of Campus Crusade for Christ dedicated to promoting traditional family values.
"Every parent who sends his son to play for Bobby Knight knows who he’s
sending his son to play for," said Rainey. "A coach has a significant
influence in a player’s life. I just interviewed John Wooden for two hours,
and I can promise you character does count. To me, as a parent of six
children, sexual preference and practice are a reflection of a coach’s
character. They do matter."
Rainey’s interference in the private sexuality of others prompts some skeptical reflection upon his own character. Young athletes and their coaches already confront serious injustices and ethical dilemmas, including cheating, academic neglect, poor sportsmanship, and steroid use. Witchhunts against coaches who behave professionally — that is, they keep their private lives reasonably private — are a prurient distraction from legitimate priorities in sports.
Coaches should be hired and retained for their sportsmanship and skill, not because they conform to different parents’ arbitrary sexual agendas: One parent may favor male coaches, another may favor heterosexual coaches in covenant marriage, yet another may favor heterosexuals who swear to having daily sex with the spouse, and still other parents may frown on coaches who have sex for any reason other than procreation. With due respect, my suggestion to all is focus on sports and mind their own private business.
From The Washington Post:
Going Behind the Back: College Recruiters Raise Issue of Sexual Orientation
By Greg Sandoval
Friday, January 24, 2003; Page D01
I’m confused. You claim that “Campus Crusade seems afraid to ask what its heterosexual coaches do in the bedroom. Or perhaps CCC is selective in its respect for people’s privacy.”
First of all (full disclosure) I work for Campus Crusade.
Second, Dennis Rainey is not “Campus Crusade” any more than I am. That’s like saying Florida is “The Unites States”. Campus Crusade is a federation in the same sense that the United States is.
Third, Rainey’s comments are exactly the opposite of what you claim. You accuse him (or Campus Crusade) of being afraid deal with heterosexual coaches practices. There is no such fear in Rainey’s statement. Specifically, “sexual preference and practice are a reflection of a coach’s character.” He did not say anything about gay sexual preference. Why did you distort the meaning of this quote? The context of the quote is not even clear in the original article. Why would you give the impression that he was singling out homosexuals and ignoring heterosexuals? He did not say that.
This seems slanderous at a number of leves. Please be more careful in the future.
Ryan,
I agree with your point that I overgeneralized from Rainey’s position to that of CCC. I’ll correct the text in that respect.
In regard to “sexual preference,” that is a common code phrase used, euphemistically, by those who believe sexual orientation is primarily a matter of behavioral choice. In that context, the phrase distinguishes between heterosexuality (assumed to be OK) and homosexuality (assumed to be an immoral choice). I wish Rainey had been more specific, whatever his intent may have been.
I agree that “sexual practice” is broader than sexual orientation, but in the original article the context of Rainey’s quote was specific to a witchhunt against lesbian coaches.
Nevertheless, in the revised XGW text of this post, I will give Rainey the benefit of the doubt that perhaps he was quoted out of context.