I wasn't trying to say a lack of empathy was a bad thing on its face, but not having experienced a situation makes it easier to dismiss the feelings/experiences of those who have.
For example, I think that most people on this board have kids who are stars. They are very involved and can quote batting averages and strikeout numbers without looking them up. These are kids who have always excelled and probably will through high school. So those parents, of course, are in favor of always playing the best 9 because their kid is almost always part of the best 9. They expect/want/sometimes demand everything be a skills-based meritocracy because their kid always wins in skills-base meritocracies. And they think that skills-based meritocracy is the only thing that matters in sports.
For a lot of sports, that might be true. I just don't think it applies to high school, because I don't think high school sports is about the individual or even the team. It's about the community. I know that's not a popular sentiment, but I think it's true.
And the reason I say that is because my kid is not a star, so that's the perspective I have. I think being a part of a program should be rewarded. I think three years of effort and practice and fundraising should be rewarded, not discounted. I think leadership matters -- and when someone tells me they know plenty of freshmen leaders, I say that's fine, but do you also know plenty of seniors and juniors who will follow a freshman? I don't know many 18-year-old young women who will look at a 14-year-old girl and say "hey, let's do what she says!" So I think there's a place on teams and in games for the kids who are out there giving it all they can every practice, being a good teammate, cheering on their friends, keeping score, practicing hard. I think that work should be rewarded. They don't have to start, but they should play when they can. There's a reason we all cry at the end of Rudy, right?
But that's my perspective as a parent of a kid who isn't better than everyone else. It's no less or more valid, it's just different.
There are also a lot of coaches -- both active and retired -- who tend to see things from a coach's perspective, and have dealt with enough asshole parents that they take any criticism of a coach with multiple grains of salt. They probably see coaches as under-appreciated more often than not, so when people start complaining about anything regarding coaches behavior, they defend the coach, sometimes to the extreme, but almost always to the margins. Because that's their perspective. What's important is the game, or "softball" as a concept. That's important and I appreciate them, but they can be quick to overlook that these are young girls and young women we're talking about. There are emotional components to all of this stuff that have to be considered.
Because ever since she started playing softball, she wanted to play for the high school. She put in four years for the program and she wanted a senior day, she wanted a senior season. Wanted to play with the girls she'd been playing in and around for a decade. She was willing to put up with a lot in order to have those experiences. We talked a lot about what the season would be like -- that there was a decent chance the coach would cut her. She was brave enough to give it a shot. She was tough enough to put up with a degree of humiliation from someone who went out of their way to embarrass her. She followed the coach's instructions. Then the coach, her bluff called, changed the rules.
or would it ?
