On February 24, 2010 in Carmel, Indiana John Williams, principal of Carmel High School, and Carmel Police Chief Michael Fogarty held a press conference to discuss an incident that occurred on a school bus following a Carmel High School basketball game. On the bus ride home from a game on January 22, an event categorized by most local media outlets as “bullying” or “hazing” occurred. The initial reaction by the student body, staff, sports teams and parents was a reflection of the deep roots of obedience in the high school’s sports mentality. The abuse, which was of a sexual nature, was targeted at a freshman on the third-string basketball team by three senior members of the varsity team.
One CHS teacher, who preferred to remain anonymous, spoke out to the press to acknowledge the systematic character with which bullying was part of the athletic team atmosphere, “It’s creating an atmosphere of mistrust between the student body and the administration… This only came to light through back channels and when it did – if the rumors are anything close to true [the two students] don’t feel like they will be represented and protected.” This comment elucidates on the general atmosphere of secrecy concerning the situation. Not only were administrators hesitant to condemn the students who perpetrated the crimes, but also members of the basketball team were unwilling to discuss or express even general concern about the incident.
Because there was limited information about the incident due to what served as an effective order of silence on basketball team members given by coaches, it was difficult to understand exactly what occurred on that school bus. In the broader perspective, though, this proved to be the less important issue. In the process of gathering information for the newspaper article I was writing about the incident for the HiLite, the Carmel High School newspaper, I understood just how important allegiance to the team was for members of the basketball team. Due to conditioning on the part of senior members of the team, even the victim’s peers were unwilling to discuss the events that occurred or condemn the actions of the three senior members of the team in defense of the victim throughout the police and media investigation into the event.
Only after all of the information regarding the incident was processed and the students responsible for the hazing were incarcerated and expelled from school were parents, team members and the administration willing to condemn the events that occurred. There is a clear parallel to be drawn between this incident and Stanley Milgram’s experiments on obedience and control. Because the students on the basketball team who refused to come to the defense of their teammate even when faced with a clear case of sexual and physical harassment had successfully convinced themselves that their moral responsibility had transferred to the team, and in particular the senior members of the team, they were able to order their commitment to the group above their own understanding of morality.
This situation seems like a strong example of how Milgram's theories about obedience and responsibility outside of the genocidal or ethnic cleansing context. I feel we as an American society exploit obedience and authority to an extreme when it comes to sports, especially those involving young men. The idea of being part of a team, especially one as elite as a Varsity team, is slightly reminiscent of what the soldiers spoke of in the video we viewed in class about the SS. While being on the Varsity basketball team and being a member of the Nazi party SS are incomparable, the human response to obedience is the same in these and other similar situations. Just like the men justified abusing another soldier for their weakness during drills, so did the rest of the basketball team justify the senior members' abuse of the younger player as part of being part of the team. By humiliating or at least intimidating the younger player, the older members were exerting their authority and power over him, putting him in his right place. Which is why I believe other members of the team never spoke of it - because they all had either done this type of harassment to gain authority or had it done to them. Hazing is commonplace because it is a legacy that tests ones dedication to the group, serves as a type of initiation, and puts new members in their respective places at the bottom of the hierarchy.
ReplyDeleteI feel as though this falls under Milgram's point of "alterations of thinking" that keeps a subject under authority. One could also say that the perpetrators also experienced a "disappearance of authority" because they were merely links in the chain of a tradition. Again, this is all based on the assumption that there were previous acts similar to this one - which wouldn't be hard to assume in contemporary American sports culture. You could also bring in Waller's "groupthink" theory when it came to the question of why nobody reported the event or even felt it needed to be reported. The players, the coach, and the boys' parents were all strongly convicted to deny the accusations, which then expanded as more and more people felt it easier to deny than confront. Only after legal action was taken did people have the gall to step up and say their opinions on the horrible nature of the act and suddenly everybody was thinking the same thing again. Their morals were forgotten in favor of the group's goals - which was the protect the boys, their reputation, and possibly the school's reputation as well.
It's interesting to me how something as weighty as genocidal theories can be applied to situations such as this.