Is there anything wrong with a McDojo?
Yet, a simple perusal of the internet yields blog upon blog of folks further defining what is a McDojo. Typically, they relate to belt factories, contracts, payment structures, and even style.
Martial arts chains are often targets, like Tiger Schulman's and Eagle Martial Arts. Also, organizations (and schools that are part of the organization) are targets, notably American Taekwondo Association and World Taekwondo Federation. Also, schools that teach children are also targets. And schools that charge fees. And schools located in strip malls.
It seems like every school is a target. Indeed, that's becoming more and more common. But just because a school possesses one out of many poor or questionable qualities, it doesn't mean that it is a McDojo.
I prefer a more practical definition of McDojo. The prefix "Mc" suggests a connotation with McDonald's Restaurants. What is relevant is that McDonalds is a chain (it franchises), its goal is to hand out food as fast as possible, with special drivethrough lanes for even speedier service, to accomodate children (see Happy Meals), at a very cheap price ($1 burgers) although one notes that even in the midst of a huge sale, one still pays the same prices regardless (upsell one product, but make more expensive the other products - like sodas and fries).
Wow. We can probably relate to a few martial arts schools who possess qualities of a McDonald's Restaurant, yes? Like the drive through, the schools have clubs for those wanting their black belts. Like the restaurant franchise, some are chains. Like the restaurant's attention to children, the schools have Little Tigers, Little Ninjas, pee-wees, Tiny Dragons, etc. Like the cheap burger-but-pay-through-the-nose-soda-and-fries, schools have cheap monthly or introductory rates, but the equipment, tests, seminars, weapons, and tournaments are very expensive - or at least, they add up.
I think Wikipedia sums it up too much, and the definition seems too sanitized and abbreviated. Had the term "Westernized Dojo" been used instead of "McDojo", I think Wikipedia's definition may fit the bill. But that isn't a catchy name, and so I think "McDojo" (and related terms like "McDojoism") has sprung into everyday usage.
The problem is now everyone who has something negative to say about a school, labels every such school a McDojo. If the school is in a strip mall (aren't many McDonald's?), then it's a McDojo. If the instructor is just a kid with a black belt (haven't you met some newly promoted cocky Fries Manager kid on some power trip?) then it must be a McDojo. If it has birthday parties and kid programs (haven't you seen a climbing pen at most McDonald's?) then it must be a McDojo. If the school is handing out black belts based on tenure, rather than merit (haven't you ever heard the blase phrase, "Who's next...") then it must be a McDojo.
And all of this, as if McDonalds is the epitome of evil? What did McDonald's ever do to you? You WANT McDonalds. You NEED McDonalds. Ever been on a long drive with kids in the back? Fastest thing to shut them up is a quickie trip to McDonald's. Been late to work, and need a coffee? There's a drive-thru with 1 miles of your current location, guaranteed. Need to break a $20? Go buy yourself a $1 burger, get $19 in change.
Alright, let's leave McDonald's alone. And let's leave some of the evil martial arts schools alone, while we're at it. Or not. Should we be weary of McDojos?
Let's see what people are grousing about, and is it enough to make the school a McDojo. And even if it is, is it something to be avoided?
Note that many of the complaints are directed at an organization called "American Taekwondo Assocation", or ATA. The ATA is an organization who started their own flavor of Taekwondo. What they do is market their style, and schools buy a franchise from them. If a school likes their ideals, they buy the marketing stuff, and then uses it to recruit new students.
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
The school is a McDojo if the idea of take-downs or wrestling is never addressed
In Taekwondo tournaments, take-downs are not allowed. So why should a school perform them? I would agree that a school should round the student off with occasional take-down drills, but the only application for take-downs is for self-defense, which is why self-defense and wrestling styles folks gripe about this. If a good instructor seems to think that self-defense can be achieved without a take-down, then that is their perogative. Yes, a student should know how to handle being taken down, but this is beside the point.
The absense of take-downs (ground fighting) does not make the school a McDojo. It may say something about the quality of instruction, but it's got nothing to do with contracts and money grubbing.
No comments:
Post a Comment