I Learned Something About the “Man Code” and It Explained So Much

An assorted lot of Pickle Ball players assembled on two outdoor courts on a nice sunny spring day last week. We had played regularly for the past year, none of us terribly good, but none of us terribly bad either. As usual, we mixed up partners, so that each person got to play with someone different each time.

As luck would have it, my teammate was another woman, and we faced a team of two men. We began terribly, at one point the score was 0 to 8. Then point by point, we began to gain, until I was serving the game point with a score of 10 to 8. My serve was good. The volley was well fought. I hit a long shot to back left corner, just inside the line and the ball was unable to be returned. My partner and I celebrated the winning point after a long comeback.

Then the man who had been unable to return the ball called it out of bounds. I was perplexed, as the ball had landed cleanly inside the line. My partner and I stopped short, but she responded with our prevailing rule, that the team closest to the ball makes the call. The man who made call reiterated that it was out. His partner agreed. Stunned, we lobbed the ball over to them as we gave up the serve.

We did get the serve back and finally did win the game. But something just did not sit well with me. Later I found out why. Later in the day, the partner of the man who made the call pulled me aside and said:

“You had a perfect shot. It was in bounds. But you never go against your teammate, even when they make a bad call. I had to let the call stand.”

I was perplexed at this “rule” I had never known of. I have always been active, but I grew up in a time when girls were unable to play organized sports. As an adult, I lean more into individual sports like running and racquetball and hiking. Perhaps I am naïve, but that was the first time I’d head this code that doing what was better for the team superseded truth and good sportsmanship.

Later that day it struck me how much this unwritten code explains so much of the male behavior that I find both perplexing and alarming. Is this why, despite our past president’s egregious acts, no one in his party is willing to state the truth and call him out? Can this begin to explain why when a few members of the Republican party vote their conscious, they are censured, defunded, and threatened? Could this be a factor in why, in spite of obvious evidence to the contrary, sexual predators in our schools, churches, and civic organizations get protected?

Three days later I am still a bit unsettled by this idea that the truth is subjugated to being loyal to the team or a teammate. It really didn’t matter much when it was only a win on a friendly game, but it matters immensely when our democracy is on the line. When political parties (on both sides) put party over the good of the nation. When justice is not blind but is blinded by unquestioned allegiance to a team or party or group or person, rather than truth.

I know that this is a radical simplification — but I also know that there is a larger truth buried in this “man code” that merits critical examination. I wonder if the code should be rewritten to say:

“You never go against the truth, even if it puts your team or your position in a less favorable position, for truth should prevail.”