I didn’t watch Super Bowl LIX, because I no longer enjoy observing or participating in sporting activities and because I choose not to actively engage with bread and circuses regarding such events. All the same, today, I’ve heard a bit about the game, commercials, and other matters.
In particular, I listened to varying perspectives regarding Brad Pitt’s appearance in a video that addressed unifying citizens of the United States (U.S.). Wanting to develop my own viewpoint, I then watched the video that could be described as an appeal to emotion for togetherness.
Perhaps unsurprising to anyone who’s monitored the content of my blog, I maintain a dialectic outlook regarding the message. On one hand, I’m pleased to see that nationalism and populism are apparently once again en vogue now that President of the U.S. Donald Trump is in office.
On the other hand, I use thinking that is logical and reasonable (collectively “rational”) regarding the message of the video which remains logically inconsistent. For context regarding the latter point, consider the introduction to the overall message that Pitt stated in the video:
By lifting others, that’s how we rise up. We, the people. Today, we come together – not just these players and coaches or these teams and sides – we, all of us – the dreamers, the warriors, the builders and believers – brought together to celebrate our greatest game. The game that teaches us what we can achieve when we gather together in that most American of formations. The one most fundamental to every play call and every game: the huddle.
Later in the video, Pitt added, “The huddle is a metaphor for our history, for the power found in our shared purpose.” The message of the video arguably relates to communitarianism—a philosophy that emphasizes the connection between the individual and the community.
With less focus on individualism, a communitarianism message of this nature presumably advocates a collection of interactions among U.S. citizens who share an interest or historical ethos which binds together a collective. However, this message relates more to myth than reality.
Anyone across the globe who was capable of critical thinking over the past four years could likely understand how divided U.S. citizens were regarding the Black Lives Matter movement, authoritarian COVID-19 lockdown measures, and other matters or events. We aren’t unified.
Therefore, dialectically speaking, I can appreciate an idealistic push for cohesion while also maintaining a realistic perspective of how this nation actually functions. As such, I reject irrational rhetoric of the huddle video.
Perhaps when hearing this you self-disturb with irrational beliefs about how I should, must, or ought to support the attempt of some people to unite members of our country. I can entertain such advocacy if you can also examine one fundamental flaw of the metaphor used in the video.
As is often the case within my blog, context is needed. In both eighth and ninth grade, I was a member of a school football team. In the video, Pitt refers to football as “our greatest game.” Admittedly, there was nothing great about my playing ability.
Not only wasn’t I a member of the A rather than B team, the head football coach in eighth grade nicknamed me “No Name,” because I was altogether unremarkable and easy to forget. Nevertheless, every member of the all-male team was subject to the same standards.
We were required to undergo the same medical examination process. As well, we were subject to the same physical fitness regimen. Although there were differing positions to be played and separation between the A and B teams, we all participated in the same practice drills.
Therefore, each of us earned our spot on the team. In what Pitt referred to as the “most fundamental to every play call and every game,” the huddle, every member of the Valleyview Junior High School Vikings and Randall High School Raiders warranted our participation.
A similar assertion couldn’t be stated if one identity group wasn’t required to undergo the same rigors for which the majority of football team participants were required. Any team member who couldn’t perform to the same standards wouldn’t have been allowed in our huddle.
In high school, I realized that football wasn’t the sport for me. In fact, no sports were appealing to me from the aspect of active participation. Nevertheless, in a relatively short amount of time after graduating, I joined the U.S. Marine Corps which operated as a team of sorts.
In the Pitt video, “warriors” are listed as members of the huddle regarding a unified message. Yet, in a blogpost entitled When Idealism Doesn’t Stack Up to Realism, I meticulously outlined how male and female Marines weren’t subject to the same fitness standards when I served.
For instance, in order to achieve the highest physical fitness test score at the time, males were required to complete 20 pull-ups, 100 crunches, and an 18-minute 3-mile run. Alternatively, females completed a 70-second flexed-arm hang, 100 crunches, and a 21-minute 3-mile run.
Male Marines had to exhibit more upper body strength and run faster than our female counterparts. Nevertheless, females who weren’t held to the same fitness standards could be promoted to a higher rank than their male counterparts. Those were disparate standards.
Also, when I became a Marine Security Guard (MSG)—a diplomatic security provider trained in special weapons and tactics (SWAT) for protection of U.S. consulates and embassies—females were allowed within the huddle without enduring the same standards as males.
In the photo above, I’m in a huddle with an all-male MSG SWAT-style team in Rio de Janeiro, Brasil. Though each member of the team didn’t get along in our personal time, we all earned our position in the unit by having remained subject to the same fitness and training standards.
However, when I served as an MSG in Lima, Peru, the sole female Marine in our team wasn’t held to the same standards as her male counterparts. Arguably, this calls into question whether or not she should’ve been able to participate in a huddle when she enjoyed easier requirements.
Whether it relates to football or warriors, I maintain that holding the same standard for participants of a huddle affords a team the opportunity to engage in play or combat at an equal level of fitness. To assess this position for rationality, consider the following syllogism:
Form (hypothetical) –
If p, then q; if q, then r; therefore, if p, then r.
Example –
If participation in the huddle relates to equal standards, then participants of a team will be required to achieve unitary outcomes.
If participants of a team will be required to achieve unitary outcomes, then males and females will be held to the identical standards when playing on the same team.
Therefore, if participation in the huddle relates to equal standards, then males and females will be held to the identical standards when playing on the same team.
This proposal is both logical and reasonable if the highest standard of performance is the goal of a team in order to win a game or war. However, even though the proposal follows logical form, it may be perceived as unreasonable if the sought-after standard relates to appearances.
If one seeks to maintain the appearance of equal opportunity for participating in the huddle by lowering the standards to suit females, then the aforementioned syllogistic proposal isn’t a rational option. If one seeks to win a competition, then equal standards will apply.
Thus, I ask which is more important in the huddle—winning a competition or the appearance of a team through standards of diversity, equity, inclusivity, and accessibility? Dialectically, I suppose there’s a third option.
Set a high unitary standard from all members of the huddle and allow males or females to earn their positions. As an example, in order to achieve the highest physical fitness test score, everyone completes 20 pull-ups, 100 crunches, and an 18-minute 3-mile run. That’s equality.
Noteworthy, on February 5, 2025, Trump signed the executive order (EO) Keeping Men Out of Women’s Sports, which states:
In recent years, many educational institutions and athletic associations have allowed men to compete in women’s sports. This is demeaning, unfair, and dangerous to women and girls, and denies women and girls the equal opportunity to participate and excel in competitive sports.
The logic underlying the EO is fairly straightforward:
Form (modus ponens) –
If p, then q; p; therefore, q.
Example –
If girls and women cannot physically compete with boys and men, then presidential action is needed in the interest of equal opportunity to succeed.
Girls and women cannot physically compete with boys and men.
Therefore, presidential action is needed in the interest of equal opportunity to succeed.
Despite whatever absurdist arguments to which our nation has been subject over the past four years, girls and women cannot physically compete with boys and men at an equal level. Thus, the logic underlying Trump’s EO is sound. Moreover, I maintain that it’s reasonable.
Why not apply that same rational thinking to the huddle of the military? This includes any and all SWAT-style teams, special operations commands, and other areas in which peak physical fitness is valued over the appearance of the huddle.
Likewise, I wouldn’t be opposed to either: (1) segregating the military into male and female with no authority given to those over others who don’t compete at an equal standard or (2) set a high unitary standard for both males and females and allow equal opportunity to win or fail. This is rational.
If you’re logical and reasonable enough to consider these proposals, then perhaps you’ll also be open to re-segregating (or “separating,” if you prefer) the Boy Scouts of America and other traditionally all-male social institutions. Or, does advocacy huddle in only one direction?
If you’re looking for a provider who tries to work to help understand how thinking impacts physical, mental, emotional, and behavioral elements of your life—helping you to sharpen your critical thinking skills, I invite you to reach out today by using the contact widget on my website.
As a psychotherapist, I’m pleased to try to help people with an assortment of issues ranging from anger (hostility, rage, and aggression) to relational issues, adjustment matters, trauma experience, justice involvement, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, anxiety and depression, and other mood or personality-related matters.
At Hollings Therapy, LLC, serving all of Texas, I aim to treat clients with dignity and respect while offering a multi-lensed approach to the practice of psychotherapy and life coaching. My mission includes: Prioritizing the cognitive and emotive needs of clients, an overall reduction in client suffering, and supporting sustainable growth for the clients I serve. Rather than simply trying to help you to feel better, I want to try to help you get better!
Deric Hollings, LPC, LCSW
References:
Hollings, D. (2023, October 14). Appeal to emotion. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/appeal-to-emotion
Hollings, D. (2023, May 11). Catering to DEIA. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/catering-to-deia
Hollings, D. (2024, November 4). Critical thinking. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/critical-thinking
Hollings, D. (2022, March 15). Disclaimer. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/disclaimer
Hollings, D. (2024, April 2). Four major irrational beliefs. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/four-major-irrational-beliefs
Hollings, D. (2023, October 12). Get better. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/get-better
Hollings, D. (n.d.). Hollings Therapy, LLC [Official website]. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/
Hollings, D. (2024, January 2). Interests and goals. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/interests-and-goals
Hollings, D. (2023, September 19). Life coaching. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/life-coaching
Hollings, D. (2023, January 8). Logic and reason. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logic-and-reason
Hollings, D. (2025, February 5). Logically inconsistent. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/logically-inconsistent
Hollings, D. (2023, September 3). On feelings. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/on-feelings
Hollings, D. (2024, May 5). Psychotherapist. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/psychotherapist
Hollings, D. (2022, November 1). Self-disturbance. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/self-disturbance
Hollings, D. (2022, October 7). Should, must, and ought. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/should-must-and-ought
Hollings, D. (2023, October 17). Syllogism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/syllogism
Hollings, D. (2025, January 16). The words we use matter. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/the-words-we-use-matter
Hollings, D. (2025, February 2). Therapy speak: A dialectic perspective. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/therapy-speak-a-dialectic-perspective
Hollings, D. (2023, July 7). When idealism doesn’t stack up to realism. Hollings Therapy, LLC. Retrieved from https://www.hollingstherapy.com/post/when-idealism-doesn-t-stack-up-to-realism
NFL on FOX. (2025, February 9). Super Bowl LIX: Brad Pitt explains what it means to be American on Super Bowl Sunday | NFL on FOX [Video]. YouTube. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/fkjimL8feG0?si=dowJ_z5WZnAVYz2_
Presidential Actions. (2025, February 5). Keeping men out of women’s sports. The White House. Retrieved from https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/keeping-men-out-of-womens-sports/
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Absurdism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absurdism
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Black Lives Matter. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Lives_Matter
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Brad Pitt. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brad_Pitt
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Bread and circuses. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bread_and_circuses
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Communitarianism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communitarianism
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Donald Trump. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_trump
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Individualism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Nationalism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nationalism
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Populism. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Populism
Wikipedia. (n.d.). Super Bowl LIX. Retrieved from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Super_Bowl_LIX
Komentáře