Gym Publishes Anti-Harassment Policy Banning Reporting

Derek Valdez, owner of Iron Crescent Jiu-Jitsu in Scottsdale, Arizona, published a five-page “Code of Conduct” on Tuesday morning after a 12-second video of him yelling at purple belt Maria Chen went viral Monday evening (12,047 views by end of day). The policy, effective immediately, bans seventeen specific behaviors including “prolonged eye contact during instruction,” “questioning the coach’s methods,” “suggesting alternative techniques,” and “tone policing.” The video, filmed by a white belt from the 5 p.m. fundamentals class, showed Valdez audibly frustrated that Chen wasn’t “drilling hard enough.” Chen was drilling. She had been drilling for forty-five minutes straight. Valdez had complained about every pass. At minute thirty-one, he raised his voice and asked (in the video’s language) why she was “basically walking through the movement like a mall ninja.” Chen continued drilling. The video cut to 4 p.m. the next day, when the gym’s Instagram had 1,200 new followers and the local online discourse had opinions. By Tuesday, Valdez had released the policy. The Code of Conduct is technically a response to his conduct. It does not address his conduct. The document, titled “Creating a Culture of Respect and Growth,” lists prohibited behaviors in seventeen numbered sections. What follows is the exact text from sections 7 through 11: “7. Sustained eye contact directed toward instruction giver without permission. (Exception: attending to the speaker is acceptable only during the first and final thirty seconds of any position instruction.) 8. Questioning the coach’s method or approach. 9. Suggesting alternative techniques or positions without explicit invitation. 10. Tone policing, including but not limited to: implying the coach is speaking loudly, criticizing manner of delivery, suggesting instruction is harsh or aggressive. 11. Implying, directly or indirectly, that the coach is hard on students, has standards that are unrealistic, or should recalibrate expectations.” Maria Chen, the purple belt in the video, read the policy on Tuesday afternoon while sitting in her car in the gym parking lot. She did not re-enter. “He yelled at me for not yelling while drilling,” she said via text message to three of her training partners. “Then he published a policy that makes it illegal to say he yelled.” By Wednesday morning, three purple belts and one brown belt had not shown up to class. Another purple belt, James Ortiz, attempted to comply with the policy during Thursday’s instruction. During a footlock tutorial, he kept his eyes pointed at his own feet. At one point, Valdez asked, “Are you even looking?” Ortiz looked up for 2.3 seconds, then back down. Valdez said, “You know what, this isn’t working,” and moved to a white belt to demonstrate. Later, Ortiz realized he’d been accused of both violating section 7 (eye contact) and violating an implied expectation to pay attention. The policy had trapped him in its own contradiction. A third purple belt, whose identity we’re protecting because she’s considering complaining and knows what happens next, attempted to ask a clarifying question about wrist positioning during a guillotine drill. The question was polite. It was brief. She raised her hand before speaking. Valdez responded: “That’s section 8. Don’t do that.” She did not ask anything else. For the remainder of the month, she attended open mat only, when Valdez was not present. Valdez’s wife, Linda Valdez, attended Thursday’s board meeting (Iron Crescent is a member-owned cooperative with a seven-person board, though Derek controls four seats through proxy voting). She presented the policy as a “living document” and asked if the board had suggestions. The board had suggestions. One suggestion was to hire a lawyer. Another was to read it. A third was to compare it against actual harassment policies from other gyms. None of the suggestions stuck. Valdez’s rationale, delivered via email to the board on Friday at 11:47 p.m., was that the policy was “designed to encourage focused, respectful training” and that “if students cannot maintain professional boundaries, they will need to find a new gym.” The email did not define professional boundaries. It did not address what constitutes “focused” drilling or how yelling at someone for doing exactly what you asked them to do qualifies as professional instruction. He did define “tone policing” as follows: “Tone policing is when a student attempts to delegitimize instruction through unsolicited commentary on volume, pace, or emotional context.” This definition eliminates the student’s ability to report yelling without tone-policing him for yelling. It’s a closed loop with no exit. By Saturday, eleven students texted asking whether they could transfer their membership credits rather than continue training. Valdez’s response was to add section 18 to the policy: “Unsolicited inquiries about membership status or credential transfer, without explicit invitation, shall be considered tone policing under section 10.” Maria Chen transferred to Alliance Scottsdale, three miles down the road. She arrived Tuesday evening. The first thing the Alliance instructor, Professor Gabriela, said during instruction was, “If you have a question, ask it. If something hurts, tell me. If I’m being unfair, you can say that too.” Maria cried during the first roll. She was rolling with a white belt who passed her guard cleanly and tapped her to an armbar. Nobody yelled. Nobody mentioned it. She just rolled and came back the next day. Iron Crescent’s 5 p.m. fundamentals class now has three attendees. One of them is a new white belt named Brandon, who has never read the policy because he doesn’t speak English and assumed the handout was a menu from the juice bar next door. He attends because class is quiet on Monday and Wednesday (Valdez doesn’t teach those days). On Thursday, when Valdez instructs, Brandon observes from the lobby, pretending to stretch. He has made more progress in three weeks by avoiding instruction than he did by attending it. Valdez, for his part, has begun considering a new career path. Not coaching. He’s stopped thinking about coaching. He’s been watching YouTube videos about real estate investment trusts and cryptocurrency, which, he noted in an email to the board on Sunday, “have no tone-policing policies because they’re digital.” The Code of Conduct remains in effect. Section 18 was ratified unanimously by Derek’s four proxy votes.