What it really shows . . .
The quotes Taai repeated were taught to me by my 1st SD instructor, and others since. It was taken seriously. But he was not perfect. Neither am I. That doesn't change what one may aspire to do and be. What happened to DS, or more accurately what he alledgedly did, even what he reportedly admitted he did, shows what is wrong with him, as a person and a martial arts teacher, if it is true. If it is true, no one can dispute it is wrong from an ethics point of view, and wrong in the sense of traditional martial arts. More wrong, than declaring one's own uniform, school name, and methods, as opposed to one's own master's instruction. That is all on him. If true, he shows himself to be either:1) one who doesn't see the pursuit of a sexual relationship by a master/teacher with a martial arts student, as wrong; 2) he does know it was wrong, but did it anyway; or 3) he doesn't read the Creeds as barring pursuit of such a relationship. Hypocrite and charlatan, maybe. Unethical, in my opinion, definitely. We know there are martial arts instructors who think it is nothing more than teaching the form, how to fight, and that is it. Its not different than a driving instructor. There is no "relationship" beyond regurgitating facts. That doesn't make it right, just makes it what he made it to be.
What it shows about SD, in general, is that it also, as do all walks of life, have its bad apples. I would modify Taai's statement, that "SD is BS, fraudulent, and pathetic," to, "Some SD people are" all of that. In the old days, the GM of the style, system, school, temple, might indeed throw the person out, stop teaching them, and the person would find another school or teacher, if possible. And if further insult were made, or dishonor brought, someone might handle it more directly. You know: "You have offended my family, and you have offended the Shaolin Temple." And then fight it out. Cannot happen here now today.
Today, what can anyone do? The S's aleady declared themselves somewhat outside of GMS's control when they created CSC, didn't they? Many say that was wrong, too. And if GMS did something to disown DS, that's the same as disowning CSC, isn't it? And they would go on, and just not get continued forms and instruction from GMS. But he didn't do it then, and there was a reason for that, which may or may not be a good reason. That is up to him. If he doesn't, it means he is permissive in areas and ways some wish he weren't, but that is true with many of the breakaway factions he has continued to associate with. Only he knows for sure why, and anyone who doesn't think those reasons could be benevolent, or could be less, is also wrong.
But it must be true, that if people are in SD to be part of a monastic life, then their teacher better be of that mind, or they better learn what they can in class and practice the rest in their own time. They are wrong to think that is what they are going to get. They are going to get, at a minimum, instruction in forms and methods of martial arts, from the perspective of GMS, and we all know the debate on that. They are going to also get exposure to a philosophy, some rules for living one's life, as to fitness, diet, mentality, yes, but only to the extent their own teacher preaches that. Some do, some don't. Anyone who comes into SD, or stays with SD, thinking anything else, or thinking every instructor's method, from GMS down is the same everywhere, is wrong.
But that is a minimum. Any student can take that minimum, and do more with it. Doing so is up to them. They better not depend on the System to make them do it. That is not, in modern times, what it does.
SD is what it is. But it is also what an individual makes of it, on their own, some to good, some not. To some that is okay. To others it never will be.