Okay look, I get special interest groups and at times the need for them. However, if a situation involves a woman NOW and other groups don't immediately leap into action...unless it involves an issue of equality.
Just because a person is black doesn't mean organizations that focus on black interests need to get involved. Yet the NAACP (and other groups) seems to leap into play when it involves someone who is black, and famous even if the issue has
nothing to do with the fact that they're black.
Latest example? Michael Vick. Look, I don't follow sports, I couldn't have told you who this guy was prior to the dog fighting story. You want to know what the first thing *I* noticed about him was? That he was an NFL player, that he made lots of money (not all of them do), and that he was apparently a pretty horrible person if the charges against him were true.
I didn't know he was black,
because the first article I read about him had no picture. When I saw what he looked like, nothing changed. So what. There was no surprise or lack of surprise. Now if his name had been Sean Patrick O'Toole and he had been asian...sure I'd have been shocked, after all I don't think there are any asians in the NFL.
My real point though is that when people reach a certain level of money, status and celebrity, they really enter a world that transgresses skin color. Their lives are often nothing like any 'average' person's anymore regardless of skin color. The experiences and circumstances which then shape their lives are so unique as to really form a completely different group of people. Those that have the most trouble adapting to it are the ones who seem to ignore it and attempt to live in the same manner as before, or those who surround themselves with the sycophants and hanger-ons which glom onto such people like a lamprey.
So, why the fuck is the NAACP even involved? Well, I don't know. I guess because he's black, that's really the only reason I can see.
[url=http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/08/22/vick/index.html?iref=topnews]
Here's their statement.[/url]
Quote:
The head of the Atlanta chapter of the NAACP said Wednesday that Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick has made mistakes but that they should not cost him his football career with the NFL.
Okay again: I DO NOT WATCH FOOTBALL (other than the Eagles games at my Grandpop's house because it's mandatory when you live that close to Philly.) I understand the game a little bit, but I'm not a fan. So take my comments with that grain of salt. But I do understand sports, I played them for years. I was involved in several sports leagues, including a traveling team at one time. I *get* sports.
If the sole purpose of a sport was how good a player was...the teams I was on would have been very different. There were people who got cut not because they didn't play well...but because they weren't part of the 'team'. There were also players who weren't the best, but fostered an extremely good and important team morale. Any 'team' sport is about more than skill.
Paid sports are also about more than skill. Everyone wants to see their teams win, certainly that's where the money is. But at the end of the day, in any league there's only one champion team. So, aside from winning they want their teams to do well. Yet even teams that don't do well have a loyal fan base. We also like rooting for those we feel are underdogs.
Players are celebrities. They personify the team, and they become a valued asset in their own right. I can't name every team Michael Jordan played for...
but I can tell you who he is. I don't watch football as I've said, but I remember 'The 'Fridge', and the Bears team that was highly popular in my youth. I remember the 'Super Bowl Shuffle'.
So whether or not he deserves to lose his job over this
is an issue. It's not just about his ability to play, which of course hasn't changed and wouldn't change even if he saved a schoolhouse full of kittens, or strangled a puppy. But his 'persona', and the image of the team is certainly affected by it. That's also part of his job, and it affects the entire league. The NFL and other sports groups have come under fire for allowing players to continue playing despite lengthy criminal records (or charges). Those issues affect the image of the sport, and clearly is going to be a consideration of whether or not he keeps his job.
I don't really like football. I root for the Eagles because my family loves them, and it feels like a piece of home. That's what will get me watching, or involved and that's probably quite a few people. I wouldn't want to wear my Eagles hat and shirt though if Vick was playing for them right now. Instead of my Grandpop and Uncle Joe and Uncle Bill yelling at the television or whooping...I'd have an image of someone callously murdering dogs.
Not something I'd want to think about.
Quote:
"In some instances, I believe Michael Vick has received more negative press than if he would've killed a human being," White said. "The way he is being persecuted, he wouldn't have been persecuted that much had he killed somebody."
I can't believe they actually had the balls to say this.
Quote:
White also said he didn't understand the uproar over dogfighting, when hunting deer and other animals is perfectly acceptable
I can't believe they actually had the balls to say this either. Guess what, cockfighting is illegal too, and we eat chicken. Think about it.
Quote:
"We feel that whatever the courts demand as a punishment for what he has done, once he has paid his debt to society, then he should be treated like any other person in the NFL," White said.
Sure any other NFL person who's run dogfighting rings and killed dogs, etc. Oh wait, that's a rather exclusive club.
I guess the real question is how many convicts are in the NFL, and what are their crimes? Certainly someone who say...litters shouldn't be treated as harshly as a convicted rapist. Are there convicted rapists playing for the NFL? I don't know. I'd certainly hope not. What about murderers. Any murderers playing for the NFL? Again, I hope not. Someone who committed theft? Well...depends really. I have more sympathy for someone who at 15-ish was involved in crime and turned their lives around.
We're all suckers for stories of redemption. We all love the hard luck stories of someone born into lousy circumstances who might make some bad choices along the way, but through hard work and determination made something of themselves. We admire that more than the people who made something of themselves, but also had every opportunity practically handed to them along the way. We have more scorn for someone who fucks up having HAD all those opportunities than we do the person who never had them.
But we're talking about a grown man here. We're talking about a wealthy man. We're talking about a man who had opportunities that most people don't. He chose to involve himself in this. Whether it was for financial gain, or personal reasons, or simple enjoyment...or some combination thereof really doesn't matter. He made those choices knowing full well they were not legal choices. They're certainly not something viewed as moral choices either.
And while the NAACP might try to spin this a bit as our obsession with pets, specifically dogs (which we do have in this country) I'd again remind people that cockfighting is illegal. We don't glorify chickens or roosters. Hardly anyone keeps them as 'pets'. They're animals we primarily use for food, and we even use their names as terms of derision. We will call a callow coward a chicken. We will call someone full of themselves, a bit of a dandy who toots their own horn a preening rooster. I won't even get into the use of the word 'cock'.
Yet we find using such animals for malicious sport rephrensible. Cockfighting is illegal. It's perfectly acceptable to use the eggs of a chicken, to kill and eat chickens. We simply don't find making them suffer for our amusement moral.
It's sad to see one of the oldest civil rights organizations, an organization that fought against Jim Crow laws, that fought against lynchings...an organization that had such a tremendously positive impact on our society...become a group that's seen in the media defending the indefensible because the man who did it was black.