I'm tired of sports writers and analysts trying to articulate the standard for how athletes and society should treat certain issues today.
When it comes to free speech, most well-known columnists and ESPN figures (including, but not limited to, Tony Kornheiser, Mike Lupica, Michael Wilbon, and Skip Bayless) will almost always favor in side of the First Amendment, whether they understand the amendment's reach or not.
When it comes to the Second Amendment, however, these same names traditionally and predictably act as if gun ownership is inherently irresponsible and irreversibly dangerous; that athletes have no business owning a firearm; and the like.
Now the major hot-button issue is gay professional athletes, particularly male athletes -- especially pro basketball players. Former National Basketball Association (NBA) player John Amaechi has recently blitzed the media with his "coming out" party, thanks to a new book promotion. I suppose the book is about being gay while playing pro basketball, based on the focus of every interview I've seen and heard regarding it.
What bothers me about the coverage of this "issue" has been the double standard and duplicity of opinion by columnists and talking heads. The intial popular reaction to this was generally "Will this book and publicity now 'open the door' for more gay active professional athletes to reveal their sexual identity publicly?" And almost to a person, the pundits said they hope this exposure helps, even though there is "still a long way to go" before openly gay pro athletes are widely accepted.
So then what becomes the story in the following days? How current athletes react to the exposure of this issue. "How would you react to an openly gay teammate?" This gives an opportunity for media soundbytes and video clips, while reporters and talk show hosts salivate with hopes of something bigoted being recorded; because then they can (1) lecture the public as to how they SHOULD feel; and (2) have something to write and argue about for several more days, if not weeks, or longer.
First of all, why do so many sports writers and columnists hope this new book "opens the door" for openly gay pro athletes? This isn't an issue in women's sports, where several WNBA players are openly gay, including former MVP and perennial all-star Sheryl Swoops. But it's apparently a big deal for men, who apparently need to be more sensitive and in agreement with sports writers and other champions of open homosexuality.
The faulty premise of these self-righteous writers and network commentators is this: Sexual preference is one's own business. Heaven forbid the NBA never has an openly gay athlete because -- of all things -- the person doesn't want his private life exploited by mass media, let alone for political purposes. If one does not want to "come out," he shouldn't be pressured to do so by critics and analysts who need a further angle to the original story.
Especially when those same media personalities pretend they want someone to champion a morally correct political or social cause.
The latest media-cornered NBA player was Tim Hardaway, who said in the closing minutes of a recent interview: "I hate gay people, so I let it be known. I don't like gay people and I don't like to be around gay people. I am homophobic. I don't like it. It shouldn't be in the world or in the United States." While this was a clearly over-the-top reaction, my question to the media is this: Why aren't you advocating his free speech rights now -- especially after you forced the issue upon him to begin with?
I watch "Pardon the Interruption" on ESPN when I can, and I generally like both main hosts of the show, even if I probably share opposite political views most of the time. But one thing I haven't liked of late is how, twice, they've added a segment where they've criticized Rush Limbaugh for "race baiting" -- while they themselves promote homosexuality/homophobia-baiting. One example was their criticism of Lebron James's comments, in response to a reporter, about how he thinks gay athletes should tell their teammates of their sexual orientation.
Michael Wilbon dismissed the comments as Lebron not being old enough to know the magnitude and relevance of the overall social issue. Tony Kornheiser said that this type of fear/homophobia is too common with the pro athlete culture. But the whole time they were lightly criticizing Lebron James, they themselves were implying that an athlete shouldn't have to tell his teammates if he doesn't want to -- and shame on silly, inexperienced Lebron for suggesting gay teammates should divulge such info.
But wait a minute....
I thought we want that door opened for an active, male pro athlete to be openly gay. I thought that was the goal toward which we still have "lots of work to do" or "a long way to go" before achieving.
Yes, folks. That is a double-standard and a mixed message.
The same thing happened during Super Bowl preparations, when Lovie Smith and Tony Dungy became the first African-American/black head coaches to coach in a Super Bowl (the National Football League's chamipionship game). After the game, Tony Dungy became the first African-American (black) head coach to win a Super Bowl.
Moments later, Tony Dungy became the first African-American head coach to say he was going to Walt Disney World in a post-Super Bowl TV commercial. Lovie Smith became the first African-American head coach to lose a Super Bowl game. That still leaves open the possibility someday for another to become the first African-American head coach to tie a Super Bowl; the first African-American head coach to coach a Super Bowl in overtime; the first African-American head coach to beat a Caucasion-Anglo-Saxon-American head coach in a Super Bowl; and the first African-American head coach to turn down the Walt Disney World ad after winning the Super Bowl.
First of all, I have utmost respect for both Dungy and Smith. And I love how they handled the media blitz that focused so much on their skin color (while the media simultaneously claimed it was with interest of eliminating people from focusing just on skin color in the future). Both men are brilliant, classy individuals, and great head coaches. That said, both coaches stressed how one day, they'd love for it not to be a big deal that a coach is black; ironically, they had to say that over and over again during the two weeks leading to the big game.
The bottom line is this: I don't care whether or not there will EVER be an active, openly gay, male athelte in major American pro sports. But I'm tired of the moral high horse that sportswriters and pundits already ride from column to column, camera to camera (let alone while criticizing conservative others for allegedly doing the same thing), trying to influence the general public.
They are sports writers. Not ambassadors. Not elected political figures. They're not even the Pope.
So if a gay, professional male athlete in America wants to expose his sexual preference publicly, that's fine. I just hope he doesn't let the media exploit him in the interest of anti-exploitation.
And I hope he has a few guns, too.
No comments:
Post a Comment