So Ted Williams has a tunnel named after him, Bobby Orr has a statue outside the Boston Garden, but Bill Russell has NOTHING?
Boston.....Boston....Boston.....
So I am driving in my car today, and I hear that they are dedicating a statute to Bobby Orr, the great Boston Bruins Hall of Famer, outside of the Boston Garden. The statue depicts the famous photo of Bobby, leaping in the air in elation after scoring the winning goal in the 1970 Stanley Cup Finals against the St. Louis Blues. That photo, and moment, is iconic in New England, and Mr. Orr is certainly deserving of his statue outside of the Boston Garden where he had so many great moments (well, it's the "New" Garden now, but let's not get caught up in the details). I have no problem with celebrating him. However this moment brings up one glaring omission here in the city of Boston.
WHERE THE HELL IS THE LOVE FOR BILL RUSSELL????
So in the city of Boston, Ted Williams, the Red Sox legend (who never won a damn thing, by the way) has a Tunnel named after him and a statue outside Fenway Park. Bobby Orr has a statue in his honor. Red Auerbach has a statue in Faneuil Hall. But Bill Russell, the man known as the greatest winner in professional sports history? The man who won 11 titles in 13 years? The man who also became the first Black man to coach a team to an NBA title, right here in this city? He doesn't have a damn thing in his honor. Not a statue, not a street, not a tunnel. Nothing.
This type of oversight is inexcusable. It's bad enough that Mr. Russell had to endure acts of racism during his playing tenure here, including having vandals break into his Reading home, covering his walls with racist graffiti, damaging his trophies and defecating in his beds. Now, years after his retirement, he is ignored by the city whose basketball team he made into the NBA's preeminent dynasty. As much as Boston has made strides through the years, it still bears the stigma as a racist city, and this type of slight certainly does not help that image.
So to William Felton Russell, I say that I support you getting your just due from this town. I support you getting the same accolades and respect that the other legends in this town receive. As much as they deserve their awards and distinctions, none of them won more than you, or brought this city more glory than you. Whether Boston recognizes it or not, you DESERVE to be help in a position of honor and in the highest esteem by this town. Maybe one day, this city will get it together and to the right thing. Boston, DO BETTER!!
P.S.
If you agree with this post and would like to see Bill Russell receive his just due from the City of Boston, please go to the Facebook group "Boston, Give Bill Russell a Statue, A Tunnel, SOMETHING" and show your support here
Monday, May 10, 2010
Monday, February 15, 2010
The Movie "Precious" and Why I Disagree With Ismael Reed
I recently read an article by author Ismael Reed, where he gave his perspective on the movie "Precious". This film, featuring phenomenal performances by Mo'Nique and newcomer Gabby Sidibe as the title character, has received great critical acclaim. The movie was recently nominated for 6 Academy Awards, saw Mo'Nique win a Golden Globe award and has received numerous other accolades.
This does not matter to Mr. Reed, who hated the film. That is not a problem, as Mr. Reed certainly has a right to his opinion. My issue with Mr. Reed is that he attempts to paint the picture that Black people all across the country are up in arms about the film. He tries to speak for the Black community as a whole, relaying that there is an uprising of Black people labeling the film the worst thing ever filmed. He states in his article:
"Among black men and women, there is widespread revulsion and anger over the Oscar-nominated film about an illiterate, obese black teenager who has two children by her father. The author Jill Nelson wrote: “I don’t eat at the table of self-hatred, inferiority or victimization. I haven’t bought into notions of rampant black pathology or embraced the overwrought, dishonest and black-people-hating pseudo-analysis too often passing as post-racial cold hard truths.” One black radio broadcaster said that he felt under psychological assault for two hours. So did I."
Mr. Reed then goes on to compare the movie to "Birth of a Nation" and allege that the Academy was "racist" for nominating the film (to be fair, another writer named Armond White also espoused this ridiculous comparison).
I love how the opinion of one of his fellow writers and an anonymous radio DJ constitute "widespread revulsion and anger". This widespread revulsion and anger evidently didn't reach the NAACP who gave the film 8 nominations for it's "Image Awards". And this widespread revulsion certainly didn't reach my neck of the woods. I loved the movie, and many of my friends (who just happen to be professional, educated black men and women) did as well. Beyond the film, I heard numerous glowing reviews of the book "Push" by Sapphire (upon which the movie is based). So to Mr. Reed's statement of "widespread revulsion" I kindly say "get the f**k out of here".
It seems to me that Mr. Reed is somewhat detached from reality given his strong opinions of this movie. NO ONE is saying that this movie is a snap shot of black people as a whole, as Mr. Reed and some of his compatriots seem to suggest. That would be ridiculous. But this movie is a realistic picture of what some black children go through each and every day. Having worked close to a decade in juvenile court, I have been privy to some pretty horrid stories and accounts of abuse. These stories are not some Hollywood dramatization. It is very real. There are many disaffected youth out there harboring deep seeded anger and pain because of this very type of abuse. Having a movie like this allows young people in this position, or those who have been in this position to know that they are not alone. They are not invisible. There are others who are out there fighting to cope with the pain just as they are, and that there are people out there who are willing to help them cope with this pain.
Some black folks are obsessed with this notion of “keeping our dirty laundry out of the light”. They would rather these stories never see the light of day because 'they make us look bad". But airing these stories out brings attention to them and can shine a light on these situations and help to make a difference and effectuate change.
But such things do not matter to Mr. Reed evidently. He likely would like every depiction of Black life on screen to look like the Cosby Show. But the Black experience is a diverse one and given that Black people as a race are still struggling to keep up and reach the "American Dream" some of those experiences are dark and desolate. This movie does not try to stamp the entire Black experience, but it does a fantastic job of showcasing a particular slice of life. And it is portrayed in such a way that abused and neglected youth of all races can look to it and see that they are not alone in their struggle.
I recently read an article by author Ismael Reed, where he gave his perspective on the movie "Precious". This film, featuring phenomenal performances by Mo'Nique and newcomer Gabby Sidibe as the title character, has received great critical acclaim. The movie was recently nominated for 6 Academy Awards, saw Mo'Nique win a Golden Globe award and has received numerous other accolades.
This does not matter to Mr. Reed, who hated the film. That is not a problem, as Mr. Reed certainly has a right to his opinion. My issue with Mr. Reed is that he attempts to paint the picture that Black people all across the country are up in arms about the film. He tries to speak for the Black community as a whole, relaying that there is an uprising of Black people labeling the film the worst thing ever filmed. He states in his article:
"Among black men and women, there is widespread revulsion and anger over the Oscar-nominated film about an illiterate, obese black teenager who has two children by her father. The author Jill Nelson wrote: “I don’t eat at the table of self-hatred, inferiority or victimization. I haven’t bought into notions of rampant black pathology or embraced the overwrought, dishonest and black-people-hating pseudo-analysis too often passing as post-racial cold hard truths.” One black radio broadcaster said that he felt under psychological assault for two hours. So did I."
Mr. Reed then goes on to compare the movie to "Birth of a Nation" and allege that the Academy was "racist" for nominating the film (to be fair, another writer named Armond White also espoused this ridiculous comparison).
I love how the opinion of one of his fellow writers and an anonymous radio DJ constitute "widespread revulsion and anger". This widespread revulsion and anger evidently didn't reach the NAACP who gave the film 8 nominations for it's "Image Awards". And this widespread revulsion certainly didn't reach my neck of the woods. I loved the movie, and many of my friends (who just happen to be professional, educated black men and women) did as well. Beyond the film, I heard numerous glowing reviews of the book "Push" by Sapphire (upon which the movie is based). So to Mr. Reed's statement of "widespread revulsion" I kindly say "get the f**k out of here".
It seems to me that Mr. Reed is somewhat detached from reality given his strong opinions of this movie. NO ONE is saying that this movie is a snap shot of black people as a whole, as Mr. Reed and some of his compatriots seem to suggest. That would be ridiculous. But this movie is a realistic picture of what some black children go through each and every day. Having worked close to a decade in juvenile court, I have been privy to some pretty horrid stories and accounts of abuse. These stories are not some Hollywood dramatization. It is very real. There are many disaffected youth out there harboring deep seeded anger and pain because of this very type of abuse. Having a movie like this allows young people in this position, or those who have been in this position to know that they are not alone. They are not invisible. There are others who are out there fighting to cope with the pain just as they are, and that there are people out there who are willing to help them cope with this pain.
Some black folks are obsessed with this notion of “keeping our dirty laundry out of the light”. They would rather these stories never see the light of day because 'they make us look bad". But airing these stories out brings attention to them and can shine a light on these situations and help to make a difference and effectuate change.
But such things do not matter to Mr. Reed evidently. He likely would like every depiction of Black life on screen to look like the Cosby Show. But the Black experience is a diverse one and given that Black people as a race are still struggling to keep up and reach the "American Dream" some of those experiences are dark and desolate. This movie does not try to stamp the entire Black experience, but it does a fantastic job of showcasing a particular slice of life. And it is portrayed in such a way that abused and neglected youth of all races can look to it and see that they are not alone in their struggle.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Okay Mr. Holder, I Hear You...So What Are You Going To Do To Help It?
I am referencing this article: http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/12/14/holder-calls-on-black-fathers-to-take-responsibility/
So US Attorney General Eric Holder, in a speech before the congregation of the Memorial Presbyterian Church in Queens, N.Y., made a call for black men to step up and raise their children. He stated that “Too many men in the black community have created children and left them to be raised by caring mothers. It should simply be unacceptable for a man to have a child and then not play an integral part in the raising and nurturing of the child.”
Now on the surface, this sounds good. Men should step up and be involved in their families. Women should never have to go it alone. However, speeches like this...and the ones made by Obama and Bill Cosby before...leave a bad taste in my mouth.
We all KNOW there is a problem with absentee fathers in the black community. There are deadbeats out there. Got it. But let's look deeper. The Bill Cosby style "Lets go rant and rave about what niggas aren't doing" approach doesn't help or solve anything and just alienates people more. The whole notion that talking shit to someone is going to spur them to do better just doesn't work. Speeches are nice. And they may even be accurate in their sentiments. But if Eric Holder wanted to do something, then he needs to go talk with his boss, our President, push for funding for more parenting programs, mentoring programs for teenage and young adult fathers. Do SOMETHING. Our president is bailing out banks, maybe be can break a little bread off to fund some programs that can help teach some of these young men the ins and outs of parenting. Maybe they can take the lead in a positive way and implore professional black men to reach out and mentor and set an example.
I's real easy to look at people who are down and state the obvious. One reason why Bill Cobsy's rants never impressed me. Another reason why I yawned when Obama said the same thing. Talking about a problem without searching for any answers comes across as waste (and please don't come with the Clarence Thomas "pull yourself by your bootstraps" shit as an answer. Some folks are in a cycle that has been going on for multiple generations and need help breaking it.)
So the next time a Black figure wants to tell Black people about themselves or talk about what Black folks aren't doing, here's hoping they have a plan to actually make the situation better.
I am referencing this article: http://www.mainjustice.com/2009/12/14/holder-calls-on-black-fathers-to-take-responsibility/
So US Attorney General Eric Holder, in a speech before the congregation of the Memorial Presbyterian Church in Queens, N.Y., made a call for black men to step up and raise their children. He stated that “Too many men in the black community have created children and left them to be raised by caring mothers. It should simply be unacceptable for a man to have a child and then not play an integral part in the raising and nurturing of the child.”
Now on the surface, this sounds good. Men should step up and be involved in their families. Women should never have to go it alone. However, speeches like this...and the ones made by Obama and Bill Cosby before...leave a bad taste in my mouth.
We all KNOW there is a problem with absentee fathers in the black community. There are deadbeats out there. Got it. But let's look deeper. The Bill Cosby style "Lets go rant and rave about what niggas aren't doing" approach doesn't help or solve anything and just alienates people more. The whole notion that talking shit to someone is going to spur them to do better just doesn't work. Speeches are nice. And they may even be accurate in their sentiments. But if Eric Holder wanted to do something, then he needs to go talk with his boss, our President, push for funding for more parenting programs, mentoring programs for teenage and young adult fathers. Do SOMETHING. Our president is bailing out banks, maybe be can break a little bread off to fund some programs that can help teach some of these young men the ins and outs of parenting. Maybe they can take the lead in a positive way and implore professional black men to reach out and mentor and set an example.
I's real easy to look at people who are down and state the obvious. One reason why Bill Cobsy's rants never impressed me. Another reason why I yawned when Obama said the same thing. Talking about a problem without searching for any answers comes across as waste (and please don't come with the Clarence Thomas "pull yourself by your bootstraps" shit as an answer. Some folks are in a cycle that has been going on for multiple generations and need help breaking it.)
So the next time a Black figure wants to tell Black people about themselves or talk about what Black folks aren't doing, here's hoping they have a plan to actually make the situation better.
Monday, December 07, 2009
The Tiger Woods Saga
At this point, I really just want this story to go away. He’s been caught, allegedly beaten up and embarrassed. He has had his private life stretched out across the blogosphere and the media. He has admitted his infidelity and sworn to come back from it to be a better man. To me, it’s done. However the media can’t get enough of the salacious details of Tiger’s trysts. We get reports of his voicemails, his alleged endowment and other T.M.I. facts as a flood of women continue to come forward.
In the media’s thirst to uncover details, there is one detail they have allowed to fade into the background. And that is the most interesting, and bothersome, part of this saga. This entire story started with an allegation of domestic violence committed against Tiger Woods by his wife Elin. The full detail of that encounter never came about due to Tiger’s refusal to talk to the authorities. However, it seems that Tiger was running from a beating when he crashed his car that night.
Now, how did the media react to this back story? Do they probe deeper into these allegations? Do they ask if there is some prior history of her acting this way? Do they consider whether or not she has a temper and if that temper has revealed itself in this way in the past? No. They are largely silent on the issue. And when they are not silent, they turn the issue into a joke (See the recent, unfunny, Saturday night live skit - http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/clips/tiger-woods-accident/1182383/ ).
This is the same media that has spent the past few months telling us that violence in a relationship is never okay. The same media that has been telling us that Chris Brown is the antichrist (and no, I am not defending him in the least). The same media that turned Rhianna into a martyr is now turning Tiger into a joke. One victim of domestic violence receives sympathy, the other is lampooned.
Ask yourself a question, all things being equal (acts of infidelity), if the story involved a man finding out that his wife cheated and allegedly beating her and chasing her with a golf club, would the media be so quick to drop that part of the story? Would people be making jokes about a woman getting beat down after her husband caught her cheating? Would his alleged violence be considered an afterthought as people focused solely on her unfaithful ways?
Here’s another twist: If the woman in question were a woman of color – for example, a woman who looked like Mo’Nique – rather than a small, petite, attractive blond haired, blue eyed woman, would the media be so quick to take a pass on the issue of violence?
There is no justification for Tiger repeatedly going outside of his marriage. He was wrong, and he rightfully stood up and took the blame for his philandering. But if the allegations are true, and Elin Woods did physically assault her husband, she is wrong as well. However, she is getting a pass. Why? Because she is a woman? Because she is white? Because she is attractive (and fits the traditional Eurocentric standard of beauty)? All of the above?
Clearly there is a double standard at play and it’s not right. But no one wants to talk about it. Everyone is so obsessed with how many women Tiger was with, or what race those women are, or what he said to them. They are too busy making bad jokes at his expense (Okay the “Cheetah” Woods and “Lion” Woods jokes were funny the first 50 times, but enough people) and laughing at him.
If we as a society are going to acknowledge that domestic violence, putting your hands on someone or acting in a terrorizing way is always wrong, then we must hold both men and women to the same standard. None of this campaigning to end a guy's career for being violent, while women make songs about "busting windows out your car" that not only become hits but are treated like they are some form of empowerment. No more hooting and hollering and laughing when a woman punches a man in a club, then acting like it’s a horror show when a man does the same. No one would have dared to have made a comedy skin featuring a bruised and battered Rhianna, so no one should have made one featuring a bruised and battered Tiger. And just as the media probed for every detail of Chris’s Brown’s behavior, so should they have probed deeper into Elin Woods’ behavior.
Tiger Woods fell on the sword to keep his wife from getting in trouble. He refused to talk to the police and instead of having her arrested, chose to try to save his marriage. That is his choice and his right, but it doesn't make what she (allegedly) did any less wrong or does it makes the reaction of the media and others any less shameful.
At this point, I really just want this story to go away. He’s been caught, allegedly beaten up and embarrassed. He has had his private life stretched out across the blogosphere and the media. He has admitted his infidelity and sworn to come back from it to be a better man. To me, it’s done. However the media can’t get enough of the salacious details of Tiger’s trysts. We get reports of his voicemails, his alleged endowment and other T.M.I. facts as a flood of women continue to come forward.
In the media’s thirst to uncover details, there is one detail they have allowed to fade into the background. And that is the most interesting, and bothersome, part of this saga. This entire story started with an allegation of domestic violence committed against Tiger Woods by his wife Elin. The full detail of that encounter never came about due to Tiger’s refusal to talk to the authorities. However, it seems that Tiger was running from a beating when he crashed his car that night.
Now, how did the media react to this back story? Do they probe deeper into these allegations? Do they ask if there is some prior history of her acting this way? Do they consider whether or not she has a temper and if that temper has revealed itself in this way in the past? No. They are largely silent on the issue. And when they are not silent, they turn the issue into a joke (See the recent, unfunny, Saturday night live skit - http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/clips/tiger-woods-accident/1182383/ ).
This is the same media that has spent the past few months telling us that violence in a relationship is never okay. The same media that has been telling us that Chris Brown is the antichrist (and no, I am not defending him in the least). The same media that turned Rhianna into a martyr is now turning Tiger into a joke. One victim of domestic violence receives sympathy, the other is lampooned.
Ask yourself a question, all things being equal (acts of infidelity), if the story involved a man finding out that his wife cheated and allegedly beating her and chasing her with a golf club, would the media be so quick to drop that part of the story? Would people be making jokes about a woman getting beat down after her husband caught her cheating? Would his alleged violence be considered an afterthought as people focused solely on her unfaithful ways?
Here’s another twist: If the woman in question were a woman of color – for example, a woman who looked like Mo’Nique – rather than a small, petite, attractive blond haired, blue eyed woman, would the media be so quick to take a pass on the issue of violence?
There is no justification for Tiger repeatedly going outside of his marriage. He was wrong, and he rightfully stood up and took the blame for his philandering. But if the allegations are true, and Elin Woods did physically assault her husband, she is wrong as well. However, she is getting a pass. Why? Because she is a woman? Because she is white? Because she is attractive (and fits the traditional Eurocentric standard of beauty)? All of the above?
Clearly there is a double standard at play and it’s not right. But no one wants to talk about it. Everyone is so obsessed with how many women Tiger was with, or what race those women are, or what he said to them. They are too busy making bad jokes at his expense (Okay the “Cheetah” Woods and “Lion” Woods jokes were funny the first 50 times, but enough people) and laughing at him.
If we as a society are going to acknowledge that domestic violence, putting your hands on someone or acting in a terrorizing way is always wrong, then we must hold both men and women to the same standard. None of this campaigning to end a guy's career for being violent, while women make songs about "busting windows out your car" that not only become hits but are treated like they are some form of empowerment. No more hooting and hollering and laughing when a woman punches a man in a club, then acting like it’s a horror show when a man does the same. No one would have dared to have made a comedy skin featuring a bruised and battered Rhianna, so no one should have made one featuring a bruised and battered Tiger. And just as the media probed for every detail of Chris’s Brown’s behavior, so should they have probed deeper into Elin Woods’ behavior.
Tiger Woods fell on the sword to keep his wife from getting in trouble. He refused to talk to the police and instead of having her arrested, chose to try to save his marriage. That is his choice and his right, but it doesn't make what she (allegedly) did any less wrong or does it makes the reaction of the media and others any less shameful.
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Wow Maybe The Democrats Have Balls After All
Thank you, Alan Grayson.....As someone who gets so completely disgusted with the Democrats tendency to lay down in the face of right wing attacks, and who is disappointed in the President's attempts to play "nice" and "civil" with forces who mean nothing but ill will towards him, its nice to see that someone in the party actually possesses a spine...and is willing to come out and say what a lot of us out here have been thinking for some time...
Mr. Grayson, you are hereby anointed my favorite member of Congress...
Please watch the link.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ery7RZ4tZ2Y
Thank you, Alan Grayson.....As someone who gets so completely disgusted with the Democrats tendency to lay down in the face of right wing attacks, and who is disappointed in the President's attempts to play "nice" and "civil" with forces who mean nothing but ill will towards him, its nice to see that someone in the party actually possesses a spine...and is willing to come out and say what a lot of us out here have been thinking for some time...
Mr. Grayson, you are hereby anointed my favorite member of Congress...
Please watch the link.....
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ery7RZ4tZ2Y
Wednesday, July 01, 2009
Activism and the Modern Athlete
I’m back…
I am a big fan of the HBO series “Real Sports”. I have always believed that sports do not exist in a vacuum. Sports are a microcosm of society. Sports are so much more than just games that are played. They mirror the most profound social phenomena in our society, as issues such as racism, sexism, commercialism, greed and exploitation play out along with the exhibitions. And the well paid athletes who perform in professional sports find themselves facing these issues both on the field and off.
That leads me to the recent interview done by Bryant Gumbel on Real Sports (who does not get his proper respect as a great journalist) with Jim Brown and Bill Russell. It looked at these two amazing men, now in the twilight of their lives, and exhibited their great accomplishments. Both of these men on the field of play are regarded by many as the greatest ever in their respective sports. Yet it is what they have both done off of the field/court, using their position and notoriety to act as agents for social change, that has created a lasting legacy. These gentlemen experienced horrible racism at the beginning of their careers. Yet they did not stand by quietly. They stood up and rallied against it. They organized other athletes behind common causes. When Muhammad Ali was stripped of his title for refusing to comply with the draft, it was Russell and Brown by his side. When Tommy Smith and John Carlos were vilified for their black power salute, these two men led the push to support them. Jim Brown has done amazing work with gangs in south central L.A., his programs taking kids from bullet riddled streets and sending them to college. They were vocal and outspoken throughout the civil rights movement. I have the utmost respect for both of these men, who resisted the push to silence them and took a stand against racism and injustice.
The interview eventually turned to today’s athlete and the lack of activism. Now as much as I love these men, I have to disagree with some of their criticism. Jim Brown went very hard at Tiger Woods. Not let me preface that I am not a Tiger Woods fan, nor do I have any dislike for him. I respect him for his greatness as a golfer and as a trailblazer in the world of golf, but I just kind of just take him as he is. Brown stated this about Tiger: “As an individual for social change? Terrible. Terrible. Because he can’t get away with teaching kids to play golf, and that's his contribution. In the real world, I can't teach kids to play golf and that's my contribution, if I've got that kind of power." Here is where I disagree. Would it be great if Tiger Woods stood up and railed against injustice in his press conferences? Of course. Would it be great if he and other athletes vocally challenged the status quo? Sure. But not everyone is built for that sort of role. Brown, Russell, Ali they were born activists who happened to excel in sports. They had the charisma, the strength to be out in the forefront as leaders. But every great movement for justice needs people taking different roles. You don’t have to be that fist pumping leader to make a difference. And I don’t think you can dismiss a man’s contribution because he doesn’t make a difference in that way. My feeling is this: I just want to see people with the resources that many athletes have do SOMETHING. Do something to help the community and those who are less fortunate. Make some sort of genuine effort. The civil rights movement has amazing leaders who spoke out and galvanized the masses but they also had worker bees that did things behind the scenes to keep the machine going. Not every person who can catch, throw, shoot or hit a ball is going to have it in them to stand up and speak out on all sorts of issues, but if they devote their time, energy and resources to bettering the lives of those in need, then they deserve to be commended and not chastised. As Bob Frantz of the As San Francisco Examiner pointed out, Tiger does a little more than teach kids to golf: “The Tiger Woods Foundation does much more than conduct golf clinics for kids. It funds university scholarships, allows students to study at Tiger Woods Learning Centers, provides millions of dollars in grants to more than 100 charities annually, and “Tiger’s Action Plan” is a program that helps teachers, youth groups and other leaders to help kids reach their fullest potential." Tigers learning centers are currently in the Los Angeles area and he plans to expand them to the DC area.
Some may dismiss that, but I will say this: When an athlete does positive things and does not go out of his way to gain media attention for it, it actually causes me to give them MORE credit. Too often, good works are sensationalized and pushed in the media and that makes me question their sincerity. When these works are done quietly it leads me to think that they are done more for pure purposes rather than photo opportunities and image embellishment. You never know for sure without knowing the person of course, but I can say that Tiger at least does something. And even if he isn’t speaking out about Iran or universal health care or disproportionate minority contact in the criminal justice system, if there are inner city youth who get to college, or who find a safe haven that keeps them from getting in trouble due to his gifts then he has contributed to bettering the world.
I love what Ali, Brown and Russell, among others, did in raising their voice against injustice and discrimination. I do wish there were more athletes who did the same. But I cannot and will not dismiss the acts done by modern athletes like Warrick Dunn (Program that helps single mothers in the inner city buy their first home), Derrick Brooks, David Robinson (Started charter schools for inner city youth) and others just because they are not advocating in ways that others think they should. There is a place for words and a place for actions. As long as someone is contributing one or the other, then we all benefit.
I’m back…
I am a big fan of the HBO series “Real Sports”. I have always believed that sports do not exist in a vacuum. Sports are a microcosm of society. Sports are so much more than just games that are played. They mirror the most profound social phenomena in our society, as issues such as racism, sexism, commercialism, greed and exploitation play out along with the exhibitions. And the well paid athletes who perform in professional sports find themselves facing these issues both on the field and off.
That leads me to the recent interview done by Bryant Gumbel on Real Sports (who does not get his proper respect as a great journalist) with Jim Brown and Bill Russell. It looked at these two amazing men, now in the twilight of their lives, and exhibited their great accomplishments. Both of these men on the field of play are regarded by many as the greatest ever in their respective sports. Yet it is what they have both done off of the field/court, using their position and notoriety to act as agents for social change, that has created a lasting legacy. These gentlemen experienced horrible racism at the beginning of their careers. Yet they did not stand by quietly. They stood up and rallied against it. They organized other athletes behind common causes. When Muhammad Ali was stripped of his title for refusing to comply with the draft, it was Russell and Brown by his side. When Tommy Smith and John Carlos were vilified for their black power salute, these two men led the push to support them. Jim Brown has done amazing work with gangs in south central L.A., his programs taking kids from bullet riddled streets and sending them to college. They were vocal and outspoken throughout the civil rights movement. I have the utmost respect for both of these men, who resisted the push to silence them and took a stand against racism and injustice.
The interview eventually turned to today’s athlete and the lack of activism. Now as much as I love these men, I have to disagree with some of their criticism. Jim Brown went very hard at Tiger Woods. Not let me preface that I am not a Tiger Woods fan, nor do I have any dislike for him. I respect him for his greatness as a golfer and as a trailblazer in the world of golf, but I just kind of just take him as he is. Brown stated this about Tiger: “As an individual for social change? Terrible. Terrible. Because he can’t get away with teaching kids to play golf, and that's his contribution. In the real world, I can't teach kids to play golf and that's my contribution, if I've got that kind of power." Here is where I disagree. Would it be great if Tiger Woods stood up and railed against injustice in his press conferences? Of course. Would it be great if he and other athletes vocally challenged the status quo? Sure. But not everyone is built for that sort of role. Brown, Russell, Ali they were born activists who happened to excel in sports. They had the charisma, the strength to be out in the forefront as leaders. But every great movement for justice needs people taking different roles. You don’t have to be that fist pumping leader to make a difference. And I don’t think you can dismiss a man’s contribution because he doesn’t make a difference in that way. My feeling is this: I just want to see people with the resources that many athletes have do SOMETHING. Do something to help the community and those who are less fortunate. Make some sort of genuine effort. The civil rights movement has amazing leaders who spoke out and galvanized the masses but they also had worker bees that did things behind the scenes to keep the machine going. Not every person who can catch, throw, shoot or hit a ball is going to have it in them to stand up and speak out on all sorts of issues, but if they devote their time, energy and resources to bettering the lives of those in need, then they deserve to be commended and not chastised. As Bob Frantz of the As San Francisco Examiner pointed out, Tiger does a little more than teach kids to golf: “The Tiger Woods Foundation does much more than conduct golf clinics for kids. It funds university scholarships, allows students to study at Tiger Woods Learning Centers, provides millions of dollars in grants to more than 100 charities annually, and “Tiger’s Action Plan” is a program that helps teachers, youth groups and other leaders to help kids reach their fullest potential." Tigers learning centers are currently in the Los Angeles area and he plans to expand them to the DC area.
Some may dismiss that, but I will say this: When an athlete does positive things and does not go out of his way to gain media attention for it, it actually causes me to give them MORE credit. Too often, good works are sensationalized and pushed in the media and that makes me question their sincerity. When these works are done quietly it leads me to think that they are done more for pure purposes rather than photo opportunities and image embellishment. You never know for sure without knowing the person of course, but I can say that Tiger at least does something. And even if he isn’t speaking out about Iran or universal health care or disproportionate minority contact in the criminal justice system, if there are inner city youth who get to college, or who find a safe haven that keeps them from getting in trouble due to his gifts then he has contributed to bettering the world.
I love what Ali, Brown and Russell, among others, did in raising their voice against injustice and discrimination. I do wish there were more athletes who did the same. But I cannot and will not dismiss the acts done by modern athletes like Warrick Dunn (Program that helps single mothers in the inner city buy their first home), Derrick Brooks, David Robinson (Started charter schools for inner city youth) and others just because they are not advocating in ways that others think they should. There is a place for words and a place for actions. As long as someone is contributing one or the other, then we all benefit.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Some Words For Mike Krzyzewski
So Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski has a problem with President Obama not picking his team to advance to the Final Four in the NCAA Tournament. For those who missed it, The President shared his bracket picks with ESPN college basketball writer Andy Katz. President Obama's bracket has the Dukies losing to Pitt in the Regional finals. An Associated Press reporter asked "Coach K" a question about the Pres picking against Duke, to which he responded:
"Somebody said that we're not in President Obama's Final Four, and as much as I respect what he's doing, really, the economy is something that he should focus on, probably more than the brackets."
A cheap shot at the President Mike? Really? Just for taking a moment to make picks like millions of other working Americans? Well you know what, Coach K?...Allow me to apply that same logic to you. You see, as much as I respect you as a coach and what you have done over the past 28 years at Duke, I think that actually getting your perpetually overhyped team to the Sweet 16 for the first time in three years is something that you should focus on, probably more than responding to picks made by the President, who, like most of us, had the good common sense to pick against your completely overrated team.
So Duke coach Mike Krzyzewski has a problem with President Obama not picking his team to advance to the Final Four in the NCAA Tournament. For those who missed it, The President shared his bracket picks with ESPN college basketball writer Andy Katz. President Obama's bracket has the Dukies losing to Pitt in the Regional finals. An Associated Press reporter asked "Coach K" a question about the Pres picking against Duke, to which he responded:
"Somebody said that we're not in President Obama's Final Four, and as much as I respect what he's doing, really, the economy is something that he should focus on, probably more than the brackets."
A cheap shot at the President Mike? Really? Just for taking a moment to make picks like millions of other working Americans? Well you know what, Coach K?...Allow me to apply that same logic to you. You see, as much as I respect you as a coach and what you have done over the past 28 years at Duke, I think that actually getting your perpetually overhyped team to the Sweet 16 for the first time in three years is something that you should focus on, probably more than responding to picks made by the President, who, like most of us, had the good common sense to pick against your completely overrated team.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
