Vick
Well, he did it. He apologized to the world for all his sins. I thought it was a well delivered speech. It seemed like it was from the heart. He wasn't reading from a prepared statement courtesy of his attorney, Billy Martin.
As part of his plea bargain agreement, he will also be an informant for the government to attempt to bring down more people in dog fighting. Is the Vick case a racial thing per se? Or dog fighting for that matter? No. It's just the atmosphere surrounding it. I think that one of the guests on this weekends Bill Maher show said it best: There are people standing in front of the court with a Confederate flag flying overhead with signs stating that Vick should be castrated in the former capital of the Confederacy. If it isn't racial yet, man, it sure smells like it. There is no way in this world that you can tell me that the media coverage over this has been disproportionate considering the crime.
The press has gotten on Stephon Marbury for saying that he, "heard that dog fighting was a sport". He's not saying that he believes its a sport, but just that he heard that. I happen to agree with that. If you're going to tell me its legal for these slobs to hunt defenseless animals for "sport" with assault weapons, you're crazy. How sporting is that exactly? How humane is that exactly? Do you think it matters to the animal in question that he is eaten after he is, quite unfairly, killed? Would you care if the situations were reversed? The only difference between these two unfair "sports", is that one is avidly practiced by a people in a different socio-economic level. Thats it. And the other is practiced, "behind closed doors", by the other people. Stephon was right. Broadcasters will tell you that he is just the typical athlete standing up, blindly, for one of his peers, but I think he was right. And, I already posted his craziness on TV the other day, so I know he doesn't come off as the brightest bulb in the batch, but he hit it right on the head with this one.
My wife and I just brought a baby girl into this world and I am deathly afraid for her safety. All the time, but more so when she grows to into adolescence and beyond. The statistics for sexual assault on women is staggering. One in 6 women will be raped or, at least, someone will attempt to rape them in their lifetimes. One is 4 women on college campuses will be sexually assaulted. Its mind numbing. This doesn't even take into account the unreported rapes and just domestic abuse in general. However, countless athletes have been charged with raping someone or beating a woman or their partner and it gets printed in the media and forgotten. The guy will catch a little bit of flack for a little while and that will be it. Back to playing sports practically immediately. So, dogs are more important than women now. Right? These animal "activists" are so stupid to me. They'll march up and down the street if they think you're testing a cologne on a dog. But violate the civil rights of a person of color systematically, beat a woman or sexually assault them and its all good. But, hurt "(White) Man's Best Friend", and its on.
Again, Vick did the crime. He was incredibly stupid and arrogant to think that he could get away with this for so long. He broke the law, he should suffer the consequences, but HE is the most evil man in the world? Are you kidding me?
22 comments:
While I am in complete agreement regarding the inappropriate amount of press given over to the Vick scandal, I do not think race was the sole factor (which is not to say I think race had nothing to do with it. I am sure that for some (including those who called for inhumane torture in the former capital of the Confederacy)race had everything to do with it).
Many of those in the sports world who have engaged in violent behavior towards women (and others) and who have 'caught a little flack for a while and were back to playing sports almost immediately' were not white. And yet, as was pointed out, little media coverage was awarded and certainly nothing that compared to the Vick scandal. My intuition tells me that this is not because (white) men are less affected by violence towards women than any other racial group. Rather what I think might be at stake here is a case of ethical intuition gone awry.
Last spring I came across an essay that cited a theory put forth by John Rawls, which made the claim that our ethical intuitions regarding animal abuse stem not from a rational place but rather could be traced back to our intuitions regarding how humans who could not defend themselves were to be treated. To put it more plainly, our minds make the connection between human babies and non-human animals on the level of defenselessness. Both babies and animals look to grown, rational, adult humans for defense, protection and guidance. Our position of power makes us guardians of the well-being of those less powerful, whether those less powerful are babies or dogs. I think that the upset over dog fighting has as much to do with our subconscious ethical intuitions about how we are to treat those beings and others like them.
What floors me is that during this last week (which was rife with Vick coverage) Sean Hannity came out in support of a friend of his, Ted Nugent (sp?), who is, among other things, the owner of several semi-automatic weapons. Ted said that he would like to make Barak Obama suck on one of his guns and Hilary Clinton ride one off into the sunset on another...So we have threat of bodily harm to two US Senators (i.e. a treasonist act) supported by one of the mainstays of the country's most watched news stations and no coverage of that.
I am sure that, while not the sole factor, Clinton's gender and Obama's race did have something to do with the media's quiet!
(For that little story and Keith Olberman's insightful comments on the Vick scandal check out http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3036677/.)
Wow, these were two very insightful posts on the Vick extravaganza. I especially enjoyed and appreciated the reference to the John Rawls Essay. I had never heard that particular insight, but I really believe he is on to something. Funny, because The Sopranos even mentions how psychopaths like Tony Soprano strongly sympathize with animals and small children, while thoughtlessly killing adults. Also, Lou your response to the Vick paralleled directly with my feelings.
First off, thank you for your comments and welcome to the Cypher.
What you wrote makes sense, except that if the same people who hate Vick also control the media AND also hunt, theres a small hole there. In this country people will literally kill doctors who abort babies, but then the government will leave babies and their families uninsured after they are born, its just a little hypocritical right? Who controls the media? Its the same people who hunt and are working on this case. In fact, experts were predicting that this judge in particular would most likely throw the book at Vick because he is an avid "sportsman" (i.e. thinks its a sport to hunt defenseless animals with a high powered rifle). And yet, the judge doesn't see the hypocrisy in all this.
I don't think that race is the sole determining factor in the coverage and demonizing of Vick, thats why I mentioned the socio-economic factor in all of this. In addition, thats why I didn't mention race when I referred to athletes that have physically abused women. I brought up race because of the other factors in this case, such as the whole confederate flag thing. The media scratches their collective head at Black people siding with Vick and White people doing the opposite, yet, they don't mentiion the other things that I did. Thats why I think the coverage of this is completely irresponsible. And, lets face facts, the whole "Man's best friend" thing wasn't created/started by people of color. Which is why I put White in front of that old saying. I see what Rawls was getting at, but his theory has a few holes in it. Well, since most men do see that women are the weaker sex - in terms of physical strength - then why isn't there more outrage when women are victims of domestic violence and sexual assault? Yet these losers consider themselves, "Sportsmen". Crap, I must be a sportsman too. I play poker. They televise it on the ESPN all the time.
As for the Nugent and Hannity thing, (BTW, Nugent used to be famous because he was the lead singer for some rock group in the 70's and is now this huge gun advocate), it doesn't surprise me. Hannity is one of the biggest A-Holes around. Anything hateful, sexist, racist or otherwise coming out of his mouth is nothing new. Its why he's still on. He appeals to the people who watch that show of his.
I'm pretty impressed by the insights in the comments as well.
Personally, I'm not surprised by the amount of media coverage, nor by the insightful acts of the racists outside the courthouse or Hannity's comments. Cynical or not these things I have come to accept as given. It would be foolish to think other than the media and this country is not filled with self-righteous hypocrites...
In any case the real surprise to me was the comments made by Michael Vick. Any one who's followed his career, even a little, will agree that he was nothing if not arrogant. But when he gave his speech, as Luis pointed out, to me he showed two things I have not seen in any politician, entertainer, or sports personality in a long long time; sincerity and growth.
Who knows where he goes from here, maybe he'll convert back to the old Vick, but for now I hope he gets another shot. It's a shame the world doesn't reward those things.
A hot topic for sure....
I think Michael Vick decided he was above the law, and went ahead and acted just that way.
A domesticated animal shows charastics different from most wild animals, and that is how they evolved from wolves and wild cats into the lovable critters we know today as cats and dogs. While that are animals just like a deer, turkey, bear, caribou, Moose, raccoon, or any other wild animal hunted or not they have shown humans compassion or at the least have been willing to deal with us in exchange for food/shelter. This goes a long way when looking at the judgement for killing them...Dennis Leary put it well
'What are you? Im a dolphin. What do you do? I can splash water and do cute little tricks. Ok, you're free.
What are you? Im a cow. Get on the @#$*ing truck!'
I think the problem with what was going on at Vick's house was based on the knowledge of how these "Dog fighting rings" operate. I have heard stories about family dogs being stolen to help train a pitbull for dogfighting. A golden Lab would have its mouth taped shut so the young pitbull could kill it and become less sensitised to the act of killing.
The most appauling to me is that if the Pitbull in question did not "perform" well in training, they would execute it by several methods that I am sure most or all of you have read about in various media sources. Nothing short of tourture. If anybody tried to execute a group of women because they could not "perform" they rightfully be called serial killers.
Lou, while I agree with some of your responses to Mikka's post, I wanted to clarify the point my understanding of his point about men identifying with small pets and children as things in need of protection. One important aspect of his theory is the notion of helplessness. Children and small animals, as large groups, are generally seen as helpless - in such a way that society doesn't perceive women. Some men may think they are superior to women, but those same men would likely not say women are helpless. In fact, those bigots are probably upset by how helpful women have proven to be over the years; for themselves and humanity as a whole. This, I think, is an important distinction. I am in no way saying this rationale is moral or logical, but pointing out that as a phenomenon, it seems accurate to say men are more willing to defend oppressed entities they perceive as helpless, and less inclined to do the same for other oppressed groups.
Otherwise, much better discussion than anything on Sean Crankitty. Gary, brother it is great to have you on the blog. Its like arguing with you over the poker table, except I don’t get to take your money.
Mikha, I checked out Keith Olbermann's article on Vick, I really like and agree with him. Who knew this guy who used to be on Sportscenter had it in him?
Thank you guys for your comments, please keep them coming.
As for people not here in NYC, who I know tend to be more to the Left with their thoughts/comments, what do other people think? How is this case being covered elsewhere? For instance, how is the Vick case being covered in England or Europe in general? Do they see it for the farce that it is?
Gary, man I wish I was taking your money while we were talking about this, it would have been that much easier right about now. Sigh. As for your comments, there is no doubt that the practices that take place at these dog fighting rings are horrible. They do kidnap dogs and make them defenseless so that they can get used to the feeling of tearing flesh and killing another dog. Its horrible. No one is denying that. But still the coverage is out of whack.
I am not defending Vick. I do think that, in terms of the crime he committed here, he is being unfairly villified. And if these animal lovers think that he was under investigation for animal cruelty, you are way off. This is all about money, as it usually is. There's money being made by someone other than the government or Halliburton (Sorry, couldn't resist to put them in there) and they're mad. Oh. They're very mad.
It is nice to see others weighing in on this topic. A topic that has become the topic of the moment. And I think its a great discussion to have.
So first off... can we really blame the media for their excessive coverage? I mean, we are here debating it as well, on two separate posts. Although I agree that the media has spent way too many hours covering this, let's face the facts. Its their job. And this just happens to be the flavor of the month. Look at it from their perspective:
High-profile athlete/celebrity the focus of a six-year federal sting including allegations of murdering animals and illegal gambling. BUST OUT THE GRAPHICS! STIR UP THE HEADLINES, WE GOT OURSELVES A BIG ONE! ESPN is loving this stuff.
Now, in keeping with the media aspect of this topic, I think that in the last five years or so, media has become over blown. they spend just as much time following the young train wrecks of hollywood as they have on Vick. And there are many people out there, US INCLUDED that eat this shit up. thing is... what Vick DID (we no longer have to speculate about innocence or guilt) was far worse than getting high, drunk and puking outside a nightclub, or getting busted for a DWI. And I know everyone wants to think its a race thing, but I disagree. the man committed crimes. White, Black, or Other, crimes are crimes. Pete Rose bet on baseball and was banned for life. That NBA ref was a white man who committed a crime and was covered just as much as Vick. VICK LIED at first and tried to wiggle his way out. Can his apology be THAT sincere if he is doing it after the fact that he first said he had "no involvement whatsoever"! I am not ignorant to the fact that people of color are viewed and portrayed in a different way, but let's be real. Who are we defending here? A socially conscious black man fighting for civil rights? Or simply a scared man who suddenly "found Jesus" cause he wants to make sure he throws a football on an NFL team again. David Berkowitz (son of sam) found Jesus too.. should we let him out of paying the consequences of going on shooting spree?
And as for Marbury.. someone needs to tell him to shut up and win us a championship. "Its like a sport, so I've heard?" Do you honestly believe Marbury doesn't know what dog fighting is all about? We all know what it is about. We all know the people who do it think of it as a sport. You don't have to be in it to know that much. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but to compare dog fighting to hunting is simply ridiculous.
Why? Because first of all, hunting is not illegal. second, hunting has environmental implications such as population control. Third, modern hunting is derived from a cultural tradition that was essential for survival. Are there poachers out there taking advantage. Of course.. and they are criminals. Are there hunters who are killing animals they are not allowed to kill.. Of course, and they are criminals. Are they all rich white people? Of Course NOT!
To continue... the media doesn't consist of a bunch of hunters. Hunters make up 6% of the country's population. 2% are black and 1% are hispanic. the rest are white men and females (who are not broken down into ethnicity.. apparently woman knows no color). so its not like we are talking about a very large chunk of the population. Also, many of those white males are from similar socio-economic classes as the socio-economic dog fighters. Not all white people are rich. and not all hunters are using high-powered automatic weapons. They use rifles and bows(source: U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service). Many of those high powered guns are purchased under the pretense that they will be used for hunting, but end up sitting in on the gun rack for home protection, or the occasional mass murderous rampage. So the whole "hunting is just as bad debate" needs to be erased from this topic. I, personally, do not condone hunting with firearms. I feel it is an unfair advantage to the hunter.. especially if its a high-powered rifle or shotgun. go out there with a Bow or a knife. But hunters use what they shoot. They eat the meat, or sell it, they use the skin, or sell it, and they may mount the head(which doesn't have much use) as a trophy. If they don't, then they are doing something illegal... like, say, dog fighting. I do not like hunting. but I understand its place in our society. I fish... and I eat what I catch. I also am forced to throw small fish back into the water even after I've wounded them with a fish hook. I don't like that aspect of fishing... but there are millions of fish in our waters and if that wounded fish dies he will become a meal for another aquatic species, so is the nature of things. can this same thing be said about dog fighting? Are they shipping the electrocuted, suffocated, and murdered "useless" fighting dogs to the Phillipines to be used as dinner? Was that dog fur Michael Vick was wearing?
My last point is in regard to the race card being pulled. Like I mentioned earlier, our media coverage is incredibly excessive as well as accessible. There are countless talk shows on television, radio, and the internet. we live in a media hungry society. So again, we cannot blame the media for covering a hot topic issue of high profile people. But do they just spend this much media coverage on black people? NO! look at what happened with those white kids from Duke's lacrosse team accused of raping that black girl. Most of the country had tried and convicted those boys of their "alleged" crime. White media, black media, all of them. And what happened? they were innocent. Will we ever truly know what happened? probably not, because the media coverage was so out of control that the true facts may never come out. but they spent just as much airtime on them then they have on Vick and Vick ended up guilty.
I will finish with this: I don't think the media has made Vick a villain. He has done that to himself with his his actions, his unwillingness to be forthright once he was caught, and the arrogance with which he initially approached the situation. I think he should be punished accordingly. After that, its over. He serves his time and then if a team wishes to hire him (which, I'm pretty sure someone will) then so be it. I wish him the best. I really hope he was sincere in his apology, even if it was after the fact. but there will be a large number of people in this country that WILL NOT forget and WILL NOT forgive him. And that is not a blight on our country's morals or priorities. Quite the contrary. I would be worried if people were not angered and outraged at this situation. And I hope it does bring the hammer down on this cruel and savage excuse for entertainment known as dog fighting.
So you think that just because 6% of the population - and those are the statistics of registered hunters i'm assuming - hunts, doesn't mean it hasn't been normalized by knowing people who hunt. I've only met one person in my life who hunted. I'm sure you have met a few more.
Please don't try and normalize for the rest of us either by saying that hunting is a good thing by ways of population control. Have you ever heard of people over hunting animals? Or animals being killed into extinction? Hey, if hunting with a bow is so fair, lets get into a fight. You have your knuckles, i'll use the ever weak 450lbs of PSI bow. Lets see who wins. But, you go to the water fountain and just quench your thirst for a while while I get a little time to aim.
Brett Myers beat his wife last year and barely missed time. I doubt many of you will remember this, but, Mark Chmura was a pretty good tight end with the GB Packers. He was charged with sexual inappropriateness with a minor at a graduation party. He went into a bathroom ALONE with this girl at a kids party. He went to court, was acquitted and then immediately retired. This story wasn't covered nearly the way this story was. More violence against HUMAN women taking place and nobody cares. Bret Myers is 6'4" 220 lbs and his wife is considerably smaller at 5'5". He punched her in the face and pulled her hair in PUBLIC. And he got off and pitched a week later? Rawls was definitely missing something there if his theory doesn't take women into account as being less able to protect themselves physically against men.
Sorry to say Dre, like I said about the socio-economic aspect of this, Steph was 100% right on the money with what he said. Are you now purporting to know what Steph does and does not know? You are right, dog fighting is illegal. The same way that people could get 15-20 years for selling/getting caught with crack as opposed to 5 for cocaine. I'll say nothing more on that.
Dre, if you don't think that this case has any racial undertones, there is nothing else I can say than what I already have. White people calling for the castration of Vick under the flowing Confederate flag may not conjure up any thoughts about race to YOU, but it does for many. Myself included. There really isn't, or at least I can't think of anything else more blatant than I have already written.
And one last thing Dre, if YOU were about to lose $130M dollars for something you did, you mean to tell me that you would IMMEDIATELY apologize to everyone if you thought you had a chance to be found innocent? You would apologize before you got caught? ("I really hope he was sincere in his apology, even if it was after the fact") REALLY? Really?
Sadly, part of the reason that the Duke case got so much publicity is because of Sharpton and Jesse. A lot of people don't like them, but they do attract media coverage to stuff.
Lou, I love the way when others post their opinions its insightful and you can agree and disagree, yet when I post, what I say is just outlandish and preposterous.
Really.
Am I not entitled to my opinion? Am I not entitled to challenge your claim:
("If you're going to tell me its legal for these slobs to hunt defenseless animals for "sport" with assault weapons, you're crazy")
So, if white people are hunting animals, which by the way IS legal, they are slobs and the animals are defenseless, yet in your first Vick post you repeatedly try to minimize the relevance of dog fighting because ("they're just dogs.. you know, DOGS!")
So now you have succeeded in dragging me into, not a discussion about the michael vick situation, but an argument between you and I. I was stating my opinion, and dropping a few facts about an activity that I even said I don't condone. I wasn't attacking YOU, Lou, the way you love to come out and attack me for anything I say(yes, I'm over-sensitive and its all about me).
If you re-read my post you will notice that I mention over-hunting, I mention poaching and I mention how its criminal(you did read it... didn't you?). So I'm not trying to normalize hunting anymore than Marbury is trying to normalize dog fighting, and you agree 100%. I don't act like I know what Marbury does or does not know any more than you act like you know that the world doesn't care about white sports figures who kill or rape.
("But violate the civil rights of a person of color systematically, beat a woman or sexually assault them and its all good. But, hurt "(White) Man's Best Friend", and its on.")
Can we start to admit that if Michael Vick didn't do anything illegal, he would not be here right now. but of course... I'm just some shmuck who doesn't think that everything that happens is racial. oh... I forget... I don't get bothered by racists because I look white. cause I grew up in Yonkers (one of the most racist cities in NY), I don't know why all you colored folk don't like that pretty confederate flag. Please watch your implications, Lou.
are there racist people who jump the bandwagon when a black athlete gets busted doing something stupid. Yes... are those confederate flag waving bigots the reason vick is in this predicament? Are they the popular opinion? I've said it before and it just doesn't seem to sink in, I'm not ignorant to the portrayal or persecution of people of color. Contrary to popular belief, I did grow up Puerto Rican. but no, I do not think that everything has racial origins. funny thing is, I'm sure I will be judged on that, but THAT won't be viewed as some sort of bigotry.
And you know what... i don't have a $130 mil contract on the line, i don't hunt or dog fight, I'm not a black athlete, I'm not stupid enough to throw away a promising career because I want to have fun with my friends fighting and killing dogs, I'm not an illegal gambler, and the media won't give a shit if I'm killed, raped, get into a fight and am horrifically maimed, or eaten by a hunter. And YES... REALLY, I hope Vick's apology was sincere even if it was after the fact, because I don't think, nor do I think any of us have implied, that Vick is "the most evil man in the world" So, I'm not really sure what your point is about that.
Lou... you can continue to tear apart what I say with irrelevant stats about rapes and beatings... they have nothing to do with Michael Vick, dog fighting, or gambling.. which are the real issues at hand. You wanna bash the media, I'm with you. You want to talk about how white athletes are treated differently, I'm with you. But if you just want to attack everything I say just for the sake of arguing, I don't have anything more to say about it. I'll just stick to writing movie reviews.
Dre, maybe it's your opinion that it is a sport to kill animals with high powered bows, rifles and assault weapons. Fine.
I know that I have not said that this is solely a race thing. I have stated repeatedly that the guy broke the law, knew he was breaking the law and should be punished appropriately. There is no debate or disagreement there. What I have had an issue with is the way that the case is being covered and the racial undertones throughout. Period. I can't make it clearer than that. In turn, I have also stated that yes, these are ONLY dogs. Why I have stated that? Because there are HUMAN women being beaten, raped, etc. and people seem to treat those crimes with much less importance. Until, in the case of OJ, the woman actually gets killed.
I responded to your, "Go out there with a bow or a knife", statement by stating that bows do not level the playing field at all. The high-tech bows that are made now are barely a step below guns. Barely. If hunters want to go out there and hunt with a knife, now that would be great. But Dre, if you weren't trying to normalize it for the rest of us, it kind of came off like that with, "Because first of all, hunting is not illegal. second, hunting has environmental implications such as population control. Third, modern hunting is derived from a cultural tradition that was essential for survival." Its probably just me.
Noone is attacking the validity of your heritage. You are bringing something else into this that noone else has. If you took me saying that you must be crazy for thinking that hunting a defenseless animal with a high powered rifle, bow or assault waepon is sport. Then I apologize. Crap, maybe you are a little too sensitive.
Yes I can see where you are coming from, but I completely disagree if the thrust of your statement is that hunting for sport is fair. Sorry. In addition, I disagree with you completely if you are also stating that there are no racial undertones both in the way it is being protrayed in the media AND the way he is being attacked personally by the protestors. Sorry again.
If you think that all we do is think that everything is racist, then, I dont know what to say. I don't consider myself to be someone that gets paralyzed from anger because I think that everything that happens to me or other people of color is racist. Do I think that race is interwoven in a lot of our day to day happenings? Yes. It would be pretty hard to think otherwise.
I don't believe that I implied you were a racist Dre (I don't know why all you colored folk don't like that pretty confederate flag. Please watch your implications, Lou.) Maybe you should re-read my post as well. If you could please point out where I implied that you were racist, please show me. Noone - I think - has stated that the only reason that Vick is in trouble is because of Race. You are mis-reading between the lines.
Folks,
For some reason, I can't post on the blog these days. This is the third time it's happened in as many tries over the last few weeks. The small pop up page won't post what I write. If anyone had this type of trouble and was able to resolve it, please let me know how. Nevertheless, here's my contribution to the Vick blog (written after Lou's latest entry):
--------------------------------------
To echo comments already well represented here, I'm certainly not surprised about the media coverage on this issue; particularly around two poignant themes: celebrity culture and race.
I hear all the time how the purpose of newspapers (and by extension print and televised news media) is to sell papers. I've always disagreed with that. The purpose of our news media outlets are to present and report the news that are important to our lives as contributing citizens. That's why there are separate news and corporate divisions in every news media company. But I think we all know that selling news as an entertainment commodity is what's been prioritized by most television and print media outlets over the last couple of decades. I really think this has created a celebrity culture that's completely warped what's covered as real news and how it gets packaged and delivered.
Michael Vick is a pro athlete and popular culture celebrity. This entire thing has been covered like a soap opera. The fact that Michael Vick is black and of a certain socio-economic class introduces a whole bunch of other "stuff" that reflects our hypocrisies and contradictions. But I don't think race is the sole, major contributing factor in how this has been covered and the amount of "outrage" being expressed. I firmly believe that if it had been Peyton Manning in equal circumstances the media circus would be the same sans the race element. And, yes, I do think that a guy like Peyton Manning or Bret Favre would be as important a target to the FBI as Vick would be given the amount of illegal money that was trafficked across states' lines. Nevertheless, we saw this type of unrelenting, incessant, pop culture coverage during the Clinton/Lewinsky case, JFK Jr's death on that plane, Princess Diana's death, Anne Nicole Smith's death, etc. Even a story about some mountain climbers stuck in an avalanche becomes a soap opera dominating most television "news" shows for over a week at the expense of reporting real things happening around the world.
The race element is the most disturbing to me. I'm not necessarily upset about the media's thinly veiled racism because, as Colin has pointed out, that's implied. You can't expect a snake to act like anything other than what it is. What's upsetting is how the issue of race has been manipulated to the point that it's almost impossible to have an honest, public conversation about anything involving a person of color. We should be able to say that Vick's actions are completely unacceptable without race becoming a prevalent theme. Lou, I also agreed with the comment made on Bill Maher last week regarding white folk on the Atlanta court room stairs waving "castrate Vick banners" behind a gov't-erected confederate flag. But let's not overlook that those aren't the only type of people who've felt strongly about Vick's actions...and rightfully so.
I don't think Vick is a victim in any sense of the word here. In fact, I'm one of the people who's been completely repulsed by the fact that he actively participated in something like this. I really do believe it speaks to something in his character and personality that he needs to address. I wouldn't at all be surprised if people involved in this "sport" are also abusive husbands, fathers and individuals. Furthermore, just a week and a half ago he was still saying that he knew nothing about it and was not involved whatsoever. It wasn't until he was told by his team of lawyers that, given the mounting evidence, there was no way he could go to trial and win that he stepped up and "spoke from the heart." I DO think he was sincere, mind you, but only after he had no other recourse. Only time will tell how sincere he really is (turning his life over to God?). I have no problems with the actions the NFL, Falcons or the FBI have taken up to this point. I think the law should be applied here. That said, he shouldn't lose his livelihood over this and should be given an opportunity to resume his career, if there's still a market for him, after he's paid his debt.
To be clear, I'm in agreement with most of the comments already expressed here regarding the media reaction not fitting the crime; not to mention our hypocrisy when compared to hunting (although I do think dog fighting is a worse extreme). We all know that there are much graver acts committed by people acting "on behalf of our country" or otherwise without similar coverage everyday. But those things should be addressed separately and not used as a tool to dilute Vick's transgressions.
Thanks for the John Rawls insight, Mika. It really fits well into this discussion. What's up, Gary!
("Dre, maybe it's your opinion that it is a sport to kill animals with high powered bows, rifles and assault weapons. Fine.")
Lou... Show me where I said that.
I do believe it is you who is mis-reading. I have purposely made it a point to call hunting an activity, because I DO NOT consider it a sport. And the fact that we are still talking about hunting is tiresome. All I did was drop some stats about a LEGAL activity and state that it should not be compared to the illegal activity of dog fighting.
("Because there are HUMAN women being beaten, raped, etc. and people seem to treat those crimes with much less importance.")
How do you arrive at this conclusion? Do you have some underground voice of the world streamed to your computer that we don't know about? I know I could speak for myself, but I would not state that any general group of people treat anything anyway. Unless you can show me some survey (which would still be hard to prove a sweeping generalization like that), then don't try to accuse me of purporting to know anything.
("But Dre, if you weren't trying to normalize it for the rest of us, it kind of came off like that with, "Because first of all, hunting is not illegal. second, hunting has environmental implications such as population control. Third, modern hunting is derived from a cultural tradition that was essential for survival." Its probably just me.")
If normalizing hunting is simply stating facts, then I am guilty as charged. Facts that were only put out there to illustrate my opinion that dog fighting cannot be compared to hunting.
("White people calling for the castration of Vick under the flowing Confederate flag may not conjure up any thoughts about race to YOU, but it does for many. Myself included.")
("I've only met one person in my life who hunted. I'm sure you have met a few more.")
These have some pretty straight forward implications do they not? I mean, I'm not even sure what you are trying to imply with the second comment, maybe you can help me out on that one.
("Noone - I think - has stated that the only reason that Vick is in trouble is because of Race. You are mis-reading between the lines.")
I never said that anyone is stating that. Again... I'm not sure what you are trying to say. I mean, for the record, I never said anything directly to anyone. That is something you do with me. My post didn't start every paragraph with LOU...
My whole problem with race being brought into this discussion is that I don't even really see how race is being portrayed in this case by the media. You keep talking about these confederate flag people, but my point was THAT is not the media. Those are RACISTS! And yes, once they see a black person in trouble they will jump on it in a second. And my problem with your beating and raping women connection is this:
Those incidents are just that.. incidents. They are serious, they are horrible, etc. But the reason they haven't received as much media coverage is because its not a federal offense to hit a woman or sexually assault a young girl. It Should be... but it isn't. Michael Vick is being brought up on federal charges that stem from a six year operation that includes illegal gambling across state lines, as well as all the dog fighting stuff. This is big news. But show me where the media is saying anything about race.
Just as a side note, in the history of large cases, it is not particularly true to assume federal cases are more prominent than state or local ones. Some of the most historic cases have been local trials. Scopes on evolution. O.J.'s trial. Kobi Bryant's trial. The F.B.I gets a lot of big cases with Serial Killers and Mafioso cases; that’s true. And notice how all these other big cases have to do with the killing of actual people. Like I said, a small point.
Is, I don't think you can say the media would have still demonized him like they have if he wasn’t black. Lou's point is not to undermine Vick's crime, but arguing that Other, more serious crimes have been committed by athletes, like wife abuse claims, child support issues, and they haven’t gotten this much attention. And I would argue a case like this wouldn’t usually be covered to this extent. It hasn’t gone on as long, but this dominated the media like steroids in baseball did. This was covered more than when that football player paid to have his wife killed and hid from the F.B.I in his car. I will stand by that statement. This was crazy! Every freaking day, it was like him and the president. And I think media focuses on certain things and obsess over this, because some people are bigoted and gain a subtle, unacknowledged pleasure from seeing this rich, popular, arrogant black man go down. I'm not saying Dre is like that or you Iz, but both of you know those people do exist. And I think they are making the coverage so insane! I really think this is mostly what Lou is trying to say.
While I think race is a reason, there are other reasons this is getting so much more attention then other Pro athelet crimes.
That is because this is MICHAEL VICK... the guy who was the best player on the most popular video game for 5 years. Why, because he is the most intriguing athlete since Michael Jordan. I for one have looked forward to seeing him juke his opponents and throw interceptions every year since he entered the league, and I have proclaimed him the "most entertaining athelete in pro sports" because of his awesome highlight reels.
I think that Peyton manning, Tom Brady or Ladanian Tomlinson would get just as much publicity if they were as strongly associated to an illegal dogfighting and gambling ring for sooo many years.
What kind of an implication is it to write what I did about the flag exactly? At least about you? You went out of your way to state that you don't like the race card being pulled. Why would you not want it to be pulled if there is an actual valid beef? I really don't get it.
As for knowing people who hunt, its pretty simple: Do you know more than one person who hunts? I'm not saying as a great friend or intimately, just do you know more than one? Simple.
As for crimes against women, I really don't think listing MORE examples of the same would do much for you now. Other than for you to take it is as an implication that you hate women now too. I already gave examples and how the media doesn't cover it. You got me. I'm not going down a route if you won't listen/read/pay attention to, etc.
Of course the media won't mention anything about race Dre. Thats our POINT. Get it? They never do. According to the media, race almost never comes into play into anything. So, would the only way for you to think that the media is covering a story with race being involved would be for the newscaster lead off the news chanting the "N" word a dozen times? Does it have to be that blatant for you to see it?
Is there something else that anyone else has written that you feel attacked you personally in any way? You called yourself a schmuck. That wasn't any of us. But let us know, group hugs are still free.
Gary, I agree with you and thought about the fact that Vick is such a celebrity. Mark Chmura wasn't nearly the celebrity that Vick is when what he did took place, he was a very good tight end (3 Time Pro-Bowler just coming off a pro-bowl year) and a very popular figure in Green Bay. But the strory disappeared. Yet, there still is no denying that Vick is more popular than the other examples I gave. But still, neither he nor Myers, nor other athletes/celebrities, have ever been shown the same level of vitriol that Vick has. Thats my only point. And its something that has bothered me for some time now. Izzy knows. Ive talked to him about the workshops that I've gone to teach men about how women should be treated and how they are systematically treated "less than". (And no, my wife didn't make me go to them) You're not going to take that as me saying you are a hateful, sexist white guy now, right Gary? Please say you don't.
If you remove the smoke and mirrors of the inequalities argument all you are left with is an opportunity to voice a pathological contempt for authority.
BTW, Morland has aspirations of becoming a fortune cookie author.
I agree with you that Vick IS being demonized here, Drew. But doesn't that go hand in hand with the theatrical nature in which this entire story has been covered? Indeed, it's the way most stories involving celebrities are covered in major news media these days. If you believe the media, then Lindsay Lohan is a drunk, high, stupid, shallow and immature bitch. We don't know if that's an accurate portrayal but it's more dramatic to create that perception of her.
Those who know me know that I feel just as strongly about the media's (particularly the sport media's) subtle and not so subtle racist undertones when covering black figures. As I said in my earlier post, their racism is implied. I DON'T agree, however, that Peyton Manning would get less coverage under similar circumstances. Race adds another dynamic that's difficult to quantify but certainly relevant. Michael Vick's status as a football icon has played a huge role here, however. Not to mention that we're talking about pretty disturbing acts of violence in the name of profit. People have a right to voice their disgust. Clearly, some folks have been offended more deeply than others and I think that's also contributed to the public's response. Some folks actually do think that breeding, training and forcing dogs into death matches is JUST as bad, if not worse, than not paying child support or having sex with a minor. As I've said, there are more egregious acts committed everyday by other athletes and regular citizens alike that doesn't receive the same type of coverage but we're also talking about one of the top 5-8 talents in all of organized sports and an endorsement machine. Mark Chmura, while committing acts that are clearly unnaceptable, is not the icon Vick is...not even in the same universe. Even if he were the best tight end to ever play the game, his celebrity status would be non-existent compared to Vick given the positions they play, comparative talent and Vick's immense status as an iconic figure. Let's not overlook this element. Honestly, do you really believe that if Shawn King or Aaron Brooks were involved in something like this it would be covered this way? I don't.
Lou, I completely agree with you about our need to take certain other issues, particularly around gender equity, more seriously. But I do think it's a seperate discussion from this one. Vick is in no way a victim or martyr here. The guy actually comes off like an arrogant, self-absorbed athlete most of the time. And, from what I've seen of him in interviews and the like, is probably not someone you would keep in your circle of friends. Is this entire thing being overly covered in the news? Of course; but I firmly believe that it has more to do with news treated as entertainment than anything else.
Lou, You have a gift for saying a lot without saying anything at all. You can twist and turn words around as much as you want, and you will always be right, at least to yourself. hey.. it is your blog. I'm simply bored with your condescending tone and YOUR lack of "listening/reading/paying attention" and just general lack of respect for MY opinion. If you want to have a real discussion, let me know. But thank you for sparing me more irrelevant examples of incidents that have absolutely nothing to do with dog fighting, illegal gambling or Michael Vick.
Sad thing is, if you could come down from your pedestal, you would understand that our views on hunting, race, and women issues are probably quite similar. But that would mean you don't get to be "funny" while doing your best to try and make someone look like THEY don't know what they are talking about. I would ask you again to read my FIRST post and make believe someone else wrote it. Maybe then you'll see my only point... maybe. But since I know you won't really do that, I'll tell you again. unfortunately I can't write it in another color(shit.. was that racist of me to say?), so I'm not sure if you'll really get it this time as opposed to any of the other five or so times I've wrote it.
CRIMES AGAINST WOMEN AND HUNTING HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE DIFFERENCE IN MEDIA COVERAGE. ITS LIKE SAYING APPLES SHOULDN'T BE RED BECAUSE ORANGES ARE TASTY. ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER.
Post a Comment