I watched Bob Costas’ special town hall meeting for the second time this afternoon. The bloggers went to town on Buzz Bissinger’s ridiculous rant against Will Leitch — a moment to make some great points that was lost in Bissinger’s decision to launch his candidacy for the Crazy Old Man Hall of Fame — but I’ve seen far less on Costas attempt to discuss race in sports, the most disappointing segment of the show.
You know, a white person whose heart is in the right place, when he or she addresses race and any aspect of the commentary involves something that decries something other than white racism and recognizes the complexity of the issue in 2008, we feel obliged to preface it with about five minutes worth of stipulations that prove that our heat is in the right place because it’s such a minefield.
That was the quote Bob Costas made toward the end of the discussion. I’d tell you more about the beginning, except there wasn’t much to tell (and this was from a panel with two gifted commentators, Michael Wilbon and Jason Whitlock).
Here’s what I say to Costas and anyone else that thinks what he said was right on — stop telling me about your heart. I don’t care about your heart.
Look, we all read people that might have bad hearts. I work in this game. I know more than a few people with bad hearts. I don’t care much about that.
At least I don’t care about that in the media. The problem with white people making points in columns about race is rarely about anyone’s heart. It’s about their minds.
Most people in this country don’t know a damn thing about race. To take this even further, most people in the media don’t know a damn thing about race. That includes members of all races.
Black people are typically considered experts on race because…well, we’re black. That’s really it. Now, I’ve got credentials that should indicate to you that I know something about race. Degrees and stuff, you know. That said, when people have called me to talk about race and sports on television, it was because I’m black and little more. I know this because, quite honestly, if people were looking for people to talk about race based upon their ability to deal with the topic in a substantial yet digestible way, I’d be on television a lot more talking about those things. I wouldn’t be the fourteenth call when the brothers start talking crazy and the masses needed some translation.
Call that arrogance if you want, but I think anyone familiar with my background and familiar with my work would tell you that statement, at the very least, is informed.
Being a good sportswriter, regardless of where your heart is, doesn’t make you a capable commentator on race. But I’ll be damned if every single black sportswriter can be expected to have some opinion of “race topics,” even though there’s little reason to assume black folks know more about race than white folks other than the fact that we’ve had a different vantage of racism.
So, when’s somebody going to give me the take on racism from the other side. You know, when is someone going to be asked to come on television and tell me what white people think about something? When is someone going to ask a white person to explain the thought process of someone that’s said something racially offensive? When is someone going to give me the white perspective of racism?
And how come no one’s asking?
Which brings me to my original point about why heads, not hearts, are important in this discussion. How many white media members have given serious thoughts to the depths of racism in this country? Let’s go past saying racism is wrong — which, when you think about it, is the most notable thing that’s present now in society that was in short supply before — and start explaining the depths of an issue. How many of my white colleagues can do that?
Those sportswriters that are supposedly reluctant to talk about race because it’s a “minefield,” I bet, have never backed off any other topic because they’re afraid of how they’ll be branded afterwards. Perhaps this is a special concern for white people, seeing how being considered a racist is a serious faux pas these days.
I know this — I have never, not once, backed off a point when I knew what I was talking about. That’s not to say I thought I was right, no matter what. I’m saying that I was qualified and capable of discussing the topic, so I didn’t sweat the responses for a second. The days I worry about readers are the days when I may have taken a step I shouldn’t have taken, which is a euphemistic way of saying that I wasn’t sure if I had any idea of whether I knew what I was talking about.
This is the part that Costas misses — there are a lot of people with good hearts that think faulty things. That’s why I’m not sweating that. I’m friends with people that harbor some racist views, because I do believe their hearts are good. I wouldn’t read their columns, though, and that’s because they’re good to spit some stuff that just doesn’t make any sense.
The problem isn’t that these white writers are decrying something other than white racism. The problem, most often, is they don’t know what they’re talking about. Not even Secretariat had a heart big enough to obfuscate that, whether you’re black or white.
I just ask that people save me the sob story of having a good heart, the same way I need people to stop drilling me with talk about how people don’t mean any harm when they say offensive things. This isn’t about your heart. This is about addressing a powerful and pervasive system. Bad people are as capable of doing that as good people.
But neither of them can do a thing unless they are smart, informed people. That’s the only part that matters.
In HBO’s defense Whitlock said in his column today that they ran out of time. HBO wants to have a full 90 minutes dedicated to the topic of race in sports. Whether or not that happens remains to be seen.
As for when someone is going to give you the white perspective on why somebody made a racist comment, I’d say “no time soon.” White people in the public eye fear being called a racist more than anything else. Just like athletes who defended Michael Vick’s actions as being a cultural thing were villified, white people are convinced if they talk about a racist statement in a way that even seems like they’re defending it, their career will be over.
I know this…Steve Nash wouldn’t have won back to back MVP’s if he wasn’t white. His team didn’t even go to the finals in either of those seasons.
That’s all I have to say about race in sports…for the time being
Bomani,
You made some salient points about white people’s reluctance to talk about racism but you must also be mindful of this so called ‘minefield’ that we whites will have to jump through should we ever give viewpoint on race, nuanced or not. The first thing about this minefield is that usually blacks don’t want to hear anything about what whites think in regards to racism; and sometimes for good reasons (in one of those ‘you come back to me when someone enslaves your people for 200 years and then systematically oppresses them’ sort of ways). And often those experiences, like the example I gave, are part of an experience gap that lies between the races, which I will get to in a moment.
That being said, when whites do give a nuanced view of race it is often treated with suspicion; a good example of this is when you and I discussed, via email, the Queens case where those cops got off. My aim was to give a viewpoint that looked beyond the case and at the circumstances that led to it and I could sense that you were reading it with a degree of suspicion, which is fine by me (it was poorly worded to begin with anyway). The point I’m trying to make is that there is a fine line for white people to talk about race without being racist or offensive. Even when we have a legitimate criticism we are often afraid of voicing it because 1) the point is usually dismissed because people construe it as racist and 2) anything we ever say in the future will have a taint on it because we will forever be labeled a racist. This is especially true for anyone who writes for a living. Because of this, the default position for any white person speaking about race by and large is apologetic. No doubt we have lots to apologize for, but it should not be the only position we can take within the discussion.
It is hard to talk about a topic when it only affects you on a secondary level. Unless America enters a parallel universe, I doubt I’ll ever know what it feels like to not being able to catch a cab because of my skin color. Anything I say to that commentary sounds benign and trite. Sure, I can make the comment that ‘most cabbies are robbed by black men, so it is understandable that they are reluctant to pick them up’ (I just made that up btw, for the sake of argument) but in making that comment I would look like I’m either defending a racist and biased position or I’m in the very least sympathizing; no matter if that fact were true or not. And even then, I still would not be able to get to the heart of the matter because I’ll never have that experience of not catching a cab because of my skin color. Its like rich people talking about the poor, if you’ve never been poor then you can spout all the facts and figures you want but you still can’t truly get to the heart of their experience. There is a suffering in both experiences, being poor and being black in America, that cannot be replicated. It must be lived. And because of that the rich man’s words about the poor and the white person’s words about race will matter, although a bit less than those whose circumstance are of which they speak. And so it should be.
Whether we recognize it or not, there is an experience gap between the races which often prevents meaningful discussion. We can work toward racial reconciliation but may never be able to work toward changing that gap, the weight of history is too great upon both races to do that within our lifetime in the very least. However, being mindful of that gap can enhance racial conversation just as knowing that there’s a pothole in the street can prevent you from blowing a tire: you just adjust and move around it to get to your destination. In our context, that destination is racial reconciliation.
Hopefully this won’t come off as a long rambling babble, but if it does… my bad, but my heart was in the right place *joke*
I think one of the ways to take racial politics/identity from a secondary to a primary level is to travel.
I’ve never felt more out of place than I did stepping into a seedy bar/strip club in Kathmandu. The Middle East was strange, but I didn’t get into the real parts of the cities – away from the airports and fancy hotels.
My friend just came back from South Africa and he says it was honestly one of the weirdest/coolest experiences he’s ever had. A big chunk of that was his experiences with race (he is white and was with a Chinese friend in a not-quite-Western place where blacks are the majority).
Justin-
Many blacks don’t want to hear it because for most of their lives they’ve had white people look them in the eye and say that racism either 1) doesn’t exist any longer or 2) if it does exist it is so small as to be negligent and blacks are whining over something that they need to get over. Now, this does not excuse whomever you have tried to talk to for summarily dismissing you simply because you’re white. I’ve had many fruitful discussions on race with people of varied ethnicities and classes; what is required is an openness on both ends. If you can’t get that, then everything fails. I’m sorry if you’ve run into people who are afraid to think and listen, but I would hesitate to say that this is the majority of black americans.
What happens most often, in my experience, is when white people want to have a “substantive conversation” on race it becomes quite evident that they approach the conversation mired in white privilege and they often refuse to accept the fact that they have white privilege. Now, your post shows that you seem to be aware of some aspects of white privilege when discussing race. That automatically puts you ahead of the game for many white people who won’t even recognize the idea of white privilege. I don’t think that means you have to “live” as a black person. I think that you just have to be willing to try and set aside one’s privilege and take a big view.
Now, most commentators, Bob Costas included, don’t recognize this. Thus Bomani’s post. They don’t have enough knowledge about race to truly talk on the subject precisely because most of their analyses reek of white privilege. It’s not their fault, usually. It’s not like our educational system attacks ideas of white privilege. Its not like the media tries to truly contextualize the ever-so-popular race discussions we are continually hearing. The point is that everyone needs to do more than just pontificate without information, bloated with white privilege or black angst, and look at the history and data that is out there. This requires everyone to leave their comfort zone and actively try and pursue this knowledge.
Bo,
I also watched the Costas town hall thing.
Bissinger was friggin’ hee-lurr-eee-us to me, but on point.
By I like people in general, but I have a prejudice—I HATE STUPID PEOPLE..and that’s regardless of race, creed, color, sexual and/or geographical orientation.
I just got through telling my 13 yr old daughter this very thing. When you have to qualify your statement by apoligizing for what you’re about to say, it casts doubt over why you are even making the statment. The people that say, ” I hate to tell you this but” before they say something they think is profound are trying to sound profound. Shut up and make a point or just shut up!
Bomani,
Yep, I plead guilty to not knowing squat about race issues. And as a Right-wing Republican, nobody can teach me anything about it.
This is due to the obvious fact that we were written off, as far as “teachable moments” were concerned. After all, our most hated Presidential candidate ever (Richard Nixon-not even GWB can approach that sort of hate) decided to race-bait a bunch of Southern redneck voters in order to achieve victory in ’68. The GOP was a dead-letter up until that point. After that, everything we did was automatically assumed to be racist, so we were exempt from trying to please “the right people.” And since we couldn’t please anybody, we Right-wing Republicans were free to implement things like Racial Profiling, and the media essentially ceded the floor to us.
It’s not my fault that folks like Bob Costas and Will Leitch forever lost opportunities to peer-pressure us Right-wing knuckle-draggers into having “proper attitudes” about race. And I frankly wouldn’t listen if those same white commentators were to regain said opportunities.
But then, why bother with me, Bomani? I’m a known racist quantity, right?
Bomani,
So what’s it like being the president of your own fan club?
Brad, effective sarcasm more or less rests on the notion that you have a point to make that can be seen and understood clearly through the sarcasm. Not sure where you were going with that.
I’m white enough to be clear, and a Republican. I also don’t care too much if anyone else thinks I’m racist, because I know where my head is at. There’s absolutely nothing here to be getting worked up over.
Brad, it didn’t exactly help matters that the same right-wing Repub–well, let’s just say right-wingers, some of ya’ll were Democrats, remember?
Anyway, to indulge your point, it didn’t exactly help matters that most of the political right carries the tarnish of being on the opposite side of pretty much every civil rights and civil liberties advancement that has ever been put to paper in the last 100 years, before the world ever heard of Dick Nixon.
Whites of your kind were not ‘written off’–they, like yourself, were pretty open about not wanting to be a part of that kind of democracy, and more than often backed it up with your actions.
defiitley agree with Bomani on this. It dosen’t matter how “kind-hearted” you are, what matters is how you think. Racism is a mindset, not a “heartset”.
It’s not about the cards you’re dealt, it’s about how you play your cards.
Black, white, brown, blue, green, whatever. People will always have a racist mindset because humans engage in associative thinking. They associate behavior with race and class, as much as they associate cake and ice cream with a celebration. Doesn’t mean those associations are accurate or understandable or permissible, but it means they exist as part of the cognitive thinking process. It’s not about getting people to understand race divisions and the existence of a problem, it’s about getting people to stop associating behaviors with race.
Person A doesn’t play basketball because he’s black, he plays because it’s economically efficient in an urban setting (if that’s the case), and because Person A is tall and athletic (scarcity of tall, athletic people in this world) and because it can provide a benefit from a personal passion/interest.
It’s the approach of analysis that is key. I’m done baking my bread, might as well call it sour dough.
(How do the Lakers look now?)