I know this isn’t a sports site, but it seems unlikely that many people by now haven’t heard of the charges against Michael Vick, Atlanta Falcons superstar quarterback, who has been indicted by a Federal Grand Jury for conspiracy involving the illegal training and fighting of dogs at his property in Virginia. It’s a sordid story, to be sure, with claims that Vick and others killed many animals who did not fight well, some allegedly by drowning and electrocution. Vick’s professional career may be over, as the team and the National Football League ponder possible sanctions against him which may take effect even prior to any trial.
What makes this story important to more than just American Football fans are two issues:
(1) The exposure of an ugly underground culture that participates in “sporting events” involving the brutal maiming and death of animals trained to fight against one another while crowds watch and gamble on the outcome; and
(2) The fact that Michael Vick is an African American.
In short, we have the issue of race once again thrust to the forefront of a media whirlwind involving a brutal crime alleged to have been committed by a celebrity. Much as the OJ Simpson murder case attracted a media storm in the 1990’s that divided America along racial lines, so does the brewing storm surrounding Mr. Vick threaten to do the same all over again a decade later.
(cont.)
You might think that is a bit of an over exaggeration, but I don’t think so. Google “Michael Vick + dog” and you already get almost 2 million hits. And the media interest is bound to grow as the date for the trial draws near. And while we all can agree that the charges, if true, are horrific, I think you will find that how people view this story may very well depend on race. Many many white commentators, such as those at ProFootballTalk.com, a prominent website devoted to football, have treated Vick’s story as if his guilt has already been determined, or was a foregone conclusion. Their coverage of the case suggests that they also believe “dog fighting” may be a popular avocation of other pro athletes in the NFL and NBA, most of whom are African American.
Contrast that with statements by African Americans such as former Cowboys running back Emmit Smith, NBA star Allen Iverson or sports columnist and ESPN Television host Stephen Smith, who either contend Vick is being unfairly targeted or, as in Smith’s column, decry the fact that most people are not extending to Mr. Vick the presumption of innocence to which is he entitled under the law.
It’s amazing that in this great country of ours, at a time when few of us hesitate to heap praise on our soldiers representing us abroad, how convenient it is for us to forget the actual rights they fight to protect.
One of them happens to be: innocent until proven guilty. We were supposed to have learned that from the Duke lacrosse case. Except we haven’t learned a thing. Probably because we don’t want to.
It’s hard not to see these cases, such as Vick’s, as recurring litmus tests for how Americans perceive race and racial stereotypes. Certainly the strongest defenders of the Duke Lacrosse team’s innocence regarding the rape allegations made by an African American woman were often white, just as most of the people who disagreed with the result in the OJ Simpson trial were predominantly white, and those who agreed with the verdict were black. Indeed, this racial divide exists not just in relation to celebrity trials, but as this columnist noted back in 1998, to how popular political figures such as Bill Clinton are viewed.
It seems the disconnect between white and black people on the effect that race plays in our society has changed little over the course of the past ten years. Whites are generally quick to dismiss the idea that race has a diminishing effect on what happens in society, while African Americans and other minorities hold the exact opposite opinion. Where many whites see their outrage at these cases as having little to do with racism (with the exception of the Duke case, where many whites did believe that race played a contributing factor in the indictment), blacks believe that the uproar over these cases has a great deal to do with the race of the alleged perpetrator. As an example of the difference between how whites and blacks view the Vick case, let me quote to you this blog post from the field negro, dated July 18th, the day after the indictment was issued:
[I]f this story with Vick and the dogs is true, he is cooked. America will never forgive him! He would have had a better chance of redemption if he had killed his wife like another famous football player did. I have blogged on the issue of white folks and their pets before, and if you thought I was lying, watch how this Vick thing plays itself out.
On my to work this morning it was all over AM radio stations. And I am not just talking about the sports shows. One guy actually called in and asked for the “death penalty” if it could be proven that Vick actually trained dogs to fight.
Now let me say for the record; I love dogs. If I had to make a choice between a dog and a cat it wouldn’t even be close. They don’t call them “man’s best friends” for nothing. Still, I just don’t get it with America and animals. There is so much hypocrisy involved with this entire situation that it’s almost laughable. I can hear Joe “Sixpack” over the dinner table now: “Honey can you believe what this jerk did to those poor animals? The man should be put under the jail; how can you do that to a poor dog, another living thing for crying out loud? Ahhh could you pass the steak for me please?” Context America, context.
Sorry, I live in a city where 222 human beings like me have been murdered so far this year; so you will excuse me if I don’t lose any sleep over Micheal Vick’s fucking dogs.
And this really is the crux of the matter: white and black people for the most part live in completely different worlds, and not just in terms of their physical location, but more importantly in a psychological sense. Whites are often oblivious to the racial stereotypes that society imposes on minorities.
White people hear blacks talk about racial profiling (driving while black, e.g.) or disparate treatment by are criminal justice system for drug offenses or differing treatment by medical, legal and other professionals because of their race all the time. Nonetheless, we have a difficult time connecting to the raw emotions expressed by black people, just as many of us have a difficult time believing that the claims they make are not exaggerated or the result of hypersensitivity. We don’t experience these things directly in our own lives, so that makes it harder to accept that the racial attitudes of other whites (and often ourselves as well) can really be having the effect that many African Americans claim.
We even have a label for what many whites consider inappropriate and wrongful claims of prejudice and discrimination. We call it “playing the race card” as if the anger we feel (and fear, if truth be told) emanating from their voices and their body language is merely the result of delusion, paranoia or a shallow attempt to wring an advantage from so-called “white guilt.” Denial, and anger in return at having our own motives questioned, is often the first and only response whites have to such claims. We often don’t see how our own prejudices, and the stereotypes of others that have been inculcated in us by society practically since birth, cloud our judgment in matters of race, and obscure our vision of the world as it is, not as we would like it to be.
If you doubt me on that, all I can offer is my own experience of living with a Japanese American woman who frequently (certainly more frequently than I would like to admit) reminds me of the stereotypes that she and our children deal with every day, stereotypes as to their mental abilities, food preferences, emotional range and athletic ability to which many people, myself included, often fall back on, sometimes unconsciously, to place her and other Asian Americans in a box that defines who they are and what they can hope to be.
The same can be said for Latinos, Native Americans, Arabs, etc. Indeed, almost any ethnic group labors under the burden of societal categorization, a shortcut approach to viewing and making sense of “people different from us” which form the principle building blocks for prejudice and racism in our society. As the dominant “race” whites are primarily responsible for the dissemination of these stereotypes, and for using them to modify our behavior toward, and treatment of, other groups. No group has faced the brunt of these preconceived generalizations of ours more than African Americans. The history of slavery and institutional racism in every region of the country is rife with examples where stereotypical views toward African Americans have led to both suffering on the part of blacks, and denial on the part of whites.
The first step to overcoming racist attitudes is being willing to admit that you have them. So, when you read about the Michael Vick case, or watch coverage of it on television, in the coming months, ask yourself this question: Does the fact that Michael Vick is an African American affect your perception of his guilt, or heighten your anger for his alleged misdeeds? It’s a question worth considering as another media circus prepares to assemble to gawk at, and mock, the latest alleged villain worthy of our Nation’s scorn and outage.
oj simpson kills his wife and her friend
michael vick kills puppies
no doubt in my mind a jury will convict vick much easier than oj
people care about puppies more than other people…..esp when race is involved.
It’s isn’t just race either. The sentiment expressed by the field negro is urban based. When people get killed all around you on a nightly basis you have a totally different sensibility about violence.
I wonder however if we would be so quick to judge if Peyton Manning was the QB involved in dog fighting?
what if it was Ryan Leaf?
Same race, different benefit of the doubt.
or what if it was Steve McNair?
again, same race, different character.
I’m responding to TFN’s general sense of apathy about the dogs when compared to society’s apathy about the 200+ dead in Philly.
you seriously think that if a da brought an indictment against a white man for organized dog fighting and animal cruelty, people would dismiss it?
people love dogs. people hate animal cruelty.
i hate to disagree w/you all, but i submit that no matter the race of the individual, if an indictment was handed down (and an indictment is much more substantial than just an arrest…one would conjecture that the da must have something to levy that kind of charge at an individual, especially such a well-loved one), then regardless of the man’s race, his reputation would be toast.
my two cents.
These are crimes that are indicative–not especial–of the entire American culture. Whites do this. Latinos do this. Asians do this.
Understand that all black men are whipping boys for any kind of aberrant behavior. It plays to a deep-seated racism. It plays to a mindset that still insists that black men–in particular–and women do not value life, much less their own, or in the case of Michael Vick, those of ‘dumb’ animals. We like to cut corners on American values. In other words, that we are BORN CRIMINALS that deserve no rights people are bound to respect.
Every day that the media heralds some new murder, cheat, sprees, or atrocities, I pray that I don’t have to see a black face on the television screen, or hear a black-sounding name on the radio. And I am not the only one who thinks this.
Thank you.
no, i don’t get it.
i’ll see your oj and raise you a robert blake.
i don’t have any idea about the cop who killed his pregnant girlfriend.
you might have an argument about barry bonds, except i’d counter with lance armstrong’s alleged steroid use.
and your michael vick argument can’t hold up unless you can provide a white athelete who is running (or at least participating in) a dog fight ring and is getting a pass from the press.
Robert Blake? Oh come on–you’re smarter than that. No one gave a rat’s booty about Robert Blake, and you know it. Do you even remember the victim’s name without Googling it? If so, you’re in the minority. No one cared, and why? Because it didn’t provoke the same type of outrage like that of a Black man being accused of murdering a white woman. Simple as that.
Same thing with Barry Bonds. I feel sorry for him and I can’t stand baseball. I don’t recall Mark McGwire being vilified like Bonds. Same thing w/ Armstrong–he’s not been vilified like Bonds, either. I don’t see people lining up to pitch their “live strong” bracelets–do you?
Also, I find it awfully telling that CNN found the time to broadcast Sen. Byrd’s remarks about animal cruelty, but somehow never gave the same airtime about his remarks about the war. Interesting, no?
And quite frankly, there are a lot of people who are quite cool with torturing HUMAN BEINGS, but will cry a river about some dog. And I have pets. Hell, I’m attached to a dog that isn’t even mine (he belongs to a sibling) because he’s so smart, protective and loving. But I have perspective, too.
There’s a reason why the Blazing Saddles‘ line about not sending a horse to check for quicksand but two n*** is so funny until it hurts. Because that attitude has been proven again and again. If a Black man or woman–a fellow human being–was shot or kidnapped folks would yawn. But they weep for Michael Vick’s dogs.
Bottom line: Do I feel sorry for Vick? Nope. I believe what he’s been accused of IS barbaric, and I find breathtaking the fact that if this is true, he couldn’t find anything else to do with his time, talent and money. Now–do I think Peyton Manning or a Brett Farve (esp. in his prime) would be vilified like this?
Hell no.
And again, thank you.
Side note: I just returned from New Orleans. OH MY GOD.
I didn’t see nearly the destruction that’s still there, but the little I did see makes my blood boil. Oh my God, FEMA needs to be horse whipped.
Or is that cruelty to horses?
nobody wants to think they’re racist, but the recent zogby poll, Report Card on Prejudice in America shows some interesting, startling in fact, aspects of that dynamic.
we’ve got a long way to go.
lTMF’sA
well….
the people that argued FOR the Duke lacrosse players ended up being right.
The ones who were outraged about OJ also (to me) happened to be right. It didn’t matter that the LAX players were white, or that OJ was black, or that Vick is black.
At least not to me.
I actually initially thought to myself that the Duke Lax players were guilty. That much evidence would get anyone other than OJ convicted much easier – white or black. In fact, wouldn’t blacks be hollering how unfair it was if it was a white person who did what OJ (presumably) did and got off b/c of fancy lawyers?
As for Vick, I think he is guilty but I will wait and see. Not b/c he is black, but b/c he is a punk (I am a football nut) whose brother is even worse.
People play the race card when it is convenient for them, and I think that OJ is the perfect example of the hypocrisy in that….
just my 2 cents.
hit post, not preview.
last point – it is about character, not race.
But my point is that how blacks and whites will view this case will be seen through very different lenses, irrespective of Vick’s guilt or innocence. And the disconnect between the two is far more the result of whites than blacks. Vick, like OJ will become a symbol. The media will have a circus, and what should be a minor story will be inflated. That’s what interests me: how these cases bring to the surface racist attitudes that most of us try to deny exists.
imo
Somehow it is difficult to associate animal cruelty with race, since Peyton Manning, as someone indicated, will be treated in the same way by the law, or at least should be.
Animal cruelty is a felony in many states and until it is prosecuted to its full extent, animals of various kind will endure pain, suffering, and death at the hands of another species of animal, the human being. I am not pleased to be one of them when I hear about atrocities like this one. If Vick is allowed to return to football, I’ve seen my last game.
It should be difficult to associate murder with race too, but history shows us it isn’t. This isn’t about Vick’s guilt or innocence, its about what the case reveals in our attitudes towards others who are “not us.”
But at least we do, today, have laws against animal cruelty so that at least part of society is reacting against the way we treat other species. A step forward has been made. Now let’s prosecute what our consciences believe is illegal or unjust or just inhumane.
On ESPN’s Pardon The Interuption WaPo sports journalist likes to point out how a basketball brawl (consisting of largely black players) drawls a different reaction from the public than does a baseball brawl (consisting of many more but largely white then hispanic then black players*).
who’s the “journalist” making this shitty comparison?
huge differences between basketball fights and baseball fights –
1 – Baseball, like hockey and unlike basketball, has a tradition of players fighting each other. Unlike hockey, baseball fights involve more posing and talking than fisticuffs.
2 – and more important – the most notable basketball fight, Pacers-Pistons ’04, involved players charging into the stands to attack fans! This is clearly unacceptable and has nothing to do with race.
1 – Baseball, like hockey and unlike basketball, has a tradition of players fighting each other. Unlike hockey, baseball fights involve more posing and talking than fisticuffs.
They have a history of fighting? It’s just part of the game? WTF?
Baseball and hockey are just that–baseball and hockey. They are NOT boxing matches. It’s always been thus? Prove it. Even IF so, if fighting is not found in an official history or rule book, then some dumbass, lame-brain punk thug started something, and you simply have newer dumbass, lame-brain, punk thugs in baseball and hockey perpetuating it.
Or maybe simpler still–you’re just reaching.
That rationalization rather sounds like Katrina vocabulary: Blacks steal; whites commandeer.
Sorry. That’s just bogus.
i heard the district attorney was having a real hard time making a case against vick…
until one of the dogs rolled over on him.
good night, folks, and try the veal!
is football really less brutal than dog fighting? they are both violent contests. sure, there are distinctions to be made. but there is an essential similarity too.
is this really a serious question? Any human sport, even if violent, is played by willing participants risking their own bodies. There is IMO no similarity between this and two half-starved dogs forced to fight to the death by their vicious owners.
For me, (I hope) it is not so much skin pigmentation but the attitude of the person in and out of the sports arena. I would much sooner believe in a Bill Russell than a Mark “Big Mac” Mcgwire. A Sam Jones or a K.C. Jones over an Iverson or a Terrell Owens.
I also believe that dog fighing is barbaric and should be prosecuted.