african-american-woman-covers-her-mouth-via-Shutterstock-615x345

In a piece for the New York Times, sports journalist William C. Rhoden wonders why our society seems more apt to punish people for their homophobic, but give them a pass for racialized opinions.

Rhoden uses the events of the past few weeks—Richard Sherman being labeled a thug for his exuberant post-game interview; Texas Tech’s Marcus Smart pushing a fan who allegedly called him a racial slur; and Missouri football star Michael Sam coming out as gay—as a backdrop for his argument.

Rhoden writes:

The N.F.L. surely will not tolerate publicly expressed closed-mindedness around the subject of sexual orientation, just as the N.B.A. has fined star players like Roy Hibbert and Kobe Bryant for using homophobic slurs.

Many of us find it easier to convene at the universal intersection of sexual orientation than to negotiate the complicated streets of race. During football and basketball season, gigantic home entertainment systems blast race and ethnicity into America’s living rooms, from Compton-born, dreadlock-wearing, Stanford-educated Richard Sherman to a young star player like Marcus Smart who has had previous blowups.

Will the reaction to Sam be different? The early reviews have offered hope. In the wake of Sam’s announcement, many fans, players and commentators urged the N.F.L. to draft and embrace him. Now that his cards are on the table, team owners, general managers and players will have to put theirs on the table as well.

Although we should shy away from partaking in the Oppression Olympics for the most part, Rhoden makes a compelling point. While many Americans still hold very antiquated views about both race and sexuality, folks seem much more comfortable punishing blatant homophobia, while overlooking both coded and overt racialized language.

What do you think? Are people more comfortable confronting homophobia rather than racism? Share your thoughts. 

Tags: ,
Like Us On Facebook Follow Us On Twitter
  • SayWhat

    To answer your question, YES.

    Remember when the word ‘tolerance’ was all the rage? It was in every good liberal’s manual that we must teach tolerance knowing darn well what they were really preaching is ‘you are not my equal, but I’ll put up with you because it makes me look good to do so’ because that is basically what happens when you ‘tolerate’ instead of ‘respecting’ someone, you (grudgingly) put up with them. As soon as people started to use the word ‘tolerance’ with gays, all of a sudden people started to talk about the negative connotation of the word and it is pretty much banned now.
    The moral of the story, as long as a white person is affected, you will see action (this applies to gender, religion, sexual orientation and tantrums).