Wednesday, July 10, 2013

The Anti-Athlete Role Model Argument



Some early morning channel surfing lead this writer to the channel in which Skip and Stephen A. were discussing Colin Kaepernick’s recent clothing “controversy.”

The former Daily News sports writer took the stance that because Kaepernick is in an elevated position in society, he has to be far more image cautious than the average citizen because of how impressionable members of the younger generation are.

While the point was well defended, the idea of professional athletes being role models for kids is ludicrous.

To plagiarize the late Mahatma Gandhi, we have to be the change we want to see in the world; and placing all athletes on the increasingly fragile pedestal of high moral values is foolish when many of them are not willing or able to embrace that responsibility.

It is easy to blame media sensationalism for why kids act like the questionable people they see on television. Yet an enormous part of sports on every level is sensationalism. The athletic marvels like Blake Griffin jump over cars and Robert Griffin the Third sprinting at an Olympic hurdler pace are huge reasons for why people watch sports.

Combine that with broken households (by societal standards), the current economic mindset, and the increasing prominence of media as a pacifier and kids are hard pressed not to act like who they see on television.

Yet in the midst of these realities one key fact slips through the cracks: kids who are at the age of being impressionable are looking up at the sensational people that we as a society are putting in front of them.

An uncomfortable reality that needs to be addressed in regards to professional athletes as role models is this: society builds athletes up on the foundation of how good they are at their craft rather than the content of their character.

Therefore, if we actually want the people on television to be serviceable roll models for the youth of a nation, it is up to the fans and media alike to make good character of public figures the foundation of public support.

And that is impossible to do in the world of sports because winning cures everything.

While it’s easy to take Tom Brady and his exploits in comparison to Paulie D and his exploits (and believe me that’s a good choice) we have to look at why Brady is viewed as highly as he is.

Because Tom Brady is arguably the best quarterback of all time is the reason why so many impressionable people place him on a moral pedestal that apparently comes with success. The fact that Brady is a big contributor to the national charity Best Buddies is not nearly as prominent as the fact the Patriots quarterback is fifth all time in touchdown passes.

You can be a complete a-hole and still be forgiven by the sports viewing society so long as you win. Michael Vick can mutilate and murder dogs like he did back in 2007 and will be largely tolerated so long as he has a season like he did in 2010.

Ray Lewis can get charged with obstruction of justice during a murder trial, like he did in 2000 and have public perception remain that he killed two people; so long as he wins two Superbowls, is one of the best linebackers of all time, and a reverend in the locker room.
Ben Roethlisberger can allegedly rape a woman like he did back in 2008 (the charges against Roethlisberger were dropped), yet so long as he continues to put up good numbers and keep the Steelers Superbowl contenders he will be forgiven.

Still, Lewis and Roethlisberger are two time Superbowl champions who have reached the apex of success in their sport. No matter what we say about their character, they will be remembered first and foremost as being successful at their craft.

Obviously not all athletes are these heinous villains Vick, Roethlisberger, and Lewis have made them out to be. However, if we as a society really care about the people our kids look up to we will work on directing their attention to individuals of higher moral character; and more importantly making good character the definition of a good role model rather than how successful they are.

The alternative is defaulting to building up athletes and musical artists as saints and tearing them down as they do something stupid because they believe their fans will forgive them if they are successful in their craft.

Yet the saddest thing is in today’s society the athletes are correct to believe their sins will be forgiven if they catch ten touchdowns or make a great album.

There is nothing wrong with wanting people in higher positions to carry themselves better, like Stephen A does with Colin Kaepernick; especially in the image paranoid country we live in today.

However, that does not exonerate society from choosing whom to elevate if in fact the end goal is to have good role models for kids.

This notion leaves us with only two choices. One option is that both media members and fans have to decide that sportsmanship and good character take precedence over winning. The other option is to acknowledge that athletes are not good role models because winning is the most important value in sports; society can’t have the best of both worlds if they actually want better role models for their kids.

The second option is far more appealing if the goal is to be the change we see in others.







No comments:

Post a Comment