Today's column is not for the simple-minded or sensitive. If you are either, I apologize in advance and respectfully suggest you go read one of the thousand other takes on Alex Rodriguez.
To understand the furor/hysteria regarding Rodriguez testing positive for performance-enhancing drugs, you have to grasp the importance of symbols to any culture, but most especially American culture.
Cultures do not survive without the vigilant preservation of iconic symbols that stand as proof of a society's righteousness, strength and courage. Because we are the world's melting pot, the maintaining of ethnic/racial symbols occasionally causes major friction and difficult-to-explain double standards.
Steroids are the forbidden fruit in baseball and a healthy green vegetable in football. Why?
Well, throughout our American history there have been four sports that define male machismo — boxing, baseball, football and basketball. As you know, men take machismo very seriously. It is the lone, scientifically proven substitute for having a big Johnson, which explains Napoleon's disease.
Thanks in part to segregation laws, three white men and a mixed-race native American — James J. Jeffries, Babe Ruth, Jim Thorpe and George Mikan — got first crack as symbols of the macho games that matter most in America.
Jeffries was the first to fall. In an effort to prove the superiority of white men over the American Negro, Jeffries came out of retirement early in the 20th century, lost 100 pounds and took on Jack Johnson in "the fight of the century." Jeffries lost badly and later admitted that even in his prime he would've been no match for Johnson.
Jim Brown unseated Thorpe, a native American, as the unquestioned king of football. Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain leaped past Mikan on the hardwood.
Willie Mays and Hank Aaron took good, hard runs at Babe Ruth, but The Great Bambino is still standing. Today he shares the stage with Brown, Muhammad Ali and Michael Jordan as the greatest of all-time in the American sports that define who we believe we are.
Babe Ruth is not going anywhere without a massive, nuclear fight. His supporters do not care that he dominated a segregated, inferior brand of Major League Baseball.
Babe Ruth is an important symbol, and challengers to his throne will be greeted with immense resistance.
That's why steroids matter so much in baseball. They distort our appreciation of Ruth's numbers, particularly his home-run stats, the penis-measuring digits of baseball. Chicks dig the long ball.
Barry Bonds threatened Ruth's legacy in a way Hank Aaron never could. Aaron was consistent, durable and humble. Bonds was overpowering, menacing and arrogant. He was the epitome of macho.
When Bonds announced he wanted to pass Ruth more than Aaron, Bonds knew exactly what he was doing. He was giving the finger to all the baseball geeks determined to protect Ruth's legacy. Bonds did not know he was also fueling the steroids witch hunt.
The hunt for Bonds ensnared Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens and now Alex Rodriguez, the last known threat to Ruth.
Let me be clear: I am not a proponent of performance-enhancing drugs. They are a problem in ALL sports and will remain one as long as there are millions of dollars to be made in athletics. I object to the ridiculously inconsistent outrage we have about PEDs. "Perfectly acceptable" is an exaggeration, but I can't think of a more accurate description of PEDs in football. And they're all but ignored in basketball, golf, hockey, tennis, horse racing, etc.
Also, let me add that I don't have much of a problem with white sports fans protecting the legacy of their athletic icons. Black people (and other racial groups) do the same thing.
As a kid, when Magic Johnson and Larry Bird met on the basketball court, I kept my own stats because I was convinced the scorers cheated Magic.
Are white fans really outraged by guys like Barry Bonds, or do they maybe just feel a little inadequate? (Doug Pensinger / Getty Images)
Last week, when I wrote this Michael Phelps column and we ran this mock campaign poster, one of my best friends called me to complain that it was racist for Fox to mock Barack Obama's symbolic campaign poster. I had to explain to him that Obama was a politician and not a religious deity.
We can and will spoof Obama with the same enthusiasm we made fun of George Bush, Bill Clinton, Dan Quayle and Paris Palin. And I say that knowing full well that many black people are going to be offended by the humor because they are going to be un-objective and too protective of the Obama symbol.
Obviously those of us in the media are supposed to be ruled by some level of objectivity. Being humans we oftentimes fail. We have failed monumentally when it comes to baseball, Bonds, home runs and steroids.
Of our three major sports leagues, the least amount of racial diversity among the journalists/broadcasters covering the games is in baseball. As best I can tell, Joe Morgan is the lone, influential, non-white voice in baseball.
Things don't get challenged in baseball. There's a comfy network of peers writing about, talking about, managing and coaching, general-managing, owning and commissioner-ing Major League Baseball.
There's significant diversity playing the game. But there is virtually no diversity shaping the way the game is viewed.
That's why all the steroid hysteria is focused on the players.
That's why in the years before Bonds turned to steroids to keep pace with all the "cheaters" we were sold the bogus story that juiced balls powered the home-run explosion.
That's why ownership and managers never get adequately questioned and vilified for their role as the No. 1 benefactors and blind-eye proponents of steroids.
That's why Tom Hicks, the owner of the Texas Rangers, would have the audacity to claim that A-Rod owes him an apology.
That's why ESPN broadcaster and baseball shill Peter Gammons could be celebrated for decades as the gold standard in baseball journalism by his peers in the media.
That's why Sports Illustrated's Selena Roberts has pursued A-Rod like Moby Dick, unveiled her report about his steroid use a week after the Super Bowl and has a book about A-Rod ready to be released in the coming months.
That's why ESPN suspended Scott Van Pelt for calling Bud Selig a pimp.
That's why Mike Lupica ran me off "The Sports Reporters" because I refused to allow him to put a black face (Bonds') on a drug epidemic that by the 1990s was clearly colorless, pervasive and initially sparked by white athletes trying to keep pace with black athletes.
I'm not suggesting a colossal, racist conspiracy. I'm saying it's easy for any of us to fall victim to our biases if our thoughts are rarely questioned by people who look, think and experience life different from us.
To understand the furor/hysteria regarding Rodriguez testing positive for performance-enhancing drugs, you have to grasp the importance of symbols to any culture, but most especially American culture.
Cultures do not survive without the vigilant preservation of iconic symbols that stand as proof of a society's righteousness, strength and courage. Because we are the world's melting pot, the maintaining of ethnic/racial symbols occasionally causes major friction and difficult-to-explain double standards.
Steroids are the forbidden fruit in baseball and a healthy green vegetable in football. Why?
Well, throughout our American history there have been four sports that define male machismo — boxing, baseball, football and basketball. As you know, men take machismo very seriously. It is the lone, scientifically proven substitute for having a big Johnson, which explains Napoleon's disease.
Thanks in part to segregation laws, three white men and a mixed-race native American — James J. Jeffries, Babe Ruth, Jim Thorpe and George Mikan — got first crack as symbols of the macho games that matter most in America.
Jeffries was the first to fall. In an effort to prove the superiority of white men over the American Negro, Jeffries came out of retirement early in the 20th century, lost 100 pounds and took on Jack Johnson in "the fight of the century." Jeffries lost badly and later admitted that even in his prime he would've been no match for Johnson.
Jim Brown unseated Thorpe, a native American, as the unquestioned king of football. Bill Russell and Wilt Chamberlain leaped past Mikan on the hardwood.
Willie Mays and Hank Aaron took good, hard runs at Babe Ruth, but The Great Bambino is still standing. Today he shares the stage with Brown, Muhammad Ali and Michael Jordan as the greatest of all-time in the American sports that define who we believe we are.
Babe Ruth is not going anywhere without a massive, nuclear fight. His supporters do not care that he dominated a segregated, inferior brand of Major League Baseball.
Babe Ruth is an important symbol, and challengers to his throne will be greeted with immense resistance.
That's why steroids matter so much in baseball. They distort our appreciation of Ruth's numbers, particularly his home-run stats, the penis-measuring digits of baseball. Chicks dig the long ball.
Barry Bonds threatened Ruth's legacy in a way Hank Aaron never could. Aaron was consistent, durable and humble. Bonds was overpowering, menacing and arrogant. He was the epitome of macho.
When Bonds announced he wanted to pass Ruth more than Aaron, Bonds knew exactly what he was doing. He was giving the finger to all the baseball geeks determined to protect Ruth's legacy. Bonds did not know he was also fueling the steroids witch hunt.
The hunt for Bonds ensnared Mark McGwire, Roger Clemens and now Alex Rodriguez, the last known threat to Ruth.
Let me be clear: I am not a proponent of performance-enhancing drugs. They are a problem in ALL sports and will remain one as long as there are millions of dollars to be made in athletics. I object to the ridiculously inconsistent outrage we have about PEDs. "Perfectly acceptable" is an exaggeration, but I can't think of a more accurate description of PEDs in football. And they're all but ignored in basketball, golf, hockey, tennis, horse racing, etc.
Also, let me add that I don't have much of a problem with white sports fans protecting the legacy of their athletic icons. Black people (and other racial groups) do the same thing.
As a kid, when Magic Johnson and Larry Bird met on the basketball court, I kept my own stats because I was convinced the scorers cheated Magic.
Are white fans really outraged by guys like Barry Bonds, or do they maybe just feel a little inadequate? (Doug Pensinger / Getty Images)
Last week, when I wrote this Michael Phelps column and we ran this mock campaign poster, one of my best friends called me to complain that it was racist for Fox to mock Barack Obama's symbolic campaign poster. I had to explain to him that Obama was a politician and not a religious deity.
We can and will spoof Obama with the same enthusiasm we made fun of George Bush, Bill Clinton, Dan Quayle and Paris Palin. And I say that knowing full well that many black people are going to be offended by the humor because they are going to be un-objective and too protective of the Obama symbol.
Obviously those of us in the media are supposed to be ruled by some level of objectivity. Being humans we oftentimes fail. We have failed monumentally when it comes to baseball, Bonds, home runs and steroids.
Of our three major sports leagues, the least amount of racial diversity among the journalists/broadcasters covering the games is in baseball. As best I can tell, Joe Morgan is the lone, influential, non-white voice in baseball.
Things don't get challenged in baseball. There's a comfy network of peers writing about, talking about, managing and coaching, general-managing, owning and commissioner-ing Major League Baseball.
There's significant diversity playing the game. But there is virtually no diversity shaping the way the game is viewed.
That's why all the steroid hysteria is focused on the players.
That's why in the years before Bonds turned to steroids to keep pace with all the "cheaters" we were sold the bogus story that juiced balls powered the home-run explosion.
That's why ownership and managers never get adequately questioned and vilified for their role as the No. 1 benefactors and blind-eye proponents of steroids.
That's why Tom Hicks, the owner of the Texas Rangers, would have the audacity to claim that A-Rod owes him an apology.
That's why ESPN broadcaster and baseball shill Peter Gammons could be celebrated for decades as the gold standard in baseball journalism by his peers in the media.
That's why Sports Illustrated's Selena Roberts has pursued A-Rod like Moby Dick, unveiled her report about his steroid use a week after the Super Bowl and has a book about A-Rod ready to be released in the coming months.
That's why ESPN suspended Scott Van Pelt for calling Bud Selig a pimp.
That's why Mike Lupica ran me off "The Sports Reporters" because I refused to allow him to put a black face (Bonds') on a drug epidemic that by the 1990s was clearly colorless, pervasive and initially sparked by white athletes trying to keep pace with black athletes.
I'm not suggesting a colossal, racist conspiracy. I'm saying it's easy for any of us to fall victim to our biases if our thoughts are rarely questioned by people who look, think and experience life different from us.
