Some things are beyond parody

Link from RealClearSports.com:

What if Michael Phelps Were Black? – Jemele Hill, ESPN

 

http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=hill/090209


Wow, that was a pretty dumb column.

 

She's got a point. Not sure that she made it, though.

 

I haven't read the column yet but the headline is stupid. Would Phelps have apologists if he was black?

Sure he would. Look how many defend Barry Bonds to this day. As for Phelps, there aren't many who defend him and at that most people are critical of his apologists.

 

I had never heard of O.J. Mayo being busted until Jemele told me, so right away he got off easier than Phelps (granted, he was a little lower-profile). And I don't get what she's saying with that comparison. It's better to be made fun of on Letterman than not to be made fun of on Letterman?

I'm playing dumb, of course, but that's because Jemele is overlooking a huge fact - Michael Phelps wasn't charged (yet, to my knowledge). He was caught by a camera, not a cop. All we can do is make fun of him, and write about him, and take his sponsorships away. And all of that is happening. O.J. Mayo and Rasheed Wallace were caught with drugs, which is why they were charged. That's the only difference between the way those two were treated and the way Phelps is being treated. He's getting absolutely shat on in the media.

 

And I'll add that her second-to-last graf is absolutely, 100 percent right on. She just got there in a head-scratching way.

 

Maybe it's just me, but I can't figure out if she's saying Phelps is being treated too harshly, or is getting off too easily.

But, based on what reading comprehension I could muster, I disagree with almost everything Hill wrote.

I'd submit that perspective has been used in Phelps' treatment/punishment.

There is the perspective of hindsight and the realization that people, in fact, did not come down hard enough on Phelps the first time (after the DUI), the realization that he apparently did not learn from that experience, and has now proven not worthy of that pass/second chance that he was given; the perspective that he's now almost five years older than he was then, and should know even better, now, and yet, he didn't; the perspective that he should have all the more experience, knowledge and understanding of his place and role in the world, and it apparently does not mean what he himself has professed it to mean. Phelps is getting what he deserves now, whether he got it when the DUI occurred, or not. (Perspective was probably being used then, too, as people gave him benefit of doubt because of his youth, first-time offense, etc.)

Perspective shouldn't only cause people to hold back judgment because something may seem not so bad (especially in comparison to something else).

Perspective as it is applied to punishment is best when it causes a person to be treated on a unique, individualized basis. Ideally, everything, and not just the act itself, should be taken into account to result in what would hopefully be a fair and effective outcome/sentence/message for that person.

Everything that Phelps has done/experienced in the past -- the DUI, what is now seen as his second offense, his fame, the raised expectations of him, and his reactions to them -- is contributing to what is going on with him now.

 

I do think that if you generally act and dress as a thug or a jerk and you get in trouble, the knives come out.

If you act and look like a nice guy/gal, you generally get a pass.

Probably a racial component as well.

 

What if he were black? Well, then, he wouldn't be able to swim.

 

It makes a compelling point -- "Jesus, folks, let's all lighten up about weed, OK?" -- but, as has been said, it goes all around the barn trying to make it. And she's right about one thing -- that Baltimore Sun editorial is a joke.