Tuesday, September 4, 2007

Whoopi Goldberg defends Michael Vick


I hate The View.

For those that have read my this before long ago, you know that I fucking hate that show starring three hookers and their mom. The show was actually interesting when Rosie O'Fat joined the show, but overall, every morning my wife put that fucking show on in the summer was a morning i wanted to punch my testicles to make the pain in my head go away. Watching The View is like taking a bukake of idiocy.

So, when Whoopi Goldberg goes on The View for the first time as a full time player, I was sticking my chin out like a champ awaiting my bukake. Instead, she comes out and brings a good point. The video is on CNN.com. She mentions the point that what Michael Vick did was pretty atrocious, but no one really brought up the point that in the South, where he's from, dog fighting is not uncommon. So to look at Vick as this freak, while we justifiably can because of how horrendous the sport is, he didn't just decide, "I'm going to be a fucking prick and see dogs kill each other because they were hyped up from just being off the 'rape stand.'"

This bring an interesting point that I want to explore further. In some countries, women are forced to mutilate their genitals. This is normal for them. And as we sit and rightfully think, "That's fucking wrong," if a player born from that country is caught forcing his wife to do that here in America, we'd probably think he was a big, disgusting asshole that needs to be burned because he's the same as a rapist in the USA. As opposed to a rapist who was brought up in a country where he should know rape is bad, this dude was brought up to where mutilating his wife is expected. So how much haterade do we put his way?

Whoopi's point supports the idea of handlers that protect high profile players from situations such as these and have them understand what people view as acceptable behavior. Shit, Terrell Owens was seen as worse than others that killed people or beat their wife because he showboats immaturely. While Vick of course does not deserve any leniency for his crime, there should be some care into how big the stone we cast at Michael Vick. I teach alternative education kids where they grow up in a cycle of spousal abuse, gang violence, and self-destructive decision making. While I try my best to break what tends to be a 3 or 4 generation cycle (at least), we're realistic. We often find that these same students end up in jail for spousal abuse, gang violence, or self-destructive decision making; but do they deserve our full disdain?

2 comments:

Nick Pomazak said...

I think alot of the Haterade thrown Vick's way is more out of a sense of schadenfreude than out of reprehension for what he's done. At least it is for me.

Not that I don't find dogfighting sickening, I do. But almost as sickening was the nauseating buildup the national sports media (read: ESPN) has given him over the last 5 years. When he went down, for me it was like, "Yeah how you like me now Berman you vapid cakehole".

dook!e said...

My problem with all this is, in most businesses, if you get convicted of a felony, you lose your job. When you've been "rehabilitated", you have few options of finding a job outside of the retail food industry.

Vick hasn't lost his job. He's been suspended without pay. That leaves the door open for:

A) Vicks returns to the Falcons under his existing contract
B) Falcons sign him to a new contract
C) Falcons cut him and another team signs him
D) Falcons cut him and no other NFL team signs him.
E) Falcons cut him, he signs with Arena League.

I hope for D because he doesn't deserve to entertain me anymore, and the media (read: ESPN) will never let his story die as long as Berman is sucking down hoagies. I want to watch two teams play football, not hear about what its like to drop the soap in cell block 5. That would be "tragic", huh Berms?