The notion of celebrity athletes as roles models is intellectually and ethically bankrupt. They’re a bunch of guys who were lucky enough to develop a talent for playing a game that, in the grand scheme of things, is entirely meaningless except for its unfortunately high impact on the economy.
Athletes are great examples of talent and skill. That’s about all.
They don’t invent anything.
They don’t lead anyone.
They don’t provide jobs or make any lasting contributions to their communities (sports camps for kids don’t really count, IMO) in amounts in proportion to the numbers of athletes and the millions of dollars they make.
They don’t show great strength of mind or character and are never challenged to do so.
They don’t create anything lasting that impacts the world.
Some of them are barely educated. An alarming number of them can’t string together a grammatically correct sentence even when they have college degrees. Alcohol abuse, drug use, domestic violence and sexual promiscuity are rampant in their ranks. Humility is all but non-existent. Egos grow unchecked.
If you or, worse, your children view professional athletes as role models, when the world is filled with doctors and educators and artists and inventors and people of courage, conviction and integrity you get exactly what you deserve when another one is charged with spousal abuse or public indecency or drunk driving or firearms violations or drug possession or assault or rape or murder and dashes your trust, hope and admiration against the rocks of hard reality. (For the record, all of those are charges which have been leveled against professional athletes in the last five years or so.)
Look up to people who have earned the respect and privilege of being a role model, someone who provides an example worth following.
Just because someone is a public figure doesn’t mean that they’re an honorable figure. The fact that we’ve built up this cultural boondoggle of hero worship of pro athletes isn’t an excuse for people with two brain cells to rub together to buy into it.
I bet a lot of companies are talking out of the sides of their mouths. Unfortunately in this fucked up society of ours, sometimes getting arrested can make companies even more money. Take a look at Allen Iverson, his shoe sales shot up after his arrest (I forgot which one), and he had the highest selling jersey during the time. A lot of people were even mumbling that Kobe being arrested was a good thing, at least from a marketing standpoint. I wouldn’t be surprised if he has more “street cred”, and sales of things with his name start taking off.
As for whether it was rape? What I have heard is that there wouldn’t have been any charges if it weren’t for so many people calling the police about all the screaming. Does anyone have a cite for this?
I don’t watch the news much, so I hadn’t heard this before. But what I keep wondering is – for what reason did she think she was going to his room?
I would just like to chime in and say thank you to tlw for saying everything I wanted to without the poor grammer, inflated attitude, and bad spelling that I would have used.
So, let me get this straight, tlw - I am supposed to want my children to look up to pro atheletes for their speed, power, agility, determination, etc. - and IGNORE everything else they do in the public eye?
I don’t like the way it pans out, either; I simply think if you’re making that much freaking money you should be discreet, at least!
here’s a thought - we should look up to people who demonstrate characteristics that we admire. End of sentence. Doesn’t have to be an athelete. Doesn’t have to have all potential ‘good’ attributes.
If her raped her then obviously he’s a bad bad person. But simply cheating on his wife? Big deal. That’s between them and no one else. If she is standing with him through that then who is anyone else to judge the act?
Maybe they have an understanding about such things, maybe they are poly or swingers, maybe he makes like 50 million a year and his wife likes to shop? What is the point of being rich and powerful and adored by millions if you can only schtup one person for the rest of your life?
So he didn’t want to tell the public? BFD! It’s no one’s business. It has no more bearing on who he is in relation to you thjan any public facet of his life. He has a very good reason not to tell the public his opinion, it will affect his income levels. Does everyone here bitching about the adultery aspect believe in disclosing every personal detail to those who pay them directly or indirectly?
Neither his athletic prowess or his extramarital activities have any effect on the products he sells, but they BOTH have an effect on public opinion. It’s his job to try and make more money not to tell us he likes to poke 19 year old hotel maids.
Well, as i said earlier in the thread, i agree with this. But if Bryant feels this way, why did he have a big weepy press conference?
Sorry, but i make my own judgements about adultery in general, independently of what others choose to forgive.
Again, if they have an “understanding,” why the need for the weepy, grovelling apologetic press conference? Why not say “We have an understanding about this sort of thing, and that is our business and nobody else’s”?
Maybe no point at all. But if you wanna “shtup” hundreds of women, don’t get married. No-one held a gun to his head and forced him to the altar.
Again, i agree with this, but you don’t get to have it both ways. Kobe Bryant chose to have that press conference. No-one held a gun to his head for that either. He could have released a statement saying something like: “I am innocent of the sexual assault charges and feel i will be vindicated in court; my marriage is no-one’s business but mine and my wife’s, and we will deal with this issue ourselves. Thankyou.” But he didn’t, and the fact that he chose to hold the press conference shows that he believes that he needs to clear his name with the public, irrespective of whether the public has any “right” to know his personal affairs.
Well, again you don’t get to have it both ways. He is now obviously using the media for damage control. I’m always fascinated by people who contend that the public has no right to access to the stars’ personal lives through the media, but refuse to be critical of those same stars for using the media to put a positive spin on their own public images. I’ll say one more time; you don’t get to have it both ways.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mhendo * Well, as i said earlier in the thread, i agree with this. But if Bryant feels this way, why did he have a big weepy press conference?
You seem to think Kobe was talking directly to YOU. He wasn’t, he most likelt was talking to three groups of people 1) The vast numbers of people who DO think they have a right to know what is going on in his private life 2) His corporate endorsement clients 3) any potential jurors he might be able to influence.
Sorry, but i make my own judgements about adultery in general, independently of what others choose to forgive.
Then as a matter of routine you must judge a great many people or by a hypocrite. Pretty much everyone out there has comitted adultery in some way or another. Even Jimmy Carter comitted adultery in his heart. You also probably lose a lot of sleep staying up nights judging people for crimes against others that in no way relate to you.
Again, if they have an “understanding,” why the need for the weepy, grovelling apologetic press conference? Why not say “We have an understanding about this sort of thing, and that is our business and nobody else’s”?
Because no matter what goes on behind closed doors most people openly judge others based on private sexual matters. Just like you. If they did have an understanding and stated so then even if Kobe were aquitted of all charges he would likely never see even a percentage of the endorsement money he now recieves.
Maybe no point at all. But if you wanna “shtup” hundreds of women, don’t get married. No-one held a gun to his head and forced him to the altar.
Why not get married? You think sex is the only reason to or not to get married? Again another case of you applying your judgement and set of moral standards to someone else. Maybe he wants to have kids, or a best friend, or he is in romantic love with her and just enjoys physical love with many other women. Where do you get your guidelines and liscence to set rules for others in matters that do not affect you?
Again, i agree with this, but you don’t get to have it both ways. Kobe Bryant chose to have that press conference. No-one held a gun to his head for that either. He could have released a statement saying something like: "I am innocent of the sexual assault charges and feel i will be vindicated in court; my marriage is no-one’s business but mine and my wife’s, and we will deal with this issue ourselves. Thankyou."
Again, that is most likely damage control. He wasn’t talking to you, he was talking to groups of people who are not you. You seem to think you can have it both ways yourself. On the one hand you don’t think he should have had a press conference in the first place (as is his right to do), but if he des have one he should say what you think he should say. Your main problem appears to be with his emotional level and what is going on in his marriage. You claim to agree that what goes on in his marriage is no one’s business but you have a problem with him not disclosing more in that area. Huh? then you have a problem with his tearful announcement? You get accused and charged with rape and face posible prison ot worst and at best the loss of millions of dollars and see how you react.
But he didn’t, and the fact that he chose to hold the press conference shows that he believes that he needs to clear his name with the public, irrespective of whether the public has any “right” to know his personal affairs.
Maybe he or his advisors are smart enough to know that there are nice folks like you out there that use a complete lack of information to make complete personal judgements that fit in to nice little packages.
zen-- thank you for expounding on some of the points I made earlier (although I know the points are your own.:)) You fleshed them out and explained them better than I could. Some people don’t get that a marriage is between two people-- it is NOT the business of the public at large. And of course, with society being what it is today, Kobe had no choice but to give the press conference that he gave.
I neither know nor care who he was talking to. He can talk to whomever he pleases. But once he talks in public, he gives people licence to judge what he says against his actions. Whether it’s any of their business or not become immaterial.
What a moronic argument. Firstly, i lose no sleep at all over this issue, because even though i make a judgement, it’s not one that is particularly important to me. The extent of my judgement when i heard is press conference was something along the lines of, “Oh, another asshole sports star who thinks he can do what he wants because he’s famous, and then gets all defensive when he gets caught.” Then i promptly put it out of my mind (until i saw this thread, of course).
“[E]veryone out there has committed adultery in some way or another”? Um, no, unless you prefer to use a rather old and unusual scriptural definition of adultery. The Oxford English Dictionary defines the term, firstly, as:
This, i believe, is reasonably close to the definition used in law when adultery becomes an issue in divorce cases, etc. The OED also offers a second definition:
I suppose you can, based on this definition, make the assertion that all inter-denominational marriages and any pre-marital sex are adultery, but this is a pretty archaic definition (the last OED example is from 1872) and not one that’s part of the legal definition, as far as i’m aware.
“Adultery in his heart.” Give me a fucking break. The fact that someone might be tempted to commit a “sin” like adultery is not the issue, for me at least. I only have a problem with them when they act on that temptation.
Your contention that i probably lose sleep judging people who do things that don’t relate to me is stupid, because it implies that we should never judge people morally who do things that don’t relate directly to us. How dumb is that? By extension, you could also argue that i should not judge a murderer, as long as he did not kill me or anyone that i knew. And, to examine this issue from the point of view of good acts rather than bad, i should also refrain from making positive judgements about charity workers in Africa because they don’t directly affect me either.
I only judge people on “private sexual matters” if their actions affect someone else who could not consent to them. As long as all people involved are consenting adults, i don’t care what they do. If Bryant and his wife had an “understanding” or an “open marriage,” i wouldn’t judge them for it at all; nor would i judge Bryant for having sex with another woman.
But i can only go on the evidence i have, which is Bryant’s own admission that he was sorry for what he did. His own “heartfelt” apology, tears and all, suggests that they did not have an “open marriage” type of arrangement. It might be true, as you suggest, that they are not revealing such an arrangement because of Bryant’s endorsements, but i can’t know that, can i? You accuse me of making judgements about Bryant based on limited information, but you want me to exonerate him based on something that he hasn’t said. You’re basically criticizing me for taking him at his word.
If Bryant does indeed have an “understanding” with his wife, but is willing to go on national TV and lie about it to save his endorsements, why should i cut him any slack based on his lies? And if he’s telling the truth, and he did commit adultery without his wife’s consent, then why should i not make my own judgement about that? Any judgement i make about that has more to do with my general position on adultery than with whether or not the person concerned is a sports star.
You really are a fucking moron, aren’t you? As i’ve said over and over, i don’t care what he does, as long as his wife is in on the deal. If she had known and approved of his actions, i’d have no problem with them. But all evidence so far–including his own testimony at the press coinference–points to the fact that he betrayed her. The fact that she might choose to forgive him doesn’t change that. If my belief that a person shouldn’t betray his or her spouse and/or best friend strikes you as too judgemental, then that’s an accusation i’m willing to live with.
Once again, for the dummies. I don’t care if he has a press conference or not. But once he chooses to have one, he should expect that people will make judgements about him based on what he says at that press conference. Why have one otherwise?
And where did i say that i wanted him to disclose more? In fact, my whole argument has been based on the fact that he disclosed quite enough to show himself as an adulterer. Nor do i have any particular problem with his tearful announcement. I just don’t understand why i should be expected to feel sympathetic for a guy who declares on national TV that he’s an adulterer. I don’t particularly dislike him, and i certainly don’t want him to go to jail if he’s innocent of the sexual assault charges. Nor do i care what goes on in his marriage, per se, as long as he and his wife are consenting partners in his behaviour.
I should also add that if his wife forgives him, as she seems to be doing, then i wish them both the best of luck in patching things up. Plenty of relationships have been salvaged after stupid, selfish behavior like this; all i’m arguing is that the forgiveness and the salvaging doesn’t make the behaviour any less selfish.
And while your “damage control” argument may be true, as far as it goes, why should anyone cut him slack just because he wants to preserve his cash cow? That’s his problem, not mine.
Fuck you are dense.
I made a judgement completely consistent with the information at hand, to wit: Kobe Bryant, by his own admission, committed adultery, and in my opinion this makes him a selfish idiot.
So if a fireman is good at putting out fires, it’s okay for him to be an asshole and cuss at the people whose carelessness started the fires in the first place?
Why not? You hire a fire fighter because they are able and, as important, willing to risk their own life to save yours. Forcing them to be polite seems a bit far fetched. It would be nice if everyone with a special skill was nice as well as willing to perform that skill to your benefit, but if you set your home ablaze and some asshole pulls you out and risks he or her own life in doing so and then tells you that your kids are dipshits for playing with lighters and you are a double dipshit for letting them have access to lighters where exactly is your complaint?
Now if a fire fighter came over to your home at random and took a shit on your lawn then maybe you would have a legit complaint, unless it was a runny shit used to put out a small fire.
Oh, well all the cussing me out changed my mind. Well put. If you argue a point like this in real life you must really be a popular guy who wins arguments all the time.
Maybe you could take the opportunity to explain some of the realities of modern life to those special kids.
See, they shouldn’t ignore anything. They should see the foilbles, flaws and weaknesses and see that these are ordinary men with extraordinary athletic ability. Hero worship is, IMO, a bad thing.
I agree with you to a point. They certainly should be discreet. But if they aren’t, there isn’t anything we can do about it. Except maybe to stop buying the mercahndise with the indscreet person’s name on it. You know what? That might actually make a difference! It would affect their bottom line.
I’m with my fellow Dallas-ite, Blonde. You can’t seperate the player from the man. If I was looking to hire a famous actor to appear in a series of commercials, and said actor gave a nightly public speech called “I hate the United States of America and everyone in it”, I’d be hesitant to give this person a job. If the public is disgusted by his behavior, are they going to overlook it and buy my product anyway?
To me this seems fairly similar to professional sports. Say that I own a team that has had a terrible reputation. Many players have been arrested for public drunkeness and fighting. Drug charges have also been popular. My team is the butt of an endless supply of jokes in the newspapers and on the internet. Whether we’re winning or not, the fans are eventually going to get tired of the shenanigans, and stop filling up the seats and buying the merchandise. That affects my bottom line, and the financial security of the team.
So why wouldn’t I make that a factor in the signing. You get paid X amount of dollars for y number of years, but if you commit a crime, you’ll be punished.
Gotcha. So next time me and my fellow white-collar engineers get a memo from management about how we have to “act professionally” and follow the corporate dress code and refrain from using drugs, we’ll just tell our bosses to shove said note where the sun don’t shine, then.
