I’m an avid curler. Yes, that funny sport from Scotland where people slide rocks down a sheet of ice, and others chase after them with brooms.
The curling club I belong to is quite diverse: rich and working class, young and old, men and women, with Protestants, Catholics, Jews, Asian Indians, Asian Asians … but no blacks. The curling club is based at a country club that has black members – it’s not exclusionary – but none of them curl. No blacks have attended any of the curling demonstrations that are frequently held, despite quite a bit of promotion, and the club’s location in a racially integrated middle class community.
When there’s a bonspiel, with curlers from around the US and Canada playing in a tournament at our club, none of the players are African-American or African-Canadian. In all the photos and media coverage I’ve seen of rinks (teams) and draws (games) at other curling clubs and events around the world, I’ve never seen a black curler on the ice.
While there are black golfers, black hockey players, and black skiers, I’m convinced there are *no black curlers playing at either a club or tournament level. None, anywhere on the planet. This got me thinking … what are the “whitest” sports out there – those with the least amount of participation by blacks – and why are they that way?
Nobody knows, exactly, but just like how curling rocks spin in the opposite direction of how thrown objects usually spin on a flat surface, there’s research being done at the University of Manitoba to discover why.
Because it works out linguistically. Some people often simplify into an “us” and “them” racial or cultural perspective and then retrofit convenient terms for it.
But I haven’t even posted in months.
Besides, a bizarre and curious interest in which sports have the fewest blacks is slightly less flame-worthy than your strange definition of “whitest”. Slightly.
So “white” would essentially mean everyone except blacks because, to elmwood, Asians, Indians, etc. are a part of “us” but blacks are a part of “them”?
