Those racist Bama fans
Warren St. John in Slate today.
The article itself is fair, but the teaser on the Slate.com homepage reads, "Hanging with racist football fans" next to a photo of Brodie.
Shocking, I know. This gets old.
posted by Tortfeasor @ 9:13 AM
6 comments
6 Comments:
As far as I'm concerned, Warren St. John is a sellout. He may simply be relating a true story in his book, but he knows good and well how such a story will be received by the masses. He does as much as the individuals in his story to perpetuate an undeserved stereotype.
You have a right to your opinion, Mitch, and on some level, I agree.
But is the stereotype really so undeserved? Isn't there at least some basis for it? Now, before you get pissed off, I do agree with you that Bama fans are no worse than AU fans, UT fans, MSU, OM, UGA, or virtually any either SEC fans (save Vandy) when it comes to this kind of thing.
Also, notice that St. John is saying that the reason he included the story was not because it was commonplace, but because it was uncommon.
Please, keep it civil in your response.
Thanks
Of course the stereotype is undeserved, and your pointing out that St. John included the story because it was "uncommon" simply substantiates that fact.
Boy, this is an argument I really don't want to continue.
I'll just say this: there is some basis for the stereotype. Whether that basis is strong enough to support the stereotype--especially its current applicaton (rather than the past--is more doubtful.
But it would have been strange for St. John not to have included the controversial conversation in his book, in some way at least. The point of the book was to explore the culture of fandom, not to glorify Tide football. Understandably, you come from a much different perspective -- and as I recall that perspective, I realize how much of a waste of time it is for me to write this post...
You act as if I continued the argument when your previous post invited a response from me. I offered a very simple one, pointing out an inconsistency in your argument.
For the record, there's "some basis" for virtually every stereotype--simply put, the stereotypes originate somewhere. At what point does a stereotype become "deserved?" I will say this, there certainly exist other stereotypes--ones that an individual would be labeled a bigot for subscribing to--that have more of a factual basis than the one in question. Without a doubt, those I make reference to are widely considered "udeserved."
Upon reflection, my frustration is less with St. John's reporting the encounter and more with the unfortunate reality of how many will receive and use the story.
Addendum: I understand your point: that St. John cannot be both a true fan and an objective observer/reporter. A true fan, in your opinion, would willingly suppress uncomfortable and embarrassing facts or situation so as to present his team/university in the best light possible. That is a fair point.
Post a Comment
<< Home