The Rapinoe Debate is Not Even a Debate

Posted on by

There is a saying in Spanish: Dime con quien andas, diras quien eres. “Tell me who you are with, and you will tell me who you are.” As you are aware, lots of athletes are protesting racial discrimination by doing various things during the national anthem. Some raise their first. Some kneel. These are silent protests that do not impede the ability of any person to go about their daily lives: nobody is running to the streets, flipping cop cars, or setting stores on fire.

Yet, people are upset. At a recent USWNT game, star player Megan Rapinoe kneeled in solidarity with people of color and other protestors.

I am not going to wade through all the blah blah analytical debates. That would take a really long time and get wordy and confusing. Instead, I have a shortcut for salient issues: I call it the WWJD principle. What Would Jason (Whitlock) Do? I have no clue if All Takes Matter has covered the protests yet – ignorance is bliss, after all. And Fox shows amateur golf on weekday afternoons instead of Champions League games!

Yet, based on past utterances, I am assuming Whitlock is against the protestors. Ergo, this is pretty clear and convincing evidence that said position is dead wrong.

And that’s not all. Whitlock is but one of two canaries in this mine. At the heralded Tiempos de Nueva York, the tepid take resident-writer known as David Brooks (“DAAAA-Veed Arroyos” for you Spanish speakers) has also opined on athletes protesting during national anthems. The take’s historical beginning is so marvelous that I can’t even stomach a link to it appearing on my site, so just take my word for it.

Thus, when Whitlock plus Brooks combine to agree on an issue, that equals: stay the fuck away from that side of the issue. When a NeoCon and a spineless, incoherent Faux Liberal meet to hold hands, run for the hills, sons and daughters, run for the hills.

Comments are closed.