The Dolphins Make Me Cry.com - Forums

Redskins quarterback Robert Griffin III recently said in a recent interview that he didn’t want to be defined as an African-American quarterback. One ESPN commentator says that raises questions about Griffin.

In fact, ESPN’s Rob Parker said Thursday morning on First Take that as an African-American, he has a lot of questions about Griffin.

“My question is, and it’s just a straight, honest question: Is he a brother, or is he a cornball brother,” Parker said. “He’s not really. He’s black, he does his thing, but he’s not really down with the cause. He’s not one of us. He’s kind of black, but he’s not really like the kind of guy you really want to hang out with.”

Parker said he wants to know more about Griffin’s personal life before he can accept Griffin as authentically black.

“I want to find about him,” Parker said. “I don’t know because I keep hearing these things. We all know he has a white fiancee. Then there was all this talk about he’s a Republican, which there’s no information at all. I’m just trying to dig deeper into why he has an issue. Because we did find out with Tiger Woods, Tiger Woods was like, ‘I’ve got black skin, but don’t call me black.’ So people wondered about Tiger Woods.”

Asked by fellow panelist Skip Bayless about the fact that Griffin braids his hair, Parker said that’s an aspect of Griffin that he approves of.

“That’s different, because, to me, that’s very urban,” Parker said. “Wearing braids is, you’re a brother. You’re a brother if you’ve got braids.”

Another panelist on the show, Stephen A. Smith, said he wasn’t comfortable with how Parker had framed his argument.

“First of all, let me say this: I’m uncomfortable with where we just went,” Smith said when asked to respond to Parker. “RG3, the ethnicity or the color of his fiancee is none of our business, it’s irrelevant, he can live his life in whatever way he chooses. The braids that he has in his hair, that’s his business, that’s his life, he can live his life. I don’t judge someone’s blackness based on those kinds of things. I just don’t do that. I’m not that kind of guy.”

I asked an ESPN spokesman whether the network had any response to Parker’s comments on the air and will post it if ESPN does issue a response. But ESPN obviously thought Parker’s comments were worth repeating: When Best of First Take aired on Thursday afternoon, the show ended with a replay of the discussion about Griffin.

I figured this would be a good topic of discussion.  This has to be one of the most idiotic comments I have ever heard.  So a well spoken, intelligent, athletic, good role model for not only young African Americans, but young people period isn't "black enough"?  Come on man!

It's common and happens in nearly every minority culture.  Native Americans have "apples" (red on outside, white on inside), Asians have "twinkies" (yellow on outside, white on inside).

Every culture has people who feel that if you don't "stay true to your roots" (read: act in a stereotypical manner), you're selling out and/or "acting white."  These people are stupid and useless.

Amen, bro. This kind of stuff just "Makes Me Wanna Holler."

It also happens in the white culture.

1.  I thought after Warren Moon and the whole Doug Williams thing we were past the whole African American quarterback thing.

2.  I don't understand.  What cause does he need to be "down with" other than winning football games?  I seem to recall them saying something similar about Obama when he ran for President in '08.   And what does being down with any particular cause have to do with his skin color?

3.  I have to agree with Stephen A. Smith.  What business is it of anybody's if he has a white fiancee or is a Republican or what he wants to do with his hair? 

4.  I wonder if ESPN will shit all over themselves over this like they did when Rush Limbaugh went on that rant about McNabb.

Way to perpetuate stereotypes Rob Parker.

I have to admit I'm shocked ESPN would even allow this... there's absolutely no upside for them.

Jeff Foxworthy has made an entire career out of it.  >:D

What part of the white culture criticizes people for not being stereotypically white?

Where do you think the terms white trash or wigger come from?

After I got over my initial shock from reading Parker's dumbass comments, my head started spinning again after I realized I agreed with something Steven A. Smith said.  The world might just end next week after all.

When people make fun of whites for being rednecks or white trash (read: low-class), that is roughly analogous to making fun of blacks for being ghetto (read: low-class), which is the opposite of criticizing them for not being ghetto enough.

The key in the "acting white" criticism is when you speak too properly, when you dress too professionally, when you act too civilized... you are "denying your culture."  I've never heard of anything like this in the white culture.

I have.  Go see the movie Malibu's Most Wanted, then get back to me.

I agree with you on the white-trash thing as it just refers to low life whites. The term "wigger" is completely based on a white person pretending to be black.

This is a black man being called out for not separating himself enough from the white man. This is a very common double standard for which we live with all the time. I've mentioned this before but this seems like a good place to bring it up again. The term "African-American" is a separatist term. You can't separate yourself and then get upset because others do it.

Seriously, you never heard white people use the term wigger?

Stupid comment by a minority opinion.  I try to ignore this stuff when I see it.

Its funny that, reading the Stephen A Smith comment, I feel like I can see him and his angry eyebrows and  receding hairline saying it on TV...

When considering where to file "Malibu's Most Wanted," I am presented with two options.

Option 1: Lame Fictional B-Comedies
Option 2: Accurate Social Documentaries

Hmmm, which shall I choose?

Maybe I should just merge this thread with the ESPN less coverage on Tebow thread and call it "moronic statements from ESPN made solely to drive traffic that aren't really worth paying any attention to" 

Option 3:  Both Option 1 and 2.  That's which one.

When a white person is called a "wigger," it's not because they are extremely good at long-distance running.  It's because they are exhibiting some of the "ghetto" mannerisms that RG3 is being criticized for not exhibiting.

That's my point: I know of no equivalent in the white culture where someone would be criticized for not being low-class enough.

I have no idea what this has to do with the conversation.

If Skip Bayless made the comments that Parker made, he would be fired and called a racist.  Stephen A Smith should have went after Parker.

Jon Stewart makes all sorts of comments about Jewish people that would get Al Sharpton fired.

And Stephen A. Smith did go after Parker.  Keep in mind that unlike an argument about LeBron or Tebow (where they can scream at each other like idiots with no repercussions), there's a very real chance that someone can lose their job behind comments like these, so you aren't going to see Smith fire up the usual fake theater shouting match.  He certainly realized the gravity of the situation, and objected with as much professional courtesy as I think was possible.

^^^ Not fair to compare with Jon Stewart.  Stewart is a comedien, and his comments are clearly being said for comedy.  Parker was being serious.

OK but that isn't how your phrased it before. You used the word stereotypical rather than low-class.

The nature of the criticism is generally over low-class stereotypes.

Um, exactly? RG3 is black. If you are white and you're being criticised for being the exact opposite of what RG3 is being criticized for not exhibiting, I fail to see how that's not the same thing.

RG3 was being criticized for not being black enough. Call someone a wigger and you are criticizing them for not being white enough. That's the same thing.

Ok ... I now see what you meant in reference to the wigger comment.

The separatist comment is about being "black enough" in the first place. IMO it is the exact same thing as wanting to be referred to as "African-American" instead of just being an "American".

I think it's hypocritical of blacks to complain about him saying this when they, themselves separate from whites and other races. If one is going to say "black power" then then they have to be ok with others saying "white power". I think we all agree that isn't a good thing. It separates instead of bringing anyone closer together.  Well if you then complain about one of your own calling out another for not wanting to separate from the white race, or any other race for that matter .... isn't is a bit hypocritical? 

Parker has been suspended I see.

No, it isn't, for a very important reason: criticism of not being "black enough" is discouraging positive traits (e.g. professionalism, grammar and vocabulary).  Criticism of not being "white enough" is not.

When I say that there is no analogue to this in the white culture, that's what I'm referring to.  Not that someone would accuse them of trying to be something that they aren't (this happens across all cultures, commonly referred to as a "wannabe"), but that people of your own culture would try to discourage you from doing things that should be considered positives in the name of "staying true to your roots."

This is just silly. I grew up in a poor white neighborhood. My buddy and I went to college, graduated, got good jobs, and when the guys from our old neighborhood see us they label us as sell outs because we didn't stay poor enough or blame our "roots" for holding us back. None of it had or has anything to do with race. What you're referring to may happen predominantly in black culture, but it's not limited to it. -EK

True, "sell out" is not race or culture specific.  But I doubt your former neighbors question your qualifications for being "legitimately white."

No- they look at a white guy from a trailer park neghborhood who doesn't act the way they think he should given his upbringing and those around him, and they cast stones. It's the same thing as the RG3 thing in my eyes. It's not a race issue.


Edit to say I have no desire to stir the pot, get into an argument or debate on this or even say anything else. I respect your opinion on the matter, SpiderDan, and simply disagree. I acknowledge that being white there is an aspect of black culture that I will never understand, despite having several black friends and two family members. It's a limitation of being white. I've been told by my black friends that even though I'm a cool white guy, there are some things, I just don't- and can't get. I understand that, and find this topic as a whole to be something that I don't really want to fight about. If I misunderstood your perspective on it, then all I can say is, "my bad." -EK

I don't think that's why RG3 was being criticised. I think he was being criticised for not being a "brother", traits that in the eye of the beholder are positive traits.

Its one thing when people outside of a racial group believes in stereotypes. Its another when people inside a racial group believe in stereotypes. Both cases are foolish. Its the inability to accept people as individuals. Not one of the "traits" that RG3 was being criticized for was detrimental to himself or others. Yet, he was being criticized for not being "down for the cause" or "someone you would want to hang out with". Really? RG3 is the "cause" that Mr. Parker was talking about. It would be one thing if Parker was talking about the stereotypes that RG3 doesn't adhere to. But he was using the step stereotypes to DEFINE RG3. The bright side is, there are people intelligent enough to distinguish between the two. The problem is there are people who can't. And then use situations like this to justify foolish arguments.

What was the one thing that Parker praised RG3 for, as evidence of his "blackness"?

His unprofessional hairstyle.

How is his hairstyle unprofessional?