Monday, December 1, 2014

December 2: "Tiger Woods and the New Racial Order"


Brandon Silva

            In his article “Tiger Woods and the New Racial Order,” Cashmore writes about how Tiger Woods is viewed as an African American man by the majority of people when ironically, he does not view himself as an African-American but rather as ‘Calinasian’, a mix of multiple ethnicities (2008).  Tiger tries to diminish any conversations about his race but it seems that many are interested in portraying him as an African-American.  For better or for worse, it does not seem that Tiger could shake off his identification as an African American.  Cashmore argues that as an African American, Tiger stands a “symbol of integrated America,” (2008, p. 621).  In this sense, it seems that America wants Tiger Woods to be African American to represent the progress of the country with regards to racial inequality.  It is almost as if the country needs Tiger Woods to be this for the betterment of the country.  In a harsher reality, the viewing of Tiger Woods as African American also brings out the racism associated with people of color.  Due to his prominent status, Tiger becomes an easy target for many racists.

            The reading of Tiger Woods as an African American athlete shows that the U.S. still has ways to go in overcoming its struggles with racism.  Anytime a person is labeled by their race, correctly or incorrectly, this automatically deteriorates the true topic of interest.  If we see Tiger as athlete, rather than an African American athlete, then the emphasis is on Tiger’s athletic accomplishments rather than his race.  The true focus of the conversation is the golf that Tiger has played and the championships he has won to even make him a relevant individual in our society.  So, even though it may seem that identifying Tiger as a great African American athlete may seem beneficial to demonstrates acceptance for racial equality, this identification actually only perpetuates the distinction between the topic of race and sport.  In doing so, it diminishes the athletic accomplishments of an athlete who is arguably the greatest to ever play the sport.  If we want to consider ourselves a true ‘color blind’ society, we must begin to eliminate these distinctions.  Tiger Woods is not a great African American golfer.  Tiger Woods is a great golfer, period.  In the same way, President Obama is not an African American President, he is the 44th President and Aaron Rodgers is not a great white NFL quarterback, he is a great NFL quarterback.  Distinction leads to an unnecessary distraction and gives a racism a foothold within topics in which it should not be a consideration.

References

Cashmore, E. (2008). Tiger Woods and the new racial order. Current Sociology, 56, 621-634.

1 comment:

  1. Your comment about Tiger trying to diminish conversations about his race was very interesting. Like you say, it seems that he doesn't want to be seen as a great African American golfer, but as a great golfer. Your example in comparison with a white NFL player is very eye opening. We don't see whiteness. We would never say that Phil Mickelson is a great white golfer, so why do we say that Tiger is a great African American golfer? It really diminishes his accomplishments as you say. You mentioned that the distinction may attempt to demonstrate acceptance for racial equality, but I'm not sure it really does. If it really demonstrated acceptance I don't think that we would spend so much talking about his race, because it wouldn't matter. Because we put so much emphasis on that aspect of him I think it only highlights the fact that we do still see a difference.

    I really enjoyed reading your post. You had some interesting points that really made me think about the topic in a way I hadn't before.

    -Rebecca

    ReplyDelete