July 6, 2006 - Issue 190 |
||
Back | ||
Yet Another Hard
Road To Glory: Examining Shani Davis Through Black Female Perspectives by Rhone Fraser Guest Commentator |
||
Printer Friendly Plain Text Format
|
||
Historian Darlene Clark-Hine writes that “the
experience of black men and women in American sports are a microcosm of
their lives in American society. The privileges whites enjoyed in
sports paralleled the disadvantages and exclusions that were a constant
part of black life.” Certainly the ordeal experienced this year by 2006 Olympic Gold Medalist
Shani Davis is yet another example of how the privileges white athletes
enjoy continue to parallel the disadvantages that are continuing to be
a part of black life. Shani Davis is the first African-American
male to win an Olympic Gold medal in an individual competition of the
Winter Olympics, however he is not able to enjoy the privileges afforded
to white Olympic Gold medalists due to the disadvantages he has experienced.
These publicized disadvantages support the notion that institutionalized
racism in America is certainly still alive. Norman Kelley recently wrote that the greatest unrecognized achievement
of the civil rights movement is the unintended consequences of convincing
white Americans that racism is no longer a serious social and structural
problem in the United States. By studying the stark similarities
in the experiences of pioneering black athletes such as Althea Gibson
and that of Shani Davis, it is clear that racism in the greater corporate
society is still a serious social and structural problem in the
United States. However I advocate a study from an alternative perspective
from the one Davis himself has revealed in his recent quotes in Ebony
and Jet articles. In the March 27, 2006 issue of Jet,
Davis states: “When I skate and people try to get me down, I’m thinking,
Malcolm X had to do this, Martin Luther King had to do this or Jack Johnson
went through this and it's nothing compared to what they had to go through.
So I just draw strength from those guys who paved the road that made it
possible for Black people period.” As important as this is, it is even more imperative for Davis to draw
even more strength by studying and mentioning the black female athletes
who also have important lessons to teach. While I am not implying
that Davis has not sufficiently considered the experience of black female
athletes, I am simply stating that Davis must be sure to include their
perspectives in his public statements. Especially since Shani Davis’s
most vocal and articulate defenders have been black women such as his
mother Cherie Davis, Deborah Mathis, Julianne Malveaux, and Melissa Harris-Lacewell.
These perspectives undoubtedly can help Shani Davis to overcome the hurdles
of the entrenched American racism. However, to overcome such hurdles
requires understanding the nature of the problem. To understand
oppression in professional sports in its most complete form requires the
perspective of a black woman. Darlene Clark-Hine writes in Speak
Truth To Power that: “It is senseless to discuss the impact of racism
on the formation of black identities without concomitant explorations
into the ways race, a social construct of tremendous importance, nevertheless
intersects with constructs of gender and class. Arguably, the history
of black women in the United States provides the best available lens through
which to illustrate the intersections of race, gender, and class across
time.” Therefore, to discuss the impact of racism on Shani Davis, I hope to
compare his experience with that of a black female athlete who also broke
color barriers in what was then an elite sport, professionally played
by only whites: tennis champion Althea Gibson, who later became
the first African-American to win Wimbledon in 1957 and 1958. Certainly Althea Gibson’s experience in the early to mid-twentieth century
provides illuminating sources of strength that could encourage Mr. Davis
and should be recognized. Like Davis, Althea Gibson became a pioneer
in a sport dominated exclusively by whites, an elite sport that arguably
demands more finances than others. To date, an important primary
source about the experience of Althea Gibson is her authorized biography
Born To Win, written by Frances Clayton Gray and Yanick Rice Lamb.
Gibson’s experience with the U.S. Lawn Tennis Association (USLTA) and
the greater American society in the Forties, Fifties and Sixties mirror
Davis’s experience with the U.S. Speedskating Association and the unchanged
American society that operates with a more covert yet latent racism. There are events in Gibson’s life as told in Born To Win that
draw disturbing similarities to the experience of Shani Davis as stated
in current media reports. For example, Born To Win states
that in 1949, when Gibson became the first black woman to play tennis
in the exclusively white Forest Hills court, the United States Lawn Tennis
Association nonetheless “maintained a cold shoulder given the widespread
segregation in society at the time.” Reasons like these are why
the American Tennis Association (ATA) was founded in 1916, to increase
the field of black athletes. While many ATA players were thrilled for Gibson’s 1949 breakthrough,
many said the USLTA needed to strengthen its opposition to exclusions
based on race or religion at USLTA events. They also felt that the
USLTA had an “implied quota” and too many barriers. “No Negro player,
man, or women, has ever set foot on one of these courts,” wrote the journalist
Lester Rodney of the West Side Tennis Club at Forest Hills. Rodney says,
“In many ways, it’s even a tougher personal Jim Crow-busting assignment
than was Jackie Robinson’s when he first stepped out of the Brooklyn Dodgers
dugout.” Deborah Mathis writes that Cherie Davis, mother and personal manager
of Shani Davis, describes the relationship between Davis and the U.S.
Speedskating Association as “poor,” evidenced by the fact that they have
not, to this day, posted his biography and record on its website.
However the biographies and records of all other athletes who are over
90% white have been posted. Of course, the U.S. Speed Skating Association
in their willful ignorance would probably not attribute this to their
racism, but to their heavily publicized disagreement with Davis over the
corporate sponsorship logos on his skinsuit. Tracey Robinson-English in the May 2006 issue of Ebony writes
that under the association’s national team agreement, athletes
are supposed to wear skinsuits with logos provided by U.S. Speedskating.
However, Davis opted for a corporate sponsor outside of America, Deutsche
Bank (DSB Bank of Holland) which clearly angered the U.S. Speedskating
Association and is probably responsible for his long-standing fallout
with the organization that exists to this day. In my personal interview
with Ms. Robinson-English, she revealed that in helping her son avoid
American corporations for sponsorship, Cherie Davis was protecting her
son. Cherie said that she refused a Wheaties endorsement offer because they
did not really plan to unequivocally support her son. She said their
full endorsement was very conditional; they only guaranteed commercial
spots if he medaled, without the type of provisions that were arguably
less friendly than those offered to white winter Olympic athletes. This kind of endorsement was weaker than the one DSB Bank of Holland
provided. Second, she also noted that Nike in particular
wanted him to make a lot of personal appearances that conflicted with
his own personal training schedule; ultimately, Nike simply did
not have Davis’s best interest at heart, according to Cherie Davis and
thus did not deserve her son’s endorsement. This kind of endorsement
was also arguably weaker than the one DSB Bank of Holland provided.
Why couldn’t American corporations offer Davis their full support without
it being riddled with conditions? Why couldn’t these giant corporations
find ways to work around Shani Davis’s schedule to support him so that
he would not feel forced to look outside America? In a March 10,
2006 interview with Shani Davis, Tavis Smiley said: Tavis: “I like your spirit and attitude
but it does not make me happy to hear that you ain’t been able to get
no phone calls from nobody about endorsement opportunities as a result
of doing what you’ve done historically? As an African-American?
And your phone ain’t blowing up?” Davis: “No. I guess that’s just the way
it is. I think maybe, maybe…there might be something but I don’t
know.” I urge to inform my brother, Shani Davis, that there is something.
Its called American institutionalized racism and in order to continue
surviving it, it is important to study methods of surviving such oppression
by studying the experiences of one Althea Gibson. Born To Win
reveals that Althea Gibson “had more freedom moving about Europe and
other parts of the world than she did in her own country.” The relationship between corporate America and Shani Davis demonstrates
in very significant ways the ultimate value that the center of corporate
marketing, or Madison Avenue places on black life. This kind of
disrespect that Cherie Davis rightfully discerned and rejected is discussed
at length by another scholar, Sheryll Cashin, a Georgetown Law Professor
who happens to be a woman of color and writes in her latest book The
Failures of Integration when she describes the pattern of white flight,
that includes not only residents but also major businesses and markets,
away from black communities:
Many American corporations probably devalued Shani Davis’s endorsement
of their product because of their racist or ignorant assumptions about
what he should be giving up to them for their money. Cherie Davis
clearly proved to them and to the American public that money will not
be their god. The American dollar bill will not dictate the
direction of her son’s professional advancement. The relationship
between these American corporations and Cherie Davis is a crucial, essential,
instructive example as to how to maintain your dignity and morals in the
face of million dollar offers. What was apparently more important than millions of dollars was the integrity
of her son’s career work and ultimately of course, her son. This
kind of decision certainly is not popular, but was certainly more moral.
Popular approval would advocate a “profit-at-all-costs” relationship with
American corporations that Cherie Davis clearly avoids. This kind of relationship is seriously challenged in an upcoming book
by New York Times sportswriter William Rhoden entitled Forty
Million Dollar Slaves, suggesting that the relationship between professional
athletes and team owners are like slaves to plantation owners. It
was this kind of slave relationship that Cherie Davis was trying to prevent
her son from entering. Like Margaret Garner, Cherie Davis was doing
all that she could to make sure her child avoids living in a certain kind
of slavery, a kind that is undoubtedly more inhumane and brutal than that
during Garner’s time, but one that is nonetheless comparable. Rhoden’s
book explains the dangerous relationship between the black male athlete
or “new slave” and the American corporate world. It includes provocative
chapter titles such as Integration: The Dilemma of Inclusion Without
Power. Certainly Cherie Davis by asserting her son’s ability
to earn a Gold medal and her insistence on a stronger contract from corporations
was trying to assert power that American corporations were clearly unwilling
to yield. Therefore she had to move the way so many African-Americans
are forced to move when backed into a corner: outside the country. Commentator Julianne Malveaux succinctly and articulately described this
incident when she said on a February 23, 2006 News & Notes program
that: “…white folks are sending e-mails to him under
friend’s page using the n-word. It is utterly absurd…our country
missed an opportunity to celebrate an excellent athlete because we are
so seeped in our racism, and in the pathology of so-called patriotism
that we forget the U.S. Speed Skating Association does not support this
young man. He trains in Canada. His momma is running around
wearing orange, the Danish colors, as opposed to our colors, because of
how rude they have been to him and this is a single mom who has sacrificed
all kind of stuff to get this young brother going and that’s the story
that needs to be told here.” Speaking of American corporations, BET also missed a phenomenal opportunity
to celebrate an excellent athlete when they did not even nominate Shani
Davis for their 2006 Best Athlete of the Year Award. They gave it
to yet another basketball player. That was utterly disrespectful. The rudeness of other American
individuals such as speedskating teammate Chad Hedrick reveals other reasons
why a corporate endorsement from the U.S. would be unlikely. Mathis
wrote that Hedrick wanted to bring home five Gold medals, including one
for a race involving the U.S. team. Hedrick was angry that Davis
would not participate in the team event, saying that he “felt betrayed
in a way. Not only did he not participate, he wouldn’t even discuss
it with me as a leader of the team.” In fact, Melody Hoffman in Jet writes that “Shani was never
among the five skaters U.S. Speedskating officials entered in the [team]
event. Since January, Shani and his coach made it clear that he
would not be skating in the pursuit and preferred to concentrate on his
later individual races…Shani could never have pulled out of the inaugural
event because he never entered.” However the American media has
insisted on unfairly characterizing Davis as “unpatriotic” and “selfish”
because he did not participate in the team event with Hedrick. NBC commentator Bob Costas has gone to great lengths to castigate Davis
as not being a team player. When Davis won the 1,000 meter race,
Hedrick would not congratulate him, according to Davis who said “it would
have been nice after I won the 1000 if he would have been a good teammate
and shook my hand, just like I shook his hand – or hugged him – after
he won the 5,000.” Being the fierce competitors that Hedrick and Davis are, why exactly
would Hedrick think that Davis should immediately perform the team event
when he was struggling with endorsements from American corporations?
And based on the type of coverage, it was clear that corporate-network
coverage of Shani Davis was clearly biased against him. Davis was
labeled ‘rude’ for his terse interview on NBC, where Davis said about
an NBC reporter that “I didn’t have anything to say to her because I saw
the way she was with Chad and I didn’t have any respect for her.
I had no intentions on talking to NBC at all but they (the U.S. Olympic
Committee) forced me to.” Melissa Harris Lacewell poignantly traces Davis’s treatment to Jim Crow:
The racial rules that Lacewell mentions are unspoken, however Davis has
stated that he feels like the Jack Johnson of speed skating. In
Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson, Geoffrey
Ward writes that U.S. authorities were seeking the arrest of Johnson under
the 1912 Mann Act, which made it a crime to transport white women across
state boundaries for “immoral purposes,” and Johnson then had a white
wife. It was said about Johnson that he “has insulted every white
woman in the United States.” No doubt similar repercussions were felt by Davis when he refused to
engage the white female NBC reporter who refused to engage him before
he won the gold medal. Davis felt the retaliation of this insult
against white women when he was attacked by the American media for being
“selfish” and “rude.” Johnson fled to Canada, while Davis trains
in Canada. Davis also discloses to Tavis that to this day, money
is still hard to come by, despite his Gold medals. Althea Gibson
said less than two years after her Wimbledon win that “I may be queen
of tennis right now, but right now I reign over an empty bank account.”
She later says:
William Rhoden writes in Ebony that Althea Gibson was “the most
significant black athlete in America.” However Born to Win reveals
that for a long time she was “dead broke.” Gibson came along too
early to have the monetary awards to go along with her talent. There
was no prize money when Althea won Wimbledon. Venus Williams, on
the other hand, earned $650,000 for winning Wimbledon. The most
Althea ever made in playing tennis was $100,000 during the year that she
turned pro – and that was before expenses. David Dinkins is quoted as saying, “it’s one of the many injustices in
life that Althea never really made any money at this sport as she should
have. But those were tough times. One appreciates the fact
that she was not only black, but a black woman – and those were pre-civil
rights days when she was accomplishing all this greatness.” In her 1968 memoir, Gibson noted the lack of endorsements, the lack of
offers to teach or tour, the lack of pros, to play, the lack of money
from seemingly good business ventures gone bad. Most of all she
noted that any barriers she had destroyed had been erected behind her
again. Arthur Ashe pointed out that it took him years to understand
“the emotional toll of repressing anger and natural frustration.”
And he, far more than Althea, was acknowledged to have been proactive
and outspoken in venting his feelings on racism. So much so that
he published three volumes of the African-American athlete’s experience
entitled A Hard Road To Glory, where he describes the presence
of Jim Crow in every conceivable American sport. Certainly Shani Davis’s experience proves that the barriers that Gibson
broke down are still present and produce yet another hard road to Glory.
These barriers need to be assessed by the U.S. Speed Skating Association
and other professional sports associations with currently low numbers
of people of color so that this country is not shamed by their own citizens
being sponsored by corporations in other countries. That is, assuming
that America is comfortable with its athletes of color being endorsed
by companies outside the U.S. This assumption has yet to be challenged
on a systemic, nationwide level at the moment. Althea Gibson was no doubt profoundly affected by the impact of institutionalized
racism on her life. She dealt with racial injustice in her own way,
one of them was her medically diagnosed depression. Her niece said
that “she didn’t like talking about her sickness.” Her doctor said
that “she had a lot of pride. That’s part of the depression, and
becoming more or less reclusive.” However, Gibson’s experience of her depression is an instructive lesson
for Shani Davis. It teaches Davis to not underestimate the impact
of psychosocial forces and to identify them before they in fact try to
obliterate his accomplishments. Rhoden writes that Althea Gibson
had a profound impact on the “psychosocial impact of black America.”
However as much psychosocial influence she gave, she was also on the receiving
end of such influence by a very real and racist society that denied opportunities
to pioneering people of color in sports. Darlene Clark-Hine writes
that: “…an enlightened future is possible only if
we are finally able to comprehend and confront the damage that historic
sexual [and gender] exploitation has done to black girls and women.
Further, we must fully understand the close friendship and family ties
between black women. Only within the realm of these critical relationships
can they receive the psychosocial support that has helped them escape
the paralysis of being the country’s greatest and most total victim.” Clearly family relationships are essential to athletes coping with the
lack of endorsements due to a racist society that suppresses accomplishments,
evidenced by the U.S. Speedskating website’s omission of Davis’s information.
The first American woman to win three Olympic Gold medals, Wilma Rudolph,
states in her memoir,
More specifically, Rudolph’s question can be rephrased in the context
of Davis’s experience to ask: who is going to tell the American
corporation presidents and advertising agencies to start making room for
black speedskaters? Especially when, as Davis admitted to Tavis
Smiley, speedskaters of color are pushed away from the field. Davis describes a speedskater of color to Tavis and says that “he was
one of the first that was considered a true threat to a lot of skaters,
but they found a way to get him out of skating because he wasn’t an American
citizen; he was of Nigerian descent.” Still, Rudolph poses a crucial
question and an even more important answer to the question of coping with
such constraining environments. Rudolph said “whatever the future holds, I’ll be ready for it, for I’ve
learned a family’s a powerful thing.” This is also exactly what
Darlene Clark-Hine states as being the most important coping mechanism
with institutionalized racism: the family relationships. The support
Shani receives from his mother proves that he will be ready for any obstacle
in his way. Rhone Fraser is a graduate assistant in the Department of Africana
Studies at the University of South Florida. Contact: [email protected]. |
||
Back | ||
Your comments are always welcome. Visit the Contact Us page to send e-Mail or Feedback or Click here to send e-Mail to [email protected] e-Mail re-print notice
If you send us an e-Mail message we may publish all or part of it, unless you tell us it is not for publication. You may also request that we withhold your name. Thank you very much for your readership. |