I watched the last quarter-and-a-half of the Eagles/Vikings game last night online. I don't really like either team, but I was on the computer anyway and had it on. Plus I was a little curious to see Michael Vick play, as the sports world has been abuzz with how great he has been this year. I listen to the local sports radio station when I am out driving around, and often during the day while I work, and all the pundits were talking about how this "easy game" should have been a perfect opportunity for Vick to seal up his claim to league MVP this year. Amusingly enough, he didn't do so well. A game which many said Minnesota had "absolutely no chance to win" actually turned out to be a win for Minnesota. That amuses the hell out of me. That's why I love sports radio. People are such loudmouth blowhards about shit I really don't need to care about. It's like political talk radio without the stakes in breeding ignorance that can ultimately hit me where I live. In other words, sports radio rarely pisses me off.Most people know about Michael Vick. Even people who aren't sports fans know about the guy. His wikipedia page has an excellent breakdown on all of his problems with the law as a young man, which culminated in a conviction for his role in a dogfighting ring called Bad Newz Kennels. He was suspended from the league, served his time in prison, went bankrupt, and ultimately got out of prison and signed by the Philadelphia Eagles after two years out of the game. Many people thought his career would never be rekindled, that the rage over his involvement in killing dogs would never allow it, that the public would never accept him.
So this year the guy comes back big time. Lands the starting slot at quarterback for the Eagles when the original starter gets hurt, then proceeds to have his best season ever. At one time Vick had the most votes of any other player in the fan balloting for the Pro Bowl. Ultimately he comes in at #2 (last I checked) and will be the starting quarterback for the NFC when the game happens. Pundits and those around him talk about his comeback, how grown up he is, how he served his time and, as part of community service, has spoken to children about the evils of dogfighting. But is that enough? Has the guy earned redemption, which clearly he has in the eyes of many people, or were his crimes so heinous that he should never get a second chance? President Obama called the Eagles' owner and thanked him for giving Vick a shot at redemption. Does the guy deserve it?
I've thought about this a lot. I was never a fan of the guy in the first place, and his crimes were abhorrent. I don't have a stake in it, though I confess I root against the guy because I don't like the Eagles. Spiritually, I believe in redemption and forgiveness. It's not a Christian thing for me, which I'm definitely not; it's a human thing. This situation pushes the boundaries of that conviction, though, and it has been quite a journey for me to even get this far, where I grudgingly admit the guy has earned a second chance. Personally, I think his prison time should have been greater, but that is a different issue. Point is he did his time as dictated by Society, of which I am part, and if he keeps his nose clean and becomes a stand-up guy then I would agree it is an amazing story.I also understand why some people can't get there. But I wonder about the motivations beneath the surface of that position. We are a nation of dog lovers, absolutely. Is it because he essentially tortured and murdered dogs specifically, or just that he would treat any animal that way? For people who see themselves as animal lovers, are any of those folks consumers of factory-raised beef, chicken, etc.? There is all the testimony you could want available about the horrors of slaughterhouses; how does one justify condemnation of Michael Vick while tucking into a Baconator, prime rib or three-piece crispy with a side of mashed and gravy? Mike Vick just happened to be more hands-on in his destruction of life, but is it really any different?
I think there is some hypocrisy involved, but I'm curious in other people's takes on this. I totally understand folks who aren't willing to forgive this guy, but I'm also interested to know how they justify those feelings in light of their own actions . . . or if they feel they are even comparable. What do you think? Is Mike Vick irredeemable? If he is, then where is the line in what someone can be forgiven for and what they can't? Finally, am I off-base in my own take on this?
Posts
16 comments:
Strange as it may seem, I enjoy debating this topic. For me, my feelings are clear. I was never a big fan of Michael Vick to begin with - I thought he was lazy and unappreciative of his talents. This is, interestingly, something he now attests to and from all appearances, has changed. Good on him for that one.
I have no problem with him playing in the NFL. He served his time, 'paid the price for his deeds' so to speak, and should not be kept from whatever legal livelihood he can carve out for himself. Additionally, if the NFL is going to let the likes of Leonard Little (multiple DUI offender, including the killing of an innocent third party) continue to play in the NFL, I have a hard time making any argument that Michael Vick should be treated differently.
That being said, I strongly feel he should not be held up to adulation. In my heart and mind, an animal torturer is an animal torturer is an animal torturer. We all know the bit about torture of animals being one (of many, admittedly) signs of sociopathy. I find it hard to believe Michael Vick feels much more for anyone other than himself than he did/does for dogs or any other animal. I do not believe he is remorseful for his acts. He himself has admitted that if he wasn't caught, he would still be doing what he was doing at the kennels. As much as I like and admire Tony Dungy, I'm not sure he has the power to help heal a sociopath. And I believe that is what Michael Vick is, through and through.
People argue he should be allowed to own pets again because only through owning pets (the 'right' way) will he and his kids learn the value of animals in our lives. Sorry, but to me, that's like saying, "Hey, pedophile, the only way you're going to learn the non-sexual value of kids is to have one of your own!"
Maybe I'm wrong. I hope I'm wrong. I hope those who would hurt or torture any creature intentionally and repeatedly would eventually see the error of that way and change. I just don't hold out much hope.
And as for the hypocrisy of feeling one way about animal torture and eating meat, two points. First, there is (I believe) a difference between eating meat and torturing an animal. Though some, perhaps quite accurately, would say that many of our farmed animals are not treated much more humanely than MV's dogs.
Second, that's part of the reason I recently changed my diet from eating only fish and occasional chicken to vegetarian/vegan. I felt like a hypocrite. Trust me, it has been hard to give up sushi, but I do admit to feeling a little more comfortable in my pro-animal (and human) rights.
Ranted on long enough. Will be interested to hear what others have to say.
I'm pretty passionate about this topic myself. I am not a vegetarian but I do make every effort to consume foods that were raised and prepared for consumption in the most humane ways possible. I do, however, think there's a drastic difference between purposefully raising animals for human consumption and viciously torturing animals for human entertainment.
The other elements that play into this scenario for me are Vick's continued efforts to flat out lie about his actions until he realized he was caught. His over-inflated ego led him to believe that he could get away with actions he knew were wrong.
Finally, I feel that playing professional sports and making millions of dollars doing it should be a privilege, not a right. Vick should have another chance to live in our society, make a living, etc. That doesn't mean he should be allowed the privilege of a high-profile, much-sought-after, respected position on a football team. And neither should those players that abuse their wives, rape, commit vehicular homicide...or any homicide for that matter. It's time to say we won't tolerate that behavior, period! It should NEVER happen in the first place and require a second chance. When we make choices as sound adults, then we should also have to deal with the consequences. Some actions are serious enough to justify life-long consequences.
We can be outraged by animal cruelty, but unless you're a vegetarian/vegan, you're going to tread the waters of hypocrisy if you criticize Vick.
If he was raising and slaughtering cattle, would anyone have cared? It's the way our peculiar society works...dogs and cats get a free pass, but chickens, turkeys, pigs and cows don't. Our notions of what constitutes animal cruelty are pretty selective. In this day and age, with the food options available to us, I can't draw a line between killing an animal for entertainment and killing it for food consumption.
And it begs the question, so who decides what animals are fit for consumption? We could argue about cultural relativity and all that stuff they teach in sociology classes, but ultimately I think the slaughtering of any animal for food is cruel.
But I eat meat anyway.
And I think Vick and his brother Marcus are pieces of human shit. As much as I detest dog (and cock) fighting, I recognize the irony, and have no problem with Vick playing football again.
No, I hate Vick aka Ron Mexico because he embodies everything I hate about professional athletes and hip-hop/gangster culture. And I guarantee the only remorse he has...is for getting caught.
Harry Crews' book of essays FLORIDA FRENZY has a good piece on dog fighting, as well as cock fighting and alligator poaching. He's for all the above, and makes pretty arguments, as I recall. I'll see if I can locate my copy tonight and refresh my memory . . .
I don't know how I managed that many typos in that few words, but this make up for it: http://bit.ly/gv7UHK
I think Michael Vick is a dick. There is a huge difference between killing animals to eat and fighting them for entertainment. I grew up watching animals slaughtered for our dinner. I also saw my grandparents shoot their own dogs for killing their chickens or drowning puppies instead of having the animal "fixed". As a city girl, I was astounded that anyone could be that heartless. But they were just animals to them.
I am not a vegetarian. I know how the cows are slaughtered. I know how the chickens are kept before they are killed. But it is the cycle of life. We eat the meat.
Michael Vick fought his dogs. He did not eat the dogs that lost the fights. He threw them in a ditch to bleed out and die. Dog fighting is bullshit. I don't care if he did his time. I hope he was taught a lot about watching his ass in prison. I know he was not taught the correct way to raise a pet. He does not deserve another chance. He needs to just play football and shut up. He does not deserve other players respect.
This is only my opinion.
Peter, I'd have to respectfully disagree with you. I think Native Americans were among the most respectful of everything in nature: plant, animal, human. And still they ate meat. They had standards and expectations and they surely would never have tortured animals nor considered it acceptable just because they used them for sustenance.
We may have more choices than they did, but it doesn't change the mindset behind each action.
I'm pretty much with Michelle, except to add to the hypocrisy of it all is the fact the Eagles didn’t give Michael Vick a second chance from any sense of altruism. That scumbag owner and his scumbag coach did it because they saw the potential and a low risk investment. Think of how he handled the guy who helped Vick get back into the game (Donovan McNabb—thrown under the Philly bus).
I’m prejudiced here. I have a dog I love as much as any member of my family (fact). I’ve done some bad things in the past that include violence but nobody (NOBODY) was innocent. People make choices. Animals do not; any animal is innocent. I am guilty of eating meat that is slaughtered and if I go to hell for it, I probably deserve it. Animals slaughtered for food and animals slaughtered for fun are two different things. How they’re slaughtered may not be so different, but certainly should be.
As for Michael Vick … a slow trip through a fucking meat grinder seems about right to me. He was a punk when he originally made it to the NFL and he’ll prove himself a punk again.
It is an interesting topic, though … and it is thought provoking.
Thanks for some great comments!
Re: the comments several have made about the difference between killing for sustenance vs. killing for sport. My own feelings don't go quite as far as Pete's but close. The way animals are raised and killed in massive corporate slaughterhouses is every bit as reprehensible as anything Vick and his crew were doing, even if the motivations are slightly different. That's an entirely different industry than the family farm, or the hunter who feeds his/her family with game they take in the field. The companies who did on such huge scale do so out of efficiency to squeeze the last possible penny out of the process, and we are guilty by association. We may have to agree to disagree, but I can't see it any other way, and it's something I struggle with all the time.
Ben: Thanks for the Crews link. There is a chapter about dogfighting in a book I read this year called "The Fighter's Heart" by Sam Sheridan. Very similar to what Crews describes. I found it unsettling -- that kind of blood sport isn't something I could ever participate in -- but enlightening.
Michelle: It's a valid opinion you have, and I don't really disagree. I don't see factory farming as being any part of the "cycle of life" but I don't disagree that eating meet is part of that. I just think more people need to be more directly involved with what it takes to put food on their table to, hopefully, restore a little respect for that cycle.
Jen: I think Indians and their relationship to the natural world has been a little too romanticized, and I am one. It's true, for example, that they used every part of the bison. They just didn't use it every time. They were just as likely to waste a lot of any given kill as we are, they just didn't do it on the scale that rifle-bearing white folks were able to while shooting from trains. Steve Rinella has a great discussion of this in his book American Buffalo.
Charlie: You are dead right about why the Eagles signed Vick, and the whole Obama phone call irks me. Like any of these assholes were doing any of this out of altruism! As for the other thing, I'd probably use mortal force defending my pack of ill-mannered canines against a human threat; whatever that brands me, it's a label I'm willing to wear.
Damn right Vick is redeemable. Honestly, I'd follow Vick straight to hell. I am a die hard Broncos fan and I would even consdier offering Vick the number 7 if he ever came here. Obviously he wont.
Enough of me professing my love for Vick, but lets be real here. He fucked up, arguably, and served a ridiculous sentence in Federal Prison which is not a laughing matter. However people like Ben Roethlisberger, who is an alleged rapist is only suspended for 4 weeks by the NFL. Vick is the best goddamn football player in the league and I'd stand on Peyton manning's coffee table with my cowboy boots made of dog hide to declare such things
Its interesting to see that years later, Michael Vick still can produce a raw and open sore on everyone's collective psyche.
I agree that what he did was reprehensible, and the man did pay a price that was meeted out according to whatever light sentencing guidelines there were for dogfighting.
I agree that a person should be allowed an opportunity to redeem himself after doing something so reprehensible, but do we really need to put that particular person on a pedestal (even a small one like this)?
It is an unfortunate fact of life that anyone whose anybody in the sports or entertainment industry can often get a free ride from the general public...so long as they keep producing whatever it is they're know for.
As for me, I don't really care one way or the other whether the man has "redeemed" himself. He could say he redeemed himself, do and say all the right things (he did make a few required appearances here in Connecticut at a few local schools), but deep down in the back of my mind, there will always be that nagging suspicion that once the media goes away and he becomes a journeyman player, he might just slip back into old habits again.
Wow...some great points made here in these comments. I guess I should have been more specific in my distinctions, but it's a complicated subject and like Chris said, unless you're a militant vegan, it's hard to not be guilty by association to some form of animal cruelty. Whether it's the one meal at McDonalds you eat a year or the leather jacket you got for Christmas, if we had the ability to see where that product came from, it could prove as gruesome as what Vick and his homeys were doing to those poor dogs.
Ever since his conviction, though, there's been a lot of people in Atlanta calling for Vick's head, many of whom knuckle-dragging carnivores who with their dollar and diet support a no less cruel corporate meat industry. Those are the folks that piss me off the most, not the ones who try and subvert agribusiness by supporting family farms and the free-range industry.
With that said, Vick showed the world how he liked to spend his free time and no one will ever forgot how heinous a hobby it was. And whether he's voted MVP, wins a ring or has his best football ahead of him, I still hope he tears both his ACL's.
I
My typo ability is in overdrive today.
Anyway... Honestly, I'm a little surprised Vick received any punishment at all. If he'd been out in California, he would've skated.
I have to agree that most likely the only thing he regrets is getting caught. Next time he'll be more careful.
As a pit bull owner, I just can't forgive him. I realize he's served his time, but the only way he should ever come into contact with any animals is scooping shit in a kennel for community service.
And, as a vegetarian, too, I agree that slaughtering animals for food the way we do is just as sickening. However, dogs and humans have a different (and more complex) relationship than other animals and humans. Dogs not only depend on humans for food and water, but also for social contact. Not many other animals see humans in the same light. And it's heartbreaking to me that he abused that trust/love that dogs are so willing to give.
I don't think he deserves to play in the NFL, and I sure as heck don't think anyone in the press should be saying his name in relation to his "success." It makes my stomach turn.
Post a Comment