Of sheep and men
Late last night I ran across a story in which the NFL announced that it was suspending New Orleans Saints players Charles Grant, Deuce McAllister and Will Smith, along with three players from other teams, for the last four games of the regular season for violating the league's banned substance policy. Each of the six tested positive for using a weight loss drug/diuretic called Star Caps, which some believe to be a masking agent for steroids and other so-called "performance enhancing drugs." It should be noted that all of the players involved have pleaded ignorance in the case, as the banned substance in question was not listed on the product's packaging or any of its marketing material.
But that's besides the point here.
As a longtime Saints fan still clinging desperately to the myopic hope that the team can somehow still sneak into the playoffs by winning its last four games, this action by the NFL and the public condemnation these players are being subjected to in its aftermath is obviously very troubling to me. No, check that, it doesn't just trouble me, it pisses me the fuck off, but not for the reasons you may think, which I'm guessing are the obvious "woe is we" sad-sack Saints fan ones.
No, what I'm really pissed off about more than anything in this case and others like it, as I have been for a long time, is the hypocrisy that we as a society are blatantly guilty of when it comes to athletes using "performance enhancing drugs."
Stop for a minute and take a look around you at your life. You see that guy sitting in the cubicle next to you? He's a guy with history of horrible depression who takes powerful anti-depressants in order to maintain his sanity, hold down a job, and maintain functional human relationships. His "performance" is enhanced by a drug, a drug that if he weren't taking he'd possibly be in a mental institution or dead, thereby opening up his job to another qualified candidate.
Why is this not considered cheating?
Take a look at that carpenter who built the new cabinets in your home for you. He's got crippling rheumatoid arthritis, so crippling that he has to take powerful anti-inflammatory drugs in order to use his hands and lift things that weigh more than a few pounds. His "performance" is enhanced by the drug that he takes. The same drug is also probably extending the length of his career, thereby allowing him to make money and better provide for himself and his family, but also taking away work from another carpenter who might not be taking any drugs in order to perform his job.
Why is this not considered cheating?
Take a look at that mind-blowing novel sitting on your bookshelf written by that hot-shit young writer. She took Ritalin to help open up her mind and focus on the enormity of a creative task it is to sit down and actually write a novel. Hell, she even gives credit to the drug in the forward of her book for helping her get it all done. Her "performance" was enhanced by a drug. Had she not taken the drug, you may have bought something by a writer like F. Scott Fitzgerald when you were in the bookstore instead, someone from another generation whose only available "performance enhancing" substance was booze.
Why is this not considered cheating?
You follow me here? In just about every aspect of life in the modern world there are millions of people using drugs to enhance their performances, to help them secure employment, to help them be more productive at their places of employment, to attract and maintain friends, girlfriends, boyfriends, husbands and wives, yet we don't blink an eye. On a massive scale we take drugs to be happy, to be productive, to sleep at night, to grow our hair, to get our limp dicks hard, yet nobody blinks an eye. This is all perfectly acceptable and wholly moral.
But oh no, God forbid an aging baseball pitcher with ligament damage in the elbow of his throwing arm dares to inject himself with something that may speed up the healing process, help reinvigorate his body, and extend his career. That we won't fucking stand for. That's cheating dammit! Athletes who use drugs to enhance their performance aren't just assholes, they're stinky assholes.
How does this happen? Because modern American society, despite all the readily available channels for knowledge that we all have at our disposal, is the biggest collection of non-thinking drones ever amassed over the entirety of human history, a collection of simpletons who with the passage of time continue to exhibit an almost breathtaking inability to process critical thoughts collectively. Americans are utterly incapable of smelling horseshit even when it's completely smeared all over their own faces, thus, they collectively swallow the "athletes who use performance enhancing drugs are bad" line that they are spoon-fed without ever taking even a second to stop and think about it to see if it makes even a lick of sense. Why do we hold the "integrity of the game" so dear while we are so willing to throw the "integrity" of just about everything else out the window in the name of progress?
I'm not saying that performance enhancing drugs of any sort are right or wrong, I'm just trying to point a stinky finger at the continued titanic hypocrisy in all things surrounding this issue. Hell, I'd love to know what sort of performance enhancing drugs that members of the sports punditry who are so quick to decry such things use to make it through each day in their own lives.
Personally, I've been known to pop a Viagra every now and again when I think that an unfortunate case of whiskey-dick may be lurking around the corner. Just please, whatever you do, don't say anything about this to the Korean girls at the Nu Look Spa on 35th street. They might get, you know, offended or something.
17 comments:
so is your argument that because of this vast hypocrisy, athletes should have unfettered access to whichever drugs they like? does it matter if that access is legal?
the difference between your examples and pro sports leagues is, you know, rules. and the idea is not to create some basic moral level of "fair play" but to have a standard do-and-do-not list. if baseball wants to say anabolic steroids are now legal, fine, then you're not cheating. but until then, these are the mandated parameters.
to suggest this is about "no no, drugs are bad" is just missing the point. making a list of acceptable and unacceptable substances for a sport is no different than establishing what equipment you can or can't wear, or the legal dimensions of a baseball bat. violating these is cheating because we've all agreed that those are the rules.
ostensibly those rules exist, in this instance, for player safety. maybe that's debatable, but you can't really argue it's inconsistent with socially acceptable use of prescription drugs.
@ryan...essentially yes, i think that if they choose to take them they should be allowed to, but perhaps in a regulated way. it's their body, why not let them take whatever risks that they choose to with it. are people who take prozac and celebrex not doing the same thing, risking long-term damage to their health for short-term gain, when they take those drugs?
Well first of all it's heinous that these guys got suspended. Most of them (all?) have weight clauses in their contracts, hence the diuretics. The NFL's strident lack of appreciation for nuance is ruining the league bit by bit. The front office is solely comprised of fucking assholes. They know it, but they don't care, which is why they're assholes.
However, prozac, arthritis, ritalin, and even viagra don't (generally) kill you. Steroids do. Part of American society being a collection of non-thinking drones is that we must be protected from ourselves. Were PEDs legal, any aspiring professional athlete would have to use them. It would be impossible to keep up otherwise. There are lots of shitty compromises one makes in the pursuit of professional sports-stardom, just ask any retired running back how his knees feel these days. Or, even worse, ask Sean Taylor's family. To add all the unpleasant side effects of PEDs to the equation, (ball shrinkage, bitch tits, death), would move the atmosphere of pro sports slightly too close to Roman Colosseum days. We (the fans) are a bunch of bloodthirsty animals, but we don't want that shoved back in our face the way it would be if some poor bastard's muscle separated from its tendons 3 times per game.
The system is by no means perfect now (how could it be? it's run by fucking assholes). But at least at the moment, there is at least a pretense of choice, not a necessity, to inject bull semen into your ass. The league(s) are trying to keep a level, relatively non-lethal playing field. Not everyone is on PEDs, and that wouldn't be true otherwise. You don't absolutely have to take something to be a pro athlete. You can't say that for the depressed guy or the carpenter. You can for Elizabeth Wurtzel and candy-ass liberal bloggers; but your drugs don't kill you and she's not really that great, even with the uppers.
@conbon...dude, why do you have a problem with bull-semen ass injections?
i guess i still fail to see the difference between using a corked bat and taking drugs barred by your league.
maybe you're right and the leagues should expand the list or tweak it (i think conbon's point about the NFL's baby-with-bathwater approach is well taken here). but it seems to me that's a different argument. using a dictionary to write a term paper is "performance enhancing" and yet i think that doesn't make it hypocrisy to force spelling bee participants to go without.
it's cheating because one has to presume that at least some large number of players don't use these drugs precisely because they're banned. even you concede that you'd prefer some sort of regulation for these drugs - would the athletes who eschew those regulations then be cheaters in your book?
I guess it's the delivery method I have a problem with. You don't see the phrase, "bulls are gentle and tender lovers" all too often for a reason.
@ryan...yes. obviously, there are some things that no human being should consume, but there are many who believe that some banned substances/supplements can be used in moderation. so yes, under medical supervision, i'd have no more of a problem with an athlete taking human growth hormone to repair an injured knee than i would with joe blow getting prescribed ambien so he can sleep at night and not be falling asleep at his desk each day at work.
shit, i forgot to mention i'm a bucs fan.
@ryan...oh fuck the bucs!!!
Dude, that last paragraph sent me laughing!
Seriously, though - I think the key is that somehow we make agreements about what is fair versus what is unfair. Osi gulping down "5 Hour Energy" is legal. Osi injecting steroids is not, because we decided that steroids are not good for the athletes or the game.
I really think it's that simple. But I am sorry about your Saints. At least you guys have hope, though. It could be worse. You could live in Kansas City and have a two win team. Like me.
I now need some powerful mind altering substance to rid myself of the image of a tall fucking cajun plowing some korean massage therapist.
Post Traumatic Korean Poon Disorder.
RJ
P.S. You could have fucking hyper athelete Vince Young and his 25 million dollar signing bonus strolling the sidelines not wanting to play anymore because he got booed and it hurt his feelings.
Every man has his poison.
i semi-agree with you cb. i would also add that when in the hospital recently for surgury the doctor thought i was depressed and wanted to prescribe an anti-depressant. i told her that this isn't depression it's my personality. she suggested that i might be happier with some medication. i suggested oxycontin. she wasn't amused and replied that oxycontin wasn't a treatment for depression. i reminded her that i wasn't depressed and that a perscription for 100 or so oxycontin would really make me (and a few close friends) quite happy.
It's not quite the same but you get the point. I would suggest that big pharmacuetical companies care more about making society a happy place than selling billions of dollars in anti-depressants. The longterm effects of which nobody knows. The effective drugs for serious mental illness were developed 40 years ago but every year we get a host of new pills for depression marketed to normal everyday people with normal everyday problems. It's ludicris.
BTW, why don't you adopt the Jets since the AINTS ain't gonna get it done this year.
Go Patriots!
This blog may cause serious side effects such as nausia, vomiting, sweating, runny nose, runny eyes, runny ass, constipation, frequent urination, no urination, painful urination, and shitting yourself everytime you stand up. If you experience any of these side effects turn off your computer and contact your physician immediately.
The most abused PED in sports is speed. All the leagues ban it, but they don't enforce it, because you couldn't play at a high level every day without it. Try playing every day, with every fourth game being played after traveling all night. It can't be done over a 162 game season with out some form of speed. Try rushing the passer 30 times a game without being totally gassed, it can't be done without speed. But the leagues look the other way so that the quality of play remains high and ratings are not affected. I played a lot of football at a high level and I was provided speed at every level above high school. I guess I am agreeing with you CB. If an athlete wants to abuse his body with PED's to be better why not let him. It's the selective nature of the enforcement that drives me crazy. The leagues don't give a rats ass about the players, just their ratings and public relations.
As a whole, this post is funny as hell. Typical super-laugh-time-showcase! But I have an issue with the message, and it's a message I hear repeated by many others.
I think there needs to be a distinction between those who have a demonstrated NEED and those who have a temporary WANT. In other words, a kid with ADHD is at a disadvantage in class without medication. This is a demonstrated NEED; the meds simply level the playing field. A normal kid who takes similar meds in order to stay up all night and finish a paper (or continue the party) is exhibiting a temporary WANT.
Same thing goes for someone suffering from medical depression. Takes the meds and feels normal. Levels the playing field, and often saves a life. Someone normal takes the meds for fun and feels altered. NEED vs WANT.
The line blurs when it comes to professional sports. I think that most would agree that your example of an aging pitcher using meds to heal a shoulder is quite different from a young QB in the NFL using meds to bulk up an 'average' arm. One is using meds to repair damage; the other is trying to gain an advantage over his peers. Again, NEED vs WANT.
I agree with you that, as a whole, we are an over-medicated and over-marketed society. The pursuit of WANT seems generally condoned by the teams and leagues whose revenue depends on developing and maintaining marquee players. But most of your examples show people with what I consider a genuine NEED.
Getting off the soapbox now to find my Cialis, two bathtubs, and directions to the Nu Look Spa.
Cajun, do you know what long-term use of steroids does to the body? As for "medical supervision," the athletes are "medically supervised" now, and look how concussions are covered up. Look what happened to Ted Johnson, which is one of the saddest stories to come out of the NFL in years (http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/articles/2007/02/02/i_dont_want_anyone_to_end_up_like_me/, if you aren't familiar with the story--strangely, the NFL isn't giving it much play).
If performance-enhancers are permitted, then every athlete who wants to be competitive will be effectively compelled to use them. I don't think my entertainment is worth the life of another human being.
Uh, correct me if I'm wrong (and I very well may be)...but Cajun Boy's argument falls completely flat because I believe that an athlete under the direct care/supervision of a doctor for a treatable medical problem IS allowed to take PEDs (during the care/rehab process). Hasn't that been a justification in the past for a positive test? "I was under the care of a physician"?
If you're fucked up due to injury and aren't playing you're not subject to league rules nor are you violating Federal law by taking PEDs via prescription. In other words...there's no prohibition against the legal, medically-justified use of PEDs.
It's only when the line is crossed into unjustified use that suspensions, bans, etc. come into play.
And I would argue that many of the cases you give in your initial scenario are "cheating". For example...the author that's taking Ritalin solely to complete a book. Hey...a big fuck you to that author, I wouldn't use the pages of your book to wipe my ass.
At the end of the day we are a vastly over-medicated society that's essentially become incapable of dealing with any disappointment (physical or mental) without drugs. I'm pretty sure the proper course of action is not more drugs, it's less.
My fav was always Schilling in the 2004 playoffs. uh....his foot is literally falling apart. But he has a courageous game in the WS, so hopped up on Goofballs that he could have pitched with an amputated foot and still done it. Why does no one discuss that?
Post a Comment