The Brooklyn Nets’ Kyrie Irving is not what most people would consider a mental colossus. The man made headlines for hinting at belief in a flat Earth and questioning heliocentricity. (Not like people I generally respect would ever buy into improbable political conspiracy theories, but heaven knows that drum’s been beaten to death.) However, the unvaccinated Irving’s most recent foray into the waters of public disapproval is fascinating, given its stark contrast to another star athlete only a few months ago.
A recent piece in The Atlantic went after LeBron James for “cover[ing] for vaccine refusers” like Irving, with author Jemele Hill lambasting unvaccinated NBA stars like Irving as “selfish,” voicing an opinion I find incredibly telling: “A little bit of public peer pressure wouldn’t hurt.”
This opinion is an absolute 180-degree turn from Hill’s take on Olympian Simone Biles, when she wrote that Biles “redefined” Olympic sports in her decision to withdraw from the women’s gymnastics final in Tokyo over mental health issues and lost move syndrome. Hill decried conservative figures who called Biles selfish, and praised her for her decision to withdraw. She then framed the issue as “some people… cannot bear to see a woman of color making her own choices.” (That’s not particularly honest or accurate framing, but that’s another issue.)
My issue with Hill’s conflicting take on Biles is not that she’s wrong. Quite the opposite in fact- she’s right. Biles made the right decision and there are several figures on the right, including Charlie Kirk and Matt Walsh, who absolutely owe her an apology for what they’ve said about her. So why can’t Jemele Hill be consistent here? If Hill had called for “a little bit of public peer pressure” on Biles post-Tokyo, she would have been absolutely out of line. So why is her attitude towards unvaccinated athletes like Irving now in vogue?
Hill’s cognitive dissonance is not particularly unique. A quick survey of the Twitter cesspool will show numerous examples of people who have nothing but support for athletes like Biles and nothing but derision for the unvaccinated among us. Why is mental health a perfectly acceptable reason for an athlete to make controversial career decisions, but vaccination status somehow not?
The reason isn’t difficult to ascertain for those who approach life with a correct grasp of first principles. We have no issue making room for causes that touch our hearts and resonate with us on a personal level. But when it comes to causes that conflict with our personal biases, we’re infinitely less inviting. As Christians, we should be able to pick up on why this is. In the words of Leo Cullum’s 1997 comic in the New Yorker, “[i]t’s not enough that [dogs] succeed. Cats must also fail.” We’re fallen beings who have a deep need to feel not only that we are on the moral and compassionate side, but that everyone on the other side is immoral and cruel. And we’re only too happy to apply this double standard to everyone from cultural heroes to political opponents to irritating neighbors.
Pro athletes are idols of the religion of Americanism. When the idols stop blessing the empire with victory, it’s only a matter of time before people start wondering how much power they really have. Our cultural idols are the same imperfect and flawed people we are, as much as our human nature wants to deify and demonize them along the lines of our own personal ideologies. We shouldn’t allow our cognitive dissonance to let us forget that they never held the power in the first place.
The views and opinions expressed in this piece are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the values and beliefs of Cogitare Magazine, nor of Grove City College.
This article was first published in the Grove City College Collegian.
