The Double Standards of the Rich and Famous

Why do we hold professional athletes to standards of accountability that we don't apply to other celebrities?

Their earnings and exposure are about the same, especially at the very top of their professions. Alex Rodriguez will earn a little more or less than Will Smith this year, and both are easily recognized anywhere in the U.S. It's kinda funny that both have gracefully grown from skinny teenagers to powerfully-built men over the same period of time, yet we only question A-Rod's bulk.

Celebrities can have any sexual relationship they want without suffering any career damage. Professional athletes must either settle in for a 50+ year marriage or make sure to keep their liaisons out of the press for fear of acquiring a bad reputation. No one thought ill of Warren Beatty's casual indifference to relationship boundaries, but oh, the howling that that profligate Woods dare profane Augusta a mere half-year after humiliating his wife! Ricky Martin can proclaim his sexual preference to the surprise of absolutely no one, but, to date, only Martina Navratilova has truly 'fessed up among professional athletes in general; the first prominent male athlete who comes out, mid-career, and announces that he is gay will stop every press in the States.

Celebrities can publicly espouse any religion they want, except Christianity. Athletes can only publicly proclaim Islam; then, they are being brave. Athletes that publicly proclaim Christianity are verbally crucified. Tom Cruise and John Travolta can blather on and on about the wonders of Scientology, but Tim Tebow can't proclaim his Christianity? Gotta get me some tech on that...

Celebrities like Nicholas Cage go broke, and it's because they made some bad business investments. Athletes like Derrick Coleman go broke and it's because they are idiots. If there is a discernible difference between sinking a million bucks into overvalued property (because everyone knows house values only go up!) and sinking a million bucks into "Pookie" (because y'all grew up together), I have yet to see it.

Celebrities like George Clooney or Ted Danson can publicly support any radical political platform they choose with impunity. Athletes who stand up for a political party are "rabble-rousers" and "locker room lawyers." It is clearly better for all involved that our cornerback know his assignment in the Tampa-2 better than he knows his congressman's voting record on the issues that matter to him...really? Sean Penn can visit Iran and get chummy with the "Death to America!" crowd and he has a conscience; Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf (the former Chris Jackson) refuses to salute the flag during the National Anthem and he's a disgrace.

John Belushi was revered. John Daly was caricatured.

We should know better by now.

Somehow, we assume that the same drive and dedication that made an athlete successful would translate to other areas of his or her life, and it simply isn't true. Athletes are human beings, prone to the same foibles and mistakes as the rest of us, yet we constantly ascribe to them a morality that we are unwilling to be held to.

We want a two-time Super Bowl-winning quarterback to be a clean-living guy, but it turns out that the only difference between Ben Roethlisberger and Roman Polanski is that the former barely avoided prosecution while the latter fled from it. Celebrities with sex tapes have fared better than Tiger Woods in the press. The excuse most commonly given is that Woods was selling something to us based upon what we perceived his character to be.

This, on its face, is patently farcical because a man who owns a yacht that requires a cool million per annum to maintain would hardly be caught leaving the scene of a domestic disturbance in a Buick...but I digress.

Perhaps the perceived morality of sport is supposed to reflect character. In other words, the athlete makes his living by playing by the rules. Those rules form a sort of morality. Transgressing the rules is akin to sinning; performing within the rules is like righteousness. Maybe our mistake is to believe that someone who scrupulously follows the rules of his sport would just as scrupulously follow the unwritten rules of society.

But that answer feels unsatisfying.

It doesn't explain why Greg Oden's private, homemade pornography gets vilified but Kim Kardashian's much more graphic video only raised her profile. In fact, it sez so right here that we'd know Greg Oden if there never was a naked picture of him, but we'd never know either Paris Hilton or Kim Kardashian without their scandalous sex tapes. There is the fact that no one is lining up to buy Greg Oden's pics, ha ha, but it doesn't change the fact that relative unknowns became worldwide celebrities for no other reason than getting paid to have sex.

There is a term for people who get paid to have sex, by the way, and it's not "porn star," cameras or the lack thereof notwithstanding...but I digress again.

The argument has also been made that athletes are dependent upon the largess of the public, thus it behooves them to maintain their best behavior at all times. I'd almost grant that point, except that I have already named persons whose prurient or antisocial acts haven't stopped us from watching their television shows, going to their movies, buying products they hawk, or listening to their music.

Is there a solution? Yes: it's called "fairness."

If it's fair to consider the character of the man playing quarterback for your team, or golf in your city, before deciding whether or not to part with green, folding cash to see him, do the same thing with your remote, and with your movie choices, and with your credit card.

At the end of the day, we're paying their salaries. If anyone is going to hold anyone accountable, it's us.