Tonight, I’m putting on my contrarian hat. It’s not new headwear for me, but it’s definitely swimming against the stream. Especially this weekend. See, I heard a podcast this afternoon about National Football League fandom, “the moral quandary of supporting the sport,” where Audie Cornish talks to former NFL player Nate Jackson and sociologist Daniel Sailofsky about the status of their current relationships with the NFL.
Particularly concerning is the long-term effects of the high-impact collisions so common in the game. A 2005 University of North Carolina (UNC) study discovered that retired NFL players were at a 37 percent higher risk of Alzheimer’s than similarly aged U.S. men.
This was 15 years ago. And not much has changed since.
The second piece I wrote was for myself. In 2014. It’s about domestic violence, and the NFL’s actions — or, more accurately, inaction — with regard to the ramifications of players who abuse their spouses.
So how do we square the month-long importance the league places on the health and safety of women’s breasts with the year-long ignorance of what some employees do to their families behind closed doors?
I haven’t watched a full NFL game since that post in 2014. I have been to Super Bowl parties since then. And I’ll admit to watching parts of those games, no doubt. But what used to be a weekly ritual involving favorite teams and draft reports and fantasy stats stopped cold turkey that September.
Now, I’m not trying to tell you how to live. I’ve got no standing there. But I would ask you to ask yourself one question: Is it worth it? I know not everyone will come to the same conclusion as I did. But I want you to have least asked the question.
Heretic
10 February 2023
Takes the cake.
Tonight, I’m putting on my contrarian hat. It’s not new headwear for me, but it’s definitely swimming against the stream. Especially this weekend. See, I heard a podcast this afternoon about National Football League fandom, “the moral quandary of supporting the sport,” where Audie Cornish talks to former NFL player Nate Jackson and sociologist Daniel Sailofsky about the status of their current relationships with the NFL.
The idea reminded me of two pieces I’ve written in the past. The first was back when I was writing for a blog on an elder care website. Because we were looking for a Super Bowl angle for a post to publish the week before the 2008 game, I highlighted the then-emerging science around brain injuries and dementia:
Particularly concerning is the long-term effects of the high-impact collisions so common in the game. A 2005 University of North Carolina (UNC) study discovered that retired NFL players were at a 37 percent higher risk of Alzheimer’s than similarly aged U.S. men.
This was 15 years ago. And not much has changed since.
The second piece I wrote was for myself. In 2014. It’s about domestic violence, and the NFL’s actions — or, more accurately, inaction — with regard to the ramifications of players who abuse their spouses.
So how do we square the month-long importance the league places on the health and safety of women’s breasts with the year-long ignorance of what some employees do to their families behind closed doors?
I haven’t watched a full NFL game since that post in 2014. I have been to Super Bowl parties since then. And I’ll admit to watching parts of those games, no doubt. But what used to be a weekly ritual involving favorite teams and draft reports and fantasy stats stopped cold turkey that September.
Now, I’m not trying to tell you how to live. I’ve got no standing there. But I would ask you to ask yourself one question: Is it worth it? I know not everyone will come to the same conclusion as I did. But I want you to have least asked the question.
See you tomorrow?