Why Can't People Be Normal About Caitlin Clark?
The Indiana Fever guard won Time Magazine's 2024 Athlete of the Year. As usual, people reacted to it with blabber that has nothing to do with Caitlin, and everything to do with their issues.
Look at the basketball player Caitlin Clark’s TIME Magazine Athlete of the Year interview and it reads like simple allyship — a notoriously self-aware woman coming into her own as a celebrity and using that to be honest about her power in the world. But, where an ally can sometimes come across as seeking cryptic or obvious applause — and, can possibly overstep in their earnestness — Clark is much more self-confident, frank, and motivated about her ability and influence on the planet. She’s a talented person who knows how dynamic her talent is, and is proud to have such an unique skillset. “I've been able to captivate so many people that have never watched women's sports, let alone women's basketball, and turn them into fans,” she would tell TIME. This is hardly somebody who wants to cede stardom; rightfully so, Clark is fine with the power she has, and is eager to continue changing women’s sports just by being herself. She’s pierced the league with skills that open the wounded male gaze — everything from the pace of her play to the range she has on her three point shot are attributes that the men’s game prides itself on — with a glaring competitive streak. And yes, with a whiteness that is All-American, and impossible to ignore. White men see her as function of their power structure, for certain, and that has aided her celebrity in the era of Donald Trump. Clark, too, is conscious of this fact. In the TIME interview, she is truthful, without shame: “I want to say I’ve earned every single thing, but as a white person, there is privilege,” says Clark. “A lot of those players in the league that have been really good have been Black players. This league has kind of been built on them. The more we can appreciate that, highlight that, talk about that, and then continue to have brands and companies invest in those players that have made this league incredible, I think it’s very important. I have to continue to try to change that. The more we can elevate Black women, that’s going to be a beautiful thing.”
Clark, who just finished her rookie season with the Indiana Fever, both has and hasn’t given people a statement with this. I’m interested in why this was considered a noteworthy quote. This is a solid statement, and exactly what I want a popular white athlete to say. As a competitor, she should know and feel that she has earned every praise, and she has, but there is also ample enough room for her acknowledge the Black women that paved the way for her reign in the WNBA. To expect more out of her is to expect her to be an activist, which is fine, if that is something that she has the breadth to do. Most people, however, don’t. Her statement reconciles whiteness and it’s obvious hold on American society and race, but it does not make her out to be an blistering ally. She’s an athlete, first and foremost. In my opinion, this is good: who wants the most electrifying athlete in the WNBA to focus on everything but the hardwood? For every Colin Kaepernick or Jackie Robinson, there is Aaron Rodgers, or more realistically, even LeBron James, the athlete who is overextending themselves, by coming out with political statements (remember when he broke a worker’s strike in 2020 by calling Barack Obama for help?) that won’t satisfy both conservatives and leftists alike.
Why can’t people be normal about Clark, especially since she is perfectly normal herself? The lofty stakes of her celebrity is often discussed, either from a form of hollow adoration or stubborn chiding at her fame, from people who consider that fame as something bombastic, and coming at the expense of others. It happened again after the TIME interview, which in a perfect world would have put all of the fussing over Clark’s privilege to rest. However, she was met with criticisms and slight negativity again. Washington Mystics owner Sheila Johnson said “the structure of the way media plays out race" was a factor in Clark receiving the honor and argued that Time should have instead "put the whole WNBA on that cover, and said the WNBA is the League of the Year." Johnson brought up Angel Reese, a Black woman who has had battles with Clark, who she thinks is also helping people (coughs: men) finally see the WNBA as a viable sport league. There are two things to that, and these are things that most people are afraid to say: Firstly, Angel Reese, however strong her rebounding is, isn’t close to the caliber of player that Clark is. Thus, the comments about Reese in comparison to Clark ring as hollow for the Clark hive, despite how annoying and yes, full of intense misogynoir that the Clark hive, especially the men with an online presence, exhibit. (They’ve even started to turn on Clark. After her interview, Instagram was buzzing with comments from former fans who complained that she was letting the liberal media influence her too much). Now, even if everyone would concede that Reese’s skillset pales in comparison to Clark, racists will still find a way to manifest their discrimination — no argument there. Still, I would prefer if people would admit that Reese isn’t near the player that Clark is. Contrasting them reeks of corniness, and a fake rhetoric that would not be said if Johnson was the owner of the Clark’s team, the Indiana Fever. (I assume if Johnson was the owner of the Fever, and was profiting from Clark’s celebrity, she would yucking it up with her business partners). Shouldn’t Clark just hoop and pay people no mind? No amount of pandering to concealed jealousy will change racial dynamics enough to put a dent in white privilege, a massive plight in America. Furthermore, USC sophomore JuJu Watkins will be in the WNBA soon, and her immense mastery is comparable to Clark’s. Call me if Clark overshadows Watkins. Until then, take a breath, and uplift the WNBA by actually being a fan and uplifting it, including the times when Clark plays like the superstar that she is.
Clark is a sensual being; she’s learning, and she’s feeling things around her — troll behavior that takes away from how tuneful her skill is. She is something of a conductor, managing the pace of play like Leonard Bernstein, and she deserves her space — her freedom to be a basketball player, and to inspire people in the way she obviously does, and obviously will continue to do. I understood where the tension comes from. Identity almost works like DNA works: it’s a succession of sorts, one seed blossoming, then another one blossoming twice as larger. White athletes will inspire more white athletes. However, will Caitlin inspire more Black girls? Only time will tell. Allow her to be a basketball player.