“This wasn’t a racist comment. Come on. Context, as always, is important when it comes to these things. Usually, that’s when common sense prevails. Sandy Brondello is Australian. A quick Google search would’ve shown that the term “protected species” is slang over there for someone who gets preferential treatment. Fans were quick to point that out on social media, by the way. But it fell on deaf ears.”
Casual observers are supposed to know the national origins of people before they assess the apparent meaning of what they say? I guess Brondello should have said, “Mate, throw some shrimp on the barbie for the sheila, she’s a bloomin’ protected species!”
But Dean insists that even without the Aussie wrinkle, “protected species” has no racial overtones:
“Protected species” is a sports term that’s been around forever. It’s used all the time in the NFL, specifically with quarterbacks. Patrick Mahomes is a protected species. It’s a running joke during NFL season because defenders seemingly get flagged if they breathe on him. Tom Brady was a protected species. LeBron James has spent decades getting calls with his Hall of Fame flopping. He’s a protected species. In baseball, veteran hitters and pitchers routinely get calls other players don’t. Veteran players can be considered a protected species…In college football, you could argue the entire state of Alabama was a protected species during the Nick Saban years. Again, this isn’t a new term. It’s not a racist term. It’s a sports term that has been around forever.”
All I can say is that I’ve followed sports for a long, long time, and never heard or read the term “protected species” before this episode.
Therefore, my answer to that quiz, which like all Ethics Alarms quizzes represents an issue that I am less certain about than I usually represent myself to be in posts here, is as follows, to wit…
The WNBA has to protect itself against public perceptions, and public perceptions are often based on ignorance, emotion, and political biases. What Brondello really meant is irrelevant, and what Angel Reese thought she meant is irrelevant, though a fair and ethical player would have taken the heat off of the coach by immediately telling the sports media, “I know Sandy didn’t mean anything derogatory by that remark. Everyone should just calm down and forget it.”
All that matters is that we live in a culture where race is weaponized, and minority groups are addicted to using reflex, contrived or feigned offense to expand their power and influence. For that reason, and that reason alone, the WNBA had to inoculate itself from a looming race controversy that would ensnare the whole league. Brondello, as a consequence, had to “take one for the team,” or in this case, the league.
I can, however, be talked out of that position. Maybe.
___________________
Pointer: Young Bill (who is on a roll…)
Ethics Alarms 
Part of the comment comes from the fact that the league is accused of a racial bias against white players. There is a perception, not entirely wrong, that Katlin Clark is the biggest target. Many of the black players AND league leaders, who are all black, resent Clark’s popularity.
Sexuality is also a big factor. Interestingly, it tends to allign racially. It is black lesbian players and white heterosexual players. Frankly, many lesbians are not likeable, and it enters into fan relations. Many of the white, heterosexual plays have huge fan bases, and the black lesbian players don’t.
That dynamic was at play here, Reese isnot only black but an out lesbian, while Bordello is a white, heterosexual woman.
Ha! You did what I did a couple times and caught at the last minute! The coach is Brondello, not Bordello!
I’ve never heard “protected species” used in sports and I’m not an Aussie or a sportswriter, but I understand and am fluent in English.
The metaphor would go as follows: All WNBA players are various species. You’d think the referees would treat all of them equally. But not all WNBA players are treated equally because some are more important than others. Rachel Reese is a star and attractive and “presents well.” She’s not threatening and too lesbian looking or seeming. She’s marketable. She’s important. So, the refs are going to protect her and make sure she doesn’t get hurt or get into foul trouble or even get angry. She’s protected the same way the snail darter is protected. Reese was likened to an animal, but simply to an animal among a universe of animals.
In the current weaponized racial environment, you attempt to placate and appease these racial bigots at your peril. Of course, the league threw the coach and even their integrity under the bus. The league and this coach are attempting to go along to get along in order to protect their business. That way lies disaster. These racial bigots want their pound of flesh. Of course, the entire WNBA Potemkin village is doomed, and the racial grievance mongers are ascendant.
“She’s protected the same way the snail darter is protected.” (bolds mine)
Welp…after having been DELISTED from the Endangered Species Act (ESA) in October 2022, the Snail Darter is no longer protected; what say we…um…delist Reese…?
Anywho, funny story about that li’l bugger. In 1979, a Tennessee Valley Authority project (the Tellico Dam on the Little Tennessee River) was 95 % completed when the Snail Darter was found to be in the way.
The Tellico Dam wasn’t needed for power generation or for flood control. Turns out it was nothing more than a sop to cement contractors (always in need of obsequious pandering) which was cheerfully supplied by an up-n-coming Volunteer State politician.
The newly minted ESA was presented with its first challenge.
The gist of it was a “God Squad,” created to issue waivers based on a cost/benefit analysis of completing projects where ESA designees had the poor judgement of holing up in the way of “progress,” as it were.
Whether “settled science” was invoked is unknown, but not really the point.
David Brower (who some call America’s greatest environmentalist) breathlessly intoned: ”This was the beginning of the end of the Endangered Species Act.”
Now; who was this Mother Gaia ravagin’/God’s Creatures murderin’/ESA ignorin’, Snail Darter destroyin’ up-n-comer?
The name Al Gore, Jr. ring a bell?
PWS
Concrete subs do a good job of getting in on the ground floor.
He’ll be here all week, folks. Try the veal.
Hah!
I have never heard protected species used in sports either.
I think Brondello should not have apologized. if the phrase is a native colloquialism in her home country, she should have explained that, what it meant and why she used it. She should have acknowledged without apologizing that she was not sensitive to how it might be interpreted. Then, the “culturally sensitive” WNBA could have treated it as a learning moment for everyone involved and moved on.
-Jut
The left only do teaching moments. They don’t do learning moments. Just ask Obama.
thinking about this a little further, the Niggardly Principle has an application here.
-Jut
Kudos. It is a Niggardly Principle episode. I’m abashed that I didn’t think of it.
does that mean you have been talked out of your initial position? Or, do other factors you mentioned override it?
-Jut
No. I think when you are in a forest with brush and flammable stuff everywhere, you can’t take any chances. She was innocent, her suspension was unfair to her, but it was ethics zugzwang. I can’t say the WNBA was wrong. Angel was wrong not to defuse the issue herself, but once she took the approach she did, the league’s decision was defensible.
Cue Tom Hanks: “There’s no ethics in basketball!”
So, the real business of the WNBA is just pandering to lesbians and lesbians of color. Probably pretty close to the truth. I think the WNBA should be shut down and all the players should simply go play in Europe where there are no race hustlers because the Europeans kept their slaves off-shore.
You could also make the case that a league nurturing so much racism, sexism, bigotry and hatred doesn’t deserve to be defended or saved.
I would push back a bit. By issuing a groveling apology, she has signaled (along with the league who “encouraged” the apology) that intentions don’t matter. Someone can take offense at almost anything if they try hard enough. A big problem in discourse is the loss of “benefit of the doubt.” Part of the polarization of society nowadays is the assumption that “them” on “the other side” have the worst intentions and meant it in the most racist/sexist/abelist/whatever-ist way. It should have been simply “I’m insulted you took my statement as racist when there was no intention.”
Thanks, Shadow. “Benefit of the doubt” popped into my mind as well. “Gotcha!” has wiped out giving someone the benefit of the doubt.
I don’t follow sport commentary, so I don’t know about “endangered species” being part of it. But….. as a retired LEO (street variety) I am familiar with “criminal justice commentary” where “endangered species” is often implied, if not stated. I also do not think it is uniquely Australian.
In the current case, the person who was fouled carries many characteristics as the person who, a few weeks ago, fouled Kaitlin Clark (Sp?), so its not like all players are protected by the league when it comes to being fouled.
“Protected species,” not “engangered species.” Caitin Clark is the endangered species.