Cognitive behavioral therapy is often used to treat depression in psychology. One simplified definition of cognitive behavior therapy is when the patient is taught how to stop monotrack thinking. Instead they learn how to look at any situation from different angles.
If a coworker walks past you and doesn’t say hello, it could be an example. The immediate inclination is wondering what they’re upset about with you and why they don’t like you, which may be the case. It could be that they are not interested in you. They might be being snubbed by their boss. They could be lost in thought about a project on which they’re working. It could be that they have a sick baby at home. The point is you can’t automatically assume something is about you or that you know the reasons and/or thought to process behind someone else’s actions and words.
The above comes to mind when reading a recent lengthy screed by former major league ballplayer and current ESPN baseball analyst Doug Glanville. It describes a discussion between broadcasters Jim Kaat, Buck Showalter that went the following:
“After the first time I saw him in the big leagues, I looked around the dugout, like, ‘Do we have one of those?’” said Showalter, who opposed (Cuban ballplayer Yoan) Moncada while managing the Baltimore Orioles.
Kaat replied: “Get a 40-acre field full of them,”
Kaat, 82 years old, later apologized for his 40-acre comments. This was all that could be considered offensive. If you find the whole idea of farming offensive, or if you are offended by jokes about how you can grow more of so-and-so’s on a particular farm, then you should stop eating any food grown on farms. But I digress.
Glanville jumped in after the fact with several hundred words of passive/aggressive blather, accusing Kaat and, by virtue of not immediately throwing Kaat in the cancel culture cauldron Showalter of racism. Glanville then wondered aloud about his reaction to this egregious offense if he was on the broadcast crew, within earshot or living in the exact same hemisphere. This is all predicated on Glanville’s perception that the comment was racist. Herein lies the problem.
Kaat may well be a redneck’s redneck. It’s possible that he was making fun of himself and made an error in using a reference to 40 acres without even knowing or recalling the connection. Glanville didn’t have this idea, and if he had it, he quickly dismissed it in favor of virtue signaling for industrial strength.
Rather than whine about it in an effort to gin up support for his assumed offended oppression, maybe Glanville could sack up, go to Kaat privately, and ask him if he’s familiar with the expression “40 acres and a mule.” If so, and if Kaat intentionally used it in a demeaning manner, by all means, call him out. If he had either forgotten the reference or never knew it in the first place, Glanville is the one coming out of this mule-headed.
Tapdancing on an unknown landmine is assuming that the other person says what they say, rather than taking the time and learning why. It is possible to pay rent by singing and receiving a love donation from your congregation. This also does not accomplish anything.
If the left truly craves the “conversation” regarding race for which it constantly screams, maybe … oh, I don’t know … seize upon a presented opportunity to do so instead of smearing people without considering all possible facts?