Breaking news: Silence is not only violence but also a sign of privilege, or so implies 26-year-old WNBA player DiJonai Carrington who fouled rookie superstar Caitlin Clark in a recent game and then, like a middle school mean girl, mocked Clark for something Clark had not done. People with integrity who value good sportsmanship would be embarrassed by such behavior, but not Carrington. Yesterday—two days after her court spectacle—she attacked Clark on X. Before we get to Mean Girl Carrington’s response, here’s what Clark did to get Carrington all hot under the eye lashes.
Clark was asked in a courtside interview how she feels about people using her name in “culture wars.” The wise and ever-gracious Clark replied,
It’s not something I can control, so I don’t put too much thought and time into things like that. To be honest, I don’t see a lot of it. Like I’ve said, basketball’s my job. Everything on the outside, I can’t control that, so I’m not going to spend time thinking about that. People can talk about what they want to talk about, create conversations about whatever it is, but I think for myself, I’m just here to play basketball. I’m here to have fun. I’m here to help my team win. We’ve won three games, feel like we’ve been in a position to win a few more than that. My focus is on helping us do that. I don’t pay much mind to all of that.
In response, the foolish and ungracious Carrington posted this on X:
Dawg. How one can not be bothered by their name being used to justify racism, bigotry, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia & the intersectionalities of them all is nuts. We all see the sh*t. We all have a platform. We all have a voice & they all hold weight. Silence is a luxury.
Carrington’s wildly loaded comment presumes without proof that Clark’s name is used to justify racism; bigotry; and hatred of women, strangers, and homosexuals. In contrast to what Carrington has purportedly read, I have seen Clark’s name used to promote the kind of bigotry and racism leftists love—you know, the kind that’s been renamed “anti-racism” by grifters Henry Rogers (aka Ibram X. Kendi) and Robin DiAngelo, and collaborators like the View’s Sunny Hostin.
But equally or more important, Clark is wise not to waste time reading what strangers, friends, and foes are saying about her on social media, which, as everyone should know, is a supermassive black hole—a big fat time suck.
Carrington is right about one thing: Celebrities do, indeed, have platforms. The question is, for what purposes should they use those platforms.
It’s unlikely that Carrington wants Clark or any athlete to use her platform to oppose the racism intrinsic to DEI and CRT.
She likely doesn’t want celebrities to use their platforms to affirm marriage solely as the union of one man and one woman.
She likely doesn’t want them to use their platforms to say that homosexual acts are intrinsically disordered.
And she likely doesn’t want celebrities to use their platforms to condemn the anti-woman/anti-child/pro-human slaughter ideas integral to contemporary feminism.
So, she really isn’t condemning silence. Leftists love silencing conservative voices. Rather, Carrington wants to ridicule Clark into using her platform to express ideas Carrington loves.
There once was a time when going to work, doing one’s job, and keeping politics out of the workplace was considered wise and good, a way to grease the social wheels in a diverse culture, thereby making the workplace more collegial and efficient. But that was before tyrannical leftists gained control of almost all the institutional levers of power.
Now one must be a political activist everywhere, but—and it’s a big but—but one can’t just say anything on the job or when representing one’s place of employment. Now, according to Carrington, everyone must speak leftist assumptions loudly and proudly.
Hence the divisive cacophony from which it’s hard to escape—at work or play.
