On the eve of Bill Cosby’s scheduled visit to St. Louis at Harris-Stowe State College next Monday, and in the aftermath of the not-guilty verdicts in the Michael Jackson child molestation case, we are reminded of the sharp contrast in the public stance of African-American celebrities.
The American has been critical in the past of the unwarranted condescending tone of Cosby’s very pointed public rebuke of the acknowledged self-destructive behavior among some lower-income African Americans and a defeated “can’t do” attitude about addressing this harmful conduct.
No doubt, this debauched behavior has helped wreak misery and pain in African-American communities across the nation. To his credit, Cosby has not backed down from his tough, controversial remarks, but he has responded to criticism from many blacks by initiating personal encounters at town hall meetings in urban centers across the country, including Atlanta; Springfield, Mass.; Newark, N.J.; Baltimore; Dallas; and others.
According to Sylvester Brown’s excellent column in Sunday’s Post-Dispatch, Cosby is limiting his audiences to “lower-income parents, students, educators, social workers and people from community-based nonprofit organizations.” Undeterred by allegations about his personal conduct, Cosby brings a voice that “carries the passion of a man on a mission despite criticism.” Fortunately, Cosby is making use of his considerable fame and resources to urge us to move forward and “take all of our energy in bringing ourselves up.”
Meanwhile, Michael Jackson narrowly “dodged a bullet” with a high-priced legal team that benefited from an over-reaching prosecutor. Jackson may owe his freedom to the dubious decision of the prosecution to include the mother of the accuser, an acknowledged welfare cheat. The defense made her look like someone willing to deliver her own child to a man who has paid millions to settle allegations about criminal conduct with young boys in order to gain a huge financial payoff.
Andrew Vachass, a lawyer who limits his practice to representing children, wrote accurately in the New York Times that Jackson is best recognized as a “bizarre, secretive, hyper-privileged human being who believes that sharing a bed with a little boy is something to which he is entitled.” Moreover, Jackson has mutilated his face in an effort to transform his natural appearance and has become grotesque-looking in the process.
Yet, many in the African-American community vehemently complain about “false allegations” against this celebrity, who only embraces his “blackness” when he is in serious trouble. Why are we willing to defend and excuse his highly suspect behavior when he is clearly a person in need of professional help? He is entitled to justice under the law, but if he is guilty of pedophilia – a grievous fault – then he should be forced to deal with his problem rather than be coddled.
We might try to better understand Jackson’s deep-seated psychological problems. But how do we explain the Rev. Jesse Jackson and his compulsive need to inject himself into every highly-publicized situation, no matter how inappropriate?
Despite much good work during his long public career, the Rev. Jackson strains our belief in his motives with his insistent public involvement in the unsavory Michael Jackson saga, especially after embarrassing us by his dalliance with politically-motivated right-wing Republicans in the Terry Schiavo case in Florida. The good reverend needs to check himself.
African Americans are not alone in their unquestioning loyalty and intense interest in celebrities and their lives. Yet, we need to be more discerning about who we pay serious attention to and raise our expectations about celebrities and their willingness to make common cause with the African-American community and its aspirations.
As for Bill Cosby, we welcome him to St. Louis and look forward to a constructive dialogue at Harris-Stowe.