After Sparking "Outrage" With Brokeback Remark, Phil Jackson Sticks It To the Man

By Trashtalk Superstar


After going down to the San Antonio Spurs last week, Lakers head coach Phil Jackson made a crack about the game having been like "Brokeback Mountain" ... because of all the "penetration and kick backs."

Jackson's comments aroused outrage in the gay community and, subsequently, received stiff criticism from GLAAD (the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation). So having been thrust into the spotlight, and with the NBA front office breathing down his back, Jackson came out and gave an "apology."

What's funny is that the mainstream media took Jackson's apology at face value, and earnestly reported it as a straight news story. Apparently the American mass media's collective radar isn't tuned to detect the subtle hints which indicate sarcasm, because - with his "apology" - Jackson managed to turn things around and mount a back door slam of his critics.

Notice Jackson's subtlety (and bear in mind that Jackson delivered the "apology" with an Eddie Haskell-like irreverent mock sincerity):

"But in retrospect, it wasn't really funny," Jackson said before the Lakers played Houston on Wednesday night. "When you take it out of context, it wasn't funny. It was a poor attempt at humor and I deserved to be reprimanded by the NBA."

In issuing his so called apology, Phil Jackson said of his "Brokeback Mountain" comment, that when taken "out of context, it wasn't funny." Which implies that, taken in context, it was funny.

But none of the Einsteins in the mainstream media picked up on that.

Look, strictly as humor, the line was OK, but it really wasn't that funny. Was it kind of clever? Sure. Even mildly amusing? I guess so ... after all, it did get a laugh from the reporters who were gathered around Jackson, so it served its intended purpose. But that's about as far as it goes.

But to devote any significant effort to debating the comedic merit of Phil Jackson's remark would be to overlook the true significance of the "apology" - and the situation that prompted the "apology." Phil Jackson didn't get reprimanded by the league for telling a corny joke. He got reprimanded for breaking some unwritten PC speech code. And that's troubling because, whether one thinks the line was uproariously funny or just mildly amusing, one thing Phil Jackson's joke wasn't is offensive. Inappropriate, maybe. But offensive, no way.

Phil Jackson didn't make a single derogatory or malicious statement about gays. He merely compared a game that featured a lot of penetration to a blockbuster, Oscar winning movie about gay cowboys ... a movie that was famous - at least in part - because it featured a notorious penetration scene.

Would anyone have been offended if, instead of having compared the game to Brokeback Mountain (because of all the penetration), Phil Jackson had instead referenced the name of some random porno flick? Would there have been similar outrage if he'd called it a "Jenna Jamison" game?

After all, the typical porno shows a lot more penetration than Brokeback Mountain. And Jenna Jamison (the world's most famous porn star) has made a career out of getting rocked every which way imaginable, whereas the light-in-the-cowboy-boots stars of Brokeback Mountain only had one "penetration" scene (well, from what I understand ... I - admittedly - haven't actually seen Brokeback mountain). But, somehow, I seriously doubt that any non-gay reference to "penetration" would have incurred the same kind of angry reaction that the "Brokeback Mountain" comment did.

That's because most of the objection to Jackson's comment came from people and groups that have made a profession out of being outraged and offended. Notice that in their objection to Phil Jackson's comment, GLAAD didn't claim that Jackson had been homophobic or insulting to gays. They didn't even claim that Jackson had said anything negative about gays, gay culture, the gay lifestyle or the gay community in general. Their objection was, simply, that they found what Jackson had said to be "offensive."

In failing to cite any insulting, demeaning or even remotely negative comments about gays in Phil Jackson's statement, GLAAD's objection to the statement's "offensiveness" leads down that old, proverbial "slippery slope -- because whether or not something is considered to be "offensive" is a totally subjective matter. The offensiveness or inoffensiveness of any statement is completely up to the judgement of the individual who takes offense - or doesn't take offense - to the statement. Just about anyone can take offense to anything Which is why, by basing their objection to Jackson's statement on the fact that they find it "offensive," GLAAD doesn't have a leg to stand on.

But it's doubtful that the validity of their position is a primary concern of the folks at GLAAD. Their primary concerns appear to be attracting attention to their organization, acquiring power and wielding what power they do have. And make no mistake, they absolutely love this kind of drama (don't be fooled by their objection to Jackson's comment ... the people at GLAAD aren't happy unless they're offended and outraged). It gets them the attention that they crave and - perhaps more importantly - it's a fund raising cash cow.

As for Phil Jackson, he's an old hippie, a self-described "Zen master," an acolyte of the late Dr. Timothy Leary, was an outspoken supporter of former New Jersey Senator Bill Bradley's bid for the 2000 Democratic Presidential nomination (Bradley was a vocal advocate for gay issues and an early proponent of same sex marriage) and part of his mystique stems from the fact that - even though he's a basketball coach - he's been known to question authority and "stick it to the man." Jackson is, after all, a life-long adherent of the "anti-establishment" counter culture of the late 1960's (despite having spent his entire adult life as either a player or coach [authority figure] in the completely "square" and "establishment" world of professional basketball). So it's hard to imagine that Phil Jackson harbors any particular hatred for ill will toward the gay community.

Phil Jackson is just about as far from being a redneck or a bigot as anyone can be. He's a tree-hugging, (and -at the very least- former) pot smoking flower child. Hell, when he was coaching Chicago, Phil Jackson reprimanded Michael Jordan and Scottie Pippen for owning firearms ... Phil thought that guns brought "bad Karma." And Jackson ran such a loose ship in Chicago that he even encouraged bench players Jud Buecheler and Steve Kerr to go out and get drunk with Dennis Rodman while on road trips, because he thought Buecheler and Kerr were "too uptight" and needed to "relax."

Phil Jackson shouldn't have had to apologize to anyone for his "Brokeback Mountain" quip. And - in quite brilliant fashion, actually - he didn't.

When forced to apologize by the NBA, Phil Jackson could have issued the standard "non apology" apology that's quickly becoming the the "go to" course of action for public figures who find themselves drawing fire over something they said.

Jackson could easily have slid by if he'd said: "I apologize if anyone was offended by my comments." After all, that's how it's done these days. You don't, technically, admit to having said or done anything wrong: you're only sorry that some people may have found your comments "offensive" - but not necessarily sorry for having made the comments. It's the easy way out. It's posturing, placating and obfuscating all at once. It's sophistry as public relations strategy. And it works.

But that's not what Phil Jackson did. Rather, he - underhandedly - made a smart ass mockery of the "non apology" apology (and of the situation that prompted him to "apologize") which also served to rebuke GLAAD, the NBA and other critics of his "Brokeback" comment. And the best part is that it was all cleverly disguised as an actual apology.

Which is pretty damn brilliant! Bill Murray couldn't have pulled it off any better or with any more irreverence - and he's made a career out of doing that kind of stuff.

By saying: "If I've offended any horses, Texans, cowboys or gays, I apologize," and "when you take it out of context, it isn't funny" (which, again, implies that - when you don't take it out of context - it is funny), Phil Jackson delivered a giant middle finger to all the critics of his comment. And, once again, Phil managed to stick it to the man.

But the funniest part is that no one seems to have noticed.