There is a trope that has been passed around for decades that in the USA, the 250 years of slavery has resulted in African Americans being better athletes because of the legacy of slavery and how slavery lead to a genetically athletic population of African Americans. However, this claim is widely disputed. As I show below, history and science both don't support the idea of genetic modification of the population of African Americans. Additionally, the racial identity of athletes doesn't support the trope either. However, I explain that the trope exists and makes sense to so many people because there are a couple of very popular sports that are racially skewed because of their accessibility to African Americans.
The NFL and NBA are definitely racially skewed toward Black players:
NFL - 28% White, 68% Black, 3% other
NBA - 17%, White 74% Black, 2% Hispanic, 6% other (but many Whites are European)
Historically nonsensical
Even though slavery was a brutal institution, slave owners needed slaves to be alive to be valuable. Each slave had a worth attached to their life. Slave owners had no vested interest in killing off slaves. Furthermore, the physiology that NBA and NFL athletes possess was not something that slave owners would have bred for; fast-twitch muscles, jumping ability, speed and quickness were not useful on plantations.
Biologically nonsensical
Even if slave owners forced physically desirable slaves to have children, this Guardian article explains that,
this is also a ridiculous notion. Beyond the fact that it feels like a blatant injustice to even attempt to grasp at any sort of positive consequence from this brutal infringement upon human rights, the claim that ancestral breeding is the primary source of Black athletic superiority is unsubstantiated by both history and science. According to a study conducted by Oregon State zoologist Josef Uyeda, lasting evolutionary changes in a population require around a million years to occur. Even if we assume that the forced reproduction of the enslaved was rampant in America long before the 1808 closing of the transatlantic slave trade (which significantly increased the demand for a self-sustaining enslaved population) the 400 years in which slavery existed in the United States is nowhere near enough time to produce drastic results in today’s African American population.
Whites living at the time would have disagreed with the idea of African Americans being physically superior
This research explains that,
The idea of African Americans being athletically superior did not always exist (Sheldon et al., 2007). Furthermore, African Americans have been historically viewed as inferior in every aspect by many whites, and to this day many racist individuals still agree with this notion (Sheldon et al., 2007). This suggests that this idea is a social construct rather than being factual (Sheldon et al., 2007).
The numbers of athletes are so miniscule to the total population.
Athletics, especially professional sports, is not a good proxy for race and athletics because the real numbers of athletes are so low:
Total Americans: 329,000,000
Total Black Americans: 46,000,000
NBA players: 450
NFL players: 1,696
The NBA and NFL players represent .000652% of the population or six one-millionths of the US population. And they only represent 4/100,000 (or .00004) of the Black American population.
And PBS, Race; Power of an Illusion website explains that,
If we take the sort of commonsense idea that black people are faster than white people, what does that actually mean in a rigorous test? Does it mean that all blacks are faster than all whites? Well, that's demonstrably false. Does it mean a hypothetical average black person is faster than a hypothetical black person? Well, that's meaningless because I don't know how you'd find the hypothetical average person. Does it mean the ten fastest black people are faster than the ten fastest black people? This is, I think, close to what people mean when they say something like that. But the problem with that, is it's statistically nonsensical to characterize a group of a couple of billion people by its most extreme members.
What are the reasons for athletic dominance?
As Gnida illustrates, the traits necessary to succeed in athletics include: Quickness, Strength, Speed, Hand-eye coordination. But there are two important realities that illustrate the falacy of the argument that African Americans possess genes that endow them with these athletically superior traits.
First, simply examing the physical variation within NFL and NBA players shows the wide genetic variation among successful athletes: some athletes are tall and others are not, some are very muscular and others are not, some are quick while others are powerful. Some examples include:
Lebron James 6'9" 250lbs (left)
and
Steph Curry 6'2" 185 (right)
Darnell Mooney 5'11" 173lbs (left)
and
Akiem Hicks 6'4" 335lbs (right)
Second, if African Americans possessed these traits, wouldn’t they have a propensity to dominate in all sports that use these?
The percentage of African Americans in certain sports cannot justify this argument that they are genetically more athletic because there are plenty of sports that require similar athletic abilities where whites make up the overwhelming majority. For example, weightlifting is overrepresented by whites, and if it were true that African Americans were naturally more powerful, it would only make sense that weightlifting consisted of mostly African Americans (van Sterkenburg & Knoppers, 2004). Similarly, the proportion of African Americans in baseball should be significantly higher as well. Whites make up the most represented ethnic group in baseball, representing 57.5% of THE CONCENTRATION OF AFRICAN AMERICANS TO SPECIFIC SPORTS 5 the players, while African Americans only represent 7.7% of the players (Lapchik, 2017). Similarly baseball is a sport where power and speed is necessary, which according to this argument, African Americans are genetically inclined to have.
Note the wide range of disparity in various American sports:
- Baseball - MLB is 57% White, 32% Hispanic, 7% Black, 3% Asian
- Hockey - NHL is 97% White, 3% other (including only 26 black players)
- Soccer - MLS is 40% White 33% Hispanic, 23% Black, 4% other
- Volleyball - 89% White, 10% Black
- Wrestling - 71% White, 6% Black (NCAA)
- Tennis - incredibly dominated by Whites. From Vice, Across the last 28 Grand Slams, only one non-white player has competed in a men's final – Jo-Wilfried Tsonga at the Australian Open in 2008. Currently, there are only two black players in the Men's top 50 and only 1 from Asia. Since the ATP Tour began in 1990, only Michael Chang and Tsonga have won any of the ATP 1000 Master events. This ratio is mirrored historically. In the 91 years since the four Majors were instigated, only two black players have won a Grand Slam and one Asian player: America's Arthur Ashe (who won one Wimbledon, one Australian and one US Open over seven years), France's Yannick Noah (who won the French in 1983) and America's Michael Chang (the French, 1989). That's a total of five Slams out of the 364 that have been contested since 1924, the inaugural year of the four Majors, or 1.37%. Statistically, it's more likely you'll get into Harvard School of Law than see a male black or Asian player win a Slam in your lifetime.
- NCAA D1 Athletes in general - 56% White, 21%Black, 2%Asian
- Ballet - from PBS; Race Power of an Illusion, I happen to have seen a lot of white guys who jump quite well. They're all in ballet, not in basketball.
- Gymnastics
- Skiing
- Weightlifting
And from PBS, Race; Power of an Illusion,
When we look at the general issue of occupational overrepresentation, as evidence of genetic superiority, we're kind of left with the promise of Irish policeman yielding Irish police genes, and Jewish comedians being the result of Jewish comedy genes, and Chinese laundry genes, which, of course, is ridiculous. The point of all this is that there are a lot of reasons why people are attracted to certain professions and certain occupations and certain things to do with their lives. Only one of which is that they have some sort of natural ability for it.
Certain Sports gain more attention and those sports happen to be heavily African American
This article explains the viewership for sports in the USA. American football is by far the most-watched sport in the USA with a 38% share of viewership followed by basketball in second place with a 15% share. These sports not only make up the lion’s share of viewership for pro sports in the US, they also happen to be the sports with the highest share of African Americans. This skews the American view of who dominates sports.
Additionally, because so many Americans watch sports from a young age and because the USA is so segregated, many Americans whose outgroup is African American become familiar with African Americans through these popular sports. This can lead to outgroup homogeneity and the stereotype that African Americans are all athletic.
The Real Reasons for Sports and Race Makeup: Access and the Self
Physical and Financial Access: social class limitations
Klimowicz explains the correlation between social class/poverty and sports participation in his article here. Simply put, the reason that Americans who are Black dominate basketball and football and track are because they are highly accessible sports, requiring little financial investment, and the sports are seen as a ticket to college and/or out of poverty.
Football can be played with just a ball as many boys grow up playing tackle football with friends and no pads. But football is such a part of America’s ethos that schools provide all the equipment as students join teams and progress through the system.
Basketball is similar in that it only requires a ball and a court which has become ubiquitous in cities across the country. In fact, there is a long history of marginalized groups playing basketball. Both Catholics and Jews who were marginalized groups, living in poor urban neighborhoods, in the 1920s were drawn to basketball because of the accessibility. Notre Dame University actually got the nickname "The Fighting Irish" because of their clash with the KKK in the 1920s. The KKK went to South Bend, IN to march against the Catholic University because the KKK was anti-Catholic and also against the immigration that was bringing Catholics to the USA. ND documents the story here.
From U. of Nebraska Press, Douglas Stark documents the history of Jewish basketball players in his book, When Basketball was Jewish.
A review from the Jewish book council is here.
NPR reports on "The First Basket," a documentary that details the legacy of Jewish basketball players.
Urban history of Jewish basketball.
Jewish virtual library explains the history here.
When Basketball Was Jewish from NY Jewish Week.
Charlie Rosen's book, Chosen Game details the history of Jewish basketball.
Mental Access: Self-fulfilling Prophecy
Hodge, Kozub, et. al. explain that the social class accessibility of certain sports also combines with stereotypes that Whites and Blacks have about themselves and each other which also influences their confidence, motivation and thus their likelihood of success in certain sports. Those mental stereotypes manifest in physical differences and they start as early as high school.
