Opinion: Virtue-Signaling And Basketball Collided In SDSU's Championship Games

By Peter C. Herman, Times of San Diego

April 16, 2023

At the beginning of Shakespeare’s Love’s Labour’s Lost, the King of Navarre and three companions decide to form a philosophical academy and so, for three years, they will live an austere life. They swear to fast one day a week, and for the rest, eat one meal a day; allow themselves only three hours of sleep; and most importantly, to forswear the company of women.

No sooner, however, do they agree to these strict observances than news arrives that the Princess of France has arrived (with her three companions) on a diplomatic mission, and she must see the King of Navarre. So much for forswearing the company of women.

Shakespeare’s point in this delightful comedy is that one shouldn’t agree to conditions that life won’t let you enforce. Otherwise you look foolish at best, and hypocritical at worst.

That’s the situation San Diego State University faced with the basketball championship game. Certainly, it’s thrilling that SDSU made national news with a basketball team which almost won the NCAA title. Lamont Butler’s sinking the winning point by a fraction of a second is one of the great moments in sports. Even basketball great Charles Barkley couldn’t believe it.

The game against Florida Atlantic, and the subsequent championship game against the University of Connecticut, however, took place in Houston, and Assembly Bill 1887 forbids travel to and spending state funds in Texas as well as 22 other states. Like Shakespeare’s King of Navarre, SDSU faced a problem, and like Shakespeare’s king, SDSU found a loophole.

La Monica Everett-Haynes, SDSU’s head of strategic communications, assures me that SDSU obeyed the letter of the law: “To ensure compliance with the law, general fund or tuition dollars (state funding) are not being utilized to cover any tournament travel costs; the university is relying on philanthropic, foundation, and auxiliary funds to cover these costs.”

But that ignores the law’s goal, which is to exact a financial penalty on Texas for policies that the California Legislature finds discriminatory against LGBTQ persons. “California,” the preamble says, “must take action to avoid supporting or financing discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people.”

No state funding means not supporting the Texas economy with tax dollars. Granted, there are exceptions, such as “Enforcement of California law, including auditing and revenue collection.” But sports events are not among them.

According to Everett-Haynes, many more people than the team and coaches travelled to Houston. “More than 600 SDSU students” went to the game. Several planes were chartered for the purpose. “Approximately 33 non-athletics personnel from across the university and all its auxiliaries,” also went.

They all needed hotel rooms and restaurants, not to forget the hospitality suites for the “approximately 3,000 SDSU donors, alumni and fans who attended the networking activities.” Precise numbers are not available, but it’s not unreasonable to assume that collectively, well over $1 million poured into the Texas economy.

Imagine if SDSU had decided to follow the spirit of AB 1887, and said that due to the discriminatory policies of the Abbott administration, they could not, would not travel to Texas. They could not, would not use their monies to support the economy of a state so opposed to gay rights. SDSU could have offered Viejas Arena for this game, or offered to play anywhere in any state not covered by AB 1887. Imagine what a statement that would have made!

Imagine also if the money that went into chartering private jets went instead into the library. Or hiring tenure-track faculty. Or lowering class sizes. Or, really, anything having to do with education.

But SDSU did not do that. Instead of standing on principle, SDSU decided to find a way around AB 1887, even though that meant supporting and financing “discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender people” by pouring money into the Texas state economy.

All of which begs the question: what’s the point of AB 1887 if, the moment it’s inconvenient, the law gets set aside? What’s the point of a boycott if you break the boycott the moment there’s an actual price?

AB 1887 is thus a classic example of virtue-signaling, of publicly announcing opinions or sentiments meant to demonstrate one’s moral probity. But too often virtue signaling is nothing but hollow rhetoric; it has the appearance of virtue, but no substance.

Peter C. Herman is a professor of English literature at San Diego State University. He has published on Shakespeare, Milton and the literature of terrorism, and has published essays in Salon, Newsweek, Inside Higher Ed, and Times of San Diego. His next book will be Early Modern Others: Resisting Bias in Renaissance Literature (Routledge).

Times of San Diego is an independent online news site covering the San Diego metropolitan area. Our journalists report on politics, crime, business, sports, education, arts, the military and everyday life in San Diego. No subscription is required, and you can sign up for a free daily newsletter with a summary of the latest news.