The UFC, Cain Velasquez and the Problem with Racial Marketing

The build-up to the title fight at UFC 121 between Cain Velasquez and Brock Lesnar for the UFC Heavyweight Title was one seeped in controversy. The UFC felt they had an unmarketable contender in Cain Velasquez and thus decided to focus on his Mexican heritage as his defining characteristic. Not that he's an undefeated prospect. Not that he has basically destroyed everything that's been put in front of him. But that he is of Mexican descent and would be the first Mexican (despite being born in America) heavyweight champion in combat sports. The error of that statement aside, this choice has the potential to harm Cain more than it helps him.

Flash back to 2004 at the Democratic National Convention. A young charismatic Black Senator named Barack Obama spoke in front of millions and captivated us all. One of the big marketing factors in Obama's presidency was that he would be the first Black President in U.S. history (despite being only 1/2 Black). The ads started running Obama as potentially the first Black President who might be able to do a good job rather than a guy who might be able to do a good job who happened to be Black. To the Democrats' credit, the color of Obama's skin was not the only, or even primary, element of his "push" for office. Nevertheless, it was a substantial part. Fast forward to now and we have been through some of the most vitriolic, anti-President years in quite some time. Why is that? Though some would argue Obama's performance as the reason, any reasonable observer would note the amount of hate is not proportional especially in comparison to past presidencies.

The American public (and by that, I mean White people) is very sensitive when it comes to issues regarding race. The "race card" has become a common term thrown out to combat many valid claims of racial inequity. White people, based on the very unique history of America, have many unresolved issues with race and thus have a heightened sense of anxiety when the subject is broached. This phenomenon is something I've personally witnessed dozens of times over the course of my life. The majority of responses largely fall into two separate categories, either a) the ultra-liberal we live in a PC world and race doesn't matter/we are all equal or b) a 2nd more angry, more combative response to discussions of race. Thus, in my opinion, it's best to avoid bringing race into the public fora when possible in order to maintain a sense of civility (which is why I didn't write this weeks ago). That is not to say "Don't talk about race", but it is saying "Don't make race an issue where it doesn't need to be". It's like opening Pandora's Box.

So what do we have in Cain? The general public knows nothing about Cain except that his father was an illegal immigrant and that he has a "Brown Pride" tattoo on his chest. The UFC has chosen to market him as the "Mexican champion" and thus, the UFC has given us no other reason to care or identify with him. Thus, the UFC has opened Cain up to a thorough examination by the American public. Cain is an American-born man who has lived his entire life on American soil. He speaks perfect English and went to American schools paid for by American taxes. And yet, he chooses to claim Mexican. Not even "Mexican-American", but just Mexican. To many it looks like he is rejecting his country.

You have to understand the current political environment to understand why this is an issue. Recently, the issue of Mexican illegal immigration has become a pervasive issue in the American public. Many Americans, wrongly or rightly, are against illegals coming across the border and becoming a "tax burden" on an already burden-heavy economy. That is exasperated by the idea that Mexicans undergo a form of self-segregation and isolationism creating pockets of population within our country and not assimilating. They point to instances of families 3 generations living in America that still speak no English. 

The most blatant item of controversy is Velasquez's "Brown Pride" tattoo that has been the topic of conversation for a couple years. Many point to the tattoo as a form of racism, calling out a double standard that if a White fighter had "White Pride" on his chest he would be a racist. They say if he's proud of Mexico, then why didn't he get "Mexican Pride". Still others don't believe that it's racist so much as it's associated with a widespread Latino gang responsible for murder, rape and robbery primarily in that very area of California that Cain represents. Cain's tattoo is an exact replica of the tattoos that adorn the chest of thousands of Brown Pride gang members. Cain has stated that his tattoo is 100% unrelated to that gang. Whether or not one believes his story is one thing, but the speculation will be there. 

The common rebuttal to these feelings is "Why can *insert name of White fighter* claim his heritage, but it's a problem for Cain?" The answer? White Privilege. You see, being White in America affords you certain societal privileges. A White fighter who claims Italian Pride (like Rocky), isn't going to be looked down upon by the majority of society because at the end of the day he's White. Just like them. . There's nothing "off-putting" about him. There's no current conflict with the Italians or the Irish or the Polish. A brown fighter claiming Brown Pride appears to be an outsider primarily because of the current conflict with illegal Mexican immigrants. Is that a double standard? Yes. Just as it is a double standard that a White fighter can't have "White Pride" tattooed on his chest. We live in a world of double standards, the faster people realize this, the better off they will be. People argue that it's about "history"; actually, it's more about "current events". Ask the post 9/11 Muslims.

If Dana White had advertising executives on staff, they certainly would've presented this dilemma to him. You cannot mass market race without negative backlash. It's been shown over the course of history. To me, there's a marked difference between Cain, the UFC fighter who happens to be Mexican and Cain, the Mexican who happens to be a fighter. The former is easier on the social palette while the latter is not. The UFC did not give fans any alternatives; they sold the fight on race. It's almost as if the fight was secondary and the primary focus was on Cain being the first Mexican Heavyweight Champion in combat sports. It's almost unfortunate, as Cain, like Obama in 2004, put on a star-making performance Saturday, utterly destroying the juggernaut named Brock Lesnar. That performance in and of itself would've made him a star while supported by some good strong marketing. Now Cain has the stench of racial pandering about him.

So, where are we now? The honest answer is we don't know. We have no way of knowing how the general public will react to Cain and the way he's been marketed to the general public. Hopefully there's not a backlash, but a small part of me can't help but hope there is so the UFC doesn't try this Vince McMahon-esque BS again. The fact that MMA "fans" and "media" implicitly gave the green light for this lowest common denominator advertising scheme is as disappointing as it is funny. Dana White didn't "have to market" Cain like this. There were other ways of presenting Cain to the public. Just another case of missing the long while grabbing for the short.

Follow me on Twitter

SBN coverage of UFC 121: Lesnar vs. Velasquez