Another facet to this, and related to what spambot was saying, is that by coming out in this way the players agree controlling the story which is important in this matter. Just going out and 'being gay' would result in tabloid sensationalist reporting if such a story, pictures and eyewitness accounts and all. This way the people in question get to set the stage themselves and have the opportunity to answer questions and really get across the point that it's nothing to be ashamed of. It sets the tone. Especially when you know the media would treat it in a certain way.
Someone doesn't come out as gay to their parents by bringing a man home, because it wouldn't give them the opportunity to take it in the news and ask what they need to ask me.
How about just being yourself and to hell with what other people think? Sure there are folks who hate others because of their choice between taco and sausage. There are folks who hate others because of the color of their skin. Everybody hates someone else, it's the way of the world.
The folks I hate, along with Squeeler fans and liberals, are those who demand I accept them. I don't have to accept or like you. It's my choice. There are laws in place that say I can't discriminate against you for any reason, so it's not like my feelings are having any effect on your life.
I take great pride in being myself. I was literally the only football player at our college who majored in English. Get into those upper level courses, and I was usually the only Christian and Republican in there as well. Guys on the team made fun of me because I read poetry. My classmates (at first) thought I was just a big dumb jock. I didn't care then and I care even less now.
On a more general note, I find it strange the amount of people that are against gay players coming out citing things like 'I don't care who they sleep with'.... Well just ignore it then. It doesn't impact your life any. Don't click the links, turn the TV or page over.
It's the 21rst century version of our parent's and grandparent's old saw about "I have nothing against negroes, I just don't see why they need to make such a fuss about where people can sit on a bus."
Actually, the more I compare the two, the more apt the comparison to the civil rights movement becomes.
Sure, blacks should have been able to simply walk up to a lunch counter or voting booth, but without the orchestrated actions of the civil rights leaders and their fellows, does anyone here seriously wan to suggest they would have succeeded?
Before it became acceptable, they had to fight in the court of public opinion and in the Courts of Law to make serious and permanent change. And we as a country are better for their struggle. Even though there are racist bigots today who they haven't yet reached.
Well obviously, it's just wanting to keep the people in the LGBT community in their place. It's at best a lack of empathy and not appreciating the privilege of being straight in a heteronormative society, and at worst passive homophobia. I had an exchange on twitter with someone who was basically saying 'we don't need to know who they sleep with' and after a while their argument boiled down to 'well I have no problems being straight, why should they have problems just being gay' which is an incredibly blinkered view that comes from having not faced those challenges.
I think ASB is spot on with the comparisons.
I know my own experience is very similar to many during the racially charged 50's and 60's. I was the biggest homophobe I knew. Looking back, it was because I simply didn't know any gay people, or so I thought, and I was afraid of the unknown.
Then, around 2004, I learned one of my best male friends was gay. Shortly there after, I moved away from Baltimore to San Francisco for a year. You can't help but interact with the gay community there. Once I learned more and more, it became clear how silly I was being.
This issue strengthened my stances toward libertarianism even further.
Its going to be tough for gay players to be accepted in the NFL though.
If there's any type of special announcement, I can promise you what the reaction will be; 90 percent of the population (like myself) are going to say, "So?" 5 percent are going to grab pitchforks and start acting like asses. The other 5 percent are gonna say, "Well we're obviously the only group in the history of forever that's been picked on", and start acting like asses. After that starts, dipshit group A will swear the 90 percent who don't care are heathens and trying to destroy America. Dipshit group B will swear the 90 percent who don't care are insensitive pricks.
So I guess after this happens, I'll be a heathenish, insensitive prick out to destroy America. Darned good thing it's only the gays who are ever insulted or my feelings might get hurt.
I've given this issue honest consideration over the years and have changed quite a bit.
I was just mulling this over the other day after thinking about how tired I was of the incessant new coverage. I realized though, constant newsworthy events are what has to happen if a change is going to come. This issue has to run its course. The only way to make an impacting change is through a cultural paradigm shift. The only way to make a cultural paradigm shift is by constantly pressing the issue to force people to think about and acknowledge that there is an existential issue.
I wonder if people make those same assumptions about Chris Kluwe and Scott Fujita.
Don't usually watch Jon Stewart, but I happened to catch this and got a kick out of it. Pretty clever.
Starting at 3:40
So now gay people are attacked with water hoses, lynched, have ferocious dogs set on them, and banned from eating in certain restaurants?
That maybe the single biggest piece of bullshit I've ever read on here, and I remember Galin.
The only argument gay people have is the right to marry, and I promise that one would go away if they'd just compromise and argue for Civil Unions.
And hey, those no one was stopping those negroes from drinking in water fountains or sitting on buses either, they just had to know their place.