Players’ View: Is Baseball Ready for an Openly Gay Player?
O.co Coliseum prepares for the Athletics’ LGBT Pride Night.
The Athletics had an LGBT Pride event Wednesday night, and the night was peppered with love for many people that haven’t always felt comfortable at the ballpark.
Opera Singer Breanna Sinclaire, the first trans singer accepted into the San Francisco Conservatory of Music’s master’s program according to the San Francisco Chronicle, sang the anthem. According to Major League Baseball, she was also the first trans singer to perform the anthem.
MLB ambassador of inclusion Billy Bean was in the building, and was part of the impetus for the event, as the news of this event came out after he addressed the Athletics in Spring Training.
Sean Doolittle’s partner Eireann Dolan helped improve the event, as she not only offered to buy back tickets from disgruntled ticketholders with a heartfelt and funny letter, but also started a GoFundMe to help pay for even more donated tickets to members of Our Space, AIDS Project East Bay and Frameline, a nonprofit LGBTQ cinema foundation.
It seemed like a good time to ask the ballplayers willing to comment about the issue at hand: is baseball ready for an openly gay player, and what obstacles might they face when it happens? Even with a few “no comments,” the opinions given all had their own unique angle, and showed that even a ready country and sport will not make the first openly gay player’s professional life easy.
Athletics pitcher Sonny Gray: “I don’t think it would be a problem with pretty much anyone. I don’t think it would be a problem at all. I’m not really sure what problems they’d face, I’ve never really thought about it. I’m sure it will happen sooner than later, and I think that when that times comes, it’ll be completely fine with everyone.”
Athletics outfielder Sam Fuld: “I don’t think there’s any doubt that baseball’s ready. I just think we’re ready, especially now that there’s been a little bit of movement in basketball and football, since Jason Collins and Michael Sam — at least to some degree — paved the way for a major leaguer to come out. If there’s any clubhouse in any part of the country that’s ready for it, this is it. The Bay Area is certainly a progressive place. Inevitably there is going to be some backlash. Not necessarily from inside the clubhouse, but outside. I think you can equate it to some degree with Jackie Robinson, and the pioneering that he did. Certainly a different dynamic, but there are a lot of parallels. If a player were to come out, he’d certainly get heckled, and I’m sure that would be a challenge. Inevitably, whether it happens tomorrow or five years from now, it’s going to be challenging for the player. But for that player, it would probably be worth it in the long run. And in the short run — you hear people talk about what a relief it is to come out and be comfortable with themselves. They’d probably be willing to deal with the negative commotion that comes with it.”
Athletics outfielder Josh Reddick: “It’s tough to say. You never know until it actually happens. I don’t want to say we are and say we aren’t at the same time, but I don’t know how guys will act in certain situations. It’s just something we have to wait for to see when it happens. A lot of guys are so used to not dealing with it, and not even really thinking about it. Not saying all of us are homophobes by any means, it’s just never know how it’s going taken by certain guys, what guys are not going to want to change in front of them, because you never know how comfortable they are going to be in that perspective. It’s not like we’d treat him any different in here or out there; he’s still your teammate, and that’s what you gotta focus on.”
Padres pitcher Tyson Ross: “I think this country as a whole is evolved from where we were a long time ago — events like this. I don’t think it really matters. People are people, baseball players are baseball players. I come from a pretty diverse place, growing up in the Bay Area, but I think it’s about letting the best players play. That’s what it’s about.”
Padres outfielder Justin Upton: “Baseball is a sport that’s America’s game. As far as being American, you can do what you want to do and be who you want to be. It’s one of those things where, any time you’re the first person to do anything, there’s going to be a lot of media, a lot of things going on, and those are things that the person would have to handle in that position. But baseball is America’s game and that’s why we live in this country and enjoy these freedoms. If you can hack it, you can play.”
Retired outfielder Billy Bean: “Today is a perfect win for this organization and for baseball. Nobody is expecting them to be experts or to understand fully the magnitude of having a transgender person sing the national anthem… Whether the players are ready to let it scratch the surface of their consciousness, I think the bigger, more important point is that fans and the community see what the A’s stand for, and it’s going to have a lasting impression on a lot of people that aren’t going to have the chance to say thank you today… It’s just a simple message of acceptance and embracing our differences. The beauty is that today, we have one thing in common: we all love baseball. There are a lot kids, all types, especially in the LGBT community, where an environment like this was a source of great pain and fear because they did not feel that they could be themselves.
“When you’re playing pickup basketball in the park, three or five on each side, they don’t know each other when they get there, but if you become one group and you work together and you win, then you get to keep playing and playing, and there’s a fairness to that… For me, knowing what it felt like even on the field, when I just buried my secret deeper and deeper, even then I was afraid to tell my own family. I chose to leave baseball before I had the talk with my own parents. My mom said it was harder for them to accept that I wasn’t a baseball player than it was for them to accept that I was gay because they love that so much. It was like a knife in my heart because at that time I’d been out of baseball for two years and I didn’t realize that me walking away took that away from my family.
“That’s the core of the message when I do talk to players. It’s not about changing the way they think, or their religion, it’s really about the wonderful opportunity and privilege it is to be a baseball player, and all the wonderful things that go with that. And now that baseball is supportive of the message of inclusion for every type of diversity that wants to come through the turnstiles, or hopefully work for a team someday, I don’t think they find it such a huge obstacle to get past. I think they see the simplicity of that.”
Thanks to Nathaly Morga for the header image.
With a phone full of pictures of pitchers' fingers, strange beers, and his two toddler sons, Eno Sarris can be found at the ballpark or a brewery most days. Read him here, writing about the A's or Giants at The Athletic, or about beer at October. Follow him on Twitter @enosarris if you can handle the sandwiches and inanity.
Where’s Torii Hunter’s quote?
I’m sure there are many homophobic players in baseball, but most have the good sense to keep their mouths shut. I’m sure there are racists and other types of awful people, too. Luckily we’ve moved to a place in society where it isn’t considered okay to dislike people for being gay, even under the guise of something else.
Ask and ye shall receive:
Former Angels outfielder Torii Hunter, among baseball’s most thoughtful and intelligent players, isn’t kidding when he says an “out” teammate could divide a team.
“For me, as a Christian … I will be uncomfortable because in all my teachings and all my learning, biblically, it’s not right,” he says. “It will be difficult and uncomfortable.”
Although I (and essentially any Bible-believing Christian) believes it’s sin, that doesn’t mean I (and all of us Bible-believing Christians) believe LGBT people should not be allowed to play the game in the MLB.
IMHO, give them separate facilities, eg. shower rooms, probably lockers, etc, w/in reason to make it workable. IF you wouldn’t expect female athletes to share the same shower rooms, locker rooms, etc. as male athletes, then you shouldn’t expect a straight man to share likewise w/ a gay man or similar. Beyond such, there’s no real reason why a gay man or a straight woman or most anyone else mature (and talented) enough can’t play in the MLB.
This sin doesn’t have to be treated like the plague or something of the sort. We are all sinners and each have our own sins to deal w/, but that doesn’t automatically disqualify us from whatever jobs/careers we choose. We’re not talking about being a homocidal maniac or similar afterall…
As for non-believers who object to it being called a sin at all, well, we all have our own beliefs and biases… whether we readily acknowledge such or not…
Shalom…
Right, because separate facilities has always worked historically for equality.
How inclusive of you to suggest that a gay athlete should have a separate locker room.
So are you saying MLB should also force female ballplayers to share the same shower rooms, locker rooms, etc. w/ the male ones if we ever have female ballplayers reach the MLB?
Inclusion and equality doesn’t mean everyone should be forced to feel comfortable w/ having all their private parts, etc. be visible to everyone else, does it?
My point is do what’s sensible/reasonable.
Perhaps another option might be to simply not allow players to walk around naked (or even half-naked) in the shower rooms or locker rooms then, if they must share such…
I’ve got a better idea: separate facilities for the uncomfortable “Bible-believing” players who can’t handle it. Everybody else can use the main clubhouse.
I hate to break this to you, but professional athletes are already sharing lockerrooms with gay teammates. And many of them are well aware of it.
You don’t have to be comfortable. Have you ever been to a public Gym or pool change room? Get over it. Having openly gay players make you uncomfortable is hardly akin to having to share a single change room with members of the opposite sex. Addditionally, there’s been at least a handful of closeted big leaguers, so it’s not as if it’s all that new.
At no point did I say women should share bathrooms with men. I said that it’s crazy, and quite frankly insulting, to suggest that men who are gay cannot share a shower room or locker room with straight man.
It’s neither reasonable or sensible, it’s discriminatory and disgusting that you’d even suggest it.
I don’t even know what to say but you’re either an excellent troll or a despicable human being. You can hide behind religion all you want, but not all Christians believe this nonsense. You, “TheUncool”, simply hates or fears gays and you’re trying to push your idea as a religious belief, when that’s pure bullshit.
I’m not going to continue wasting my time arguing this, because as I said, you’re either trolling, or an awful person, and neither option is worth my time.
Or they could just treat a teammate like a teammate. Do you think every woman is interested in your junk? They aren’t. Why would you assume that a gay man would be?
The point isn’t whether some players are already comfortable w/ it.
The point is what should and should not be forced on every player… both those already in the MLB and those who might be in the future.
And isn’t whether I personally am uncomfortable w/ another gay person seeing my own parts, etc.
IF you’re going to make rules that everyone must follow, you have to allow for the reality that some will be uncomfortable.
Heck, I don’t know that all female athletes would be uncomfortable sharing a shower room or a locker room w/ male athletes. But there probably are enough who are to make that allowance, no?
Don’t be so intolerant of other people’s beliefs, feelings, etc. while proudly promoting your own brand of self-proclaimed tolerance, acceptance, etc.
I see what you’re saying, separate but equal.
LOL, people are so reactionary…
Why do think the idea that “this is where the baseball players get dressed” is even 1% controversial? A locker room is a workplace. Does your workplace have a smorgasbord of bathrooms or do they pretty much divide it by whether standing up to pee will work for you or not?
Pot,”Don’t be so intolerant of other people’s beliefs, feelings, etc. while proudly promoting your own brand of self-proclaimed tolerance, acceptance, etc.”
Pot, meet kettle.
And no, I’m not saying the separate facilities idea must be the only way. That’s just one possible idea.
IF that’s not acceptable, find some other way to make it workable.
IF no players (both present and future) are actually bothered by sharing shower rooms, etc. or anything else, then sure, no such need at all.
But don’t just jump right to the conclusion that nobody should be allowed to object at all no matter what…
@Twitchy,
At my workplace, there’s no culture of walking around naked or even half-naked in front of my fellow coworkers either. Heck, I’m not even allowed to wear tank top and shorts, LOL.
Some workplaces don’t allow anything particularly revealing at all for professional attire.
Oops, that last reply should not have been directed to Twitchy, but to vonstott (and whoever else believes there should be absolutely zero concern at all regarding sharing certain relatively private spaces in such situations).
TheUncool, I’m not clear why you think uncomfortable straight players (religious or otherwise) need to be accommodated in the first place.
This is America. Freedom of choice! If you don’t like sharing a locker room with gay people, you’re free to choose to not go to the gym. Just like if a racist isn’t comfortable sharing a restaurant with a black person, they can choose to eat at home.
And if Torii Hunter isn’t comfortable sharing a locker room with a gay teammate because he’s squeamish, he can retire. Nobody’s forcing anybody to do anything. Freedom!
“give them separate facilities”
“doesn’t have to be treated like the plague”
The uncool…ppl are jumping on you because of the locker room thing, I took the good from what you said, that being that not all “believers” would necessarily think it’s a dividing issue. Whereas toriI might have been speaking for himself, sometimes when you say “as a Christian” ppl might think all christians, and that certainly isn’t the case
@Andy,
Let me get this straight. People should have freedom of choice.
But Torii Hunter should just retire rather than have the freedom to not be put on the spot for being uncomfortable about sharing certain private spaces or be treated like an outcast as soon as self-proclaimed tolerant, freedom-loving people dominate the scene?
NVM that there might be workable solutions to allow everyone to be comfortable enough and not necessarily be treated as outcasts. We won’t try to find any such solutions, but will just shoot first and not bother to ask later…
Got it.
@TheUncool: yes.
It’s ridiculous that you think having separate facilities would not mean treating a person forced to use those facilities “as an outcast.” That’s simply delusional.
Your argument is that THEY (gay people) should be the outcasts, not US (homophobes).
I’m not going to convince you that you’re wrong, but I don’t have to. You’re losing, around the country and the world. It’s over. Either adjust your attitude, or get used to being uncomfortable, or get used to being an outcast.
@TheUncool
Or, of course, Torii Hunter can shower and change somewhere else. That’d be up to him. We can put HIM in separate facilities, where he’ll be nice and comfortable.
@Andy,
Then by all means, have MLB provide separate set of facilities for anyone not comfortable w/ sharing the same such spaces in that manner.
I did subsequently clarify that I didn’t mean MLB has to put gay people in those separate facilities or that having separate facilities must be the only way.
Do what’s sensible and workable. Maybe separate facilities are needed for the near term, but not in the long run. Maybe not.
But we won’t really know if folks will not even allow discussion on this issue…
TheUncool, there are dozens of comments’ worth of “discussion” of the issue right here. Nobody’s disallowing anything.
People are mocking you because you have a bad and wrong position. Let’s discuss it all day. You’re just upset that you’re so far in the minority on this.
Tough shit.
@GoOppo, apparently, somebody didn’t like your sympathetic comment enough to vote it down, LOL. Talk about (in)tolerance.
@Andy, yeah, “tough shit” is a great way to win an argument. And nice try w/ claiming I’m just “upset” about being the “minority” here, LOL…
@TheUncool.
Scoreboard.
Not just here, nationwide. Nobody’s buying this crap any more.
I’m not trying to win an argument any more; I’m just mocking you. Like I said, the “argument” is pretty much all over but the shouting, now. Instead, I’m telling you personally, with your wrong-side-of-history whining: tough shit.
@Andy,
You’re right nobody’s *technically* not allowing discussion in one sense, but what meaningful discussion can be had if those disagreeing will simply resort to this sort of approach to disagreement as soon as the matter begins?
Theuncool…honestly Idc if someone votes me down or up. I dont agree with some of what you said. But I didn’t step up and offer the perfect locker room solution before you tried your hand. It’s refreshing to hear someone, who like torii, is well christian, and doesn’t automatically see this as a dividing issue. Some people come on here to pick apart other peoples comments. It’s their moral gladiatorial arena. Don’t fight them about your opinion, right or wrong, that’s what they want. This is a free country and people are allowed (encouraged i would hope, so long as its not hateful or bigoted)feel any way they want to.
And gotta love the “wrong side of history” bulletpoint too.
Do people even know how to discuss anything w/out resorting to endless polarizing rhetoric?
And yes, I’m directing that last criticism towards the so-called excessively politicized Religious Right as well.
Poor you… nobody will “discuss” your opinion with you on your terms, because they don’t respect it.
I know you think you’re a special snowflake, but you aren’t entitled to being taken seriously if you don’t make worthwhile points. Nothing you’ve said here yet is worth being taken seriously, and I very much doubt anything is forthcoming. Enjoy the rest of your day.
@GoOppo,
Truth is… I suspect we’d all be walking around naked and not be bothered one bit if sin didn’t enter the world (and human nature). Afterall, Adam & Eve clearly didn’t notice and wasn’t bothered until after the Fall.
Take care and be well.
And yes, despite the apparent hate, I do wish everyone else well too…
Shalom…
When your reason for ANYTHING is: “My imaginary friend in the sky says so,” I refuse to take you seriously. It’s amazing that, in 2015, this bullshit still holds any sway at all…
So, TheUncool, you say that you say that killing gays would be wrong (“Not saying it’d be ok if my conscience is telling me to go kill gay people or anything remotely like that of course. But that’s also not what we’re talking about here, right?”), but right here in your precious bible it says: “If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives.” (Leviticus 20:13)
I suppose the christians will, of course, insist upon separate facilities for each terrible sin which makes them uncomfortable? Lol. Men who lie to their wives or cheat on the girlfriends or beat their children or drink and drive may shower wherever they please. It’s just the gay men who must be feared and despised. The hypocrisy of christians knows no bounds.
If I was a MLB player, I would be all for this. Then I would come out as gay. My own facilities? Jeah!
He guys, do you want to play XBox that I don’t haveto share? I bet, screw you pitchers. My facilitiez, my rules, bitches!
@Randy,
As GoOppo mentioned in another subthread, we may be treading too far into religion at this point.
But I will reply thus-ly, hoping it is ok enough. Much of the OT indeed present difficult passages for believers today — heck, the NT itself also present some difficult passages too. The one you referenced is definitely one of them. But I believe having a proper understand of such difficult passages require full context for such. And I doubt this is the right forum to delve that deeply into it.
Consider this NT passage as a hint to part of the answer:
“For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.” (Rom 6:23)
IF (as I claimed) we all sin, then we are all deserving of death according to the Apostle Paul who wrote a large portion of the NT — and yes, Jesus also show similar sentiment. But the point isn’t so much that we’re deserving of death, but that we have a way out thru the free gift.
And no, I’m not espousing the notion that people should be put to death for their sins.
What I would add is that context is crucial, and our context in the USA today certainly isn’t the same as the context of OT Israel, especially back when Leviticus was given to that people…
Shalom…
Pity the poor christian who embraces their biblical bigotry and clings to it out of fear and ignorance. They do not think for themselves, that’s scary stuff. They think as the ancients thought. They fear as the ancients feared. They are ignorant as the ancients were ignorant. Pity the poor fearful and ignorant christian.
Sigh…
All Christians must apparently be dumb or do not think for themselves to believe in something “religious”…
This may come off as snarky, but it’s not supposed to be – it’s a genuine question about where the line you suggest should be drawn. Some players have religious beliefs that clearly bar tattoos. Should their teammates who do have tattoos be required to use separate showering facilities, if the religious teammate objects?
“You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks upon you: I am the LORD.” Leviticus 19:28.
@CuriousCuria,
Let me put it simpler then. Forget that I even mentioned the sin (or Christian) thing.
Why might you draw a line at female vs male sharing the same shower and locker rooms, but not this? I did actually point that out in the same breath (more or less).
There are, afterall, a lot of people who are fine w/ nude beaches, which do not require one to be some sort of pro athlete to visit and enjoy. So why would most(?) draw the line there for pro athlete shower and locker rooms instead of here?
BTW, let me be clear.
I do not personally believe being naked in front of a straight person is necessarily any better or worse than being naked in front of a gay person.
I am not saying I would somehow feel violated myself if a gay person saw me naked in a shower room. Heck, that gay person might well feel more violated than me that he/she has to see me naked at all.
I am talking about finding solutions that’s workable/agreeable enough for all in light of the reality of the situation, which includes a variety of beliefs and feelings across a wide range of people. And yes, there may always be some tiny minority who will be too unhappy, etc, but that’s not the same as rejecting attempts to find some sort of middle ground and saying “my way or the highway”…
You have the perfect name, because all of this caveman rhetoric you’re spouting with the genuine belief that what you’re saying is reasonable makes you seriously “uncool”. There was a time when people felt uncomfortable about African Americans dining at a table beside them in a restaurant. That’s no more justification for refusing to seat African Americans than is a ballplayer’s discomfort at undressing in front of a gay man justification for forcing gay men to have separate facilities. Gay guys don’t want your straight manparts, and if you’re worried that they do, then that’s on you, not them. I can’t tell if you’re a message board troll, or an actual troll. Either way, get bent.
@Harry,
Perhaps, the fault lies in me not clarifying myself enough from the get-go.
IF you’ve read a few more of my comments, especially the last one in this subthread just ahead of yours, you will see that’s not what I’m getting at.
Heck, I thought I was reasonably quick to clarify that a workable solution doesn’t need to be what my 1st suggestion was — maybe I should’ve realized sooner I’d get this type of response, but then again, I also thought most visitors to FG are smart enough to not be quite so quick to jump the gun and keep running w/ it. Anyway, I’ll admit that may have been poor judgement on my part.
RE: TheUncool handle I (regularly) use, it’s mainly a reference to what Lester Bangs says in Almost Famous, not specific to this series of comments (although you’re probably right that it applies in this case).
Also, as I’ve hinted somewhere in these comments, if the world (and people) is perfect, nobody would feel uncomfortable being naked in front anyone else — well, that’s what I believe anyway…
Shalom…
Some people’s hangups just aren’t worthy of compromise, and history provides ample evidence of this. If you’re a man, and you’re uncomfortable undressing in front of gay men because they’re gay, then it’s on you to get over it. There is a workable solution to the situation: treat gay man the same as straight men, regardless of how uncomfortable it might make people feel. As far as I’m concerned, it’s the only workable solution. Ballplayers’ homophobia is not deserving of compromise.
@Harry,
You might be right that it shouldn’t matter in the long run (and I’ve hinted at that myself), but in the near term, is it right to simply force it?
“Beyond such, there’s no real reason why a gay man or a straight woman”
What about gay women?
I think a lot of the separate shower/locker room people are missing the point that gay or straight a man is a man. And within that club house those men are employees contracted to play ball. If they don’t feel comfortable having a gay dude in the clubhouse. I don’t think the holders of their contracts care. Bye. With the money these guys make to play a child’s game I don’t think many will even bat an eye if a team mate came out. And they are a piece of shit If they do, get over your self they are not hurting you.
I’ve never really understood this separate locker room thing. Like, umm guys, gay or straight, you got the same parts. What’s the big deal?
Doesn’t the Bible preach about loving your brothers and (locker) neighbors though?
There isn’t a more hate and fear-based religion than Christianity. Plus, when is god going to show up and tell us what to do? Its been 2015 years, it ain’t happening.
Religion gives people a lot of comfort…in facing a world thats been destroyed by religion.
Be careful, I’m not sure if you’re allowed to put things so perfectly here in the comments section
Yes to that 1st question.
But what does love mean? Does that mean we must never speak from our consciences about what’s right and wrong? Does that mean we must never shown concern based on our consciences?
Sure, you may believe my conscience is faulty, but it *is* my conscience. Am I (or Torii Hunter) not allowed to have my conscience, but only some “right side of history” or whatever conscience dictated by someone else?
Not saying it’d be ok if my conscience is telling me to go kill gay people or anything remotely like that of course. But that’s also not what we’re talking about here, right?
As for your understanding of Christianity (and probably truth in general), talk about being bigoted and/or ignorant while assuming that’s what Christianity must be or how truth must work or that the Christian God must do what you suggest in order to be real.
Let me know when you’re able to readily and rigorously prove to everyone else even a fraction of the truths to which you hold. Start with proving who your great, great, great, grandfather is. And if you can’t rigorously prove who he is, does that mean you didn’t/don’t have one or that he can’t be the one? Sure, you’re probably not ready to die for that truth or the like, but surely, you don’t want other people to say bad things about him anyhow (and will continue to have whatever respect for him), right?
“There isn’t a more hate and fear-based religion than Christianity.”
You really aren’t all that familiar with the history of Islam, I see. Or the history of Hinduism, Buddhism, or for that matter non-theistic belief systems like Communism.
*Humans* run on hate, fear, and tribalism, and have for millenia. Singling out one group just shows your own bigotry.
Everyone, everyone, everyone….relax. I think the concept of religion is in 2015, strictly profit-based off said fears and unknowns and has ruined the planet. ALL religions need to be made extinct.
Gay or trans people who play baseball should not have to be worried about ignorant religious nuts like Torii Hunter putting forward their beliefs on their sexuality and gender. It should be a non-issue. They see ball, they hit ball. The end.
“Does that mean we must never speak from our consciences about what’s right and wrong?” – if that means demeaning or demonizing others, then yes, you should never speak from your BIGOTED consciences about what IN YOUR OPINON is “right” and “wrong”. Shut your ignorant mouth and leave people alone.
Sigh…
It is apparently demeaning or demonizing toward others to say some people might want some privacy in relatively private spaces…
It does, indeed, but it exhorts Christians to denounce sin and turn their fellow man away from it. For instance, James 5:20 says “Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.”
Well that’s a mind-blowingly ridiculous claim. People like you never grasp the irony of denouncing what you consider to be hateful, bigoted ideas with hateful, bigoted ideas of your own.
Religion can be perverted to evil ends, without question, but you’re blinding yourself to the numerous other forces that have been used in a similar manner. Hitler, Stalin, and Pol Pot adamantly opposed religion. At the risk of playing armchair psychologist, it seems like you have had some kind of bad personal experience with religion that has prompted you to blame it for most of the world’s ills. But that’s your perception, not reality.
Eh…there isn’t a more hate-and-fear based religion than Pauline Christianity. Actual Christianity is about being a good and loving person, just like every other religion (along with some revolutionary proto-socialism. Jesus Christ was a bro.)
Unfortunately, the only practicing version of that version of Christianity is the Unitarian Church, haha.
LOL, Cooler Lester Smooth.
We will have to disagree about what’s true Christianity and what Paul actually teaches then.
For those who actually care and would want to look it up, I would recommend checking Romans 14 (plus also 1 Corinth 13) for something Paul says that’s probably very relevant to this.
In a nutshell, he points out that believers can disagree even on something as seemingly crucial as the sabbath and food placed before idols. And he recommends following one’s own conscience if there’s disagreement and to not force our own conscience on others. And in the other passage, he recommends *always* cover everything we do in love… at least in part because we don’t know everything and thus could be mistaken, need some other guiding force besides knowing the truth or having authority, etc. And yes, he goes into detail what love looks like. What he says in those passages would seem to completely contradict various things already quoted here or there (as arguments against Christianity)… and yet, he was himself a zealot who would’ve gone out of his way to execute all those things… that is, before he became a Christian himself (and taught as he taught in the NT).
So yes, while I believe something is a sin, that doesn’t mean I want the person committing it to be condemned or similar. You could think of it as no different than if I want my own kid or kid brother to learn right from wrong. I’m not looking to condemn my kid or kid brother, and if in the long run, he will not listen to me, so be it… though I will hope that he changes his mind (and heart) before he gets into any serious trouble w/ whatever it is — and even then, I will seek to care for him even if that means visiting him in jail (or the hospital or wherever else) or helping him return to society or full health, etc. afterward.
And no, I lay no claims to being great at doing all that, but then again, I never claimed to be anything other than a sinner myself… except one who believes he’s saved by Christ.
Shalom…
PS: I sure hope I didn’t delve waaaay too deeply into religion for this comment section…
PPS: Well, ok, I did also claim to be “Bible-believing” as well…
@theuncool.There are some pretty hateful comments.. (I am not a practicing catholic anymore) and when my favorite player goes yard and points to the sky or thanks god after the game I would not call him an idiot for his beliefs. I’ve found that being comfortable in what I believe in/or dont…helps me not pile on someone for their “caveman beliefs”. once you delve into the realm of “This bible passage says such and such” or “how on earth can you believe in jesus”…you’re talking to people who will never see your side(or want to maturely debate) because they feel they’re on a higher level, intellectually, not based on your intelligence inventory. Based solely from a belief standpoint. You gotta bail at that point. Your orginal point had some merit. Obviously they picked at what seemed discriminatory (I don’t think you meant it as such. They don’t care)
Cool Lester Smooth, I’m hoping that you’re trolling and not genuinely this ignorant. Christianity doesn’t even come remotely close to being the most “hate and fear-based religion” either in doctrine or actual practice. Furthermore, it is completely false to suggest that all religions are “about being a good and loving person.” Some religions advocate conquest and the subjugation of outsiders.
Forrest Gumption:
Again, you fail to realize that you are repeatedly espousing bigoted, ignorant comments that are “demeaning or demonizing” those with religious beliefs. You are guilty of the exact behavior you claim to deplore.
jd, I’ve studied religious history academically. I think Pope Francis is the man, but the Roman Catholic Church is probably the most historically malevolent, repressive institution of the last 2000 years.
Modern Christianity is something totally different, IMO, because they’ve gotten back to focusing on the stuff that guy Jesus said, but don’t even try to pretend that it was any better than Islam 1400 years after its founding.
And the only religion I’d say doesn’t necessarily boil down to being a good and loving person is Hinduism, which embraces social construction at its finest by attaching morality to performing ones proscribed societal duty.
It’s pretty frustrating when people think like that. His own bible tells him not to judge. He could just as easily say “For me, as a Christian, I am not in a position to judge him, so whether I like or dislike his identity doesn’t come into it, I am going to respect him regardless.”
And, of course, when it comes to some things that are actually wrong, like domestic abuse, then some of these Christians are all too happy to withhold judgment.
This is not a complaint about Christianity, or even about Christians as a group, but rather a complaint about how statements like this are so disingenuous. Torii is a homophobe; his Christianity is tangential.
Agreed. It can all be quite frustrating, especially to someone on the outside sincerely looking in trying to understand.
RE: the do not judge thing, that’s actually not quite what non-believers tend to assume AFAIK. The judgement referenced has to do w/ condemnation… rather than judging right from wrong period.
Obviously, it makes no sense to say you cannot judge right from wrong. But the reference is about assuming the role of the perfect judge, who not only judges right from wrong, but also has the responsibility to sentence and condemn.
Christians are not given that role to condemn AFAIK, but we are called to speak what we believe graciously… in no small part because we ourselves haven’t been extended grace.
But yes, some (perhaps too many) professed Christians are indeed too quick to judge *and* condemn… and I do apologize for my own part in such if/whenever I’ve done likewise…
Shalom…
Sharing a locker room with someone has nothing to do with approving their lifestyle or choices. You need to respect people no matter what their life style. Just because you disapprove doesn’t give you the right to treat people any differently si the point. That is the whole point of why people jumped on the separate facilities. Whether you approve or disapprove with what they may or may not be doing has nothing to do with them as a fellow co-worker. Its fine to have personal beliefs, if you don’t like something you are free to protest or petition but by voicing your opinions in direct or indirect action to a fellow co-worker whether by avoiding them or demanding separate facilities for them that is clearly sending a message to them that interferes with their well being and professional career. Keep religion and politics out of the work place so you and your fellow co-workers can work in peace. If you don’t agree with LGBT laws then protest against them, you are very likely in the minority but that is your right just like those who still believe in creationism and a flat earth. You are free to do anything you want as long as it doesn’t violate the law and infringe ont he safety and freedom of others.
@HighRent,
As I suggested, does your logic apply to female athletes who’d want separate facilities too because the existing shower room and locker room culture is what it is?
As I subsequently clarified, having separate facilities might not be the only solution. Also, if nobody will actually be bothered, then fine. But don’t just jump to the conclusion that nobody *should* be bothered in such private spaces.
You don’t have to be particularly religious to believe somethings would need to change in order to accommodate the inclusion of LGBT people afterall, do you?
That’s my point. Torii thinks it’s wrong to be gay, as do many other Christians. Most of them, in my opinion, feel this way because they were raised to, and not because they studied their bible and formed their opinions from what they believe the word of god to be. However, they are all too happy to quote the bible when it confirms what they already think.
If he really derived his ideas of what’s right and wrong from the bible, he might still feel it’s wrong to be gay, but he would also recognize he has no business making someone feel unwelcome about something that doesn’t concern him.
Now, I could also criticize him for thinking it’s wrong to be gay – something that is basically indefensible at this point – but it’s more fun to criticize him for being a hypocrite.
I don’t honestly know Torii Hunter’s precise rationale for what’s said in that one quote. It’s actually rather vague.
He could be like me or like someone more clearly to the (far) right of center or the like.
But either way, although I agree LGBT people should be allowed to play baseball in MLB just like straight men (and women for that matter). I disagree w/ the notion that straight men must be forced to share shower rooms and locker rooms w/ gay men given the existing cultural norm of shower and locker rooms AFAIK them. That was my main point.
I guess I could’ve probably said that w/out mentioning the sin thing, but the point of mentioning it was more to help explain the Christian POV a bit more… although yes, not every professing Christian has the exact same understanding.
I’m not really sure what your bathroom policy has to do with sin, Christianity, or anything really.
Separate bathrooms are necessary because there are a lot of men out there around whom women have good reason not feel comfortable and safe. If there was a need for separate locker rooms, it would be in the case where the gay player was threatened by the straight players, not because the straight players were uncomfortable. If the gay player made the straight players purposely uncomfortable by doing something sexual, he would be liable for sexual harassment, just like any other person would be if they did so. If he goes about his business in the shower, like all major league players would, then a straight player’s imagined discomfort is not reason for segregation.
Unfortunately, it does get more complicated if we delve into the sin issue anymore deeply.
So far, most everyone seems to assume any talk of “sin” will only refer to the gay person (for being gay). But that’s actually untrue. The concept of sin in the (Biblically grounded) Christian faith goes far beyond that, and I sort of hinted at that w/ comments about how things were before the Fall (in Eden).
Sin (as part of human nature) is also a deception thing, a twisting of the truth. Yes, bear w/ me on this concept for a moment.
Consider the ideas conveyed in the movie, the Matrix. Sin is in a sense something pulled over our eyes just like the Matrix. We see everything thru that lens, that perception of reality. And because of that, yes, we do hold certain irrational fears, hate, etc. We can also “love” in less than ideal ways too as a result (and not realize it).
So yes, is it possible that Torii Hunter or someone else is actually harboring sin-induced fears/discomforts (as some may have suggested w/out calling it sin)? Quite possible, but it’s very hard to be certain. And at the end of the day, given the realities of imperfect people (and finite knowledge), which includes every last one of us, it’s best not to go too far w/ trying to judge him (or somewhere else) for it, especially if/when there’s so much disagreement (and his intention really does not seem to be to cause harm to anyone).
In practice, it’s usually better to simply allow everyone enough freedom and space to work out their disagreements. That’s at least partly why it’s good we have freedom of religion. But some people seem to assume they know everything about the other side(s) and refuse to discuss and find workable solutions.
One thing I forgot to mention re: the deception concept, but I had alluded previously.
Why did Adam & Eve not even realize they were nude before the Fall? Why didn’t it bother them? Why are we bothered by nudity today?
In that sense, original sin has probably twisted just about *all* of our perceptions of nudity… although we may have gradually shifted away from some of the ill effects over the centuries as we become more “enlightened”.
Of course, this concept is just one way of understanding what we see in reality… and maybe not all Christians will agree w/ it, let alone non-Christians…
So what exactly is wrong with what Hunter said? That’s the part I don’t get. The mob is busy with its torches and pitchforks because he was honest about what his religion taught him.
Because it’s hypocritical. His own religion is not instructing him to reject a person. He is uncomfortable around gay people and is hiding behind religion.
But, also, assuming he was genuinely representing his beliefs, discriminating against someone because it’s written in some 2000 year old book is pretty terrible also. Our collective moral consciousness has had many thousands of years of human history from which to evolve, and he’s purposely rejecting all that, at the expense of people’s ability to live openly as who they are. That’s pretty terrible on its own.
And why are you holding Torii Hunter to such high standards just because he says he’s a Christian and was taught some things about being one?
Is he not allowed to feel uncomfortable at all even if it’s irrational?
Since when is rationality an absolute prerequisite for allowing people to feel uncomfortable about something?
Sure, you may wish to teach/show him otherwise, but why should he be forced in the manner demanded?
Must we all really fall in line w/ the political correct doctrine of the day or lose our jobs if we don’t?
Do you simply always force your kids to do what you believe right rather than teach/show them and give them some space to learn and grow, including making some mistakes in the process? And what if you’re actually wrong for a change?
Bip, it’s not hypocritical. As I quoted above regarding the passage in James, the Bible actually directs adherents to speak out against sin and to turn sinners from their ways. You might find it odd or even obnoxious, but it isn’t in any way hypocritical. You only think so because you don’t understand Christianity.
So he should be just as uncomfortable around any teammates who curse or cheat on their spouses since sins are no different in god’s eyes
At a purely rational level, you’re more or less correct — let’s for a moment assume God could be real.
But we don’t anyone of us AFAIK operate only on a purely rational level though.
And it doesn’t have to be a “phobia” — at least the kind people tend to assume — that too many liberals seem to assume or want to smear everyone on the other side.
I mean. You’re not really gonna label a woman male-phobic for not being comfortable sharing a shower room w/ men, even if there’s plenty of security to help ensure nothing bad will happen to her, right?
Yeah, on a purely technical, rational level, I guess you call say at least some of the uncomfortable feeling is due to unnecessary fear, but it might not be anymore so than usual though…
Personally, as I suggested elsewhere, I don’t believe I would personally be any more or less comfortable being naked in front of a straight man or a gay man despite what most everyone have probably assumed about me before my last few comments…
Sure, and there have been plenty of examples throughout the decades of clubhouse friction along those lines.
It’s hard to call Torii Hunter “among baseball’s most thoughtful and intelligent players” and then mention how he’s a Christian and he can’t handle being around someone that is gay.
I like Torii and think he’s a great ambassador for the game. By all accounts he’s a great dude, but I wouldn’t call him thoughtful and intelligent if he can’t get around such a basic issue.
Sam Fuld seems like a pretty goddamn swell dude.
If he could hit then I would turn him into a saint.
Seeing as Pope Francis opposes gay marriage and gay rights in general, I rather doubt that.
If only swell-ness was a metric that showed how being swell helped teams win ballgames.
The Will To Swell.
Putting up a 8 WARHB (Wins Above Replacement Human Being) season
Baseball had an openly gay player from 1976-1979, Glenn Burke.
Gay? Yes. Openly? Not really.
His teammates and management all knew; Davey Lopes said “No one cared about his lifestyle” but there are rumors the Dodgers traded him because of it. And of course afterwards Burke was very candid about his career in interviews with various media.
Of course, he may also have been traded because of his performance. Career -2.7 WAR
There’s a big difference between lots of people knowing you’re gay and talking openly about it with them. I wish I had a good way to describe this difference, but I don’t, so I’m just going to have to ask you to take my word for it, as someone who’s been that guy who everyone knew was gay before he came out.
That’s fair enough. I haven’t read Burke’s memoir so I don’t know how he talked about it in clubhouses etc.
The players may well have all known and not really cared, but Manager Tommy Lasorda certainly wasn’t on board. Ironic given that his son was gay.
Management tried to quash the gay rumors; Dodgers executive Al Campanis Jr. offered Burke $75,000 to get married, which Burke (to his credit) declined. His alleged response (“I guess you mean to a woman”), if true, is pretty funny.
Do you have to appear on Oprah first to be considered “fully out”?
Give that man a high five for knowing Glenn Burke!
I didn’t need him clogging up the basepaths!
Which makes Cam totally wrong in that one episode of Modern Family.
Just looked him up on Wikipedia, and apparently he’s also credited with originating the ‘high-five’.
How is that guy not more popular?
They had an e60 special on him or whatever those are called recently.
Probably because Dusty Baker was the other player who helped co-create the high five, and Dusty Baker is a horrifyingly bad manager who ruined some of the best young pitchers careers of the 00’s in Jason Schmidt, Mark Prior and Kerry Wood, amongst countless others, as he did not believe pitch counts hurt a pitchers arm and they could throw 100-150 pitches every single time they threw.
Eh, Jason Schmidt threw 185 innings the one year he played for Baker. He was 28 and then was fine for another 4 years. Don’t think you can say there were countless others when I can’t think of another young pitcher (maybe Volquez?) who got hurt.
Also FWIW, Dusty Baker came off looking liking a pretty impressive guy in that Glenn Burke short film.
Aaron Harang.
I think that unfortunately there are still a lot of older-school kinda guys in clubhouses who would really dislike having gay players in baseball. I think that it will get easier each year for gay players to be open. But I think locker room culture would be extremely intimidating now and probably for the next few years, but I think it will get better.
Last night, a 20-something co-worker told me he thought it was disgusting to see two men holding hands. And another 20-something told me to stay out of my old neighborhood because black people live there. And I live in the north in what’s supposed to be one of the most progressive towns in the country.
Our culture has a very long way to go, still. It’s not going to be just the old-school guys who have a problem with it.
Were those guys from Boston, though?
Any particular reason you refer to Eireann Dolan as Doolittle’s partner and not his girlfriend?
Can’t speak for Eno, but I generally try to use the words partner and spouse in order to be a little less heteronormative.
“Spouse” is a matrinormative term and also should not be used. I generally avoid “girlfriend” because I’m not in high school anymore.
In the “heartfelt and funny letter” link, Dolan refers to Doolittle as her boyfriend. I assume she’s out of high school as well. But hey, you never know. Also, stop making up words.
Oh so someone is telling us what we should and shouldn’t do? I thought we were trying to NOT do that….
Eh, I say husband/wife and girlfriend/boyfriend regardless of the gender pairings.
Once you’ve been in a relationship for a long time, “girlfriend” and “boyfriend” start to feel a bit silly or childish. Both my (divorced) parents have been in relationships for 5+ years at this point, and I generally refer to their significant others as “partners” because they’re all grownups and the relationships are serious and long-lasting.
To each their own. I know plenty of well grown adults in long lasting relationships that still use boyfriend/girlfriend.
I think the difference here is in what other people call you and your SO without really knowing you and the other person, versus what you label yourself or your own relationship. You can label yourself or your relationship however you want. Before I know you or how you label yourself, its generally safest to go with nondescript terms like “partner” or “significant other”, but once you label your relationship for me, I’ll just use that.
Just didn’t want to use girlfriend for whatever reason. Dunno why.
“Paramour.”
Vague, and gives everyone involved class.
Can’t use (word X) because it might offend (person Y) or (group Z). 2015!
I read Billy Bean as Billy Butler and was astonished.
I had the same reaction when I read it as Billy Beane.
Yeah, “retired outfielder Billy Butler” would be quite the shock to the system.
Where is Kris bryant and Jacob deGrom quotes? Those dudes definitely look gay.
Grow up. Nobody’s impressed.
You never know but… DeGrom, with that hair? I highly doubt it. Bryant on the other hand, wouldn’t that be nice! yum.
My gaydar is pretty precise and it agrees with you on Bryant, but cmon man.
Who else is on your gaydar? I feel weird asking this, because I’m not trying to be crude, just curious.
To paraphrase Shaggy:
It’s some prick who thinks that using my handle to say horrid shit will somehow validate the fact that he’s draining our planet of precious oxygen while contributing nothing to anyone around him.
I thought so. You say a lot of stuff I disagree with, but I always thought you were one of the better commenters here.
Kris Bryant’s girlfriend is Jessica Delp.
https://twitter.com/jessicadelp3
I’m sorry that the Red Sox haven’t been good this year, and/or that you don’t know that calling someone a 1/2/3/4/5 starter is a scouting term, not 1-30/31-60/61-90/91-120/121-150, but:
Fuck off and grow up, you stupid twat.
Jacob deGrom is married
Yeah, but still.
For the longest time, I thought MLB was already very progressive with an openly gay GM in Billy Beane because no one ever brought up the fact that he was gay.
Oh, you must be confusing him with homosexual ex-MLB player Billy Bean – he has no “e” on the end – the A’s GM spells his last name “Beane”.
A’s GM = Beane.
Gay ex-player = Bean.
I can understand how difficult it is to understand that two different people have similar names, but it happens from time to time.
That was the joke.
and you clearly didnt get mine 🙁
Oh no. I didn’t realize Billy Bean existed and thought Billy Beane was gay.
As Justin Upton spoke, a bald eagle holding a hot dog in its beak flew past a Chevy pickup truck parked on Mount Rushmore.
Don’t forget the Springsteen tune in the background!
I think I shed a single patriotic tear when I read his comment.
I would make pounding, gigolo’s love with that bald eagle, even if it’s not a lady eagle. Of course, I would be wrapped in Old Glory and wearing my authentic Teddy Roosevelt explorer’s hat.
#progress #tolerance #rainbows
Yeah, this is a pretty tiny sample of mostly young, mostly white players. Older or religious Hispanic players would probably tell a different story.
Josh Reddick is most certainly a paragon of progressive thought.
David Ortiz has gone on the record saying he’d welcome a gay teammate, for your tiny sample there.
Yeah, just check out the retrograde opinions of noted white people Tyson Ross and Justin Upton! but seriously, this is all anectodal, so kinda wack to just proclaim that young white people are going to automatically be more enlightened or whatever; from my own anecdotal experiences in Puerto Rico and Cuba, I would say that I’ve found personal attitudes towards homosexuality to not be much better or worse than those of white people in the areas where most US baseball players grow up (AKA the suburbs/country, not in huge metropolitan cities).
Love Sam Fuld’s response
Baseball is probably no different than society in general. There will be people that are supportive and accepting, there will be people who are totally against it and the majority won’t care either way.
The majority are at least “accepting” if not “supportive.”
Probably, but professional baseball is also a hyper-masculine, team-oriented social structure, which definitely has a way of making things worse for people who don’t fit into that relatively narrow gender archetype. So one could expect it might be harder for a gay person to fit in there than in society at large.
Baseball will not be ready until we can have an openly gay player without a media circus.
I do not want to hear every day about a replacement level, light hitting corner outfielder for 2 months just because he is gay.
I dont want to see homophobic speculation if an openly gay college student goes undrafted.
Ha, this comment really made me laugh. I can see the puff pieces now…
“He may be a replacement level baseball player, but his WAR as a person, is unmatched…”
A) This piece discusses the question of how players individually and as a group would react to a gay player, and how the media reacts certainly has no part of that, and b) if and when a player does come out, these things will certainly happen initially because that player will be breaking a barrier. That will be important, whether you think it should get attention or not.
JC Denton in 1948
“I do not want to hear every day about a replacement level, light hitting corner outfielder for 2 months just because he is black.”
Literally nothing wrong with that, give me gay Jackie Robinson and I’ll be all over his dick.
then you should be on the train of making this person accepted, because if that person is accepted, the media frenzy dies down pretty fast. If that person runs into problems because he’s gay, then the media will light up again.
Thank you for this, Eno. As a baseball fan I’ve sort of held out hope that MLB would be ahead of the NFL and NBA on this, but I know there’s a lot of inertia and tradition in clubhouses that might make someone reticent to come out.
While I’m not one to knee-jerk blame the media for things, I have a feeling there are some gay players in MLB right now that probably just don’t feel like drawing attention to themselves for an entire season by making some big pronouncement about it.
WHO CARES!!!!
I don’t need to know about baseball players sex life. I don’t need to know if they are gay or not. If they are the best baseball player let them play. Keep personal stuff to yourself.
I think it was stupid that the gay football player got so much press coverage during the draft because he kissed his boyfriend. He was one of the last picks of the draft and got cut from his team (I think before the season started).
I don’t watch sports or read blogs like this to know if someone is gay or not. I read/watch because I enjoy the game and I enjoy the stats. I could care less what their personal life is.
As to Fulds response. This is nothing like Jackie Robinson. Blacks were not accepted anywhere when he started to play. He was a trailblazer to allow blacks into the majors. He had to endure tons of stuff that I’m sure we could never imagine. Being gay is a personal choice and should be viewed as such. Jackie Robinson could not change who he was. He could not keep it a secret what color his skin was. A gay person can keep it a secret to avoid harassment, Jackie couldn’t. By “coming out” you bring the attention on yourself. You can choose not to. Don’t confuse the difference between an American hero, and someone that “wants” the attention it would bring.
Well I guess it’s a testament to the Fangraphs commentariat that there’s only one comment like this….
Oh I agree with him.
But of course, you are right, no one else has been cowed into silence on the issue…
So, it is just me and him here all alone with our cruel opinions…
Actually, it’s pretty awesome that most people with that kind of opinion are too embarrassed to voice it in public these days. It’s an embarrassing opinion, and you should be embarrassed.
This argument has and will always be ridiculous. Aside from the fact that expressing a pro-equality position was ridiculed for thousands of years, it’s just a fact that you can’t say embarrassing things without being embarrassed. If I like to play with my own feces, that is gross, but if I keep it to myself I’m not hurting anyone. If you want to dislike people without a socially acceptable justification, just keep it to yourself, or alternatively accept the consequences of being an outcast. And maybe dream of being alive in any of the other centuries when the shoe was most definitely on the other foot.
Actually, if Torii Hunter is really a Christian, he’d be dreaming of that day when his Savior returns and understand that we can expect some backlash for our beliefs.
Afterall, even a “prophet isn’t welcome in his own hometown”…
Every morning from June to September, I make an active choice to glance at the girls of Toronto because if there’s one thing I love, it’s getting smacked in the shoulder and then having to answer the question, “Do you think she’s prettier than me?”
Any tips on how to better hide my heterosexuality would be appreciated.
Tell her the PC-police says “get over it” because there’s really nothing inherently wrong w/ look, LOL.
“Don’t confuse the difference between an American hero, and someone that “wants” the attention it would bring.”
The point is that nobody wants the attention that they know would come with being the first openly gay player. That’s why none of them have come out. Gay people don’t think being gay is a big deal. Only those who are uncomfortable with gay people think it’s a big deal.
You could care less? Then why don’t you?
You might be able to keep it a secret, but being gay or straight is certainly not a choice. I didn’t choose to be attracted to the opposite sex, not sure about you. “Coming out” might be a choice, but think about it for moment. You’re essentially telling people they have to hide their true selves from team mates, fans, society in general, just because they aren’t like most people and you don’t want to hear about people different from you. This doesn’t have to bring attention to anyone. Its only because of people with opinions like you that it does bring any attention to someone that does come out.
Wrong. The media is the one that brings the attention to it. They praise the sin of homosexuality. My opinion is it is wrong and if you want to do it keep it to yourself and keep it in the closet.
To put it bluntly, your opinion isn’t worth shit. It certainly isn’t powerful enough to force other people to hide their true selves from anyone that might share this opinion.
I used to get really angry at people like you. Now that I’m a little older, I’m honestly just embarrassed for you. I truly hope that you look back on these beliefs someday and are ashamed. Until then, you have my sympathy.
Fine….I’m bored, I’ll reply.
I agree…keep it to yourself. Also, players should stop bringing their wives to the games. They really should keep that to themselves.
Yeah, I also can’t believe the defensive player of the year from the best conference in the nation got a lot of coverage….shocking.
Yep, being gay is a choice, just like being straight is a choice. I remember that day in kindergarten when they made us choose. Glad I chose straight….no idea why some people would sign up for a life where they are subject to bigotry and hatred on a daily basis.
Totally agree. TV broadcasts are always showing players’ wives. Sometimes they also show a players parents!!! Father AND MOTHER!!! My kids are watching! I don’t need the media shoving sex in their faces when they’re just trying to watch a baseball game. KEEP IT TO YOURSELF!!!
I’m pretty pissed I chose straight.
Imagine only ever having to deal with other guys! Shit would be so much easier.
Sigh… Yeah, it’s wonderful to be straight and have even more temptations to break different moral laws or do stuff to get women prego, etc. what w/ all the straight sex being sold all over the place. Yeah, I have straight sexual desires and can’t control any of that and must hump like rabbits or something.
Oh wait. Do some of us also forgo certain other moral laws too? Well, in that case…
Sigh…
Oh, I’m not joking. I’m saying that it would be much, much easier to have no strings attached sex out of wedlock were I gay, because it’s a lot easier to convince a man to have sex than it is a woman.
One of my gay friends always makes fun of the rest of us for how much harder we have to work to violate your moral “laws.”
Farmer said:
The only way people can truly believe that being gay is a choice is if they actually made the choice themselves (or, to be fair, just never really thought about it). So, Farmer, at what age did you decide what team you were going to play for?
Personally, I don’t believe it is a choice for the overwhelming majority of people because I was attracted to and curious about girls long before puberty or even before I was old enough to be influenced by popular culture. I never had any of those feelings about boys. If someone tells me that they were always attracted to members of the same sex, why wouldn’t I believe them?
I never had to “Choose” to be attracted to the opposite sex, like you. We were made to be attracted to the opposite sex. Gay people just choose to sin and not follow the path God has set out for them.
So you believe that gay people are actually attracted to the opposite sex but choose to be with people of the same sex because sin? I am sorry, but that is just stupid. There are a lot more fun ways to sin than to have sex with someone you are not even attracted to.
Have you ever even thought about this?
We’re also supposed to be made to be male or female, but there are a number of people who are born with ambiguous genitalia. I suppose these people were sinning in the womb?
RE: the issue of being born w/ ambiguous genitalia, does that automagically make that a good or even neutral thing?
It does not. There are plenty of undesirable things people can be born with even if we assume that or homosexuality is not undesirable.
Don’t confuse the logic/arguments and just jump to the conclusion all that must mean it’s all good (or neutral)…
IF we are really honestly concerned about these issues, we should not be reckless in our approach…
But I would also reiterate this, especially given my own stance, IMO, *love* should be a very important factor, if not the most important one, in what we actually do in practice. Certainly, if one is using the Bible to justify one’s stance, that most definitely needs to be the case… although love doesn’t mean we don’t tell the truth at all or assume the truth cannot ever be offensive at all to anyone…
“Being gay is a personal choice”
No, being an ignorant fool is, as you clearly demonstrated here. Shut your dumb mouth, and go back to sleep, grandpa.
A lot of homophobes are fighting off their repressed homosexual urges, which is why the argument that “sexuality is a choice” seems so salient to them. If they can choose to repress their homosexuality, why can’t others? Then again, fighting against your sexuality is a pretty futile and self-destructive effort for pretty much everyone – just ask Larry Craig…
By that logic, I guess that’s why everyone either gets pregnant or gets a girl pregnant as soon as the hormones start, etc. Nobody has the slightest ounce of self-control nor should they…
Not arguing that it’s necessarily a choice… anymore than certain other things we might consider undesirable that people can be born with, but that’s not really why something might be a sin though… despite what’s being assumed by too many people…
PS: Of course, I’m not talking about women who can’t get pregnant or gay people who don’t want to have sex w/ the opposite gender, etc.
Oh, that’s right. I forgot that we have a separate locker room for people who have children out of wedlock. And that most athletes who have “carelessly” gotten a woman pregnant hide it for fear of endless harassment.
If it were really only about sex, I would probably agree with you. Whatever two (or more) consenting adults want to do with each other is fine with me (and none of my business), but it’s naive to think that this is only about intercourse.
And, by the way, it’s not a choice.
“Being gay is a personal choice and should be viewed as such.”
No, it isn’t. Unless the only metric is because you say so.
How about the Bible?
A) The bible doesn’t say that.
B) Who cares if some old fictional book say so anyway?
Actually, I don’t believe the Bible says you cannot be born w/ it.
The Bible does indicate we’re born in sin… that we are all born sinners and can’t save our own selves from it.
Whether every gay person is actually born w/ it is another story. Nobody’s actually proven that to be true AFAIK even though there are claims made based on some correlations, which probably do not equal causation.
You’d think more people in the FG community might recognize the potential fallacy of that conclusion or would at least dig deeper to before jumping so aggressively on the rest of who might disagree — and again, I don’t actually know one cannot be born w/ it or that most are not, etc.
Not born with it != choice, though.
I’m not sure how anyone would ever prove being born with a certain sexual preference anyway. What’s the experimental design on that one going to be?
Seems to me the easiest way to figure this out is to just ask people. Did you make this choice or not? I didn’t. No one I’ve ever asked or heard talk about it has ever said they did. What more is there to really dig into here?
@Walter,
Obviously, it wouldn’t be easy to prove despite what some proponents claim about certain studies. Given today’s science, at least some people would probably want something like a gene identified or something similar, not just some relatively crude statistics-based study (from say psychiatry/psychology/sociology fields) yielding some correlations. Certainly, if anyone wants to reference some psych/sociology study or the like, I will want to scrutinize it myself and not just accept so-called experts’ summary conclusion or the like. We all know there’s enough klugey-ness to such stuff to not merely take people’s word for it — heck, we are regulars here on Fangraph, no?
But regardless of that, one should not assume the Bible teaches we cannot be born w/ undesirable traits. Heck, you don’t have to be religious at all to realize it’s very possible to be born w/ something undesirable — and the science for that is more solid than whatever claims I’ve seen so far that’s specific to homosexuality. It’s a clear fallacy to assume being born w/ something must necessarily mean it’s perfectly ok.
Heck, ask the same psych/sociology experts and they’ll likely tell you there are people born w/ all sorts of undesirable traits. It’s more that nobody afraid of the PC police want to link that reality w/ this one regarding homosexuality these days.
So whether it’s good, ok, neutral, etc. shouldn’t merely depend on whether one can be born w/ it.
The question comes down to what’s your basis for determining morality and such issues. Also, it comes down what should you do about that. Often, people assume and/or confuse the 2 and just combine them together — that might be what Torii Hunter’s doing. Sure, the former may well compel you in certain ways about the latter, but the exact relationship between the 2 might not be the same for everyone. And in this country, the 1st Amendment at minimum puts some limitations on what that relationship will be while also helping to ensure we’re not arbitrarily forced to forfeit such…
@Walter,
As for the issue of “choice”, well, we make decisions to exercise choice all the time. Doesn’t mean we have no compulsions about stuff one way or another though.
It’s a fallacy that having strong compulsions/instincts automatically means you have no choice.
Whether you believe in the Bible or something else, most people believe lying is bad for instance. And yet, who isn’t regularly tempted to lie (w/ varying compulsions/feelings and actual results)? And how many people do you honestly think you know who’ve easily resisted that temptation everytime?
Sure, we tend to make lighter of it probably in part because everyone’s done it at some points, etc., and we even call some of them “white lies”. So it’s often treated as a fairly innocuous thing. And since nobody feels offended enough about calling that a sin, nobody’s really up in arms about it.
Thing is the problem isn’t necessarily that Christians or whomever else are actually right or wrong about the practice of homosexuality, but it could be that people have a problem w/ it being offensive to them. And the truth *can* be and often is offensive to at least some people.
The Bible doesn’t quote Jesus in multiple accounts saying that a prophet is not welcome in his own hometown for nothing afterall — and we know who it also depicts as the ones most desirous of shutting Him up… even to the point of a horrible, torturous execution…
OR consider any sexual behavior at all. Many/most of us have strong desires to have sex (and it can vary depend on age, etc. due to biological factors, etc)… and if we just leave it to instincts, many more of us would be adulterers or fornicators.
Some people believe there’s nothing wrong w/ sex outside of marriage at all. Some even believe that when the involved parties are already married to other people. And some might also believe polygamy or bestiality or whatever is perfectly ok or even desirable (for themselves anyway)… though might not want to say so out loud in public. And do we really know some of those people aren’t somehow born w/ some of those desires too?
So where and how do we draw any lines then?
PS: You don’t need to answer me here. I would rather people actually give serious thought to such then just jump right back w/ a pat answer, etc. Such issues are not quite so simple as too many seem to assume and wanna shout others down rather than genuinely consider/discuss/etc, which can take a good deal of time… Shalom…
Oh boy, TheUncool, that was a lot of words with very little substance. Not sure what there is to think about there….
“WHO CARES!!!!”
Certainly not the guy who wrote four paragraphs about it….
He really doesn’t understand what not caring means. If you don’t care about something, you ignore it, the way I ignore NBA basketball. I know San Francisco won the title, but I could not name a single player on the team to save my life, and the only one I can name from Cleveland is Lebron.
The MLB is perfectly ready for an openly gay ball player as long as one of its organizations don’t go out of their way to fuck it up. Baseball is a business, and while the organizations are part of the community and have some social responsibility, they still love cheddar.
If the MLB wants to create a problem, the steps are crystal clear: Have an organization promote someone based on 80% merit, and 20% publicity.
The problem was never going to be the major leagues. The MiLB and the infrastructure and support systems the MLB puts in place down there will basically define whether or not there will “be an openly gay player in the mlb”
As a side note, of course I understand that there’s a better chance than not that there is already numerous gay players in the MLB .
You say “Baseball is a business” like gay people don’t have the most frivolous spending money out of anyone.
A team could literally call themselves “Gay America’s team” and they’d make hundreds of millions.
Study from Williams Institute at UCLA School of Law finds that gay men earn 10-32% less than similarly qualified straight men.
http://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/Badgett-Sears-Lau-Ho-Bias-in-the-Workplace-Jun-2007.pdf
(Report is from 2007, but I doubt that it has changed much over the last 8 years.)
I wasn’t clear, I suppose. I partially agree. It didn’t cross my mind that a player would be kept down because of his sexuality. My point was that a team would make *so* much money with the inclusion of a gay player, that it’d be tempted to bypass the traditional skills-based promotion. I’m sure when the Jays went after all of those Canadians, they didn’t mind slightly overpaying because they know they’d make additional revenue. When you consider that hate’s generally based on ignorance and jealousy, you can see the problem that would arise.
Think i fell in love with doolittles girlfriend. Funny, pretty and seems to care about the right things. Wish them the best.
SJWs gonna SJW.
Oh i hear ya
I propose we pass a law that forcibly euthanizes anyone who uses the term “SJW” as a pejorative. Or at least dump them all off on a remote island.
SJW. SJW. SJW. SJW.
I’m so annoyed that all the MRA types appropriated that word.
It used to be the perfect term for people who are actually involved in effecting positive change in their communities to complain about the keyboard warriors who make our jobs harder with insane, semi-literate screeds.
Ironically, those GamerGate idiots have helped the Suey Parks of the world by turning the perfect dismissive label for them into a catchall for anyone who isn’t a prick.
How very tolerant.
The mere fact that I’m not linking to my page (as I do on my other comments) because I know how much SJWs like to attack those who disagree with them (and btw, I support gay rights) – it speaks volumes.
if you support gay rights, you are a SJW
…eh.
I’d say that, with the original meaning of the term, it’s “if you say you support gay rights on the internet, but spend all of your time attacking other people on the internet who say they support gay rights for not supporting gay rights in the ‘right way,’ rather than actually acting to support gay rights in the real world, you are a SJW.”
You can, of course, replace the word “gay” with any other marginalized social group, and it’ll hold.
Unfortunately, assholes have latched onto the term and started using it against anyone who isn’t a shitty person, but there are definitely perfectly nice people who haven’t caught up to the current usage, because they don’t spend all of their time on the internet.
cool, insult people for actually giving a shit about others, reflects real nicely on you…
A better title would be: Is The MLB ready to be more like Me?
Rollin rollin rollin
Grow up.
Baseball is as ready for an openly gay player as that player is ready to receive the public’s response to him. Just because the baseball players quoted here indicate that they’re ready to welcome such a player, the public at large may not be as welcoming in some venues. I think, in today’s society, the general public would be more accepting of a gay player than they’d be 20, even 10 years ago. But you’re always gonna have lunkheads who cross the line and will say something extremely offensive. Those sorts of comments stick with certain players, and it could have a negative affect on his psyche. No one should have to deal with that sort of crap.
I just want to watch baseball thanks.
I don’t care how many children Steve Garvey may or may not have fathered out of wedlock.
I don’t care who’s cruising the mens room.
I don’t care about Tori Hunter’s religion or lack thereof.
Straight, homosexual, attracted to animals, I don’t want to know about it.
More baseball, less bedroom.
You don’t have to care about any of those things. This is not being shoved down your throat.
Actually it is/will be, because the media sees this issue as all it wants to cover.
Guy wins olympic medal 30 years ago.
Guy has parts of anatomy removed 30 years later.
Media focuses on nothing else for three weeks.
You have the choice of not paying attention to it. If you can’t then that’s your problem. No one is forcing your eyes open sticking you in front of the TV or computer.
Only partially, Eric.
The media latches on to one or two stories and that’s what we’re forcefed… unless as you say we go off the grid.
Case in point: There’s a great big golf tournament this week. Until he’s not playing in it, Tiger Woods will be 90% of the so-called-story.
If someone is forcing you to watch TV or go on the Internet, I’d contact the authorities. I’d rather hear about John Kruk’s BMs than hear him talk about batting average with runners in scoring position. My solution is to not listen to John Kruk, but if someone else wants to, that’s fine with me.
However, you clicked on an article that was clearly about openly gay players. You could have chosen not to click on it, but you did. So to say you just want to watch baseball is demonstrably false. You want the entire world to be exactly as you want it. I don’t blame you, we all do, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Curacao, its pretty easy to just not click the link about Jenner or switch the channel when they bring her up.
You don’t have to be here 150+ comments into a discussion about homosexuals in profession sports if you don’t want to be.
Wally–
Thing is, if nobody puts his hand up and says “enough of this”, the hive mentality just takes over.
I’m not going to violate Godwin’s Law and give the easiest examples of what happens when hive mentalities take over; anyone interested in seeing my point can come up with his own examples. But the hive mentality of political correctness is just as dangerous as the groupthink of anything else.
If it were really that easy to flick a channel and never see a 70s olympic athlete or a 7th round NFL washout clamouring for attention, this wouldn’t be an issue. But the media drags these freakshows out over weeks and months everywhere we look, and it gets in the way of serious news and serious pleasure like sports.
Curacao,
I think you have cause and effect mixed up here. The news only puts these things on because people will watch them. If we turn them off, the news won’t keep dragging the freak shows out, as you say.
The only news about Catylin Jenner I’ve ever heard is through my wife, for example. She told me about it one night and I went “uh, ok”, and that was that. The media didn’t force me to watch a damned thing. There are places to get news from that won’t dwell on stuff like that you know.
BTW, even though you didn’t say the name Hitler you still violated Godwin’s law….
Nah. Silence supports the status quo, and until everyone is treated equally the status quo doesn’t cut it.
We’re also overlooking the fact that there are, most likely, several gay players already in MLB. And like Glenn Burke, the players and management probably know. It’s just that we don’t know, and that’s fine, because what a person does off the field, and whether or not someone thinks he’s going to heaven or hell, does not and should not be apparent from how he swings a bat or throws a ball.
When we ask if baseball is ready, of course it is. The question is can the fans and media handle it? And, sadly, that probably actually does depend on the player’s performance. I can see a conservative crowd cheering a star caliber gay player much more easily than a god awful straight one.
“does not and should not be”… I forget how to English sometimes.
Leer mi ojo negro . Además, me niego a jugar para los Atléticos .
Read my black eye. Moreover , I refuse to play for the A’s
I just hope its not another talent-less jason collins-michael sam type. Can it please be someone capable of putting up great-decent stats. Like at least a 1-2 war player.
It would be so annoying to see constant updates on someone who is totally fringe. The tim tebow type of amount of attention is too much and annoying when dealing with who cant play.
That’s what made Jackie Robinson Jackie Robinson. .883 career OPS with half his time at 2B. Amazing player, period.
I’m rooting for Mike Trout.
Trade Value: Fabulous
That would actually be awesome! haha.
Id totally be ok with a gay all star talent on my favorite team. That way he can pave the way for other gay guys to come out and not have it be all about their sexuality for weeks without end, and just go out and play. Gay and not very good, ok you get no attention because all star gay guy already stole all the thunder a few years back.
A trailsetter would be perfect. Beats possibly hearing about a gay reliver throwing 10 relief innings his whole career and having hundreds of articles written disproportionately compared to his skill level.
Mike Trout and Bryce Harper should date each other x) cause espn to blow up
With baseball’s structure, the first openly gay player would almost need to be a 1-2 WAR player. Can you imagine the shit storm that would ensue if a team promoted a gay player as a DL-replacement only to demote them again? Media-types who have no idea how baseball works would go nuts.
It would need to be a player that once they are called up, they are there to stay.
Look how baseball handled the Sabermetric/analytics movement. You think they’re ready for this?
Slowest moving sport of the four in terms of adapting to…anything. Sadly, I think much of that had to do with Bud Selig and I hope the game moves in a new direction in terms of appeal to younger people. Great time to be a fan with the flux of young talent coming up.
Except with breaking the color barrier!
“Slowest moving sport of the four in terms of adapting to…anything.”
Hockey just called. The whole “pulling opponent’s jersey over his head and punching him repeatedly to cause a concussion, with both parties receiving a five-minute penalty” seems kind of on the slow side.
And yet the NHL had sports’ best PSA campaign supporting gay players.
literally who cares
why is there so much gay pandering in sports these days
lol, there’s like 2 players who are out. That’s the opposite of pandering, dumbass.
top articles for weeks and months
gay this gay that
if thats not pandering i dont know what is
You mean one article? I believe ever? There was an article on Fangraphs about the Homerun Derby poll going live in April. There were only 13 comments on that article, but none were complaining that an article was written about something that “nobody cares about.”
You’re right – you don’t know what pandering is
Recently, the front page article on MSN was about Michael Sam leaving the CFL team he was with. Since when has anyone in the USA care about when a former college player left a CFL team prior to this?
You sure showed everyone how much you don’t care by clicking on the article and commenting.
I think what he’s trying to say is “enough is enough”
If he meant that he should have said it. “Enough is enough” is a silly thing to say anyway, though, as it’s not like Fangraphs specifically has posted all that many articles about the possibility of an openly gay player in baseball.
One article. Ever.
The closest thing I could find: http://www.fangraphs.com/blogs/making-mlb-safe-for-mr-mom-the-paternity-list/
A throwaway line at the end of article written 4 years ago. But yeah, enough is enough.
Everyone here is into statistical analysis, so let’s be real. If estimates are to be believed, then anywhere from 3-10% of the male population identifies as gay. 30 teams x 40 man roster = 1200 players. That tells us that there are between 36 and 120 gay players on 40-man MLB rosters at any given time. If you just go by the 25-man MLB team, then there are on average 0-3 gay players on every team, or 22-75 for 30 teams. And this is the reality in 2015 as it was in 1995, 1985, or 1975.
Get over it! Is anyone saying they’d be less of a Mike Trout or Clayton Kershaw fan if you found out they were gay? If that’s the case, I feel sorry for you. Enjoy the skills and talents MLB players are blessed with.
Statistical analysis requires good stats. The 10% number is garbage, a product a badly flawed study that was further badly misinterpreted and then used as propaganda. (Very effective propaganda; still quoted as true.)
If you want to use something more recent there is the NHIS survey. Their results: among men 1.8% homosexual, 0.4% bisexual. All things being equal, that would be 15 out of the 750 on the 25 man roster. Not clear if all things are equal; number could be higher or lower. 0 not out of the question, though unlikely.
1.8% homosexual seems waaaaay too low.
Anywhere from 2-12% is probably accurate
Not to mention we can’t assume the percentages are the same in professional sports as they are in the regular population. There may be factors pushing homosexuals away from sports like baseball.
this article was written to generate traffic
Don’t forget the mutual and solo id stroking opportunities!
No it was not. I have never heard my bosses mention traffic to me, and I don’t track my traffic. I was legitimately interested in their opinions on this important matter.
So you were looking to get embroil one of those players in a media firestorm. Great.
Pull your head out of your ass
“important” is a bit of a stretch
I think you’re thinking of Cameron…now that dude writes just to get traffic.
Lulz.
Eno did you get your comment count up where it needs to be?
Create enough traffic?
Lame response! I was honestly interested in what they would say, and it was timely. A great day at the park.
Disingenuous.
You expect us to think you thought you would get honest responses from those whose opinion differed from yours???
And what would you do if one of them was honest and did offer an opinion the SJWs didn’t like? Print it? Would you reluctantly or gleefully start the firestorm?
Just asking harmless questions, right?
Stop.
1. How did the baseball players know what Eno’s opinion was?
2. How do YOU know what Eno’s opinion was?
3. He said he got a lot of “no comments” and he did get a comment, from Josh Reddick, that “the SJWs” might not like.
Your turn to stop.
I left comments on the cutting floor.
I didn’t leave them because I didn’t agree with them, they weren’t interesting.
I don’t agree with some of the comments I posted.
I don’t think the players care what the FG comments section says.
I was legitimately interested in the second part of the question, the first was an entry point.
The way people talk about the obstacles is surprising and different, even among people who are trying to agree.
This is a fun passive-aggressive tactic that members of the privileged group get to use. It goes basically like this:
Marginalized person: /tries to access area in society populated only by members of the privileged group
Privileged people: Here, have some barriers that make it nearly impossible to enter this space.
Marginalized person: /succeeds in breaking those barriers
Outside observers: /celebrates that person’s achievement
Privileged people: What is everyone making a big deal about? We’ve been here this whole time.
Hit the nail on the head.
Pitcher or catcher?
I work in Sports Management, and there are a least a couple of dozen players of consequence between MLB, NFL, NHL and NBA that are known by their organizations and, generally speaking, teammates to be gay. While I haven’t worked directly with any of those players, the reasons I’ve heard for them not being “open” to the media is that they don’t want the media frenzy and spectacle that comes along with it; the attention generally doesn’t lead to more money or marketability for the player, so it doesn’t provide them any benefit to be “public”.
I can totally understand the media circus aspect, but I find it hard to believe it wouldn’t lead to more money or marketability for the player if handled efficiently. I mean, if Michael Sam isn’t cashing in somehow, his people are failing him and he needs to give Bruce Jenner’s people a call.
And the first one who does come out is going to be accused by a ton of people of doing for attention, when in reality they will be doing it despite the attention they are receiving. It’s a nonsensical statement anyone. Hiding your identity is an action. Not hiding it is the lack of an action. So when someone complains about a player coming out “for attention”, what they’re actually complaining is that the player isn’t going out of his way to hide it, so they can maintain their illusions.
I’m pretty sure that today’s ESPN “Baseball Rules” is “you can love the game without loving other guys.”
According to BBR there have been 18,533 major league players and counting. It’s pretty safe to assume that Billy Bean and Glenn Burke are not the only two homosexuals to play major league baseball. I don’t think it would be a major issue today. But I’m not a major leaguer either.
I don’t buy the Jackie Robinson comparison at all. When Jackie debuted in organized baseball Jim Crow was in full force. It was illegal in many sectors of society for blacks to be next to whites. Calling black people the n-word was common and acceptable. Black men were killed for just looking or talking to a white woman. The majority of people supporting Jackie were other black people, Jewish people,”progressives”, and communists. Jackie faced LEGAL discrimination and death threats. He couldn’t eat with his white teammates. His team was barred from at least one hotel. In spring training he was constantly harassed in the South.
A homosexual major leaguer today would not face such open hostility. It would not be acceptable to call him a “fag” or for him to be verbally harassed. The law would be on his side. The media would adore him and venerate him as some sort of courageous “hero”. He would be given an ESPN Courage Award or whatever they call it. He’d be on Oprah shedding tears along with Oprah about how “free” he feels to be “himself” openly.
We’ll have an openly homosexual player very soon and it will be a good thing. But comparing this to what Jackie Robinson went through is just plain wrong.
Why does the player have to be ‘openly’ about it? Just go about your business and life. I have no problem with homosexuality, but is it really a requirement to ‘make it known’? True equality will be achieved when everyone just goes about their personal lives without having to step up and say “i am…”, and there’s no discrimination in that regard.
If he / she hits .300 with 35 hrs or strikes 200 hitters out with a 1.00 WHIP, then i’m willing to accept all with open arms onto my team of choice. The performance on the field is what matters to me, not the behavior after they’ve dressed and gone home.
Because when people have had to hide who they really were for centuries, and suffer shame, abuse and worse for it, being open about it is a revolutionary and laudable act.
see, is it “hiding” it or living your life as you want without pulling everyone into it? My intent is not to “hide it”. Likewise i don’t need player X to go out and declare they are a womanizer (not equating the two). i just don’t care…if you womanize then so be it. if you’re straight, then so be it. If you’re gay, then so be it. All i care about is can you hit or pitch as a professional ballplayer. your personal life is all yours.
maybe i just don’t get the need to declare to the public where you are in the spectrum
Because, in this world, ‘not hiding it’ and ‘openly announcing it’ are the same. Imagine a player did what you said. He simply decided he’s not going to hide it. So, he takes his boyfriend to a players’ banquet, and kisses him without really caring whether there are camera’s watching.
Are you saying that would not be interpreted as “declaring to the public”?
when i say “players’ banquet”, I’m also thinking of a kind of fan interaction thing that the teams set up.
BIP,
I don’t interpret a boyfriend kissing partner at a banquet as being the same as a press conference or other media related ‘declaration/statement’. To me a press conference or issued statement (this is how i interpret what is meant by ‘coming out’) only screams ‘look at me’ in our attention hungry society.
I don’t think someone should hide their life, however (which is why i have no problem with your players banquet example).
Maybe i’m doing a poor job of getting my opinion across, but i see a lot of ‘shades of gray’ (not 50, mind you) in how this discussion is evolving.
And this is really point, right Bip?
If you follow a team closely enough you’ll soon realize that the families of the players are involved with the team in many different ways. The wives/girlfriends follow the team to X location and put on some fund raising event. Players and wives go do some fan interaction thing for charity. Heck, it can be as simple as wives/girlfriends all gathered outside the locker rooms after playoff games and being part of post-game celebrations. Wives-kids-players are all there when you see the WS MVP interviewed after the game right?
Oh, wait, now imagine a gay player. Is his husband/partner standing next to him in the same interview? Is he joining the team for this dinner function? The gay player and his partner get to be treat like second class citizens. Everyone else can bring their loved ones along expect you, because you “chose” to love the wrong person.
Wally,
I hope my post right above yours makes clear that i differentiate those activities you speak of from some type of ‘press conference’ used a means for declaration.
I have no problems (not that my opinion should even matter in this manner) with those things.
Just like how i don’t care if Mike Trout one day gets married – i don’t need it announced. That doesn’t preclude said ‘future wife’ (or hey…husband? ) from participating in things that all other spouses/partners participate in.
FM,
Aren’t we kinda getting ahead of ourselves with this press conference thing? It hasn’t happened and may never happen even once players do start come out (and mean like the way we find out is through a specific press conference about it rather than a more natural means). I doubt its really a primary motivation of a gay player to have a press conference to tell the world they are gay. Rather, I’d guess they just want to live openly without discrimination.
However, I suspect once a player does come out the press conference about it well essentially force itself upon the player. What is this player going to do, not make himself available for comment about it? You know the first chance he sits down for any press conference that’s about the only thing the media will want to talk about. And surely the player will face pressure from all sides to do some sort of “exclusive interview”.
We can’t just suddenly jump from no openly gay players in MLB to no one really giving a rip about it. The first few players that do live openly will get a lot of attention because of it, but that doesn’t mean they really want that attention. It just means they are willing to live with it in exchange for living openly themselves and hopefully blazing the trail for others to do the same.
Wally,
I guess my only real point of reference was with the whole Michael Sam ‘coming out’, which was via an exclusive interview. It was not a press conference, persay, but it had all that same feeling.
I agree with you that there should be no discrimination for those who would like to live in the open. Is baseball ready for it? I don’t know. Change is coming. It may be slow moving, but the gears of change are churning. Look at the last 20 years…very different in attitudes and perceptions in such a small amount of time. Again, like Billy Bean says, not looking to change worldviews, but the goal is to treat people with dignity, respect, and decency regardless of who they are.
FM, I guess I don’t really get the hang up on the press conference type attention. Michael Sam had told his team in August, rumors circulated all season while he mostly hid from the media, then that exclusive interview was the following February. That doesn’t sound like someone who is screaming “look at me.” He wanted to live openly with his family and teammates, eventually stuff leaked out, becoming a fairly major story to the media and so he dealt with it on his own terms in that interview.
Sorry, I just don’t really see an justifiable criticism regarding this being about demanding attention.
Why do players have to share their belief that God helped them perform well? Why do some players point to the sky after getting a base hit? Why do some players thank their spouse at emotional moments? People tend to share who they are and what they believe. Why should a gay player have to suppress that desire if they want to be open?
Religion poisons everything.
As a Christian, I apologize for the ignorant comments of Torii Hunter and the commenters on this board who think like him. Scary.
Why are Christians getting so much hate in these comments? If the majority of players were muslim, they would probably behead any openly gay player right in the locker room and use his head for batting practice.
Do you know any actual Muslims, or do you just assume that all 1.5 billion of them are in ISIS?
Do you know any actual Muslims, or do you just assume that all 1.5 billion of them are as tolerant as liberally socialized late-gen Xers/millenials?
I know plenty of Muslims. They’re all lovely people.
Enough already. I come to to fangraphs for baseball information. Nobody cares, but the people that keep this going. This is really disappointing to read an article on this site that should be free of social issues. If the guy is raking, then nobody will care if he is gay. This isn’t a story. This is click-bait.
“Stop talking about discrimination! Nobody cares!” – Person who is not marginalized by society
actually by Joe’s statement, he is looking past all our differences and looking at baseball players for their true baseball merit. Isn’t this what we should be striving for, if we want a truly equal society?
Eric:
Aren’t you making an assumption that I am not marginalized by society? How do you know that I am not gay? How do you know that I am any other race but white? How do you know I am not a woman? I just want to watch baseball and enjoy the game along with enjoying stats. I don’t care if a player is an alien! A person’s sexual orientation has no connection to my enjoyment of the game. Every single baseball player could be out and gay and I would still watch and participate in the sport. I am not forcing my personal, spiritual, sexual, or political beliefs on anyone. I am not judging and I am not being rude. I simply want to have one space on all of the internet where I can just enjoy a game. That’s all I want! I want one place where I don’t have to combat racism, sexism, classism, ageism, etc. every waking second of my life. I will judge a baseball player only by their merits on the field. That’s what baseball stats do. They take away all our preconceived notions about a person’s skill and break it down to simple raw numbers. There are no “ists” in stats. If you want to wage these wars of words online and howl into the moon, then go right ahead. I just wanted to communicate to the people that run this site that as a long time reader, I am disappointed in this article. It’s below them.
This is nothing on all the SJW crap Alex Remington used to post here.
I wonder, is belief any different than religion? Does Merit equate to justice, or justice to morality and then from there: do any of these words actually describe the heart of theolgy or baseball or life? What inadequate descriptors we have that fail to illustrate right actions as right actions and yet seem to do well at portraying wrong actions guised as right actions.
I read all of “Uncools” statements and kind of went, “alright, so you aren’t a true monster at all, but f****, man, will you look another human being in the eye and send him off to a different toilet and be comfortable with all your inadequate descriptors as a reason?” “Uncool” will with the WORD of GOD at his back, regardless of the inherent inability of any human construction to describe Heaven, Hell, or Baseball (at its best when a fellow says to another fellow, “you had to be there to see how awesome that double play, game winning homer, diving catch etc. was”)
No words, no invented poetic book… Ain’t even no double negative that can supplant the action of acceptance of others as the best most relevant truth. Separate but equal is not equal, sinner but I am fine with it so long as I get use a scarlet “homo” is not forgiveness of sin, and it is written so it shall be is not actually how it will be.
And we will see exactly who pays up what irrelevant currancy at the end, you will find me on Doomsday at Mardi Gras slicing up chickens for sacrifice to Mary and playing stick ball with a lot of other “Christians” who don’t give a shit about gender/sexuality based hang ups having a ball. Momma says I am going to heaven.
Man I hope to hell Doomsday is on Mardi Gras… But like as not it will just be me in my home town throwing beads at people.
Agreed, Gilapiais — I just decided to skip to the bottom and saw this.
There should indeed be no scarlet “homo” just as there should be no scarlet “adulterer” or scarlet “liar” or scarlet anything else, if grace and forgiveness is real. But sins can have consequences nonetheless, despite forgiveness, eg. someone murdered is dead, destroyed property is destroyed and might not be replaceable, ruined marriage might never fully recover if it recovers at all, etc.
What there *ARE* are sinners (both believing and not) still in this fallen world (until Christ’s return). And all us sinners will continue to mess things up, continue to have erroneous notions, be hurtful to others even if not intended, etc. even while we also might seek to make things better — good intentions do not, afterall, guarantee the ultimate good result… or even good results at all oftentimes…
That’s why the uncomfortableness (on all sides) remain whether justified or not.
But consider for instance what football player Ben Johnson has recently said (mainly regarding the various shootings of African Americans). He (and I both) believes our best hope can be found in what Christ offers. He offers grace, forgiveness and reconciliation, not just between people and God, but between people and people as well.
But no, we don’t instantaneous arrive at that final destination, that final goal/result of perfect harmony, and so, you might now and then hear/see us spur each other on while we await His return for that to happen.
In the meantime, we (ought to) do our best to move us forward. That’s why I bothered to comment as I did. And sure, we also enjoy the good things we do have, the blessings we can be thankful for, including of course, this wonderful game of BASEBALL! And aye, that too is why I bother to comment here…
Grace and shalom…
LOL! My bad for naming Ben Johnson, instead of Ben Watson. Wish I could do a quick edit. Oh well…
@Gilapiais,
BTW, re: the whole “equal” thing, there is no actual equal. We’re not actually equal in the absolute sense. Probably any meaningful equality we speak of (outside of academia and such) will never be that.
Equality will always need to be understood w/ qualifications in such concerns — that’s why I bothered to bring up the women aspect for instance.
In this instance, first, don’t confuse the game of baseball itself w/ the privacy issue surrounding shower rooms, locker rooms and such — and yes, locker rooms are certainly less private in certain ways than shower rooms, especially when the media is allowed in. I never proposed separateness regarding the game itself. What I initially proposed had to do w/ privacy concerns and such, not the actual game itself… and I didn’t say it needed to be implemented the way I initially (and very simplistically) suggested — of course, that didn’t stop people from just jumping to conclusions anyway.
Some objected w/ the rationale that all men have the same private parts, so why should anyone care? Well, you might not personally care, but we’re not talking about your own personal feeling, but about solutions/structure/rules that will be applied to everyone in the game (both now and future), not just select individuals. You don’t make rules and such (to be applied to everyone else) based solely on your own feelings… unless you’re a tyrant. Sure, LGBT folks will need to be considered of course, but don’t do so at an unnecessary expense to everyone else.
What many objecting folks are doing regarding this issue in their various comments really amount to group-think tyranny (in the name of “equality”), not the championing of freedom and rationality (or even meaningfully legitimate equality). I understand much of that is done w/ good intentions, but good intentions do not necessarily yield good results. They can often lead to tyranny and even corruption instead…
I say these things not to condemn anyone here, but to appeal to reason and good sense… in hopes that people do not merely default to polarizing rhetoric or (over)PC-ness… so that we can all move forward and make actual good progress rather than replace one bad thing w/ another bad (or possibly even worse) thing instead…
Shalom…
This was a really insightful and interesting article. It was pretty gutsy of Eno to go out and ask this question to real ball players on the field in such a forthright and genuine way. Their responses (and lack there of) are revealing, guarded, honest, and human. I am very happy to see this type of content on fangraphs, and even though it unintentionally stirs up reactions from people in a passionate way, this article is at its core a timely piece of fascinating baseball writing.
Their would not be a controversy to discuss if we just had a simple no gays allowed in the bi-laws.
Studies have shown a link between mental illness and being attracted to the same sex. Anyone who disagrees that men have one part and woman have another part simply because is fooling themselves. This is no the way things were suppose to be intended.
You do seem like someone I would come to, to find out many, many things about mental illness. I’ll grant you that.
This post is the spawn of the same strange nerd sports journalist disorder that brought us the Where Are The Muslims in baseball post, with 200 comments before all comments were buried overnight. Not even thinking to ask what non-existent Muslims thought about the non-existent gay in baseball? A little consistency would not hurt.
Who cares about a players personal life. As a fan, the only thing I’d care about is if they could help my team win baseball games.