I know people are offended by the concept... but IMO it's something that has to be asked. In a perfect world, the sexual orientation of a player wouldn't matter. But it does. Big time. So it needs to be asked and I have no problem with it being asked...
Why? If a linebacker hits somebody so hard that he lands in the next county, who cares if the linebacker's gay?
Well, none of us have to do anything. But it was a humorous incident that came up again legitimately when another inappropriate combine questions was asked. Completely in line during this discussion. Public figures have to live with gaffes and embaressing moments all the time. Kerri Russell is still getting questions about a freaking haircut she got 15 years ago.
Why does it matter? And what are the odds you're going to get an honest answer to that question anyway, even if the player is gay? It's nobody's business. And if it comes up and other guys in the locker room have a problem with it, that's their issue and they'll need to get over it. Just play the game. You don't need to be best friends with the guy.
So what's next? A thread about Ted Ginn's family. Of course I'm going to click on it and *****. It's a junk thread with no relevance. It takes no thought. If this forum was full of your threads I would go elsewhere.
TBH, I still to this day question how Ireland has a job as a GM...Not solely because of the "mother is a whore" saga, but in general...
It has nothing to do with his own individual ability to play football. It’s the fact that he works in an environment where it is standard for employees to be naked and shower with each other.
And... many people wouldnt feel comfortable showering with people that are attracted to their own sex. Just as if there was some (awesome ) type of company that had all female employees and it was standard for them to change and shower together. They would not hire a straight man, b/c none of the female employees would feel comfortable being naked and showering in front of that straight man. Or... just as when there is a female football player... they give the female her own locker room instead of making her change and shower with the guys.
The fact is that there have been gay players in the NFL before. Probably hundreds over the course of NFL history. And I imagine that many of their teamates had suspiscions regarding their sexuality at some point. Yet, the league and teams did not fall apart. I don;t see what difference there is being naked in front of a gay many as there is being naked inf ront of a straight man. I'm not interested in being naked inf ront of either. But if I was in a locker room and everybody was doing it and there was one gay guy (who you assume I believe incorrectly would be constantly leering and lusting after his straight teammates) I fail to see how that would make a huge difference
So, do you feel that a female football player should be changing and showering in the standard men's locker room?
If the person asked and lied and was drafted, the straight guys would still be naked in front of a gay guy. That means for you and others, the problem isn't being naked in front of gay guys, its knowing who is gay.
It is against the law in 21 states and the District of Columbia to ask. It is a question that cannot be asked unless the NFL wants to get sued to the stone age.
Completely different scenario. First, there have only been a handful of femal football players and there will never be one in the NFL so it's not even worth worrying about. Second, female reporters are allowed into locker rooms all the time and if the guys are comfortable remaining naked, they do so. Second, since we're talking about a room full of men, the comparison doesn;t apply. Gay men are allowed in gym locker rooms, the military, spas, etc. If the straight guy is so full of himself that he believes that any gay man would be so attracted to him and could not control it, frankly, that's the straight guy's problem. In short, it's their problem, not the gay guy's. He's just trying to do his job. None of the players should be running around staring at each other's packages, snapping towels or slapping each other on the rear end either, yet many of them do that. I think that's a more uncomfortable environment than simply being aware that one or two guys out of 53 is gay
Its not something that should be considered when hiring someone. Its something that should be considered after someone is employed. The law is very clear here.
Its about trying to avoid a potential problem for the rest of your current employees. And yes, it does have somewhat to do with "knowing". If a currently straight player thought the gay athlete was straight, they would not feel uncomfortable being naked and/or showering around that closet gay athlete. Similarly, if a Juwanna Mann type situation were to hypothetically play out... and a straight man was in a women's locker room while the women were changing and showering... as long as all the female athletes thought Juwanna Mann was also a woman, the female players would not feel uncomfortable or violated by having Juwanna Mann in that locker room. But if they did find out that Juwanna Mann was indeed a straight man... they would then feel very uncomfortable having him around while they are naked/showering.
Why is that any more a safety issue? B/c the men would be outnumbering the woman? But its different b/c the straights would be outnumbering the gays?
I dont care what the legality of it is. I'm not arguing whether it should/shouldnt be illegal. I'm arguing whether it matters or not... and it does.
No, it does not matter when deciding whether to hire someone. If it matters, that needs to be addressed after hiring. You can't not hire women because they can carry babies, eventhough that matters.
Creating a scenario and placing a woman in place of the gay guy is the exact same thing for all intents and purposes... b/c thats why "womens" and "mens" things (bathrooms, changing rooms, locker rooms, etc) were designated that way to begin with.
Man on woman sexual violence is astronomically high. Gay man on straight man sexual violence barely exists. The fear with a gay man is rape i would assume, otherwise I don't understand the fear. If the gay guy is leering at all the straight guys, then I would imagine he'd need to be talked to by management. Other than that, what's the problem?
Why do you keep referencing the law to me... when I'm not having a discussion about the legality of it?
Hell, what about a guy like DJ? Perfectly straight, but he's going to be leering at the guys to judge their build. That would make plenty of people uncomfortable. Gay isn't the problem, the problem is behavior. If a gay guy is making everyone uncomfortable by his behavior there's a problem. If a gay guy is making people feel uncomfortable by his mere existence, that's everyone else's problem. Same goes for straight people.
That doesnt mean that there cant be legit discusion about the validity and/or application of the law... just like there are plenty of legit discusions about plenty of laws that are in place.
Not at all the same thing. Women's and men's bathrooms and such are separate mostly due to cocnerns of sexual violence/harrasment by men to women, which happens all the time as I'm sure you're aware. Here, you're talking about a man, who happens to be attracted to other men, being in a locker room with other men. Unless the gay player is constantly sexually harassing his teammates (which is highly unlikely to happen) then there should be no discomfort by either side.
So, as long as her male teammates are not learing at her... a female athlete should be put in the same lockerroom to change/shower with the rest of the guys then?
I suppose. I think the more prudent discussion here is the legal ramifications of whats happened. The player that was asked this question very possibly has a serious case against an NFL team.
You cant make a rule up that protects one way but not the other. Just because it is more common for women to be sexually harrassed/assulted by men doesnt mean that men arent just as deserving of equal protections from women. And b/c of that... it also applys to gays/straights b/c sexual orientation plays a big part in sexual harrassment/assult.
I'm not. I'm using that to make my point. The real question is... why are you ignoring the safety issue of women on man sexual violence? Just b/c one may be more prevolent than the other doesnt make the less common one any less harmful when it occurs.
The difference is, she might not be comfortable being naked in a room of 52 other naked men who likely could all easily, or fairly easily physically overpower her. This would not be the case with a gay football player who has risen to the professional level. Your suggestion seeks to ostracize one guy (who hasn't done anything wrong) because of the affect his mere presence might have on some of his teammates. I'm sure there were many Brooklyn Dodgers who didn't want to be in a locker room with Jackie Robinson, but that was their problem to get over, not Jackie's
It seems to me many of these football players already engage in sexual harrasment with each other, snapping each other with towels and constantly slapping each other's asses. Perhaps many of these homophobes are in the closet themselves.
You are comparing apples to oranges. You are talking about one woman being surrounded by a large amount of men being equivalent to one gay guy in a room where almost all of his other teammates will be striaght. who is he a threat to?