I guess I've established to myself and the internet that I give at least one shit about the treatment of LGBTQ's. That's cool; it was bound to happen eventually. It just means I have to write about Michael Sam now, even though it feels like an obligation instead of an opportunity for self-improvement.
I had the misfortune of reading the comment thread on ESPN.com's story about Michael Sam's coming out. This was a mistake. The scariest thing is that you need a Facebook account to comment there, and there were many people who didn't see a problem with being vocally homophobic UNDER THEIR OWN NAME. This falls under the same "common sense" category as Christina Kahrl's column from the Dr. V. uproar, but some people just don't get it. And what I say won't convince them. But I still have some thoughts, gained through no authority other than trying to be a decent human being.
-Part of this is publicity-based. Michael Sam knows exactly what he's doing and name recognition is a part of that. My own opinion is that the positives of fame and trailblazing were probably very difficult for him to see, and to him, it was a choice between several bad options. He chose the immediate pain of being a minority of one over the gradual suffering of a closeted life. Given the same opportunity, I would probably make the same choice. Soon he'll be used to his status as a public figure, and there's a chance his appearances will change public perception of homosexuals. That would be a good thing. If his fame bothers you, then be one of the people who shrugs and says "Whatever. I'ma go play Battletoads." whenever someone comes out. If your response is "I don't care, but grrrr I'm still pissed he's getting publicity out of this", you're doing it wrong. Of course the first openly gay NFL player is going to be a big deal. People care. Let's all of us- you, me, Michael Sam, Skip Bayless, Glenn Beck, Jesus over there- rip this band-aid off already. I'm grateful it's happening now, so next time it happens we can all shrug and go play Battletoads.
-I wonder if the inherent homophobia in the NFL community is overstated. I know most of the players are black, and the black community is not as accepting of homosexuality as American society as a whole. Niners CB Chris Culliver made headlines before last year's Super Bowl by saying "Can't be with that sweet stuff, man... Can't be in the locker room, man, nah." But these guys are all gen-X or later, and the world they grew up in made it a point to accept people as they are. I hope the majority of NFL players would react more like baseball's Tom Glavine and Preston Wilson. When asked if they would ever play with a gay teammate, both answered "I probably already have". Veteran reliever Mike Timlin said he had done so knowingly, and it wasn't a problem. Maybe NFLers will transcend the narcissistic "Ewww, he's gonna be checkin' out my junk in the shower" attitude. Maybe not. We'll find out soon enough.
-This is something I'm amazed I have to say, but apparently I do: If your opinion is based in ignorance rather than understanding and you take pride in said ignorance, nobody owes your opinion any respect. You get no cookies for being protective of your lack of understanding. It is not valid as an appeal to emotion nor as a rational argument. Take it somewhere else, preferably off my goddamn internet. If you were worthy of my attention, you would sicken me. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and free speech even covers most instances of what would objectively be called "hate speech". However, it has its limits. You are not protected from the reactions of others when you say something particularly offensive or ignorant. People's impression of you is conditional on what you say. If you are vocally ignorant, being told as much should be par for the course and is not persecution.
-The following is considered middle ground in some circles, but it's as insidious as outright bigotry: "I don't have a problem with people being gay. I just think it's wrong." If you say something like that, you're a liar. You do have a problem with people being gay. Let's try it with a couple words changed and see how it sounds. "I don't have a problem with black people. I just think their existence is wrong." "I don't have a problem with women. I just think it's wrong to be a woman." Seriously, it reeks of "Homosexuality is a choice". Nobody chose their orientation any more than I chose to be born with a penis or Trayvon Martin chose to be born black. And if you say you remember the day you "chose" to be straight- as some luminaries of the ESPN thread did- you intentionally misunderstand the word "choose" and your argument is a false equivalency. I do believe people can have "awakenings", but that is not exactly a choice. It is living life one way, in the darkness of ignorance, because it's what you think you're supposed to do. Then one day you change and start living your life another way because you realize it feels fucking phenomenal and takes you to places your old life never could. It doesn't mean you chose to be the new way. It means you never fully knew or accepted yourself, and once you did, there was no turning back. I believe we can choose what we do, and we can choose how we express our feelings, but there's no controlling what we feel. The best we can do is act on our emotions in a way that helps, heals, and does no harm.
-This goes back to what I said about Dr. V. Being born with your appropriate physiology and a socially acceptable set of sexual preferences to grow into is a privilege, probably the easiest of all privileges to take for granted. I try to empathize with people who can't fathom homosexual feelings, but they make it very difficult by refusing to accept that some people don't have heterosexual feelings. Homosexuality and gender dysphoria don't come from childhood abuse or inappropriate exposure to sex as a child. They aren't diseases or defects or repercussions of trauma. They're things that just exist. I'm a believer in the genetics argument myself, and the science is pretty clear that nurture cannot undo what nature has done. But shit, if science swayed these people, this wouldn't be a discussion we'd need to have, because then Leviticus would just be a bad story instead of a central tenet of American Christianity. Besides, the focus on that one verse is really unique to American Evangelicalism (I think). There's all sorts of batshit rules and regulations in the Old Testament, but as is their wont, thumpers pick the one that doesn't affect them personally and enforce the crap out of it like Jihadists. Maybe it's just my status as an outsider of the church, but the whole thing seems completely out of step with stuff like "love thy neighbor" and all the other awesome stuff Jesus said. Maybe that's the point.
tl;dr: Mizzou DE projected to be drafted in the 3rd or 4th round.
No comments:
Post a Comment