Raiders DE Carl Nassib announces he's gay

[Malfatron]

1 hour ago, Matts4313 said:

Dismissing challenges is very different than attempting to convey that you are welcoming to all color, genders, sexualities.

i was making the point thats how saying "I dont care about this. why is this news? can he play?" comes off, regardless of intent.

If someone said "I welcome all colors, genders, sexuality...and i know society isnt there yet but hopefully this will be a catalyst for progress". well, i doubt anyone would have an issue with that.

[ET80]

8 minutes ago, Dome said:

The company one keeps" the person someone decides to be in a romantic relationship with. It's a common phrase, here anyways. Usually used when scolding someone for fooling out with trashy riff-raff but not exclusively. Maybe it doesn't translate to texas slang

For the record, I got it. Never didn't get it... but I'm old.

[scar988]

FWIW, this is a big deal. It's not a big deal for cis, straight, people. But for people like my little brother as well as for people like a former member on here who I used to do a radio show with, having someone come out and be the first active player in a league to be gay IS a big deal. It doesn't hit home for some of the guys here because they're not who it's supposed to be for. It's for the younger generation. 

Much like how Lil Nas X was one of the first rappers to not only be gay, but to be super open about it and successful was a big deal for his community. This will go a long way to help other young, gay football players be open and live their life honestly. Live their life without hiding who they are. So, while some here don't see the value, there is a whole community of people who sees the value and thanks Carl for this.

[Dome]

 

2 minutes ago, ET80 said:

For the record, I got it. Never didn't get it... but I'm old.

My mom says it all the time and you're probably about her age, so this checks out. 

[ET80]

Just now, Dome said:

 

My mom says it all the time and you're probably about her age, so this checks out. 

She was a few years older, last I recall.

*Shrug* I like 'em mature.

[Dome]

Just now, ET80 said:

She was a few years older, last I recall.

*Shrug* I like 'em mature.

By dad goes under for shoulder surgery in one hour... he's losing his power.

Now would be the time to strike.

[scar988]

38 minutes ago, JonStark said:

I'm going to look into this, but I still think you are taking the "I don't see color/orientation/gender" thing and automatically turning it into "not acknowledging the struggles these groups face". They are not the same. 

In my every day life, how someone looks or what someone is interested in does not stick out to me. I base my opinions of people off of how they act, if they are decent, how they treat other people/animals/the planet, if they are logical, etc. That does not mean that I'm dismissive of the hardships they have had to face or still may face. I'm not pretending these things don't exist, I'm simply stating that they mean nothing to me when I look at another human being. 

Are there people who do dismiss it? Absolutely, but the ones that don't care about these things are not the enemy. They aren't uncomfortable, and if fact may be the most comfortable around this type of thing. I think only one person in here has said that Nassib's announcement could be a bad thing, and he's 100% wrong in that. 

I submit to you a quote.

Quote

"We must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented. Sometimes we must interfere." - Elie Wiesel.

In this case, if we're not actively trying to help people who are disenfranchised and who are being othered by educating the ignorant around us, we are being neutral. And that's not how we help the world grow and improve for everyone. It's how we continue to oppress and limit those people's freedoms.

[ET80]

Just now, Dome said:

By dad goes under for shoulder surgery in one hour... he's losing his power.

Now would be the time to strike.

So, now you and @Ty21 are my sons?

Least I ain't gotta worry about paying for college...

[ET80]

1 minute ago, scar988 said:

I submit to you a quote.

In this case, if we're not actively trying to help people who are disenfranchised and who are being othered by educating the ignorant around us, we are being neutral. And that's not how we help the world grow and improve for everyone. It's how we continue to oppress and limit those people's freedoms.

Very well said.

[goldfishwars]

1 minute ago, scar988 said:

FWIW, this is a big deal. It's not a big deal for cis, straight, people.

Exactly. Before you say 'you don't care' or 'this shouldn't matter' just take one second to ponder whether you have any skin in the game. 1 guy coming out will have a demonstrable filtering down impact on young gay kids. It matters, them seeing acceptance at this level matters to them.

[Dome]

1 minute ago, ET80 said:

So, now you and @Ty21 are my sons?

Least I ain't gotta worry about paying for college...

But you will have to worry about who is going to take care of you when you're old(er). 

[Matts4313]

13 minutes ago, Dome said:

Sure sure, but you get why having to argue with someone like that would make someone angry?

"The company one keeps" the person someone decides to be in a romantic relationship with. It's a common phrase, here anyways. Usually used when scolding someone for fooling out with trashy riff-raff but not exclusively. Maybe it doesn't translate to texas slang, regardless, referring to that as their own "kind" tells me this guy has mental lines drawn on what is "normal" and what isn't normal.

should probably be warning worthy but we'll see how much webby wants to enforce the "no hate speech" rules. 

It didnt click until you explained it, but I have heard that phrase now that you mention it. Just not part of my regular lexicon. 

13 minutes ago, Dome said:

I'm trying to understand where you stand. You playing devil's advocate and using admittedly dumb examples to prop up a side of the argument you claim you don't subscribe to. It is a bad look and it's purposefully obtuse. Nobody in the history of the world has looked good doing that.

I dont know that I am truly playing devils advocate. My example failed along with the successor tries to explain it. So last attempt.

1. You can care about human rights and not be interested in someones individual sexuality. 

2. By say "I dont care" it can very easily mean: "I dont treat this person different based on their gender/sexuality/races/religion/etc". You are not saying you dont care about their struggles. You are simply saying that those factors wont bias you against who they are as a person. 

IE: "Joe/Jane is a gay" - "I dont care, I am welcoming to all" or "Carl is gay" - "I dont care, can he help my team win a superbowl". Its not dismissing their struggles, its a statement that their sexuality isnt a factor on if they should be on the team. Which I believe is Nassibs goal in the first place. 

[RamblinMan99]

1 hour ago, xenajets said:

Which was precisely the point I made earlier in the thread about players of colour back in the 40/50’s. 
 

If Tony Dungy did say that then I feel he made a mistake there. There will always be a barrier that needs to be broken just like it did in sports when only white athletes were allowed to play. Go watch the Jackie Robinson film and see what he had to endure to ‘force’ narrow-minded individuals to accept people of colour into sports. 
 

The same now could be said for people from the LBGTQ community. I for a long time was the epitome of ‘not seeing colour/orientation’ and thinking that was enough. I’d easily stick up for someone being attacked/assaulted but how rare is that to actually see?

Instead it’s the stuff you don’t see and the pain that’s caused that make statements that you’ve made very insulting and ridiculous. 

No, Tony Dungy did not make mistake.   He was speaking for the majority of NFL coaches and football coaches overall who wouldn’t want to deal with this kind of situation.  

I’m fully aware that the moderators are watching me like a hawk, so I’m going to try to say this without anybody getting offended right away.  

………You and most of the posters in this thread don’t have a clear cut picture on how the real world works and you haven’t really spent enough time around other people to understand it.  
 

No matter what kind of activism people take for equality/social justice/whatever,  the vast majority of people will continue to stick to their tribes.  
 

Why is that?  Because it’s natural and most people don’t have a problem with figuring out who they are.  
 

White people still marry white people. Black people still marry black people.  
 

The only thing that has changed is that our society will collectively say “it’s ok” but they know that they wouldn’t do the same.  For those that feel they have to integrate into a group that isn’t their own are going to experience the underlying tones that they do not fit in.  
 

That’s why Michael Sam didn’t have a career in the NFL.  And, that’s why Nassib leaving the league on his own terms is bound to happen too.  Publicizing someone like him is exactly what the NFL and the rest of mainstream media want to see on paper but mainstreaming someone like him in pro football will never come into fruition.  
 

If you feel you have to resort to calling me a bigot, that’s perfectly fine by me.  You have a First Amendment right to do that.  
 

But, hear me out when I say that nobody else on this thread is going to be nearly as honest about the cold hard reality.  

Edited June 22, 2021 by RamblinMan99

[Totty]

I am happy for him.  

 

Now, go chase QBs and tackle the ball carrier.  

[JonStark]

2 minutes ago, pwny said:

I understand exactly what you’re saying. I fully understand that the position you’re aligning yourself as feels to you like you’re not causing harm. That’s the entire point of the the research I mentioned people towards. You think you’re not causing harm, you think this stance of color blind and gender blind and orientation blindness is helpful and not regressive. I’m flatly saying, if it wasn’t clear at first, that it is incorrect and not productive and you’re going to have to stop arguing about how you’re right and just go read if you want to understand it.

This isn’t about the bigots who pretend they don’t care so that they angry and mean things under the context of “well, I don’t actually care, so I’m not a bigot”. it’s entirely about how the “me not caring about his sexual identity is the truly progressive stance” is reductive and harmful because of the state of society. So I mean you can either read the articles I pointed towards, or you can keep telling me that it doesn’t apply to you because you aren’t intentionally coming from a harmful place. But I’d honestly much rather you stop arguing and instead just maybe go read some and have an open mind that maybe what you’re doing, regardless of your intent, is harmful.

I'm going to read some articles tonight (if you'd like and specific ones, let me know) but unfortunately if I still disagree, you'll just say that I didn't go into it with an open mind, so there's really no point in continuing this conversation unless I change my opinion. Regardless, I have a few people in my life of the LGBT community so it's worth the read in case I can pick up anything from it. 

Also, a stance of color/gender/orientation blindness is not regressive. Regressive would be the mindset that those things matter and that they should be used to separate each other. Again, those people do exist but are not the ones I'm referring to.