Raiders DE Carl Nassib announces he's gay

[JonStark]

2 hours ago, VonKarman said:

THIS.

Staying away from situations like this and pretending that taking an equidistant approach is valid is completely wrong. There's only one morally acceptable stance, and it's to fully support people that have been oppressed for no good reason. It's also important to not be tolerant against people who actively or passively support that oppression.

Except no one was staying away from these situations or acting like they don't exist (at least not me anyway). I agree with everything you said 100%. 

I've spoken up in public as far back as high school for my gay friends. I'm aware of the struggles and oppression they have/currently face. I wasn't saying that I don't care about those issues, I was saying that I do not personally care what their sexuality is. It makes no difference to me. When we hang out with my wife's lesbian sister and her girlfriend, I don't think of her as my gay sister-in-law. I've admitted that this was the wrong thread to debate the issue on, but that doesn't make me the homophobe like the angry mob here wants to make me out to be. 

1 hour ago, Rainmaker90 said:

For the people who ‘ don’t care ‘ can you at least acknowledge and appreciate that a lot of people do care, and that it means a lot to others to see people like them represented and accepted? 

Absolutely. I don't care about what he does off the field (as long as he's a good person), but I do care about his announcement and the message it sends. 

[Louis Friend]

Just now, stl4life07 said:

That’s true. Not only that but people question the Rams motive for drafting him in terms of getting attention. In the end I didn’t think he got a fair shake in the NFL which sucks. 

I agree, to a point. But after being cut by the Rams, he signed with Dallas and couldn't catch on there either. Then he signed with the CFL and couldn't produce there. While I have no doubts his sexuality and openness played a part in his draft status and how teams and players felt about him, I don't understand the need for people to rewrite history regarding the NFL "cutting him for coming out". And not from your post, but from what I've seen trending on twitter, Instagram and Facebook by some claiming that people are ignoring Sam because he was black and came out, when in reality, the situations are different. However, both very impactful. 

[LETSGOBROWNIES]

2 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

I agree, to a point. But after being cut by the Rams, he signed with Dallas and couldn't catch on there either. Then he signed with the CFL and couldn't produce there. While I have no doubts his sexuality and openness played a part in his draft status and how teams and players felt about him, I don't understand the need for people to rewrite history regarding the NFL "cutting him for coming out". And not from your post, but from what I've seen trending on twitter, Instagram and Facebook by some claiming that people are ignoring Sam because he was black and came out, when in reality, the situations are different. However, both very impactful. 

Yeah strictly from a football perspective he was a tweener who lacked athleticism.

Good college player, but by no means an nfl athlete for the position.

Nassib is actually good enough not play and contribute, albeit overpaid.

[ramssuperbowl99]

9 minutes ago, Louis Friend said:

I agree, to a point. But after being cut by the Rams, he signed with Dallas and couldn't catch on there either. Then he signed with the CFL and couldn't produce there. While I have no doubts his sexuality and openness played a part in his draft status and how teams and players felt about him, I don't understand the need for people to rewrite history regarding the NFL "cutting him for coming out". And not from your post, but from what I've seen trending on twitter, Instagram and Facebook by some claiming that people are ignoring Sam because he was black and came out, when in reality, the situations are different. However, both very impactful. 

He also played well for the Rams in that preseason. So every NFL team got a very public, good look at Sam against NFL preseason competition, and pretty much everyone passed despite him putting his best foot forward. 

Great collegiate player though.

[pwny]

8 minutes ago, JonStark said:

but that doesn't make me the homophobe like the angry mob here wants to make me out to be. 

I do want to be clear, I was not calling you a homophobe. It’s pretty clear who those people have been so far, and it’s quite clear that they’re being intentionally harmful. I don’t think you’ve said anything that crosses that line towards intentionally harmful. But while doing things that you don’t intend to cause harm doesn’t make you an evil bad person, it doesn’t mean those things don’t cause harm.

The entire point of my post was to explain that good intentions doesn’t always mean good outcomes, and that if you want to understand why what you believe to be good intentions are actually regressive and harmful, you gotta do the google search and read. And if you do that, and you go in with an open mind, I’m confident you’ll understand it. I used to think “not caring” about all these things was the right way, but then I was pointed at the research and dove into it and figured it out.

[pwny]

23 minutes ago, JonStark said:

I don't care about what he does off the field (as long as he's a good person), but I do care about his announcement and the message it sends. 

I skipped past this when I first read it. Having read this, if this is decidedly true, I’m confident that if you read the research with an open mind, you’re gonna figure it out.

“I don’t care if you’re gay” and “You being gay will not change how I feel about you, but I will use this information to help me better understand the way you have to navigate the world and I’m glad you are able to be you” are different concepts. Moving from the former to the latter is extremely important. And when we move towards the latter, it’s important to no longer use the language of the former, because of the way it is used regressively and to provide cover for the bigots.

[JonStark]

  

2 minutes ago, pwny said:

I do want to be clear, I was not calling you a homophobe. It’s pretty clear who those people have been so far, and it’s quite clear that they’re being intentionally harmful. I don’t think you’ve said anything that crosses that line towards intentionally harmful. But while doing things that you don’t intend to cause harm doesn’t make you an evil bad person, it doesn’t mean those things don’t cause harm.

The entire point of my post was to explain that good intentions doesn’t always mean good outcomes, and that if you want to understand why what you believe to be good intentions are actually regressive and harmful, you gotta do the google search and read. And if you do that, and you go in with an open mind, I’m confident you’ll understand it. I used to think “not caring” about all these things was the right way, but then I was pointed at the research and dove into it and figured it out.

You're right, I didn't get that vibe from you. 

I did go on a google search for about a half hour and while I understand what you're saying that not caring about the issue is harmful (which I agree with), that's not what I have been saying. I do not personally care about a person's sexuality. I do care about continuing to raise awareness for the issue and can't wait for the day that everyone in the LGBT community feels as comfortable in every day life as a straight person would. Just like you can be "colorblind" in the sense of not letting the color of someone's skin change your opinion on them while still admitting there is systematic racism. They are two separate discussions that somehow keep getting lumped together. 

I have spoken out for those in my life affected by it, so I am by no means silent on the issue. My point was strictly that it is fine if someone does not care about someone else's sexuality, which as previously mentioned was pretty much unnecessary to state in this thread, and I somehow got lumped into the group that thinks the issue itself doesn't matter. That's what I get for getting caught up in two other posters' debate.

So if that's not good enough, so be it. I know your heart is in the right place and honestly I don't want to continue to waste more time going back and forth on semantics. We both know the struggles LGBT people face today and while it is getting better, there is still work to be done. 

 

[SteelKing728]

From a business perspective I get the idea of "not caring" if you're the GM.

Ultimately, you want to field the best team possible and if Nassib is considered good enough to do that, then yeah, I could see the GM truly "not caring".

That's not my view (I already explained mine) just playing devils advocate.

[Dr LBC]

16 hours ago, RamblinMan99 said:

What I’m about to say here should not be considered insensitive by any means and should be part of the discussion.  
 

What about the players on the team who are openly uncomfortable with having somebody like that on the team?  

I feel like they are now in a position in which they are forced to conform to that even though they know that they are deeply uncomfortable with a homosexual being on the team, and fear of being thrown out of the league if they dare speak their concerns to NFL ownership.  
 

This is not about whether or not it is right that he is gay or if he and his kind deserve employment rights, because those are entirely different discussions.  
 

But football is a contact sport and I’m  just thinking about the other players on the team and the other players in the league as a whole.  

Put simply, they don't have a right to be employed by an NFL team just because they may or may not be talented.  At-will employment (even the kind which operates under the umbrella of a Collective Bargaining Agreement) works both ways.  If it's really so uncomfortable for them, they're welcome to quit, sit out practices/games (and take the subsequent fines).  Call me crazy, but for the vast majority of those folks, the conviction of their principles probably dies out before their willingness to forfeit fat game-checks.  No one is under any obligation to cowtow to them; and I'd hate to break it to them, but this very likely isn't the first gay player they've shared a locker room with.

[Xenos]

12 hours ago, scar988 said:

This is actually called the tolerance paradox. The only way to actually have people understand that you have to be tolerant and accepting to other's beliefs is to stamp out the beliefs that go against the acceptance of other's differences. Things like racism, homophobia, anti-LGBT views shouldn't be tolerated because they dehumanize people or make them "the other" when we should all have the same rights and advantages within society for success.

[Thelonebillsfan]

"I don't understand why this is big news, the real thing we should aim for is a society that doesn't care" people say as we literally are still dealing with inlaid bigotries and biases against certain people across the world from centuries of social strife.

This isn't just a big deal because it's the NFL, it's a big deal because in many places in the US and in many places around the world being queer in public is dangerous, having your face known like that is dangerous, you can face professional and personal recrimination and ruin. Very easily. People who think this is a solved issue because Same-Sex Marriage is legal in the US now don't know what they're talking about.

It's a big deal because it's a big deal, because yes visibility is an overrated measurement utilized poorly often times, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. And it especially doesn't mean it doesn't matter when so many queer kids are being targeted and harming or taking their own lives because society still treats them as second class citizens unless they hide and internalize who they are.

The reason why the Trevor Project still exists is because kids are still hurting themselves because for all your bespoke and benighted grand myopathy towards everything and that "you only judge people for who they are as people" great, the social forces of society don't do that, they reap people based on these othering signifiers. And that's why this matters, and that's why saying you don't care is genuine, but not in the way you think. 

[D82]

11 minutes ago, Thelonebillsfan said:

"I don't understand why this is big news, the real thing we should aim for is a society that doesn't care" people say as we literally are still dealing with inlaid bigotries and biases against certain people across the world from centuries of social strife.

This isn't just a big deal because it's the NFL, it's a big deal because in many places in the US and in many places around the world being queer in public is dangerous, having your face known like that is dangerous, you can face professional and personal recrimination and ruin. Very easily. People who think this is a solved issue because Same-Sex Marriage is legal in the US now don't know what they're talking about.

It's a big deal because it's a big deal, because yes visibility is an overrated measurement utilized poorly often times, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. And it especially doesn't mean it doesn't matter when so many queer kids are being targeted and harming or taking their own lives because society still treats them as second class citizens unless they hide and internalize who they are.

The reason why the Trevor Project still exists is because kids are still hurting themselves because for all your bespoke and benighted grand myopathy towards everything and that "you only judge people for who they are as people" great, the social forces of society don't do that, they reap people based on these othering signifiers. And that's why this matters, and that's why saying you don't care is genuine, but not in the way you think. 

Kids are still hurting themselves. Kids are still being kicked out of their homes and disowned by their own families. "Conversion therapy" is still legal in some states. It's still legal for certain entities to deny adoption to same-sex families. 

There's so many reasons why things like a professional athlete coming out and being accepted for who they are matters and IS news. Until the day comes when all of the above no longer happens and people are treated equally in society no matter their race, gender/sex, orientation, etc. then we have to care and we have to keep fighting for equality and stand up to intolerance and injustice. And if the last few years have taught us anything, it's that we are FAR from that ever being a reality anytime soon. "Not caring" isn't helpful and honestly far more harmful. 

[Thelonebillsfan]

1 minute ago, D82 said:

Kids are still hurting themselves. Kids are still being kicked out of their homes and disowned by their own families. "Conversion therapy" is still legal in some states. It's still legal for certain entities to deny adoption to same-sex families. 

There's so many reasons why things like a professional athlete coming out and being accepted for who they are matters and IS news. Until the day comes when all of the above no longer happens and people are treated equally in society no matter their race, gender/sex, orientation, etc. then we have to care and we have to keep fighting for equality and stand up to intolerance and injustice. And if the last few years have taught us anything, it's that we are FAR from that ever being a reality anytime soon. 

Literally takes 2 seconds to see the absurdly disproportionate statistics of violence against trans people and in particular trans youth relative to their incredibly low total population to know that this is important and will continue being important very likely for the rest of our lives.

Progress is not a straight line, things don't just continue on and eternally get better, all it takes is one shock and decades can be overturned in moments. This is going to be a thing for a very, very long time, and we can only hope that the line continues onwards here. Lord knows it hasn't even started moving or, in many places such as Hungary, or Chechnya has wrenched backwards very violently. There's only so many things stopping that from happening here. It's why people understanding matters.

I also hope one day I can "not care", that's a nice dream. But that's all it is right now, a nice dream, and if you live in that dream then the last thing one needs to do is be so utterly dismissive offhand of those that recognize that things aren't all roses and sunshine and that if he faces backlash, which he very well may, we probably don't see this again for another decade.

[ronjon1990]

26 minutes ago, Dr LBC said:

Put simply, they don't have a right to be employed by an NFL team just because they may or may not be talented.  At-will employment (even the kind which operates under the umbrella of a Collective Bargaining Agreement) works both ways.  If it's really so uncomfortable for them, they're welcome to quit, sit out practices/games (and take the subsequent fines).  Call me crazy, but for the vast majority of those folks, the conviction of their principles probably dies out before their willingness to forfeit fat game-checks.  No one is under any obligation to cowtow to them; and I'd hate to break it to them, but this very likely isn't the first gay player they've shared a locker room with.

Yep. This is why people coming out and making it a point of discussion is so important. 

The sense of "security" anyone feels is somehow violated by sharing a locker room with a non-hetero teammate is exactly the type of false reality that leads to stigmas in the first place. 

If you think you've only dealt with non-closeted heterosexual people or openly gay people your entire life, I've got some bad news for you.

The mere fact it's even considered taboo is crazy to me. Secure people don't get insecure about who someone else fancies. I look forward to the day people become secure enough to admit that their fears regarding homosexuality were misguided and based on fear mongering stigmas that don't match up with reality. 

[Jakuvious]

On this whole, "I don't care" bit, I think a big part of the instinctive backlash to those who say that they don't really care about this or his sexuality or whatever, is "I don't care" is 100% a cover up for many people who really do wish to say "I don't want to hear about this" or "I don't like this." That may not be the people posting in this thread, I certainly hope it isn't, but there is absolutely a crowd that does use that statement that way, and you do kind of lump yourself in with that group by saying similar things. Up until recently, I had two employees who fell very hard into this category. Black Lives Matter? They don't care if you're black. Juneteenth? They don't care about any of those holidays or months that aren't for everyone. Diversity or inclusion talks? Who cares what anyone is anyway? And every time, when you got them at home or on Twitter or just feeling a little bit less like self-censoring, they would be clear that what they really wanted was for those people to just be quiet about it all, and leave them alone. There's a lot of that out there on social media and in the real world, and "I don't care" is an easy politically correct cover for a lot of those opinions. It becomes "I don't care so stop talking about this." Again, I am not saying anyone in this thread are those people, but that is who you get associated with, when the same words or rhetoric come out. The line between "I don't care because all people are equal" and "I don't care because I just don't want to hear this crap" is not obvious.

But beyond this, just from a common usage and interpretation, I don't know how anyone could believe a phrase like "I don't care" to be truly neutral. "I don't care," in any context, is going to be interpreted negatively. Anyone would interpret that response, to virtually any topic, that way. If a coworker approaches me and says "Man, I had a great day yesterday," and I respond, "I don't care," I'm a complete and total prick. Full stop. That is 100% how that would come across. If someone makes a thread here, that they invested time and research into, they post a few paragraphs and some statistics about a topic they're invested or opinionated on, and as soon as they post that thread, I reply immediately "I don't care," again, I'm a prick. It is a negative response, because almost undoubtedly, whoever I'm responding to does care. The internet complicates the question of who we're responding to. We could consider that to be Nassib, we could consider that to be OP, or just whoever is reading this thread, really, but by saying you don't care, you are absolutely projecting negativity towards those who do care. Saying you don't care is a disagreement and a shut down to those who do. And even if that's not the intent, it should be abundantly clear by this point, in modern society, that intent is not all that matters, interpretation matters as well. The world is full of people saying insensitive things that they don't realize are insensitive, but how people hear what you say does matter in a different, but no less important way, than how you mean it.

I have been blessed enough in life to have strong and trusting enough relationships to have had three people very dear to me at those points in my life come out to me, in their own ways. And I remember how I responded. I remember how nervous they were, even knowing the kind of person I was and who I try to be. They were nerve wracking moments for each of them, fearing what this could change or how I may react. For two of them I was either the first person they came out to, or was in a group that was first. And I can't imagine how brutal a response of "I don't care" would have been, to them. Even if I just meant that it doesn't change anything to me, even if I meant well and they knew it, I imagine it would have been truly heartbreaking for those three words to be the first they heard. It's a shut down. It's a phrase used to end.

If you don't care, shut up. I don't care, that you don't care. Enjoy your apathy in silence, and allow those who do care to rally together and support each other.

 

I don't know that I'll reply to anyone who replies to this post. I won't want to, but sometimes I can't resist. But I read through 32 pages and I wasn't going to be able to go to sleep without posting something of my own.