|Is Mike Piazza an idiot?||Len J|
May 24, 2002 4:22 AM
|Watching the "drama" in New York between Mike Piazza & The NY Post, I couldn't help but feel like I was watching a train wreck.
Why would Piazza even recognize the questions he was being asked about his sexual preference?
It seems to me that question, to anyone, is like the old "Do you still beat your wife?" question, there is no answer that works. If hes says no, (especially as vehemently as he did) he gets accused of protesting too much (Wink, Wink). If he says yes, he feeds the fire & creates a mess for his team & family (Unfortunatly, there are still too many people spooked by this). And if he says that it is none of thier business (Which it isn't) they accuse him of hiding something. He can't win.
In my oponion, he should of just taken the high ground & told them it was none of their business & let the wave pass.
Am I the only one who thinks what he did was crazy?
How long will it be until a professional team athlete comes out? What will be the reaction of his teammates?
May 24, 2002 8:17 AM
|Not a big baseball fan, but I'd imagine it has more tha\n it's share of rednecks who might not accept an openly gay player. If he's not gay I don't blame him for denying it. Like Seinfeld says, "I'm not gay--not that there's anything wrong with it!" Then again if he is gay and comes out publically he could make himself a poster child for the gay movement and that could understandably be a bit awkward as well.|
May 24, 2002 11:45 AM
|Can you imagine what an openly gay player would face at his home field, let alone on the road? Baseball fans can be brutal. When pitcher Bob Welch announced that he was a recovering alcoholic, fans at almost every park would offer him beer every time he walked on an off the field. Can you imagine standing in left field for nine innings in an away stadium with a large percentage of the fans chanting "FAG-GOT, FAG-GOT"? I imagine that dealing with teammates and coaches would be the easy part of being out as a professional athlete.|
|Warning, rant! Traditional values and possible overreaction.||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 7:31 AM
|I haven't finished my first coffee of the day!
I earnestly hope that we never see a male professional team athlete "come out". The family unit and masculine values have been under attack by gay rights activists and feminists for years and we are too afraid of being branded intolerant when we stick up for the family and those we love. What I say here may not be popular but I am so very tired of watching what I say and biting my tongue for fear of being attacked by the fanatics. Guess what, they are even more intolerant yet have the blessings of society, the media and the judicial system to be vocal about it. The family is essential to a healthy future and children even if it doesn't fit their views. Look at what is happeniing to our culture with open eyes. When professional male athletes stand up and announce they are gay they are continuing the attack against masculinity by destroying or altering healthy role models to our young men and boys. I probably will be labelled a homophobe and a bigot for saying this, but you know what? I am sick and tired of seeing statistics and reading stories concerning the collapse of the family while biting my tongue about stupid, politically-correct and yet subversive-to-society moves made by a small group of fanatics who want to shape the world in their image.
If one of my sons announces he is gay I will accept it but I will not jump on a bandwagon screaming that everybody must be gay, that he is "special", any of that nonsense.
May 25, 2002 8:14 AM
|I'm very sorry. but I have no choice but to call you on this one.
>The family unit and masculine values have been under attack by gay rights activists and feminists for years
the family unit has been changing due with society - a process that has been going on for quite a while. homosexual families have had nothing to do with it; it is only recently that homosexuals have sought adoption.
gay rights activists and feminists generally do not seek anything more than equal rights for homosexuals and women respectively. it's always easier, though, to listen to the lunatic fringe of any particular group, and dismiss the arguments of the whole group as a result.
now, as for masculine values. for one, not all gays are effeminate; there are quite a few (don't know of statistics) that are masculine. second, what's this about masculine values? what are they? how are homosexuals trying to destroy them? less than 10% of the population is homosexual. should they decide not to subscribe to your vaunted masculine values, what is that to you? do Kwaanza and MLK day constitute an affront to White values?
there is no single set of masculine values. personally, I would suggest you get in touch with your feminine side; this would enable you to relate to the human race better. starting with your wife/SO.
>Look at what is happeniing to our culture with open eyes. When professional male athletes stand up and announce they are gay they are continuing the attack against masculinity by destroying or altering healthy role models to our young men and boys
I've already dealt with the former part of this statement. now, some groups of homosexuals do present an unhealthy role model to children. but homosexuals in general are no worse than the rest of us. there is no one homosexual lifestyle. there are some who engage in promiscuity; the religious right (for example) is very happy to sieze on their example, and to tar the rest of the homosexual population, because it suits their political purposes. but there is no one homosexual lifestyle, just as there is no one heterosexual lifestyle. and, for that matter, there is no one set of masculine values. studies have shown that children of homosexuals are no more likely to be homosexual, and just as well adjusted as children of ordinary families.
>I am sick and tired of seeing statistics and reading stories concerning the collapse of the family while biting my tongue about stupid, politically-correct and yet subversive-to-society moves made by a small group of fanatics who want to shape the world in their image.
that description fits the religious right in this country. except for the politically-correct bit. overall, they are possibly the greatest impediment to equal rights for all people in this country.
the 'gay agenda' is no more than the struggle for equal rights; quite similar, in fact, to the 'Black agenda' under Martin Luther King. the term 'gay agenda' is used by the religious right to further their own political ends. and these maniacs call themselves Christians...
>If one of my sons announces he is gay I will accept it but I will not jump on a bandwagon screaming that everybody must be gay
first, good for you. second, no one is demanding that everyone must be gay. homosexuality, as you may know, is not a choice. a heterosexual can choose to engage in homoerotic activity, but he can never choose to be a homosexual. homosexuals have never demanded that everyone else be like them. however, they have consistently demanded that they be accepted as equals, which often they are not. gay pride days may offend you, and some of the things done there certainly offend me. but remember, they face an incredible amount of prejudice from religious institutions, society, and individual people.
|Very good response and much appreciated...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 11:17 AM
|...with mickey-mac's, dsc's and your responses I can see where I am getting off track. I am making the mistakes of only hearing the squeaky wheels from both "sides" and accepting them as being spokespeople for the majority. I am also venting frustration with some of the things going on nowadays. Although I think that studies concerning children raised by same sex families are far from conclusive, I must say that you make good points across the board. Ones that I couldn't honestly disagree with. Well spoken and thank you.|
|BTW I got in touch with my feminine side a while back...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 11:21 AM
|...but we had a fight and now its not talking to me.
|it's all right; sorry about my heading. nm||weiwentg|
May 25, 2002 11:33 AM
|Nah, it was good, you made a lot of sense!THX nm||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 11:40 AM
|Families and homosexuality: two constants through human history||mickey-mac|
May 25, 2002 8:58 AM
|Gays have been around as long as families have. Both will survive to the end of human history. Neither will bring the downfall of the other. I simply don't understand the argument that homosexuality is a threat to families.|
|Families and homosexuality: two constants through human history||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 10:48 AM
|Before reading this "mickey-mac", check with my response to "weiwentg". I am trying to express my thoughts instead of being quiet because there are several views to these issues and I've only heard views I don't agree with. I certainly don't expect to get agreement with my views, I would be disappointed if I did.
Right now I wouldn't count the family as being a constant, the general image I receive through the media and reading is that it is on the decline. My question is what will replace it? I feel that a homosexual couple are not the same as a married heterosexual couple, it seems obvious to me. If the government follows the lead of society and grants a gay or lesbian couple recognition as a union, that is the government's initiative. If they are granted benefits as a result of a long term union that again is the initiative of the lawmakers. I just do not agree that same-sex unions are the same as marriage. My PERSONAL opinion is that children should not be raised in a same-sex union and that the traditional family should be supported instead being left to wither. When I, or anybody else for that matter, can't express a personal opinion then it will be too late for society.
By the way I realize that I probably should of started a new discussion on this subject, my apologies.
|Isn't it more about loving parents than sexual orientation?||Len J|
May 25, 2002 1:21 PM
|I am so tired of this "Only traditional Families can/should raise children" B/S. I was raised by a traditional set of parents that didn't know what Love was, and it scarred my siblings & I terribly. I also have several same sex couple friends who are raising children in a loving, nurturing environment that I can see is great for the children.
Why do "Family value" advocates focus on the form (Husband/Wife) and not the substance (Loving , nurthuring environment) of what a supportive environment really is?
Unfortunatly, it appears that "Traditionalist" still believe that sexual preferance is a choice & same sex choice is a sin. They are unable to see that all unions between 2 people can be good or bad bassed on how the people behave & the messages of Love they live (or not) not their choice in partners.
End of Rant.
|You know this makes me think of another trap I've...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 9:00 PM
|...fallen into,perhaps the worst,believing the statistics that fly around any contentious issue. The point is that statistics don't take actual people into account; your cold unloving hetero parents,my warm loving hetero parents, your warm,loving same-sex parents, my lack of encounter with said parents. I still have some reservations about same-sex parents but perhaps I need to hear more, I'm not a legislator so I won't make any difference, but I've opened a can of fish and now I'm learning.
Thanks for your rant! By the way I wish there was something I could do to make up for your parents, all children are special and lovely and deserve the best. I can promise you that I will always take good care of mine. Thats why I explore and try to understand and eliminate poor perceptions before I pass them on to them.
|yup...i's say there are more than enough instances||ColnagoFE|
May 28, 2002 7:59 AM
|of hetero couples that are worthless parents. don't see why same sex couples are any more or less likely to be good parents than anyone else.|
|Families and homosexuality: two constants through human history||Duane Gran|
Jun 4, 2002 7:45 AM
|In my opinion the problem is that marriage (and hence the family unit) is a legal entity. The matter of persons committing their lives to each other is a personal matter and I don't see where the state is involved in stipulating insurance laws. It seems like a private matter, but because marriage is equally endorsed by the state and the church in the United States we have a sticky situation.
I hear about the family being under attack, but then I wonder who is attacking it? To be blunt, I would have to say it must be the people who made a commitment to their family and abondoned it later.
May 25, 2002 10:21 AM
|You don't have any friends/family members (that you know of) who are gay, do you?
Every *group* of people contains a small segment that are flamboyant, on-the-fringe and very vocal about it. Usually this minority segment is what gets portrayed and promoted in the media as well. When so-called *normal* people (like you???) begin defining entire groups of the population based upon this small segment, this, my friend, is called *stereotyping*.
You need to stop defining people according to some *sound-byte* image, and start interacting with people on a person-to-person basis.
Now go have your morning coffee.
|You know, you're right, I see that I have fallen into a trap...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 10:55 AM
|...and let the vocal "squeaky wheels" of both sides get under my skin. It just gets so hard to listen (ignore?) some of the lunacy out there while trying to be a good father and husband. Frankly I get scared sometimes, thank you!
Good coffee, by the way.
|You know, you're right, I see that I have fallen into a trap...||dsc|
May 25, 2002 6:26 PM
|Cheers, bro, we all have our fears. Like anything, once we face them head on, we usually find that they're not as bad as we first thought.
From one good coffee lover to another :-)
|Funny thing about fear...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 8:42 PM
|...is how when you are alone or reading something, fear can grow, but when you express it to somebody else it can be better understood. I not afraid of my boys being attacked by the "gay boogie-man", I'm not afraid of them being gay except for their health at the hands of others. In fact as I look back at this day I can see how unreasonable my fears were. I am father and a husband and I have recently realized how close I came to not fulfilling my duties in those roles. I'm worried about not being the best Dad I can be. My overall fear is...change? Lack of social direction? I can't even say exactly what it is but I am trying. Part of dealing with any fear is to identify it rather than blindly strike out as I did this morning. It wasn't until I read your email, then went back to reread weiwentg's that I saw where I got off track. Wasn't it better that I did that than harbouring irrational half formed prejudices. I think so. Beware though, I will probably make other mistakes again in the future ;-)
|Your willingness to listen to other opinions...||dsc|
May 26, 2002 5:19 PM
|makes you a big man in my eyes, OW. Your sons are lucky to
have you as their father.
|Ditto the Kudos||jtolleson|
May 27, 2002 8:45 AM
|It is rare online (or anywhere) to see folks reconsider and listen. As I noted below, my response was to your original post, not to your subsequent modifications.|
|Thank you, that really means alot from you two...||OutWest|
May 27, 2002 7:17 PM
|...besides, the way I see it I had better stay open-minded in my views because I want my boys to be open-minded in theirs. Its a confusing time for everybody but I must set a good example and listen as well as speak. This is a great site and I'm glad we are all a part of it.
May 25, 2002 3:44 PM
|Caring about whether a jock is gay is a measure of taking care of those you "love?" That's a new one.
Oh, and love the straw man conclusion. Find me any equal rights activist who is really saying that "everyone must be gay" or that gay people are "special" (i.e., better).
If one of your sons announces he is gay, one of the ways you will love and support him, presumably, will be to bristle when someone calls him a f*ggot, or fires him despite his able job performance, or tries to be the crap out of him in a grocery store parking lot.
|Hey, I already admitted I overeacted and that I am trying to...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 8:28 PM
|..sort out and express my thoughts, obviously SOME are confused, I can see that now. I don't get it right every time, right away. Thats why I value input from others and I listen. If one of my sons announced he was gay I would have to continue educating myself about something I obviously don't know much about. I don't know how you draw the conclusion I would "bristle" (or what that entails) when he is attacked for his sexuality but by then I would have a much clearer picture of his situation (and mine by extension). I can tell that I would be better off offering my apologies and perhaps it would be best if I don't bother you kind people anymore. Thanks for the input though, it has made the issue (or lack thereof) much clearer.
|give the man a break||weiwentg|
May 25, 2002 9:05 PM
|we all overreact once in a while -I know I have done that lots.|
|thanks weiwentg, but jtolleson has every right to...||OutWest|
May 26, 2002 7:41 AM
|...say what he did, I have learned from everything said in this thread and for that I am grateful. In fact I should of expected far worse and I appreciate the grace this forum exhibits.
|Actually your post stung me, that hasn't happened for a while...||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 9:11 PM
|...and I'm sure its nothing like getting called a f*ggot or the other things you mentioned. I used to get called chubby,fatso and loser when I was getting beat up in school. Again this brings me closer to understanding what really goes on, not just what the talking heads present to us. As I said to dsc I have to have reasoned views to present to my sons, but not inflexible ones.
|I posted before I read the mea culpas, so chill||jtolleson|
May 27, 2002 8:42 AM
|and besides, I'm entitled to my opinions on the issue as well, and as a lesbian let's just say that such topics run a little deep emotionally for me.|
|Me, a culpas? Whats a culpas? :-) nm||OutWest|
May 27, 2002 3:24 PM
|BTW, did anybody answer your initial question Len?nm||OutWest|
May 25, 2002 9:16 PM
|No, not really, must be an uncomfortable one nm||Len J|
May 26, 2002 4:37 AM
|If it wasn't before, I probably made it so :-) nm||OutWest|
May 26, 2002 7:36 AM
|I'll take that one||mickey-mac|
May 26, 2002 11:56 AM
|Yes, Mike Piazza is an idiot. I haven't kept up with the current controversy and am not basing my opinion on it. I'm a life-long Dodger fan and consider anyone who leaves the Dodgers to be an idiot. ;-)|
|Now thats funny! nm||OutWest|
May 26, 2002 12:40 PM
|why come out?||Duane Gran|
Jun 4, 2002 7:57 AM
|Why would Piazza even recognize the questions he was being asked about his sexual preference?
The topic has gone off in some other directions, but it made for good discussion. As for the question itself I'll be happy to share some of my insight on the matter.
Repression is a terrible emotional weight. At some point you reach the breaking point, and empathizing with people who feel the same only goes so far. (just look at how much empathizing we cyclists do about cars, dogs, etc) After enough time a person hits the boiling point and feels the need to finally tell people who he really is and stop sidestepping the issue.
It might have been easier to avoid the question, but no doubt he has done that a thousand times already. We heard about it when he finally got tired of sidestepping it. This particular time someone may have had probably evidence to "out" him and he may have wanted to do it on his terms to minimize the scandal. I don't know the details, but this is just a little speculation that might put it into perspective. For those who never wanted to know or didn't care (which is well over 99% of the people), such is life.
|He didn't out himself.......||Len J|
Jun 4, 2002 8:58 AM
|he held a press confrence to tell everyone he was straight.
I do agree with the boiling point arguement though. I think he just had enough of the speculation & innuendo. However his press confrence put more gas on the fire, IMO