OT: ASU OL Chip Sarafin comes out
Edward 'Chip' Sarafin has become the first active player in NCAA football to come out publically regarding his sexuality. I'm sure this will turn into a firestorm of opinions, positive and negative. Personally, I applaud this individual to have the courage in making this announcement. Its truly a historical event as I believe that Michael Sam and Chip are breaking new ground in college athletics' environment. Link: http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/11349933/edward-chip-sarafin-arizona-state-sun-devils-announces-gay
August 14th, 2014 at 10:53 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:57 AM ^
LGBT teenagers are more than twice as likely to attempt suicide as their straight counterparts - at least per one study cited by the CDC. http://www.cdc.gov/lgbthealth/youth.htm
August 14th, 2014 at 10:39 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:40 AM ^
To the confused 14 year old football player in bumble, Iowa who knows he's gay but hides his true self.
I think many are on the same page, that we'd love for when this kind of announcement isnt news, and for some of us, we're there (Great for him, now who cares!) but everyone's not there yet - as evidenced by some comments in this thread.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:44 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 11:08 AM ^
Good for the kid and his coach. Some people will say "Sigh, just play ball dude" because they don't see the value in respectful, public declarations like this. They typically think sexuality is something to be kept private, and they see such declarations as an unnecessary imposition of sexuality into something that purportedly has nothing to do with it, like football.
Those people fail to factor in what it's like to be a part of a large social group of men, be it a football team, a fraternity, the military of what have you, where mutual deprecation as a form of bonding, coupled with machismo, inevitably leads to an uncomfortable environment for whomever happens to be different.
These public declarations can serve as a counter, simply by heightening everyone's awareness that certain comments or actions can actually hurt and alienate certain of their friends that they never knew would be hurt by them.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:23 AM ^
Does he still change and shower with the team?
They don't let straight woman shower and change with the male athletes and vice versa.
I've often wondered about that after each one of these announcements...
August 14th, 2014 at 11:25 AM ^
...still shower with gay women, as far as I know. So, I'd say the answer to your question is a definite yes.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:26 AM ^
We can imagine in world in which there are straight men's showers, gay men's showers, straight women's showers, lesbian showers, male-to-female showers, female-to-male showers, etc. But that's a lot of showers to have to build just because a gay man might see a straight man's wang.
August 14th, 2014 at 12:03 PM ^
Why is that question legitimate? Do you honestly not know the answer?
August 14th, 2014 at 2:13 PM ^
Gay athletes have showered with straight athletes since the invention of showers.
Have you ever been in a team/gym shower room with other athletes or members of the same sex? If so, guess what? You've been in a shower room with a gay person.
Did they try to rape you? Did you feel emasculated? Did you feel abused? No, you didn't.
August 14th, 2014 at 5:21 PM ^
And yeah I am aware I've been in the locker room with plenty of gay guys.. I have gay friends..
How is it any different than men and woman showering and changing together? You don't think most women wouldn't be comfortable with guys there when they are changing or showering? That's a valid question. It's more or less the same thing. You even bring up being raped is absurd.
August 15th, 2014 at 8:15 AM ^
It's not a valid question. It's a misdirection brought up because the asker thinks gay people are icky.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:27 AM ^
Although I am supportive of him and pleased with how his coaches have handled this, the following paragraph thrown in at the end of the story tells me all I really need to know to judge this young man's character:
"The 6-foot-6, 320-pound lineman graduated last spring with a bachelor's degree in biomedical engineering and currently is enrolled in ASU's graduate program for biomedical engineering. He has been involved in research for football-related concussions, and has been active in the community with youth sports and the Tillman Scholars program."
August 14th, 2014 at 11:53 AM ^
We are NOT discussing whether Jesus Christ could hit a curveball. A couple of conversations to thet effect have been deleted.
August 14th, 2014 at 12:20 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:44 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:33 PM ^
He could've scored more goals than Wayne Gretzky! He was way cool!
August 14th, 2014 at 1:07 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:52 PM ^
I love SalvatoreQuattro's comments:
Intolerance of any type leads to conflict. Tolerance to me is not the accepting (of) a stance, but rather respecting a person's right to believe what they want to believe without punishing them for it. Until we as a society grasp this, injustice and conflict will still plague us.
We as a society still have a long way to go, but I think it is a fine thing for this athlete to make this announcement. I actually think it would be fine if he hadn't, but I support his right to do so.
Some comments and thoughts of my own. I would add to SalvatoreQuattro's definition of tolerance, "respecting a person's right to act on their beliefs." In the case of homosexuality, tolerating the action goes beyond respecting their right to believe as they choose.
There also needs to be different terminology. Specifically, "Homophobia" is used as a pejorative label for anyone who doesn't accept homosexuality, who believes it is wrong. It is possible to believe that many things are wrong without fearing them or choosing them personally. You can respect the right of someone else to believe what they want and simultaneously believe that they are wrong.
We have examples of this all over.
- Politically, someone can either believe that Obama is a good president or a bad president. Another person can disagree, but respect the first person's right to their own political beliefs.
- Religiously, someone can believe there is no god, one God, or many Gods. Another person can disagree, but respect the first person's right to their own religious beliefs.
- In sports, someone can believe that Ohio State is the best sports team in the Big 10. Someone else (namely me!) can disagree, but respect the first person's right to their own belief.
- Even as a Michigan fan, someone can believe that Morris should be the starting QB. I may personally believe they are a "moran," but respect their right to their belief.
Somehow, this doesn't carry over to our views on homosexuality. I'd like to see a society that respects the right of different views and beliefs, without judging and despising those with whom you disagree.
August 14th, 2014 at 12:57 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 1:28 PM ^
I get your point, but I respectfully and civilly disagree.
Your use of the term "Homophobe" is clearly pejorative, and short circuits civil or intelligent discussion. By classing "Homophobe" with "Birther," the implication is that they both have a screw loose, wear a tinfoil hat, etc.
The Obama example isn't the best illustration. Maybe another would be better? I can believe that alcoholics make a bad choice, or a wrong choice. Same thing with those who smoke weed regularly. . . my "opinion" is that repeated use can affect your brain cells eventually.
Now, believing that these subsets (those who drink alcohol or smoke marijuana to excess) are "wrong" does not necessarily imply that they are not fully considered equals. Even "equal" is a slippery term. If equal means "equal" rights, opportunities, etc., well yes, they are fully equal. But obviously, every last one of us are "different." The fact that we all differ in various ways means that from that perspective, we're not "equal." Not being equal (in talent, background, gender, sexual choices or preferences, etc.) doesn't imply that they shouldn't have the same rights and ability to freely choose as they see fit.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:20 PM ^
It's bcause of viewpoints like yours that hundreds of non-straight kids feel they cannot express who they really are (at best) or resort to committing suicide (at worst) every year.
You don't choose to be gay. Period. It is not a choice. And stop saying that it is the action of gay sex that is morally wrong. How is having gay sex morally different than homosexual sex? Is it morally wrong for a heterosexual couple to not have sex?
August 14th, 2014 at 2:31 PM ^
I can't understand how these people can be so hateful while claiming to come from a position of morality. At least we live in a time where they feel like they have to disguise it with thinly veiled rhetoric that a child could see through. I was born in the morning, but I wasn't born yesterday morning. Homosexuality isn't a choice. It does not fall under the realm of morality. Consensual gay sex is not a sin. End of discussion.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:21 PM ^
At this point, I will self-moderate myself, and cease comments on homosexuality and morality, other than to say that I'm glad ASU football player felt able to express himself publicly.
Also, I'm glad that the season is about to begin, when all off topic discussions will be curtailed, and we can be united in our love of Michigan football.
August 14th, 2014 at 8:22 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 8:14 PM ^
To be clear, that the action is wrong is exactly the position of the overwhelming majority of Christians. We believe sodomy--in all of its forms, regardless of whether it is heterosexual or homosexual sex--is wrong. Now, you can call me a bigot if you want, that is fine. Our view is that the only legitimate form of sex is intercourse within the confines of marriage, as it is traditionally understood.
So the answer to your question as to how it is different...we believe our bodies are gifts endowed by our Creator. We reject the notion that our genitalia is something to play with for sexual gratification. It is not a toy. We believe the will of our Creator, ultimately, is procreation. Ergo, sodomy is illegitimate, in all of its forms.
I love all people, gay or straight. I truly do. But I do believe sodomy is a sin, consistent with Scripture.
August 14th, 2014 at 8:37 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 9:09 PM ^
That is a good question, because, in my view, adultery is a horrible, horrible sin. I truly hope, however, that you don't throw orthodox Christians like myself in with the Westboro Baptist Church. I don't believe "God Hates Fags," and I don't believe all gay people will go to hell. Some may, but some will go to heaven. Same goes for straight people, white people, black people, etc.
To further your point, divorce is another classic example. I believe divorce is a sin, and we should make divorce for-fault, with exceptions (adultery, domestic abuse, felony, child endangerment, etc). Virtually no Christian will go there. But I do, because it is a sin in my view.
I believe it is a problem that other sin is not discussed, and too much of a focus is placed on homosexuality/sodomy. I understand that being gay has an overwhelming--if not outright--genetic component to it. And being gay is not a sin. A wide array of sexual acts are, some of which gay (and straight) individuals may partake in.
As a Christian, I don't demonize any group of people, and I hope I don't come off as anti-gay, as I am not and that is not my intent at all. And I am aware this is not the best place to discuss such issues, so I apologize.
August 14th, 2014 at 9:18 PM ^
August 15th, 2014 at 7:52 AM ^
Homosexuality produces such extreme reactions because there is a movement explicitly to promote it. It may look like hypocrisy to you that straight Christians are willing to demonize gays for their sinful sexual behavior while ignoring their own. That's because it is hypocrisy.
America is a nation of cafeteria Christians, picking and choosing what they like and don't like. "I have urges so I need to watch porn." Well, this is idolatry, actually one of the Ten Commandments. I think this comes back to the fact that, even though American culture has accepted idolatry (to continue this example), there is no concerted effort to get the Church to back down for its belief that idolatry is a sin. People just don't care that they are personally sinning. The same applies for lying, in many instances.
Ultimately, the goal for many is for the Church to completely back down on its views, accept gay marriage and accept homosexuality -- which is naturally associated with sodomy. It is fine in a free society for people to challenge the Church to change its position. At the same time, this is where the extreme reaction comes into play.
Christians would do well to focus on the Ten Commandments, I agree with you there. At the same time, all sin -- including homosexual and heterosexual sodomy -- should be discouraged.
August 16th, 2014 at 9:05 AM ^
What is your basis for stating the view of the "overwhelming majority" of Christians? Perhaps the overwhelming majority Evangelical and Fundamentalist Christians (of which I was once a member) in the US believe what you posit, but Christianity is a very large religion, with a great diversity of views, and the majority of which choose not to take a narrow-minded, literalistic reading of a collection of books that itself reflects a broad diversity of views.
That Evangelicals are seen in this country as the "norm" for Christianity is unfortunate, and colloquial. Many Christians are enlightened enough to not give a flying fuck with whom people share their bits and pieces.
August 14th, 2014 at 1:15 PM ^
Won't somebody please think of the homophobes :'(
August 14th, 2014 at 2:59 PM ^
that is my favorite line I hear from those who are prejudiced. Please be tolerant to my intolerance...wait what...
August 14th, 2014 at 12:48 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:51 PM ^
"Do to others as you would have done to you."
Generally, if we treated others as we would want to be treated the world would be a much better place. Also, everybody should have the ability to do anything so long as their actions do not infringe upon the rights of others.
Can't we all just get along?
August 14th, 2014 at 12:54 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:55 PM ^
Decades of group theory arguments in the mass media will kind of do that to a person. I'm fatigued and jaded, so sue me. If this makes him happy and gives him a sense of relief, then I'm really happy for him.
I think people are individuals, not groups, and that the sooner we stop caring so damn much about people's sexual preferences, ice cream preferences, and automobile preferences, etc. maybe the sooner we can continue on with our lives and focus on far more important things, like understanding the probability that Michigan might run a 41 buck sweep counter out of the Delaware Wing-T on a 3rd an 8 inside the opponent red zone.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:16 PM ^
But if you throw in bacon preferences, you've crossed the line. Bacon makes everything better.
August 14th, 2014 at 1:27 PM ^
Nice to see the community handled this announcement a bit better than Michael Sam's. Hopefully in the near future athletes won't feel the need to come out publicly because it will just be accepted.
Good luck to Sarafin and ASU this year.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:26 PM ^
Glad to see the thread civil, and I can definitely think of at least "1" reason that's the case. Much, much better than the Michael Sam threads.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:26 PM ^
Who knew Arizona State had a biomedical engineering program? Or grad students?
(stolen from Reddit)
August 14th, 2014 at 3:27 PM ^
The thing that I don't like about topics like this is that they become heated and result in a lot of hate towards particlar thoughts/beliefs regarding homosexuality as well as the particular individuals they involve. "Religion" is the main reason why this is such a big deal in the first place, so to say "no religion" should mean that these things should probably not be brought up on the board in the first place only because it restricts comments to one particular viewpoint and prohibits others from expressing themselves.
That being said, despite the fact that I am a proclaimed Christian and have my own views on the subject of homosexuality, one thing I can say for sure is that I am proud of him for allowing himself to come to terms with his homosexuality in that he is not afraid of the decisions he makes and what people think of those decisions. I truly believe that if you make decisions that are regretful and are morally against them yourself, you should do everything in your power to correct those behaviors. If you like the decisions you make and find them moral and just, it is sad to think that you would be forced to contain those beliefs/life choices within yourself and "hide" from the world - So many negative consequences come from that, and I imagine that must be an extremely tough world to live in.
I respect and love those who are real about who they are, and I truly wish those who do not agree with his life choice would still love him for being real about himself and love him for who he is as an individual. Unfortunately, this is not the case most of the time. And that's truly sad and hateful, which is not what "we" are called to be.
I will only go this far in the discussion since this is not a board for "religious discussions," but I do wish those who see this from the other extreme realize that those who have differing opinions on "homosexuality" are not terrible people just like those who practice homosexuality are not terrible people - When it's an issue of hatred towards a particular individual, then it becomes inhumane and unjust regardless of the viewpoint.
I, too, wish for a day where these things don't have to be a huge media event any longer.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:49 PM ^
This is fine sentiment and all. It's actually made me realize something.
You mention people not agreeing with Sarafin's "life choice."
I think people who claim to not understand or be morally or religiously against homosexuality just really refuse to accept that it is not a choice. They don't get it - IT'S NOT A CHOICE! For a person that is anything but straight (homosexual, bisexual, asexual, anywhere in between on the spectrum), when you say "I love you despite your choice" it is the ultimate slap in the face.
This comes down to a science vs. religion issue, so I won't get into that debate, other than saying if you don't accept that it isn't a choice, you are just wrong. Period. Sexual orientation is not a choice. It is something you're born with. Some might even say "God meant for it." Which I would think blows up all the religious arguments, but it seems to be ignored.
August 14th, 2014 at 4:20 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 4:21 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 5:10 PM ^
Look, it's as much a choice as your hair color. They all accept and love gingers as people but disagree with their choice to express their hair color choice by not constantly dying it their entire lives.
This is a great analogy. We don't accept persecution based on looks (hair color). But when somone says "I accept homosexuality, but I view homosexual acts as immoral" it's the same as saying "If you don't dye that red hair blond your entire life, then you're committing immoral acts. How dare you not hide your actual, natural, self."
And then saying "hey I'm immoral too - I've drank and had sex before marriage" as if admitting to doing those things gives you the authority to proclaim that having consensual non-heterosexual sex is immoral. Come on. "I'm not judging, but gay sex is immoral! But it's not my place to judge!"
I wrote and erased a paragraph four times to avoid breaking a rule, so let me just say I'm glad America is becoming a more accepting and educated society.
August 14th, 2014 at 4:55 PM ^
MGoBender, I was curious about your assertion. (IT'S NOT A CHOICE.) If you google search, "Is homosexuality genetic" you will get more than 3,000,000 hits.
The first link about a gay gene is from the Telegraph in London. The money quote:
Being homosexual is only partly due to gay gene, research finds
What does wikipedia, the friend of today's college students everywhere, have to say about biology and sexual orientation? Here's the key sentence:
A simple and singular determinant for sexual orientation has not been conclusively demonstrated; various studies point to different, even conflicting positions, but scientists hypothesize that a combination of genetic, hormonal and social factors determine sexual orientation.
I could go through more of the links, but here's the thing. The scientific research is inconclusive. If anything, it indicates that less than 50% of "homosexuality" is genetically predetermined. MGoBender, you undercut your own position when you state your position so strongly, as if it were "fact."
There are some in the gay community who actually are concerned about the idea that there is a clear and indisputable gene marker for homosexuality. If there was a so-called "gay gene," women could choose to be tested for it and to abort, just as they do for a variety of reasons, from gender to Down Syndrome, Cystic Fibrosis, Spina Bifida, and Muscular Distrophy.
Obviously, you very strongly believe in the position that homosexuality is not a choice. I would simply ask that you honor scientific studies, and the fact that your belief is not clearly conclusive.