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 10:41 AM ^
Okay?
I will freely admit to joking about the shortness of slot receivers. Not so much about gay people.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:45 AM ^
And you think that's OK? Ross Douglas has been on campus for a year and a half now, and he just now came out as a slot receiver. It took Norfleet nearly as long (after parading himself as a DB for a week or two, likely to please his father). Even Gallon tried to hide his identity by lining himself up on the outside last year.
Let's try to be a little bit sensitive here.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:10 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:06 PM ^
I believe now that they find short to be too negative, and all slot recievers should be considered "Vertically Challenged" to be politically correct and show you great diversity.
/s
August 14th, 2014 at 12:29 PM ^
I make jokes all the time about slot receivers. It's ok though, becasue I have couple friends that are slot receivers.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:43 AM ^
I'm on your side that people should be ridiculed for making homophobic remarks and jokes, but I genuinely think that was a joke at the expense of slot receivers.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:50 AM ^
where slot receivers, as well as wide receivers and tight ends, can be viewed and accepted as equals. Oh, that will be quite a momentous day for sure.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:13 AM ^
Once again, pushing the Slot Receiver Agenda.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:15 PM ^
If we accept slot receivers as football players, what's next? Will they want us to accept kickers? Think about the big picture here.
August 14th, 2014 at 4:09 PM ^
If a joke like the above doesn't involve some form of gay as a pejorative, then it's just a joke with gay people in it.
That's a good thing.
EDIT: I think some posts have been deleted, so the ordering is all mixed up. Note the "Reply to #57". #57 is not the above post. Also note that the post that seemingly is a response to this post is a reply to #47.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:52 AM ^
Re-read what he wrote. Also read his other posts in this thread.
August 14th, 2014 at 1:38 PM ^
Dude, that's not a gay joke.. that's a "slot recievers are short" joke...
Not sure thats even a joke, as slot recievers are... you know... short.
Deep breaths.
And to the people who think these 2.. TWO! young men have made a big deal over themselves coming out.. Are you saying that nobody would have blinked if they showed up with their boyfriends at the ESPYs or something?? There is an announcement to get out in front of the shit storm that WILL come. If in ten years after hundreds of athletes have followed suit guys are still calling press conferences (or the like) to come out.. then you would have a point.
August 14th, 2014 at 2:20 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:27 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:37 PM ^
But it could just as well yield a larger percentage. What we should expect here is actually a really complicated question.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:17 PM ^
But even if only it's only one-tenth as likely that a football player is gay than a randomly selected man from the general population, that still means there are probably in the neighborhood of seven closeted gay NFL players. And I'd bet that it's way higher than that.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:27 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:54 AM ^
You suggest that the derth of gay players is explained by statistics. I'm suggesting that from a statistical standpoint, we would expect to see far more gay players than we do. The null hypothesis doesn't hold, so you need another explanation. It can be a selection bias, a self-selection bias, a significant portion of players in the closet, or some other explanation, but statistics suggest it has to be SOMETHING.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:50 AM ^
Agreed. When I was in college a decade ago, our fraternity invited members of LGBTA to speak to our house and educate us (which we needed). One girl asked if there were any openly gay members of our fraternity, and there weren't. She said that statistically, it was likely that half a dozen or so of us were in the closet.
After the meeting we talked about it, and said things like "but we probably have fewer gay guys than the average because it's a fraternity and gay guys don't join fraternities, etc etc." Similar to the excuse above about fewer athletes being gay.
Well, of my fraternity brothers that I stay in touch with, 3 are openly gay. That's still below the average (our house was like 100 guys) but it's possible there are guys I don't know about. So we were wrong.
August 14th, 2014 at 10:57 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 11:00 AM ^
according to the CDC. it's more like 2%/ Unless of course you include bisexuals, transgender, and any other non-immutable proclivity that I overlooked. . .
August 14th, 2014 at 1:58 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 5:16 PM ^
http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/health-survey-giv…
the government invested a great deal of money into (where it could have been spent elsewhere) so I imagine it's pretty accurate.
August 14th, 2014 at 9:16 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 11:05 PM ^
given a major reason why the study was done was to monitor the current spread of HIV/AIDS in the population which is, I'm sorry to say, increasing among the homosexual population in the last 5 years.
you're right, hilarious. . .
August 14th, 2014 at 11:48 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 9:41 AM ^
you told a news agency.
(I mean I'd care a little despite not knowing you because alcoholism sucks. But that's an aside).
August 14th, 2014 at 9:42 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
That would have been awesome if he did that, actually.
August 14th, 2014 at 3:19 PM ^
This reminded me of the Always Sunny episode where they guys are trying to decide whether to join the pro-choice or pro-life protestors.
August 14th, 2014 at 9:47 AM ^
Because no one has DONE it yet.
Sports have long been openly homophobic, and much of the sporting world still is. Look no further than Tony Dungy's comments a couple of weeks ago. Until a critical mass of players come out to publicly acknowledge that they are gay, and demonstrate that it really doesn't matter one damn bit, it will still be the subject of whisper campaigns, jokes, and (more importantly) discriminatory behavior.
Coming out publicly is the way you stand up and say "when you talk about gay players, you're not talking about some mysterious hypothetical sliver of the fraternity of players, or some fringe element. You're talking about me. I'm an above-average offensive lineman. I get along with my teammates. I do things The Right Way. And I'm gay. So when you talk about vague concepts like 'distraction' and 'chemistry,' you're talking about ME. And that's obviously ridiculous. Now watch me pancake block this sumbitch and tell me again why it matters who I kiss."
It's the same thing that happens with other immutable but non-apparent characteristics of the human condition, like mental health. For centuries, there was a stigma around mental health issues that made people feel they needed to hide those aspects of themselves for fear of public ridicule and scorn. If you were depressed, you didn't go to a doctor, you went to a bar. It still exists in some aspects of society (like with PTSD in the military culture), but we've gone a long way towards destigmatizing mental health issues. And it started with a few people stepping forward and saying publicly "Hi, I'm a public figure you know and like. I suffered from depression. If you suffer from depression, talk to somebody."
August 14th, 2014 at 9:56 AM ^
Very well stated, and I heard the undertones of your last paragraph to yesterday's story regarding a very funny man. Thank you for those thoughts.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 11:55 AM ^
it seems a portion of the thread was taken down by a mod. Not my doing, but considering how that thread was going, probably a good thing. But, I am impressed on how well, relatively speaking, this whole post is going. Some good discussion amidst the arguments.
August 14th, 2014 at 12:01 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:05 PM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 12:25 PM ^
agree. and FTR, Zeus can't hit a curveball
August 14th, 2014 at 10:04 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:11 AM ^
Gay players will always be different than straight players, just like black players will be different than white players or dark-haired players will be different than redheads.
The issue is that many parts of the sporting world still believe that those differences are material to the roles of those players on a team. It's like it used to be with black football players; it was only a couple of decades ago that it was the common understanding that black quarterbacks couldn't lead football teams because they weren't smart enough. Now, that kind of thinking has been shoved to the fringes by the success of a number of successful black quarterbacks.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:03 AM ^
/jk I am enjoying your posts here no matter what your hair color.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:53 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 10:59 AM ^
It's easy to condemn "those gay people" when you don't realize that they are all around you--your friends, family, heroes, villains, colleagues. The more people who come out, the more that people have to realize that their hatred applies not just to people that they don't know, but to people that they know and love (or hate, or feel ambivalent toward).
I'm looking forward to the day that we don't care who's queer or straight (except when looking for a date at a bar) and can move on to find a new group of individuals to hate.
August 14th, 2014 at 11:21 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 11:57 AM ^
I agree with your post, but I think you misread his. You two are in agreement.
I think he meant you would only care if someone is queer or straight if you are looking at them as a potential date. If I was gay, I would care if the guy I wanted to hit on was gay, for example. If I see a hot girl at the bar, whether or not she's attracted to men has a lot of impact on our future as a couple. I think that's all he meant.
August 14th, 2014 at 12:41 PM ^
August 16th, 2014 at 8:39 AM ^
No, I have no issue if men at a bar (or anywhere else) hit on me. I find it a compliment, actually. For some reason, more so even than when a woman seems to take an interest in me. I have no idea why that is. Any MgoPsychologists out there?
August 14th, 2014 at 11:52 AM ^
August 14th, 2014 at 3:23 PM ^
I don't really care if you are or not. But do you have to make a big announcement about it?
August 14th, 2014 at 3:36 PM ^