Queerty is better as a member

Log in | Register
  sports

How Many Dicks Does It Take To Turn A Bi-Baseball Player Gay?

The National Center for Lesbian Rights is suing the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Association for allegedly discriminating against three bisexual male players who weren’t gay enough to play in the 2008 Gay Softball World Series. According to the plaintiffs, NAGAAA officials asked five members of team D2 to specify whether they were “heterosexual” or “gay”, which makes me wonder: Did eating pussy in college make me too straight to play in a gay softball league?

The suit alleges NAGAAA asked the players “intrusive questions” about their sex lives and whether players identified as “predominantly attracted to men” or “predominantly attracted to women” while in a room filled with 25 strangers (most of who had come just to watch). When one of the players responded that he was both heterosexual and gay, an NAGAAA official allegedly said, “This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.”

The predominantly-white NAGAAA committee then disqualified three bisexual men of color (and not the two white guys) and recommended disciplinary measures against the D2 team and San Francisco league, including forcing them to forfeit their second-place World Series win. The NCLR says that no apology has been issued to the men nor has any disavowal been made of their public sexual questioning. NCLR is suing to rid the NAGAAA’s rules of discrimination against any sexual identities.

In response, NAGAAA’s attorney Beth Allen asked, “Why is [the NCLR] asserting this claim on behalf of three poor beleaguered straight men? I don’t get it.” And she’s right, neither Ms. Allen nor the NAGAAA get it. The players aren’t gay nor are they “beleaguered straight men”—they’re bisexual, an identity that’s regularly discounted by straights and gays who don’t know where to place them.

It reminds me of the recent, botched introduction of bisexual wrestler Orlando Jordan. TNA Wrestling had no idea how to convey the star’s bisexuality to an audience, so they had him sit between a twink and a vixen (as if he’d suddenly become gay or straight just by making out with either one).

What evidence could D2’s accusers possibly have provided to prove the three disqualified team members weren’t gay? Did they bring in old boyfriends or ask Broadway trivia questions? Is there a penis-to-pussy eating ratio that designates whether one of us is LG or B? No, attraction is intangible and trying to quantify it is absurd and dehumanizing.

Yes, a Gay World Series becomes meaningless if a bunch of straights can go gay-for-play. But the NAGAAA itself says that it exists to promote “amateur sports competition, particularly softball, for all persons regardless of age, sexual orientation or preference, with special emphasis on the participation of members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender (GLBT) community.” So why, then, are their own policies so ill-equipped to address bisexual men? Especially ones of color who may not fit within the neat and tidy boxes of GLBT?

NCLR executive director Kate Kendell said the suit “makes very clear that the core issue in the case is that sexual orientation discrimination is harmful, demeaning, and stigmatizing.” And she’s right. The sports field is supposed to be an equalizer where ability trumps identity. Even Ms. Allen agrees that the NAGAAA strives to create an environment where queer athletes can “play ball together… [and not] face any type of discrimination.” By trying to create teams of purely gay players, the NAGAAA has created the very discriminatory environment they sought to avoid.


  • 88 Comments
    • Jason
      Jason

      Can we test this on David Wright?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 9:57 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • TiredOldQueen@Queerty
      TiredOldQueen@Queerty

      For the NCLR to fund this suit is obnoxious. Gay men should flood all the women-only events (cruises, music events, etc.) and launch a suit of their own.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:14 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DillonS
      DillonS

      Are they there to play ball or hook-up? (Not the same thing ;)

      If they are there to play softball, then it shouldn’t matter. The idea of a gay softball league or team is so that gay men and lesbians can be themselves without having to hide their sexual orientation. If straight and bi players help foster that sense of inclusion and support, then why shouldn’t they be permitted to play as well?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:16 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • terrwill
      terrwill

      What would be the point of having a gay team if the straights take over? I mean, the whole idea of having a gay team is so gay men can be with other gay men without straight intrusion. There are tons of straight sports groups/organizations. Let the straights go to those. Gay men mingle with straight men in their everyday lives, at work, at home, etc. Can’t gay men have a gay baseball team all their own? Is that too much to ask? Must the straights invade everywhere?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Cam
      Cam

      Wait a second. I think that something has been missed here. If the point was that they kicked out all the bisexual players…that doesn’t seem to be the case, because the article said specificlly “And not the two white guys”. The article didn’t specifiy if the white guys gave a substantially different answer so we can possibly assume that their answer was the same.

      So if thats the case, it seems like it would be a larger issue that 5 men said they were bisexual and only the non-whites were kicked out. I mean, did I miss something or did that fact jump out at anybody else?!

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:47 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CHIP1218
      CHIP1218

      The issue here is not straight men, but bisexual men. If a guy is bisexual and currently with a woman, does that preclude him from playing in this league? What if a bi man hasn’t been with a man in a year – must he have sex with a man ASAP to prove he’s worthy to be in this league?

      I think this is terrible what they did to all those guys. Unless they had proof that these men were really straight and lying about being bisexual so they could be on a team and be the superstars, where in a league of straight men they felt they would be overlooked, then the NAGAAA people deserve the wrath of NCLR.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:52 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Moomoo
      Moomoo

      @DillonS:

      I agree entirely. If we were to make an exclusive gays-only softball team that doesn’t allow straight or bi people to play, it’d be JUST like making an anti-gay team. They’d become just like the other narrow-minded people out there.

      Sure, you can invite all the gays to play; but if others want to join and have funtoo , why not?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:00 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      There is a difference between “gay-friendly” and “gay only”. This isn’t just about “straights invading”, but about the fact that the organization seems to actively discourage the bisexual identity. There’s no indication that there are cries of “the heteros are coming!”, but rather that this organization is making it clear that there are two and only two sexual orientations…. straight or gay.

      Even if one or two are straight, so what? Aside from violating the law which protects folks from discrimination based on sexual orientation(and it does work both ways, thank you very much), why the hell can’t they play softball?!? Why is it that when straight folks want to isolate themselves form the gays, folks call them bigots, but it’s perfectly ok for gays to want to isolate themselves from the straights?

      I’d rather play in the league with the bis and the straights than the gays who refuse to be nice to anyone else!

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:05 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @Cam:

      No, it jumped out at me as well. The white guys were “gay enough”, but not the men of color? There are a LOT of fishy things going on with this situation, it seems.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Fitz
      Fitz

      First off, ANYTHING that NCLR does is suspect to me after they boff’d Prop 8 SO FUCING BADLY with their “please be nice to my gay kid” TV ads.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:22 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      If this is a private, club, then I am trying to see what the legal issue is.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:35 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • dr
      dr

      What would be the point of having a gay team if the straights take over? I mean, the whole idea of having a gay team is so gay men can be with other gay men without straight intrusion. There are tons of straight sports groups/organizations. Let the straights go to those. Gay men mingle with straight men in their everyday lives, at work, at home, etc. Can’t gay men have a gay baseball team all their own? Is that too much to ask? Must the straights invade everywhere?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:40 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • a
      a

      this decision is so obviously racially motivated, it’s disgusting. how can we call for inclusion, when we, as the dominant class within our own group, suppress the rights of minorities.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:46 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @dr:

      Terrwill, D’oh, or whoever, first off, don’t co-opt my handle.

      Anyway….

      Gay men are MEN. We need to associate with other men, straight, gay, or bi. I know I do, anyway. And if the straight guy is gay-friendly, then why not hang out with him? Why do we need to ghettoize our community, what do we gain from it? In my opinion, nothing at all. If we want full and equal rights, it’s seriously hypocritical to start excluding and alienating our straight allies, especially over a game of softball.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • tazz602
      tazz602

      Having seen and been involved with gay softball I knew this was eventually going to happen. That rule is arbitrary, enforced differently by different city leagues and doesn’t apply equally, bisexuals are sometimes equated as gay, sometimes not. Add to that, if a team really wants to stack straight players then all they have to do is lie and say they are gay, which would not surprise me if that has not already been done as some of these A teams are very competitive.

      Essentially this is a rule that has outlived it’s usefulness. To put someone thru a grilling about their sexual orientation is the gay equivalent of reverse discrimination. I’ve seen that attitude kill a LOT of straight support for some of our leagues and activities. We have to stop looking at all straights as the enemy.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • lysana@twitter
      lysana@twitter

      And lo, the biphobia and ignorance continues in the comments. Those of you who keep talking about heterosexuals in the context of this story are missing the point and making anti-bisexual discrimination even more invisible when you’re not approving of it outright. The men in question were bisexual, not straight. And oh, yes, I noticed the men of color were the bi-identified men who were removed. I wouldn’t be amazed if the white bi men conformed to the panel’s mental image of “gay” better regardless of their answers to those horrid questions. Kudos to the NCLR for taking on this case. It’s clear there’s a lot of education left for the GL community to receive on the issue of bisexuality.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @D’oh, The Magnificent:

      There may very well not be a legal issue (depends on whether it’s a public or private club), but it does raise the issues of:

      1. We don’t really understand, as a community, male bisexuality as part of the GLB identity; women’s clubs seem quite open to lesbians, bisexuals and their straight allies, as do many male sports clubs. Why is this one so hellbent on grilling the bisexual men and straight men in such a public and really inappropriate fashion?

      2. “How far are we willing to go, as a community, to maintain an identity, and does our identity as GLBs include ghettoizing ourselves and excluding straight allies?” While I may get frustrated at the number of letters being added to the acronym for our community (which seems to grow by the day!), I don’t think we ought to toss out straight allies who enjoy our company just for the hell of it, either.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:45 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Daniel
      Daniel

      @Cam: Just to clarify, an important detail that I accidentally left out: according to the suit, at least one of the two white players also identified as “bisexual” and was decided by the committee to be suitably gay enough to play ball.

      Uneven indeed.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman
      Norman

      I think the point that everyone is missing is that there is no such thing as a bisexual man. If you are a man and had sex with a man, then you are gay.

      Over 99% of all men who identify as bi, partner with the same sex as they get older and stop having sex with women after they hit their 30s.

      So they’re gay…just too young to 100% accept it

      Let them stay on the team!

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • clark
      clark

      @Norman: You’d better run for cover!

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:54 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @Norman:

      That’s nonsense, Norman. Give me a citation for your statistics (and don’t tell me “we all know that”). Male bisexuality exists, and comments like yours only fuel the fire for the argument that “you’re either gay or straight”, and that’s simply not true. Sexuality is not as black-and-white as folks demand it ought to be.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 12:56 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Zack Tedder
      Zack Tedder

      It’s amazing that people who say “it’s a private organization and should be allowed to make and follow their own rules” was so amazingly decried when the Boy Scouts of America tried to use it back in the 90s and were told no. Sorry guys, you don’t get to have it both ways.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 1:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"
      Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

      @No. 10 FITZ

      Be as angry as you want about Prop. 8; angry with its vile groups of supporters, ignorant voters who crapped on our rights, and the poor quality of the No on 8 campaign management.

      BUT YOU ARE WAY OFF BASE FITZ TO BLAME NCLR. Time to do a little research and learn a little bit about the history of the NCLR and the many contributions that lesbians lead and make in the struggle for gay and lesbian civil rights.

      NCLR was the lead counsel that WON the “In Re Marriage Cases” before the California Supreme Court that brought same-sex marriage rights to California. Their mission is to bring forth legalizing and enforcement of civil rights for lesbians [and gay men]. They are a private advocacy LAW FIRM and they have succeeded beyond all measures of success.

      The NCLR does not have a mission to act as political campaign organizers, fundraisers or leaders. There are many other groups whose mission is advancing civil rights for gays and lesbians through lobbying and campaigning, such as HRC and the NGLTF. That the NCLR decided to take money from their limited funds to run one ad expressing one view point should be applauded. Had every gay and lesbian organization chipped in, then there would have been many view point ads.

      ++++++++

      The biggest failure for the No on 8 campaign comes at the hands of the hapless gays and lesbians in California who did nothing! Of the 35 million Californians, at 5% gay/lesbians, at 70% of voting age, yields 1,225,000 potential contributors and volunteers. Yet, less than 75,000 Californians contributed to the No on 8 campaign! Had the 1,150,000 who DID NOTHING [other than vote] donated an average of just $20, the No on 8 campaign would have had nearly $25 MILLION MORE DOLLARS to fight the good fight.

      In August 2008, my boyfriend and I of, then, 22 years, got married in Massachusetts. We had planned and budgeted $6,000 for the wedding and honeymoon/vacation. When the polls showed Prop. 8 pretty much dead-even, we decided to cut our wedding/honeymoon/vacation budget in half and donated $3,000 to the No on 8 campaign.

      What did you do?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 1:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Trevor
      Trevor

      Sorry Norman – Bisexuality exhists. I have a friend who is bisexual and has been for years. He’s in his 40’s so I am pretty sure that he knows what he wants. Also – spoke with a psychiatrist friend of mine who believes that sexuality cannot be defined, although one usually has a preference as to what sex they more closely align with.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 1:20 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay

      You can get seven black males to participate in a GAY softball team but you can’t get seven black males to show up to a protest for gay rights. Maybe gay organizations should say we are having a gay softball game on the White House lawn so black gay (but they don’t want to identify as gay) males will show up.

      I completely agree with Norman. Male bisexuality doesn’t exist and if it does it’s extremely rare. For those who will use female bisexuality to argue for male bisexuality, male and female sexuality are different not the same and not mirror images of each other. There have been two studies on male bisexuality and both showed that the subject was either heterosexual or gay (majority were).
      http://www.alldeaf.com/glbt-lounge/41977-bisexual-men-do-not-get-aroused-both-sexes.html

      Where are the gay MLB players? There hasn’t been a single openly gay MLB or even minor league player ever! That’s why gay leagues exist. Because of the hostile climate haterosexuals create. This gay league will be completely haterosexual in a couple years because the climate will become unwelcoming to gay people. If you go to these games and support them, stop it. Thank all the mindless, subservient gay people who made it happen.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 1:47 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"
      Mike in Asheville, nee "in Brooklyn"

      @No. 19 Norman

      Hmmm, just like the wingnuts, you just make up numbers and call them statistics?

      Perhaps you should read the Alfred Kinsey’s “Sexual Behavior in the Human Male.” Per Kinsey, 11.4% of all males are 50/50 heterosexual/homosexual wheres 4% of males are exclusively homosexual for their whole life, 4% were exclusively homosexual for at least three years, and 2% were predominately homosexual between ages 16-55.

      Thus, predominately to exclusively homosexuals are approximately 10% of the male population compared to 11.4% who are 50/50 hetero/homo. Additionally, there are the 27% of the male population who are predominately heterosexual but have engaged in homosexual sex. That leaves 63% of adult males who are exclusively heterosexual.

      Based on on-going active sexual participation with men and women, bisexual men out number exclusively homosexual men by 4.35 to 1.

      On the Kinsey scale, I’m a 10! [The Kinsey scale is 0=100% hetero to 6=100% gay]. I have absolutely no sexual desires of any sort, and never have, for women, never experienced any kind of confusion either. So when someone else states that they desire men and women, well of course they do, and why shouldn’t they. It is the various and different natures of each of us that brings a wide breadth of humanity.

      Your ignorance and contempt against bisexual men/women is as bigoted and phobic as the anti-gay wingnuts. Whatever happened to live-and-let-live?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 1:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @AlwaysGay:

      I read that study, it’s really poorly done.

      1. Small sample of men. 30 het, 33 bi, and 38 gay. Of that number, 9 het, 11 bi and 13 gay did not become aroused by the videos they were shown and were dismissed from the study. That leaves 21 heterosexual men, 22 bisexual men, and 25 gay men, for a total sample size of 68 men. Hardly a decent sample size.

      2. The videos they were shown were male/male and female/female porn. No male/female porn. That strikes me as problematic. They researchers set up an either/or proposition by the nature of the videos used to measure stimulation.

      And stop using the term “haterosexual”, it’s silly. These guys who play are allies and friends.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 2:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman
      Norman

      Mike in Asheville-untwist your panties!
      Your stats are WAY off.
      Gay men do nto account for 10%-the real stats read closer to 3 to 5%. The 10% was latched on to to give us more numbers, but they are not true

      As a gay man who was married to a woman, I can attest that many things in teh Kinsey study are accurate. I believe I was more “bisexual” than most gay guys in that I was attracetd to women and enjoyed sex with women until I was 30.
      BUT-andthis is very important and where I am comign from-when I met my husband (legally married in CA-yay!) I became psychologically whole. Yes, it was mental. That is hwo I know bisexuality as a psychological state of beign is simply not true.

      You can have sex with both sexes, but you wont be whole until you come out of teh closet

      I am still attracted to women btu now that I have come out,I woudl never have sex with them again

      Apr 21, 2010 at 2:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay

      @DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12): They didn’t show male/female porn because haterosexual and gay men get aroused by it, obviously for different reasons. So having a self-identified bisexual man getting aroused by male/female porn wouldn’t determine his sexuality.

      Haterosexual “allies” that sue gay people because they want to destroy the gay softball league. Would these haterosexual “allies” sue Curves gym? Doubt it because they understand why there are Curves gym. The fact is these haterosexual “allies” don’t respect gay people or the reasons why gay leagues exist.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 2:49 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman
      Norman

      clark-very funny
      trevor-a guy in his 40s in the closet is not rare-its very common for that generation. I have a friend who is 48 who claims he is bisexual. He is gay though-he will make out with girls at gay clubs because of teh machismo thing (he is Italian), but he has nto had one successful relationship…why? because he clinsg to that idea that being bis is real…it isnt-it leads to unhappiness until you accept yourself
      The fact that he doesnt have a partner full time speaks pretty loudly

      these are just my opinions though, guys-I know others do nto share them…

      Apr 21, 2010 at 2:53 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @AlwaysGay:

      It would most certainly aid in determining what arouses a man. You know a lot of gay men who watch het porn? Just curious. I don’t. Maybe that’s just my friends. *shrug*

      The guys suing are claiming to be bisexual. Until proven otherwise, they’re bisexual. Gay men have a tendency to discriminate against bisexual men. Clearly you prefer a straight/gay world, and hate anyone who doesn’t fit into your categories. Too bad.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 3:05 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopCultureQueer
      PopCultureQueer

      @DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12): I like most of your points and agree with you that there is such a thing as actually being 50/50 bisexual, but using porn to see who gets aroused isn’t a sufficient way to prove that. I know a ton of gay men who get aroused by straight porn, my best friend and longtime FB are both two of them and the way they describe it to me it sounds like the reason they GET aroused is because they like to see a man in action, whether it’s with a guy or a girl on film.

      So yeah, using porn as a basis isn’t the best way.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 3:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopCultureQueer
      PopCultureQueer

      You know, for a long time I bought into the whole concept that guys who said they were bisexual were really just kidding themselves and opting into what I called the “gay credit card” which means “bi now, gay later.”

      Since then I’ve kind of grown up and realized how silly I had become. Bisexuality DOES exist and there are a few (and it seems a very few) who are equally attracted to both sexes. My Ex is one of them and he’s the one who showed me how foolish I was really being. He was a guy who had had very serious girlfriends, and very serious boyfriends. He sure liked to have sex with me, a lot, and yet he cheated on me with an ex-girlfriend of his, then started dating another guy shortly after we ended and soon broke up with him and then dated a girl for about two years and had a child with her before breaking it off and now he’s been with a guy for about a year. (Proving that bisexual men, just like straight men and gay men, are all dogs haha)

      Truly bisexual men DO exist, and while they are rare, they are out there and for people, gay or straight, to say that bisexuality is really just a psychological term that people use until they’re ready to fully acknowledge their sexuality just plain don’t. get. it.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 3:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • CertainPOV
      CertainPOV

      Although none have come out during their MLB career, Billy Bean and Glenn Burke both came out publicly after retiring. Glenn went on to play in the San Francisco league. I had the pleasure of playing against him, damn could that man run!

      You may all benefit from a little history here. I’m a former NAGAAA Commissioner and played in the league during its first 18 years, but have been “retired” for the last 15.

      During Gay World Series II played in Milwaukee in 1979, some of the Los Angeles teams stacked their rosters with straight players, with one of those teams going on to win the championship. After that the league passed an 80/20 rule, with no more than 20% of a team identified as straight.

      The intent of the rule was not to prevent straight people from playing with us, but to prevent teams from stacking their rosters just to win. The whole purpose of the league was to promote fellowship in the community thru sport, so stacking your team was the antithesis of the league’s mission.

      So what does that mean for today? I don’t know that answer. The rule was passed 30 years ago, and this issue has popped up from time to time. How does any group–be it Miss Black America, The Hispanic Chamber of Commerce, or the Lesbian Avengers–protect its identity and its mission without some type of reasonable restriction on its membership? Would it still be the GAY World Series if a straight team won? Would we still want to play?

      Broader questions than I can answer, but definitely worthy of more discussion.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 3:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • alan brickman
      alan brickman

      According to Norman “laws of gay/straight” if you then go sleep with a woman after sleeping with a man ..you are straight again…no need for a gay baseball league…problem solved….

      Apr 21, 2010 at 4:17 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)
      DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12)

      @PopCultureQueer:

      I agree, but that was the study cited by AlwaysGay. *shrug* They used porn, for whatever reason. So we have to take the study as lousy as it was.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 4:18 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman
      Norman

      @alan brickman:

      No, once you have gay sex, you are gay if you are a man

      For women that doesnt apply-they are emotionally driven creatures (as opposed to men being physically driven) so they are a little more mutable when it comes to sexuality

      Yes, I know it’s confusing…

      Apr 21, 2010 at 5:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman
      Norman

      But I’v slept with quite a few straight men that were indeed straight-most are married now with kids…

      OK-maybe I’m just talking out fo my as-s-

      Apr 21, 2010 at 5:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Steve
      Steve

      This case seems to be about the right of a private club to make and enforce membership rules that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation. Previous cases have held that private clubs may make and enforce such membership rules. The most obvious precedent case involves the Boy Scouts (BSA) right to exclude gay men from membership:
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of_America_v._Dale

      Somehow, I doubt the Supreme Court will overturn its own precedent of barely ten years ago, that benefited the Boy Scouts.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 5:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopSnap
      PopSnap

      I don’t think the people who are voting down the “gays only” posts understand what is meant by said posts.

      Yeah, ghettoizing ourselves does no good. I agree. Now, this may be me being ignorant here, but from what I know of my gay friends, straight friends, bi friends, and trans friends is this:

      You know those “so-and-so only” implied groups? Like the Gay Men’s Choruses, Gay artist groups, gay/les baseball, and others? They’re primarily formed because we only make up 10% of the population.

      How do I meet that ten percent? Oh right, go to bars. Well, straight people are usually there too now. And I suck at randomly approaching people. I feel painfully average compared to some of the guys that I’d want to approach. Not to mention all of the skanky twinks who just don’t realize yet that gay men can also be sluts just as well as straight women can.

      So, this leaves me with one option- join an LGBT-focued group. On my campus we have one general “Pride” group (about 300 strong on a campus of 21,000) and yes, that is where I make most of my gay friends. We do have like 5 straights and that’s fine. However, how would I feel if all of a sudden there were 150 straight people who joined overnight? I’d be sort of ticked. What the hell are they doing here, I’d think. Why can’t they join any of the other hundred groups on campus? Why usurp ours, to make themselves appear edgy and hip and get people to ooze over their liberal-ness? “Screw you, Republican dad! Look at all the gays I am friends with!”

      My point: you can meet straight people literally EVERYWHERE.
      You can’t, however, meet gay people literally everywhere. Not open ones at least.

      I have plenty of straight friends. I grew up in a small town in Ohio and my life was literally saved by my straight friends. but THEY are not discriminated against ever. Although yes, we love them, they don’t get what its like to be gay and be hated by almost half of the population. My best friend since 2nd grade never understood when I’d tell her about how much I hated hiding myself. She never “got” me lying to my parents about my inner self. She didn’t understand why it hurt me so bad when the only gay person I ever met within a 50-mile radius graduated and went to Oho State. She supported me, and nurtured me; but no, she would never understand. Only other gay people do.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 6:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      I would say that 90% of all men are bisexual in orientation. Probably around 5% are exclusively homosexually oriented and 5% are exclusively heterosexually oriented.

      As for this gay sports group, what a horribly discriminatory little collection of people. Talk about closed minds. I thought the aim of gay people was to break down closet doors. With this group of people, it’s almost as if they WANT to be segregated.

      Maybe this is the crux of the gay rights movement – ie to want segregation on their own terms. If that’s the case, it’s not so much a rights movement as it is a cult. I’d say a cult based on a sex act.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 7:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      One of the reasons gay men discriminate against bisexual men is that bisexual men dilute the sexual availability of men to other men. This was brought home to me some years ago when a gay male friend expressed his fury when a man he was trying to pick up instead went with a woman.

      Keep in mind the following crucial point: one of the reasons for the existence of the segregated gay male scene is that it concentrates one gender into a small space. The aim of this model is to make it easier to find and fuck a man of your liking.

      The gay male community is truly built on a sex act. The notion of it being about rights was just window-dressing designed to make us look noble.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 7:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • PopSnap
      PopSnap

      @Jason

      This is a bold generalization. I know I already talked about this in my last post, but I’ll add to it:

      Four years ago, I would’ve literally given up my penis in exchange for having a nice, kind, supportive partner that would have loved me and told me everything would’ve been ok. That would’ve been there when I needed him and wanted him. I would have given anything for that. Of course, now that I’m older and not as desperate (ie, I know many other LGBT people) that has changed but I still refuse to have sex with someone unless I have been dating him for a month AT LEAST.

      My life is NOT based on a sex act.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 7:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Glasser
      Glasser

      @Norman. Regarding your closing statement on your last post, I agree wholeheartedly. Any relation to Anita?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 7:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Norman,

      LOL. Are you into parody? You sure sound like you are.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:06 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Glasser
      Glasser

      Norman, U R 2 cute.

      Jason I like what you said on the percentages. Is that from personal experience or . . . ?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:23 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Norman
      Norman

      Hey guys-thansk for teh good humor-

      AS a rule, I am against someoen identifying as bi because I think it feeds the whole “gay is choice” thing

      From my personal experience, bisexual men always end up gay. I know of at least three peopel thatt fit this -i NEVER considered myself bisexual even when I was enjoying sex with my wife

      I can’t honestly speak for women becaue I’m not one-haha

      Glasser-Anita Bryant? That’s harsh, bro

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Glasser
      Glasser

      . . . and wouldn’t it be accurate to say the whole world is built on a sex act?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:28 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @DR (the real one, not the guy who made post #12): I see it as a private organization wanting to create a space for a certain group. Freedom of association is what everyone should have a right to whether I agree with it or not. Personally, I can understand the desire of gay men wanting to have some space outside of clubs and dating that they can congregate without having to deal with heterosexuality or any other group such as bisexuality. It is discriminatory, but in no less way than any other private group can do so. I don’t think this is the proper way to address concerns. It seems fake to me. A real way to have such a discusion is to start your own group focused on them rather than try to push it on another group that’s already being discriminated against and has few, if any, real social outlets.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:30 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @Zack Tedder: THe question is what is the legal standard. The boy scouts is a good example of what that standard is. If youw ant to debate the cultural issue, do so, But don’t try to tell me what I think just because the legal standard is what it is. Now, may be there is some state or local ordinance that you can use. However, that’s not what seems tob e the point. The point seems to be to push gay men to have to deal with bisexuality. Whatever. I don’t really care. Just don’t use the court for this if you know that’s not the standard, and certainly try to understand that may be gay men want to build relationships with other gay men that have nothing to do with excluding bisexual men. Maybe the point is to become comfortable with our own sexual orientation and there are few social outlets for this. I say maybe, but having met a few people who got into sports- that’s their stated reason. They wanted to meet other gay men and to find a place where they could feel comfortable. This is like males trying to join all women groups. They miss the point of such groups. They are not excluding to discriminate. They are excluding to build and strengthen the connection between members of a group that often do not have such outlets in other parts o fsociety. I don’t see why there could not be a separate team for gay, bi and straights for men who don’t care, and gay ones for those who see this as a chance to build relationships with other gay men. THis afterall again is private. If it were public, I would take a different view.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:35 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @Steve: My thoughts too. That without any state or local law, there is no case here. Just grandstanding.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:39 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Glasser
      Glasser

      Jason, Please email me if you get a chance. Davidusca@aol.com

      Norman, she was a real winner, hope that comment didn’t leave a scar . . . Nita scars are the worst . . . !

      Apr 21, 2010 at 8:48 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @PopSnap:

      I understand your post 100%.

      I also disagree with it 100%.

      Maybe I’m at a different place in my life than some of the folks posting that they want “gay only” spaces, but after 20 years, I don’t feel the need to segregate myself. It was necessary when I was 18 and just out, but now I’m more concerned with the quality of the people I meet and the quality of the relationships I have with them than whether or not to be overly concerned with who they sleep with.

      I’d rather hang out with a quality group of mixed orientation men than a group of gay men I don’t mesh with.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 9:01 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @DR: Why do you think what you want matters in this conversation?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 9:13 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @DR: By the way, that’s not a dig. It is simple reality. We are discussing a group of gay men who do want to associate which just each other. What business of yours if that’s what they want so long as it is not using public resources to do so?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 9:14 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      Norman,

      Why are you against a man identifying as bi? Is it because it doesn’t fit in with gay male politics?

      I’m actually of the view that gay males counter conservatives whereas bisexual males counter liberals. Liberalism is based on the “bisexual women are hot, bisexual men don’t exist or aren’t hot” notion.

      As to identification, I’m all for men who are bi identifying as bi. I’m all for men who are gay identifying as gay. I’m all for men who are straight identifying as straight. This is the perfect scenario but not the realistic one due to the stigma factor.

      Because of the great stigma against male-male sexual attraction, many men who are bisexually oriented will identify as straight. Therefore, I believe there is a great well of straight-identifying men who are actually bisexually oriented.

      Moreover, there is no such thing as “ending up gay” anymore than “ending up straight”. Sexual attraction doesn’t “end” anywhere.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:03 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • JSP
      JSP

      As someone who has played NAGAAA softball for many years, here is a bit of history/explanation:

      The various member cities each have a league wherein different teams play against one another in a “regular season.” When a lot of these leagues were formed one of the main purposes was to create a place where gays/lesbians could play softball in a safe and supportive environment. Many teams would have non-gay players, often another player’s sister or brother, or just a good friend of one of the “gay” players. The games were, and are, a great place to socialize, compete and just have a good time.

      The gay leagues are comprised of divisions based upon skill level. Often many players have never played sports and this is their first venture into something team oriented. Leagues require a lot of volunteer effort and often struggle to stay afloat. One by-product of “too many” non-gay players was that inexperienced gay/lesbian players would shy away feeling intimidated (hence the continual effort to arrange teams based on skill).

      A byproduct of the leagues were tournaments and ultimately the “World Series.” Teams travel from all over the country to different cities to play for a weekend, or in the case of the Series, for a week. Players pay their own way which often includes airfare, hotel, food, rental cars, etc. At these tournaments the more you win the more you get to play as they are double elimination. So there is an incentive to win. Plus there are trophies involved and it is remarkable how badly some teams truly desire a trophy.

      For the Series a team has to qualify and there are standards that have to be met. Tournaments are similar. What ended up happening was that teams started entering tournaments with players that had never played a game with the team. Usually these non-gay players would be superior athletes to the original team member or “ringers,” all in an effort just to win. The result was that teams that followed the spirit of their league competition ended up losing and not getting to play as many games as they might otherwise have. A lot of these teams see each other during the “regular” season and would be shocked to see these stacked teams show up at tournaments. Many of these players it turns out were not particularly gay-friendly either which only added another dynamic. Yes, there are queens out there willing to do anything to get a trophy.

      In an effort to keep the original spirit alive of “gay” softball, a rule was implemented stating that a team could only field two non-gay players and that players had to play a certain percentage of a team’s regular season.

      Teams I have played on and every year at the Series would face these problems. Many times our team had several non-gay players who wanted to play. Sadly we could only allow two. Our way around this was to play in the gay league with our two token straight players but also to play in the regular City League with all our players.

      The two-player rule has always been difficult to enforce and regulate and is imperfect at best. NAGAAA has always struggled with how to keep the organization gay/lesbian friendly and to foster competition within the so-called community. The two-player limit was arbitrary in an attempt to maintain the “gayness” but to also embrace non-gay friends/family.

      Personally I never cared for the rule. Since teams were divided based on skill level it never seemed to be an issue for me. As for tournaments and the Series, as long as a player had played in the team’s home gay league for the required number of games who cares? If a non-gay player is willing to play in 20-30 games with a mostly gay team playing against other mostly gay teams this eliminates the prospect of ringers — it doesn’t seem as though too many haters are willing to put that much time and effort in over the course of several months just to win a damn trophy.

      So the rule isn’t truly insidious. At the Series teams often show up with what appear to be too many non-gay player. The efforts as described in the story to determine just how gay or bi a player is NAGAAA’s attempt to enforce the two-player rule. At every Series the Competition Committee faces these types of problems and every year feelings get hurt and some teams have even been forced to drop out. Teams know the rule ahead of time. I think it’a bad rule and would like to see it eliminated.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:08 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @JSP: Maybe it is a bad rule, but the legal system is not the way to address this.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:38 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      @lysana@twitter:
      Thank you for adding a voice of sanity to the mess that is this comment thread.

      So many gay men still act as if bisexual men have it easy. Bi men are just greedy bisexuals who get all the heteroprivilege and have no need for protection against discrimination or a supportive community where they can interact with other like-minded men, form friendships, and maybe date.

      Just because a bi guy plays softball with you doesn’t mean you HAVE to date him.
      (OH! But I might be tempted to date him! Save me! Save me, softball league, from the temptation to date a bi guy! All bi men MUST be removed from my presence in order for me to feel safely and happily gay!)

      Just because a bi guy is attracted to some women doesn’t mean he’ll leave you for a woman.

      Just because a bi guy isn’t a perfect 50/50 bisexual doesn’t mean he isn’t bisexual; a bi guy can also be 40/60 or 70/30. Okay, when it gets to 20/80 or 80/20, maybe it’s time to go with a word like homoflexible or heteroflexible–or gay or straight–whatever. I’m not here to tell people how to identify.

      Bi men who sleep around with other men or other women outside of their relationships (when that’s not agreed upon) are just cheating man-whores. Just like straight men can be cheating man-whores or gay men can be cheating man-whores. If you are a cheating gay man-whore you’ve got no business judging bi men–or any man! If you are a gay man who doesn’t cheat and who wants monogamy, please make that totally clear to your male partner, whether he is gay or bi.

      If you are gay and your agreement with your bi male partner is to have an open relationship, then guess what? You’ll be sleeping with other men and he’ll be sleeping with other men and other women. Maybe even other transgendered people. It all depends on the individual.

      How do you know if the bi guy you’re thinking of dating it “really” bisexual? Um, I don’t know–I suppose you could TALK to him and get to KNOW him. Hang around him and see whose ass he’s checking out. Get to know which celebrities he would like to fuck. Listen to his stories about his ex-boyfriends, ex-girlfriends, or exes who are trans. Or you could just say “Fuck it!” and fuck him.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Pickles
      Pickles

      Straight men are not a minority that is discriminated against for being straight in the larger world of US sports. Straight men already HAVE straight teams. We just don’t call them that. Every team is a straight team unless specifically designated as something different. Even if there are a few closeted members, they are closeted, not out, straightness prevails uninterrupted by the gay.

      If gays were able to be openly gay and play on straight teams without fear of harassment and discrimination, we wouldn’t need to have our own teams.

      Yes there are some mixed teams and that’s great but leagues should have a right to decide for themselves.

      We don’t live in a world where gays have power over straights (socially, legally, etc)

      I don’t know what world y’all live in but in most baseball and softball leagues, anti-gay talk is ubiquitous.

      Why should we have to put up with that?

      It is not our job to teach straight people not to be homophobic or spend all of our time being the Little Rock school children taking the hits (emotional and physical) so others don’t have to.

      It is THEIR job to make their teams more welcoming to gays by actively denouncing homophobia in their leagues and developing strategies for dealing with incidents that don’t rely solely on gay folks making a fuss.

      Straight footballers and rugby players in Australia and New Zealand and the UK have actively spoken out against homophobia in their sports. Regardless of what individual players think the word is, “Zero Tolerance for Intolerance”

      That is that kind of thing that will make the need for gay only teams decrease. You can’t force the issue.

      It is a false equivalency to say an all gay team (in an overwhelmingly homophobic world where there are still laws that work against gay people’s civil rights and straight men easily sling anti-gay commentary like its nothing) is the same and an all white team in a world that still favors white straight men above all others when it comes to power and influence.

      I think it’s fine if gay players don’t want to play on all gay teams but don’t try to decide for someone else what THEY need from their league or team.

      Last time I checked, the revolution hadn’t come and homophobia and hetero sexism and violence against gays was still an everyday occurrence in US cities and popular culture and the media are only slightly better.

      There are very good reasons for gay players to want to not have to worry about that crap while playing ball.

      Apr 21, 2010 at 10:52 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      @D’oh, The Magnificent:
      And just how should it be addressed, D’oh? How many bi men get kicked off teams every year that we don’t hear about–because they don’t meet the goldstar gay standard? Shall we bake some brownies and bring them to the next NAGAAA meeting and talk about our feelings? What could possibly go wrong with that scenario–seeing that these guys were interrogated about their personal life in front of strangers to see if they could “prove” that they were “gay enough” for the team?

      At some point it does no good to beg for understanding. It’s not the way that I would like to be bi-furious. Really, I’d rather get bi-furious on Fred Phelps’ ass or Peter LaBarbera’s ass. But push me too far and I will get bi-furious on gay and lesbian ass. It’s 2010–41 years since Stonewall–and it’s time for some bisexual, pansexual, and fluid sexuality liberation!

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:26 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      @Pickles:
      Do you think that bisexual men don’t face any discrimination on straight sports teams? Do you think that any sports team whose homophobia was so thick, you could cut it with a knife, will just turn around and embrace an openly bisexual player?
      What world are you living in?

      Apr 21, 2010 at 11:31 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Storm
      Storm

      This is the funniest conversation I’ve ever seen on this site. Seriously, a lot of you appear to be suggesting that us poor wimpy little queers just can’t possibly actually COMPETE against a team that might have some straight guys on it. Those straight guys are just too big of an advantage. Are there some self-esteem issues here, or what?

      Apr 22, 2010 at 12:17 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • AlwaysGay
      AlwaysGay [Different person #1 using similar name]

      I can’t stand this up and down scoring system Queerty has. After a certain number of down thumbs your message is hidden which isn’t right.

      I’m not surprised we have so many gay people who don’t care about gay interests. They rather roll out the red carpet for heterosexuals. Their whole lives are dedicated to being subservient, docile and perpetually disadvantaged.

      @JSP: With your attitude their won’t be any gay league. Why bother with gay people who never played baseball or softball when they can get heterosexuals who played since childhood. Back to sitting on the sidelines gay people. Back to struggling just to get in the door. Maybe heterosexuals will let you cheerlead.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 12:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @Max the Communist: What do you want me to say? The law is settled. If it weren’t you might actually be addressing something in an effective way. As it is, you are creating more problems than you are solving by wasting money and time when the legal system will not help you here.

      @Storm: The point is that may be we don’t want to always address straight people in every context just like any other minority group that is constantly addressing living in a majority-minority society.

      @Pickles: Great comment. unfortunately there is an agenda outside of discussing why these teams exist, which is to give a space for people who don’t normally have one any place else.

      @Max the Communist: Your comment to pickles is besides the point. Form a bisexual team to discuss the issues of bisexuality. Gay men and bi men may overlap as minorities but the issues are not goign to be the same.

      Let gay men form teams to discuss issues of being gay. The whole point that he or she is making is that people need a space when they face oppression by society. This is like my being in a black group because there are things about race that I want to discuss about race that I can not discuss in the larger society that is white.

      If such a group exists, it is not trying to be prejudicial against Latinos or Asians to say we want a group for those coming from the black experience.

      The very fact the society is white means whites already have such spaces. The idea of having asian, latino, womens etc groups is to allow folks to have that space.

      There are some groups such as political ones that need to be together. There are others- that depending on what you want emotionally- that should be allowed to be separate so long as it is private.

      It is really about respecting that people need those spaces. For some of you, it is about something else apparently.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 12:37 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      By the way, as a practical example, I have a friend who after coming out joined a sports team of gay men. He says that helped him a lot with coming to terms with his sexual orientation to have that as a resource. That’s the point for some rather than becoming the world’s best player.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 12:42 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      @D’oh, The Magnificent:
      1) Since, according to the plaintiffs, the NAGAAA has been using public parks and public accommodations for its tournaments, there may indeed be a legal recourse. It may not matter if they are a “private club”–they were not using their own private spaces to carry out their activities, but public spaces. I await the developments of the case.

      2) “Go form your own bisexual group.” Thanks. I’ve only heard that crap since the 80s. On top of which, bisexuals (or other GLT) do not, as a rule, form softball teams “to discuss the issues of bisexuality” but to play, compete, relieve stress and socialize with like-minded people. So long as everyone respects each other and plays nice, it’s not that hard.

      As far as the “gay men form gay groups to discuss gay issues” thing goes, who gets to decide who’s gay, what a “gay group” is and what the “gay issues” are? The goldstar gays? And once they have established their goldstar status beyond a shadow of a doubt, are they to interrogate all the other gay men about their sexual histories, current levels of sexual attraction and sexual fantasy?

      You want to be a part of our gay team/support group/community? Well, we’d better hire a private eye to follow you around for 20 years with a video camera just to make sure you’re gay enough for our perfectly gay group!

      Or–and this is a brilliant idea!–we could just throw out any man stupid enough to mention his fluid sexuality in our presence. Any guy who says he’s bi or brings up bisexuality or mentions that he boinks women once in a while will get thrown out to serve as an example to all the rest. We can’t talk about fluid sexuality around here. Hell no! And we don’t dare give it any credibility, either. That will give straight people the idea the we have a choice and we can’t allow that to happen! Nope. Life is hard enough being gay and we can’t even associate with bisexuals or the straights will get us.

      Well, here’s a news flash–the straights have already gotten to you. You’re so terrified by external and internal homophobia, you can’t accept any visible form of queer sexuality that is more open-ended, flexible, and fluid. You can only accept gay in yourself if gay is a straightjacket that you can’t get out of.

      Look, inside every queer lives the fear of the queer who will make you look bad in front of the straight people. But the moment you give in to that fear, that’s when the right-wing religious theocrats have won. They have beaten you and they did it by getting inside your head and making you believe that being utterly, purely gay is the only way to be safe and secure and, who knows, maybe even moral, decent and acceptable.

      Well, snap out of it! It’s a lie. It doesn’t matter whether you’ve never had sex with a woman or you’ve had sex with hundreds of women, you have a right to have sex with men–and have mad, passionate affairs with men–and settle down with a great guy for the rest of your life, if that is what you want. Period. End of story. Who gives a rat’s ass what Phelps or LaBarbera or any of the rest of them think about it?

      You may not like bisexuals or understand us, but you sure as hell need us for your liberation. At the very least, you need our numbers to push ENDA, marriage equality, the end to DADT and DOMA, and a million other things. All we ask for is that you get over your fear–which can only isolate you–and some respect. Oh, and to play a stupid softball game with you once in a while.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 1:44 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • B
      B

      No. 9 · DR: “The white guys were ‘gay enough’, but not the men of color? There are a LOT of fishy things going on with this situation, it seems.”

      What may be going on is that San Francisco is getting an advantage that some others don’t yet have, so the losers are whining. With its cultural diversity and tolerance, it is much easier for some straight guys to join a “gay” softball team than elsewhere. Similarly, San Francisco residents are less likely to consider racial differences as a reason to limit membership, even informally. So the result is a larger pool of possible members on a softball team which, on the average, means a more capable team.

      Instead of trying to shut them out, others should try to measure up. It would send the appropriate “message”: if you discriminate on the basis of irrelevant criteria such as sexual orientation or race, you put yourself at a competitive disadvantage. The sooner the rest of the country learns that, the better, and learning that is far more important than who won some softball games.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 2:25 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @D’oh, The Magnificent:

      Because they’re discriminating against racial minorities who are bisexual men while the white bisexual men get a pass? And they did it in a totally humiliating manner which would offend (or should offend) just about any sensible GLBT person? That’s one guess.

      The other is that this issue has wider implications for our community, and not everyone agrees with you (or me) and all of our voices need to be heard, whether that makes you happy or not.

      Not all of us buy into segregating ourselves, not all of us buy into the notion that AlwaysGay puts out that straight folks are “haterosexuals”, and not all of us buy into this notion that we should be excluding bisexuals and gay-friendly straight men from our world.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 7:54 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • softballerforlife
      softballerforlife

      NAGAAA is a 501 C 3 Non Profit organization and is therefore open for these lawsuits just as the BoyScouts of America was. To keep this Non Profit status they are going to have to explain just exactly what happened. Having sat on several protest committees at every world series over the past ten years I can tell you that many of these teams do use the protest as an attempt to win in the boardroom when they can’t win on the field. It should be noted that NAGAAA used to be comprised of two divisions, the Women’s Division and the OPEN Division. The open division could NOT exclude women even though they had a divison just for women. I wonder if the Lesbians would be this much up in arms if the Open divison decided NOT to allow women any longer since they have a League of their own. I personally feel that if an all straight team wanted to form and play in a member cities league then it should be allowed. I know gay teams in Atlanta, Dallas, San Francisco, Ft. Lauderdale, Norfolk, and Philadelphia that are ALL GAY and play not only in the NAGAAA league in their city but also in the metro leagues and most of the A and B divison ALL GAY teams beat the crap out of the all straight teams. So by saying that we still need to have this rule because the Gays are less athletic or skilled is ridiculous. If a trophy means that much to a team that they want to load up on straight players then they should be forced to prove they abide by the rules. However, if a player tells you that they are Gay, Bi, Trans. etc. by openly admitting that in a public forum should be suffice enough to let them play. If you really want to hold them at their word then record them saying out loud that they are gay. Then when you get back to San Francisco, Palm Springs, Denver, Phoenix etc. make them live up to what they publicly admitted. I sat in that room when San Francisco D2 players were asked about their sexuality and I can tell you that two of the players admitted that they were currently married to women and had children. Does that mean that they are not gay???? It should also be noted that the racism card was also played because we were told that we should respect players who are on the Down Low??? I think the rule is downright stupid. I think that if a straight player is the same skill level as the gay players in their division that is all that is important. It should be looked at blindly. Instead of looking at the man or woman, look at the 27 questions that determine skill level is a straight man answers yes to 15 of the questions and a gay man answers yes to 15 of the questions then they are on EQUAL ground. There are not extra points given because you are straight. By that kind of thinking we are internalizing the stereotype that straight men are more athletic than gay men. A gay man who is rated 15 is equal to a straight man that is a 15 pure and simple. There are all kinds of opportunity’s in this world for us to break down these walls. Why can’t we use sports as a tool to help. If a straight man can play against a gay man and get beat by him and then shake his hand afterwords then we are getting somewhere. It is the straight man in Seattle or Minneapolis etc. who gets beat and then calls us sissies afterwords that we should be afraid of. That is when its time to say “its my ball and I am going home”. I don’t play with haters.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 8:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • jason
      jason

      I would much rather have the words “gay-friendly” rather than “gay” added to the front of words like “clubs” or “baseball teams”, for instance.

      “Gay-friendly” is a far more accurate and inclusive term. “Gay” suggests strict adherence to a sexual orientation by the members.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 9:39 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Robert, NYC
      Robert, NYC

      These men should be allowed to play. Though I have some issues with bisexuality, I think it helps to promote tolerance and acceptance of others which we in turn expect of them.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:32 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @DR: If its a private org, then there is no issue. Its that simple in terms of the law. If you want to debate what private citizens should be doing on their own time, then all your comments about freedom of action and labels is just b.s.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 5:15 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @DR: It is not a matter of you agree with me. I don’t need to associate with you in a free society. Your agreement is not necessary or a factor.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 5:16 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • D'oh, The Magnificent
      D'oh, The Magnificent

      @Max the Communist: I didn’t read your comment. It’s too long for what is a light discussion. I did skim some of it. Frankly, it is just a waste of my time. You either get that you can’t for yourself on others in every instance or you don’t. I am not saying that there is no situation in which laws such as equality should not be enforced. Say if the gay men were getting together to exclude you from working at a job or were blocking you ability to have a baseball team, etc. But that’s not the issue here. I am weighing what you and others are saying,a nd I find it mostly form over substance whining. Your real problems here are emotional. You don’t like being excluded. That’s a part of life. If there was something more than the emotional impact thatyou feel, I might think differently, but it’s not. and you can’t even claim here that this is a majority group blocking you. Again, I return to being a member of a black organization and being told by whites they should hve the ability to join when the purpose of the organization was to build confidence in black males, especially gay men, who needed it. I could not imagine being forced to admit you just so you can feel like you are not being discriminated against without looking at the totality of the circumstances to see what damage was trying to be undone by having the group in the first place.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 5:22 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • DR
      DR

      @D’oh, The Magnificent:

      So basically, you’re advocating a position whereby gay orgs can hide under the aegis of “private organization” and discriminate against bisexual men and treat them in the same manner in which gays complain they get treated by heterosexual bigots?

      Funny, when the heterosexuals do that, most gays get in their face and demand equal rights. You’re advocating reverse discrimination. I do not agree with you at all.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:19 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      @D’oh, The Magnificent:
      “You don’t like being excluded. That’s just part of life.”
      Funny. Why do I get the feeling that you would run to Queerty with your tale of woe if people at a predominantly straight cocktail party mistreated you and then threw you out?
      You want to take out your fear and frustrations on bisexuals for the oppression you’ve felt from straights. I feel sorry for you.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 10:42 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Darryl!
      Darryl!

      You don’t care DO’H, but I agree. It’s sad when people start disrespecting boundaries. I support equal civil rights for everyone – bi, gay straight. What’s more, I can do so without being an “ally” to or the friend of someone who is bisexual or straight. I have never been of the belief that separate can’t be equal. Finally, I too find this emotion-laden argument much ado about nothing. There is no “biphobia”. Bisexuals receive the same homophobia that gays do from straight society. And by homophobia, I’m not talking about someone going “ew” at the sight of two men kissing. I’m talking about a group of people physically or verbally assaulting two guys that may be kissing. That important distinction has been blurred by too many in the gay rights movement prioritizing acceptance of the familial variety, even where it’s not necessary.

      Apr 22, 2010 at 11:51 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gay Ball
      Gay Ball

      I can already see that some people and articles are trying to make this an issue about color when it most definitely is not. That must be their way of fueling your anger and disgust even more and taking your attention off the real matter. The 3 guys in question are just coincidentally of color. Nothing more to it.

      Secondly, do not misinterpret the policy. Anyone who is not ‘gay’ is classified as ‘non gay’. No one is saying bi’s are NOT allowed. In fact, the policy is simply: no more than 2 “non gay” players on a team. The team in question had more than their limit, period. Why just 2? That’s 20% of the number of players on the field which NAGAAA thought was reasonable and does not allow gays to become the minority in their own league.

      Now, equate that to just about all other types of leagues/organizations out there. ie: All women leagues allow 0% of non-women player; All African American or American Indian leagues allow 0% of non-AA or non-AI players…so, in essence, by allowing 20% of non-gay players, NAGAAA IS being open to other forms of players outside their intended purpose of their ‘gay’ league. Open, but no too open, in order to maintain the integrity of the GAY league. If teams were allowed all non-gay players then where would the integrity of the league be when they boast the GAY World Series? They’d have to change the name huh? Well, that already exists, it’s called, the World Series, but wait, you have to be some sort of professional to play in that series…isn’t that discriminatory? NAGAAA has the GAY World Series, open to those who are gay, why does everyone want to play with the gays all of a sudden? Where were you 30 years ago when most of us were being bashed just for hanging out together? It’s about time gays had a safe haven. Let them have it.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 3:50 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gay Ball
      Gay Ball

      @softballerforlife – I have never thought it was ever a matter of straights being better than us gays. It’s purely a matter of having a “gay” safe place to play ball with other gays. Like you said, women have their safe place to play with other women. It’s about commadre and feeling safe and comfortable amongst other like gay people. Because, yes, the rating system clearly solves the straights are better than us issue.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 4:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ossurworld
      ossurworld

      Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to view.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 7:49 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Max the Communist
      Max the Communist

      I swear to God this is my last post on the subject:

      NAGAAA’s stated mission is promoting “amateur sports competition, particularly softball, for all persons regardless of age, sexual orientation or preference, with special emphasis on the participation of members of the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community.”

      Five bisexuals were interrogated; two white bisexual players were found “gay enough” to play and three black bisexual players were found “not gay enough.”

      When one of the players responded that he was both heterosexual and gay, an NAGAAA official allegedly said, “This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series.” Apparently the official said this IN VIOLATION OF NAGAAA’S EXPLICITLY EXPRESSED MISSION, which includes bisexuals (and lesbians and trangenders).

      “The predominantly-white NAGAAA committee then . . . recommended disciplinary measures against the D2 team and San Francisco league, including forcing them to forfeit their second-place World Series win.”

      Both D2 and the San Francisco league were acting in accordance with NAGAAA’s mission by including bisexual men on their teams. NAGAAA violated its mission by throwing out the black bisexual men and forcing D2 to give up their second place win.

      Sue them for their racism. Sue them for their biphobia. Sue their fucking asses off.

      Apr 23, 2010 at 4:40 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Rob Moore
      Rob Moore

      @terrwill: It is a stupid rule. I played for a gay male rugby team that welcomed gay men, bisexual men, and straight men. It was and remains overwhelmingly gay in membership, but there have been and are players who are not gay. The nongay men are completely comfortable with the team, and I think everyone respects each other. It does tend to be self-filtering since most straight men either don’t know we exist or simply don’t feel comfortable hanging with us after practice or matches, which are often in gay establishments. When the club hosts a match with a predominantly straight team, which it does on a regular basis, the drink-up afterwards is generally in a location that is not exclusively gay, but is not exclusively straight. Except for a couple of cancellations early in the club’s history, there have been no problems with this mix of players.

      Apr 24, 2010 at 7:32 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • GirlAbout(Oak)Town
      GirlAbout(Oak)Town

      The way most commenters are framing this is essentially biphobic, because everyone is talking about letting “straight” men on their teams and pleading for a queer safe space, and in doing so are lumping bi men into the “straight” category. It’s the same old identity policing bullshit. Bi people are NOT straight. They are queer. The NAGAAA claims to be a queer organization that supports “gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender” individuals. Would all of you arguing that it’s OK for the NAGAAA to kick bi players off the team also advocate for kicking straight transgendered men off the team? After all, they’re “not gay.” Are we supposed to believe in NAGAAA’s mission statement or recognize that it’s just bullshit PC “inclusiveness” that we can’t expect to ever actually experience?

      MaxtheCommunist, I want to give you a standing ovation to every one of your comments, seriously.

      Apr 25, 2010 at 5:07 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • ossurworld
      ossurworld

      So, how does a ballplayer prove his gayness? Three affidavits from same-sex partners, swearing on oath about a hot night together?

      Apr 25, 2010 at 6:46 pm · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Gay Ball
      Gay Ball

      Players prove their ‘gayness’ by simply checking a box on the registration form: either Hetero or non-hetero. These players chose not to disclose this information therefore it was up to the panel to make that decision. You only know now that they are bisexual AFTER the fact. 2 of the 5 player answered the questioned to the panel and were released. These 3 did not. Since a team is only allowed 2 non-heteros, the panel’s decision put them over the limit, thus justifying the striping of their trophy. So, to the communist lovers out there, it is NOT a race thing, nor a biphobic thing. You are making wild assumptions if you think it is. Simply a matter of being over the set limit of the known rules and being uncooperative with the panel.

      Apr 26, 2010 at 2:11 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • nashennyrhisk
      nashennyrhisk

      ????????, ?????????????, ?????? ?? ???? ????. ??, ??? ??, ????????????? ? ???? ????????????. ??? ?? ???? ?????????? ? ?????????????? ???????????
      ??????? MILF Internal 5

      ???? ???? (2005)
      ??i??? / ?????
      ????? ????????
      ?????? ? ??
      ??? ???? ?? ???????
      ?????? / ???????? ??? / ?????? ????
      ??????? ???????
      ??????? / }{0TT@??)?
      ??????
      ????????? ? ?????????? – ????? 3

      Feb 24, 2011 at 11:38 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·
    • Matthew
      Matthew

      I am a bisexual man and was an award winning football player and captain of my team in highschool. I also came out in high school as bisexual. And things for me changed dramatically once I was out. I was subject to homophobia and I decided to refuse a full tuition football scholarship so as not to receive more homophobia. But when I tried to fit in to the gay community I was subjected to harassment as well and never found a place there. Luckily I found a place in the art community where there is an intersection of gay straight and bi people. But finding community and support as out and bisexual has been close to impossible. What really needs to be recognized is if these guys are out and bisexual they are very courageous. I also want to add in my experience it has been easier being an out white bisexual because out black bisexuals get it far worse as far as I have seen.

      Jul 13, 2011 at 2:03 am · @ReplyReply to this comment ·

    Add your Comment

    Please log in to add your comment

    Need an account? Register It's free and easy.



  • POPULAR ON QUEERTY

    FOLLOW US
     



    GET QUEERTY'S DAILY NEWSLETTER


    FROM AROUND THE WEB

    Copyright 2014 Queerty, Inc.
    Follow Queerty at Queerty.com, twitter.com/queerty and facebook.com/queerty.