SLUisville Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I think this is a great article that answers the question of why it's news: http://therotation.sportsonearthblog.com/why-the-derrick-gordon-story-matters/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sludevil Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 I agree, and I understand the difference. My point is you lose credibility when you single someone or something out just to sensationalize or jump on a popular bandwagon like D1 basketball. If a player at UMass-Lowell playing D2 basketball come out, does it not make news just because their national tournament isn't nationally televised? Why are only celebrity's decisions considered significant? Is Ellen Page being gay any more significant that Plain Jane? If a LGBT leader is more concerned with the celebrity than the common person, then his/her credibility takes a massive hit. That person should be more concerned with the majority, not the sensationalized vast minority. I think it's funny that someone stated, "you really can't be this stupid." It's the exact opposite. I was one of the few that was smart enough to read between the lines and see the story for what it actually is. We care about the major sport athletes because they're a reflection of the majority (or, at least, changing majority opinions). They're the most visible and identifiable (and, for many, the easiest to identify with) of the populace. I mean, dude, what do you want? For us to celebrate every time some Joe Schmo comes out? We don't have the capacity (time, energy, desire) for that. So we hitch our wagons to these athletes (or celebrities) as tangible representations of changing societal attitudes (and, here, changing attitudes within major sports). We're celebrating this UMass basketball player, but we're doing so at least in part to reflect on our broader society. So, yes, it's a big deal when anyone comes out. But I don't have the capacity to care about every single such person. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 As fans we're allowed to Judge an athlete on his talents. But in the real scheme of life he's a person and apply the rule "judge not lest you be judged". Non issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Band Legend Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 Until this stuff isn't news anymore you won't convince me any real progress is being made... Um, go back to the Michael Sam thread from a few months ago- I think 05 might be engaging in a little parody. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 There's major league lacrosse? Every barrier of bigotry, percieved or otherwise, should be celebrated as it gets trampled underfoot. Does anyone care if GM has it's first female CEO? No, because women have been there and done that. If she wasn't up on Capitol Hill begging for forgiveness I'd have never known. That is where we need gays and really every minority to be. First Gay Presdent? Who gives a crap....pass the pork rinds.......... What you want gays on Capital Hill begging for forgiveness? On a lighter side now in addition to knowing if a bb player is a 1, 2 , 3, 4, or 5 we now need to know top or bottom? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted April 9, 2014 Share Posted April 9, 2014 Um, go back to the Michael Sam thread from a few months ago- I think 05 might be engaging in a little parody. Tough to tell...lots of people are saying the exact same thing online, apparently seriously. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dlarry Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 He's the first D1 player? There has to be a couple of women playing D1 that are gay. I guess that's not news. What about D2 and D3? Can I assume that since D1 was mentioned or emphasized, that there are others in the lower divisions that have already announced. Or, just like everyone in the media is mentioning that UConn is the only program that has ever won men's and women's titles in the same season, that D2 and D3 don't really count? It seems the media is trying so hard to make this a story, that simple facts and reporting are being thrown out with the bath water. Britney Griner came out as gay. But I'm pretty sure she has a penis so I don't know if we should count that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Tough to tell...lots of people are saying the exact same thing online, apparently seriously. Look my personal opinion is that as long as this is an actual thing where players come out and the media makes a big deal I don't think anything has changed. That's just my way of looking at it. I'm not prejudice against homosexuals. It's really none of my business wether someone is gay or straight. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizziken Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 I agree, and I understand the difference. My point is you lose credibility when you single someone or something out just to sensationalize or jump on a popular bandwagon like D1 basketball. If a player at UMass-Lowell playing D2 basketball come out, does it not make news just because their national tournament isn't nationally televised? Why are only celebrity's decisions considered significant? Is Ellen Page being gay any more significant that Plain Jane? If a LGBT leader is more concerned with the celebrity than the common person, then his/her credibility takes a massive hit. That person should be more concerned with the majority, not the sensationalized vast minority. I think it's funny that someone stated, "you really can't be this stupid." It's the exact opposite. I was one of the few that was smart enough to read between the lines and see the story for what it actually is. UMass-Lowell is Division 1... Yes...exposure, rightly or wrongly, is the major difference between a D1 player versus a D2 or D3 player or a celebrity versus a non-celebrity 'coming out'. A lot more people watch Division 1 basketball (or movies and television) than Division 2 or 3. Inherently, there is no difference between a D1, D2, D3, Ellen Page, or some random college kid 'coming out', however, as has been explained in many of these 'coming out' scenarios the main reason WHY these people do it is to provide inspiration for others who are too scared or ashamed to do the same and also to end rampant speculation about their personal lives. You are being too philosophical for your own good...and no, a news source does not lose credibility for honing in on the first gay Division 1 college basketball player...that is something you pulled out of thin air. At some point, this won't be news, but at this moment in time we are going to have to weather a litany of 'firsts' with regard to gay athletes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milwaukeebill Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 I think it's pretty obvious why Michael Sam or gordon coming out is a much bigger deal then the kid who lives across the street from you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir boxington Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 We care about the major sport athletes because they're a reflection of the majority (or, at least, changing majority opinions). They're the most visible and identifiable (and, for many, the easiest to identify with) of the populace. I mean, dude, what do you want? For us to celebrate every time some Joe Schmo comes out? We don't have the capacity (time, energy, desire) for that. So we hitch our wagons to these athletes (or celebrities) as tangible representations of changing societal attitudes (and, here, changing attitudes within major sports). We're celebrating this UMass basketball player, but we're doing so at least in part to reflect on our broader society. So, yes, it's a big deal when anyone comes out. But I don't have the capacity to care about every single such person. I don't know where to start with this sad commentary. My whole premise was with how the story was written. The facts were laid out in a questionable way in order to justify identifying this as a "landmark" moment. The major sports athletes are the farthest thing from a reflection of the majority. The college players are 12 of the 10-30K students at any school, and the pros are even more minute. They may be highly visible, but it is unclear why so many think they identify with them. NO ONE should 'hitch their wagons' with an athlete or celebrity as a rep of changing societal attitudes. Just because you recognize them and the media shoves a camera in their face? That's ridiculous. I'll always respect Kobe Bryant's response to Travon Martin episode. "Why would you ask me about that situation. Because I'm AA? Because I'm an NBA player? Because I'm famous? I live in LA and don't know anything about that situation." Lastly, if you don't care for 'every single such person', then I'm not going to listen when you want to prop up the few that are actually NOT a true reflection of our broader society. Feel free to continue to celebrate the visible player. I have long ago realized to not pay attention to the people behind the four-letter curtain. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sludevil Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 I don't know where to start with this sad commentary. My whole premise was with how the story was written. The facts were laid out in a questionable way in order to justify identifying this as a "landmark" moment. The major sports athletes are the farthest thing from a reflection of the majority. The college players are 12 of the 10-30K students at any school, and the pros are even more minute. They may be highly visible, but it is unclear why so many think they identify with them. NO ONE should 'hitch their wagons' with an athlete or celebrity as a rep of changing societal attitudes. Just because you recognize them and the media shoves a camera in their face? That's ridiculous. I'll always respect Kobe Bryant's response to Travon Martin episode. "Why would you ask me about that situation. Because I'm AA? Because I'm an NBA player? Because I'm famous? I live in LA and don't know anything about that situation." Lastly, if you don't care for 'every single such person', then I'm not going to listen when you want to prop up the few that are actually NOT a true reflection of our broader society. Feel free to continue to celebrate the visible player. I have long ago realized to not pay attention to the people behind the four-letter curtain. You're missing the point. A major reason why these events are celebrated and discussed so heavily is because of what they represent, not specifically who they involve. A few years ago, a college or professional athlete wouldn't even consider coming out. Now, apparently, that is no longer the case. So we champion these events as proof of changing societal attitudes, of the march towards tolerance and equality. We do this with major sport athletes because, again, they're the most visible and identifiable. We see them on TV and in the news, we know their names (or, at least, their teams). So these figures have the broad appeal that you just don't get with Jon Doe down the street. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir boxington Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Well, if Gordon needs 15 minutes of four-letter fame to make himself feel better, the he's nothing without it. And if you need the TV networks to feed you stories and celebrity fame to help champion the causes you believe in, then you are as misguided as he. It was Rosa Parks who sat in the front of the bus, not Ella Fitzgerald. It was 'who's that' trying to enroll at Little Rock HS and the Univ. of Mississippi, not Sidney Poitier. It was Susan B. Anthony leading women's rights, not Marlana Deitrich. It was Jackie Robinson who broke the color barrier in baseball not ***** League showmen Sachel Paige or Josh Gibson. John Wilkes Booth was a famous actor in his day. What if everyone had listened to his views on slavery and politics? It was Ron Kovic who was the true leader of the anti-war demonstrations on Vietnam, not Jane Fonda. Now here’s a version of a real story that labels Gordon as the first “male D1” player and a reference to another basketball player from a lower division that has already come out. CBS didn’t feel the need to sensationalize the story in order to justify its own agenda or grab ratings or clicks. http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24519753/umass-guard-derrick-gordon-is-first-openly-gay-male-d-1-basketball-player Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizziken Posted April 10, 2014 Share Posted April 10, 2014 Well, if Gordon needs 15 minutes of four-letter fame to make himself feel better, the he's nothing without it. And if you need the TV networks to feed you stories and celebrity fame to help champion the causes you believe in, then you are as misguided as he. It was Rosa Parks who sat in the front of the bus, not Ella Fitzgerald. It was 'who's that' trying to enroll at Little Rock HS and the Univ. of Mississippi, not Sidney Poitier. It was Susan B. Anthony leading women's rights, not Marlana Deitrich. It was Jackie Robinson who broke the color barrier in baseball not ***** League showmen Sachel Paige or Josh Gibson. John Wilkes Booth was a famous actor in his day. What if everyone had listened to his views on slavery and politics? It was Ron Kovic who was the true leader of the anti-war demonstrations on Vietnam, not Jane Fonda. Now here’s a version of a real story that labels Gordon as the first “male D1” player and a reference to another basketball player from a lower division that has already come out. CBS didn’t feel the need to sensationalize the story in order to justify its own agenda or grab ratings or clicks. http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/eye-on-college-basketball/24519753/umass-guard-derrick-gordon-is-first-openly-gay-male-d-1-basketball-player Just stop...you simply cannot compare eras like that. Information and notoriety are disseminated in a completely different and much more 'macro' manner than back then. Who the hell is Derrick Gordon in the grand scheme of things? He is more akin to Rosa Parks, the Little Rock nine, and Susan B. Anthony than their more famous counterparts. Closeted athletes obviously feel uncomfortable about coming out, so there certainly is a 'strength in numbers' mentality that goes along with all of these news stories. Acting like these stories are a nuisance and a waste of time is what's misguided. You're completely clueless...it's not about him 'needing fame' it's about what makes him feel open and happy. If the byproduct of that makes headlines then so be it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Sir Box - This issue is unworthy of any attention, and that's why you've spent a quarter of your Billikens.com posts on it... Love my country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sir boxington Posted April 11, 2014 Share Posted April 11, 2014 Once again, my issue is with how the story was written to sensationalize the justification of labeling this as a 'landmark' moment. Also, I have never considered the actions of a celebrity or an athlete to be a guiding light. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.