Reimer stirs the Pride pot

[VincentVega]

I would rather write an article about how post #2 of this thread should have been the final post.

Yeah.

[audiopile]

You are right. You can't have a reasonable conversation with me. Maybe if you tried to be a little more objective, we would be able to have a reasonable conversation. I have respectful conversations all the time with people who have drastically different opinions than I do on topics such as this. It's a shame that we can't do that.

And yes, you already made your ridiculous point suggesting that he was forced into action when he wasn't, and I already refuted it. Should we just keep making the same point over and over again?

Listen, I get it. You aren't interested in listening or changing your mind here. You have your mind made up. Its cool. I will be completely honest when I say that it will be really difficult for you to convince me that it is OK for a Chrisitan to condemn two loving adults who aren't harming anybody on the grounds that their God says it's wrong and their magical book tells them so.

This is important to me. I gather it is important to you. You aren't going to convince me that this is ok and I am not going to change your mind. Best of luck to you.

Rylant

Objective? I fully understand your opinion, I just don't agree with it. You won't even acknowledge mine, or the points I've made, you just step around them.

I'm not trying to get you to agree with me. As above, I am looking for you to understand my point, no need to accept it. Yes, I have made up my mind, it was made up a long time ago - wanna hear it? Gay is ok, it's as normal as a birthmark, and as said eloquently by others, its not something that needs to be celebrated or shared with anyone else. It is just one aspect of whom a person is, and we all have a sexual preference. What that preference is, is not the business of others and should be kept to ones's self.

By the same token, what other people think of someone sexual preference is also private. There is no need to share this. When someone is forced to share their thoughts on this matter things can get ugly. Is there a "right way" to think about this? Sure there is, but we are all wrong about things every day, and that isnt going to change.

It should not be my responsibility to make someone else comfortable with who they are. I will treat you as you treat me, that is the only deal we have.

[2014olympicgold]

Objective? I fully understand your opinion, I just don't agree with it. You won't even acknowledge mine, or the points I've made, you just step around them.

I'm not trying to get you to agree with me. As above, I am looking for you to understand my point, no need to accept it. Yes, I have made up my mind, it was made up a long time ago - wanna hear it? Gay is ok, it's as normal as a birthmark, and as said eloquently by others, its not something that needs to be celebrated or shared with anyone else. It is just one aspect of whom a person is, and we all have a sexual preference. What that preference is, is not the business of others and should be kept to ones's self.

By the same token, what other people think of someone sexual preference is also private. There is no need to share this. When someone is forced to share their thoughts on this matter things can get ugly. Is there a "right way" to think about this? Sure there is, but we are all wrong about things every day, and that isnt going to change.

It should not be my responsibility to make someone else comfortable with who they are. I will treat you as you treat me, that is the only deal we have.

This is sports correction to how the employees of organizations treated people in the past. The anti-LGBTQ+ in male sports (mainly male sports, but all sports really) caused a fog of "sports isn't for everyone" over it and this is the correction to it. A portion of the world was treated unfairly and it's being made up in a way of "we as an organization (NHL/NBA/NFL ect.) support people we pushed away. Please come back and try us out again." Which is the reason for the events. But you may be talking more about an individual, than the larger picture I'm looking at? If so my bad.

The NHL needs to promote the players who go above and beyond to accept people, and push the ones who don't backwards so we don't see them. For every report of Reimer, Provorov, and Ovi there should be 10 reports of Schenn, Rielly, Burke, Shanahan, Gio, Kadri, and so on. As much as I don't like what Provorov and Reimer say, I don't like it even more how the media reacts to this. The NHL media team is failing...again.

[PenguinHunter]

This is sports correction to how the employees of organizations treated people in the past. The anti-LGBTQ+ in male sports (mainly male sports, but all sports really) caused a fog of "sports isn't for everyone" over it and this is the correction to it. A portion of the world was treated unfairly and it's being made up in a way of "we as an organization (NHL/NBA/NFL ect.) support people we pushed away. Please come back and try us out again." Which is the reason for the events. But you may be talking more about an individual, than the larger picture I'm looking at? If so my bad.

The NHL needs to promote the players who go above and beyond to accept people, and push the ones who don't backwards so we don't see them. For every report of Reimer, Provorov, and Ovi there should be 10 reports of Schenn, Rielly, Burke, Shanahan, Gio, Kadri, and so on. As much as I don't like what Provorov and Reimer say, I don't like it even more how the media reacts to this. The NHL media team is failing...again.

Is it the NHL media that is failing? Or is it us as that click on the media that are failing? Honest question.

I agree with you, that it would be better if the media focused on the positive stories. However, are those is media trying to make sure they keep their jobs and trying to get as many clicks as possible?

I see posts about Provorov and Reimer, but I haven't seen any posts about Schenn or Kadri or any of those other names.

Is this because we naturally just find it easier to crap on the negative than to lift up the positive??

[2014olympicgold]

Is it the NHL media that is failing? Or is it us as that click on the media that are failing? Honest question.

I agree with you, that it would be better if the media focused on the positive stories. However, are those is media trying to make sure they keep their jobs and trying to get as many clicks as possible?

I see posts about Provorov and Reimer, but I haven't seen any posts about Schenn or Kadri or any of those other names.

Is this because we naturally just find it easier to crap on the negative than to lift up the positive??

I think it came out the day that Provorov sat out that a bunch of Flyers went above and beyond in actions for the LGBTQ+ community, but that was after people had to find it. The NHL website had stuff on Provorov way quicker than than that of Laughton and other Flyers members. This is half cause of us and how revenue is made through clicks, but like...the NHL media team does not do a good job pushing "the right messages". I've never liked the way the NHL runs issues. It's annoyed me to no ends.

They try and protect damaged things over making things right. And whatever, that's not new in the world. But They overly protected Chicago in the media for their stuff (NHL XM Radio would not talk about it at all), they're protecting players who sit out of events instead of pushing good stories. It's not a new model for them.

But from a media consumer side, ya it's on us for giving positive stories less light. And again that's not new. I would also likely say "they're trying to bury the Reimer stuff" if they pushed the positive stories over Reimer...But that's counter acted by having 6 days in a row of the pushing good stuff, and having the 1 or 2 days of Reimer stories. Between the negative stories, they do not promote positive stuff, they rather run a story about playoff standings for the 5th day in a row.

Oh well. There's 40 players on the ice that night and 1 took writing that was rewritten incorrectly to push a community down for unknown reasons. We're moving forward, and it's just another piece of evidence that there's more to be done.

[PrairieDog]

So is one person's opinion that actually qualifies for the group a better or worse opinion than one person's opinion that does not qualify in the group?

If you don't toe the line and fit into the pre-defined stereotypes then you're not tolerated. In fact, you're worthy of attack.

I mean, how would straight people feel if they were patted on the head for being able to function in life despite being burdened by their sexuality? Or commended for accomplishing something even though you're handicapped by the amount of melanin in your skin? "Look at the coloured boy! He's able to compete with the whites! WOW!!! Such an accomplishment!!". It's not like we're handicapped.

For example, saying we're all a community. Seriously, is there a straight community? A caucasian community? And what does everyone in those "communities" think and believe? If you're subjecting us to taxonomical classifications and flow-charts, and see fit to come up with names for us, tell us what to be proud of and bash us if we don't do and say as we're told...it feels a bit like ownership "Look at everything we do for you, you're so ungrateful. We gave you a whole DAY! And a shirt!".

Honestly, around the mid-90's it really seemed like the racial and sexuality-based identity emphasis was fading away. The left/progressive movement (or whatever it is) has brought it back and uses it as a cudgel to bash anyone who does not profess devotion to their commandments, labels and proclamations. It's not about celebrating or accepting anyone - it's about domination and control, from the individual on up. Smug satisfaction and self-righteous dopamine hits, basically crybullies.

[Daydream Nation]

This is sports correction to how the employees of organizations treated people in the past. The anti-LGBTQ+ in male sports (mainly male sports, but all sports really) caused a fog of "sports isn't for everyone" over it and this is the correction to it. A portion of the world was treated unfairly and it's being made up in a way of "we as an organization (NHL/NBA/NFL ect.) support people we pushed away. Please come back and try us out again." Which is the reason for the events.

Bingo. This is why we have Black History Month, Women's History Month, Indigenous People's Day, Pride Events, ect. ect. to tell a group of people that have been mistreated and/or marginalized that these acts will not happen again or at the minimum that we are allies and support them. It speaks volumes when a white heterosexual male decides "Nah, I'm good." I won't support you because I am going to hide behind freedom of speech or even worse, one's chosen religion. And you know that someone strongly opposes LGBTQ+ if they refuse to wear a pride jersey since we all know the firestorm it will bring. I applaud the Sharks for not protecting Reimer in this matter. I have some sympathy for Russian players considering the Russian laws and what they might have to face at home but not for the Canadian Reimer.

[rataylor22]

So is one person's opinion that actually qualifies for the group a better or worse opinion than one person's opinion that does not qualify in the group?

It’s the same. It’s one person’s opinion and nothing more.

[rataylor22]

The problem of course with these cowards hiding behind religion is all the other religious epithets they break. And that’s before we even consider their gross misinterpretation of their own religion. Most people who hide behind religion make it obviously and abundantly clear that they don’t even understand or know their own religion.

[Fighting_Emu]

How is this still a thing? If these players were renouncing pride altogether then maybe we are having a different conversation but no one is saying that.

You shouldn't be forced to support anything! If it were st Patty's day and he didn't want to wear green does he have to explain why?? Of course he doesnt! This is so overly politicized its ridiculous!

Ftr id probably just weather jersey and actually DO support pride but its not actually support if you have no say in the matter anyways. This has so much less to do with supporting individuals at this point and so much more to do with political parties loving the fact that they can force an ideology on you now if they word it right

No one should be forced to support anything anyways- thats not support - thats a parade- and unless its in their contract and they're being paid to do it- this is really not our business...

[Fighting_Emu]

Bingo. This is why we have Black History Month, Women's History Month, Indigenous People's Day, Pride Events, ect. ect. to tell a group of people that have been mistreated and/or marginalized that these acts will not happen again or at the minimum that we are allies and support them. It speaks volumes when a white heterosexual male decides "Nah, I'm good." I won't support you because I am going to hide behind freedom of speech or even worse, one's chosen religion. And you know that someone strongly opposes LGBTQ+ if they refuse to wear a pride jersey since we all know the firestorm it will bring. I applaud the Sharks for not protecting Reimer in this matter. I have some sympathy for Russian players considering the Russian laws and what they might have to face at home but not for the Canadian Reimer.

But you shouldn't be FORCED to support any of those causes- if its forced its not even really support is it? People are so eager to label everyone a racist and a bigot nowadays but someone saying "im not going to support this event today" is not the same as someone saying "this xommunity is less than or unworthy of support".

Its a little eery how calm people are about being told what to think! I love it when someone like Jeffrey Star speaks against this stuff because people don't even know what to say- lmao!

The persecution that happened to this community was wrong and it'd be great if everyone supported this but thats not the case and thats ok- thats the world we live in. Telling people exactly how they should feel and how to act in accordance with that is not only wrong- its actually very dangerous. If you support this community thats great- i t shows empathy, respect and kindness- i support them too- but surely you can see how demanding someone else feel the same way is dangerous right?

[rataylor22]

How is this still a thing? If these players were renouncing pride altogether then maybe we are having a different conversation but no one is saying that.

You shouldn't be forced to support anything! If it were st Patty's day and he didn't want to wear green does he have to explain why?? Of course he doesnt! This is so overly politicized its ridiculous!

Ftr id probably just weather jersey and actually DO support pride but its not actually support if you have no say in the matter anyways. This has so much less to do with supporting individuals at this point and so much more to do with political parties loving the fact that they can force an ideology on you now if they word it right

No one should be forced to support anything anyways- thats not support - thats a parade- and unless its in their contract and they're being paid to do it- this is really not our business...

The league has mandated St. Patrick’s day and military appreciation jerseys. So just from that perspective it would be. From a conversation standpoint, there probably wouldn’t be much fuss if a player didn’t wear a St. Patty’s one but you can be damn sure there would be an uproar if someone didn’t wear a military one.

However the fact that the league has mandated some specific events but not this one is…..”something something that’s the whole point”.

[Rylant]

How is this still a thing? If these players were renouncing pride altogether then maybe we are having a different conversation but no one is saying that.

You shouldn't be forced to support anything! If it were st Patty's day and he didn't want to wear green does he have to explain why?? Of course he doesnt! This is so overly politicized its ridiculous!

Christians has been renouncing homosexuality for centuries. Demanding that 2 gay people shouldn't have the right to marry each other? That's clear renouncing.

And you are equating somebody not wishing to wear green on St. Patrick's Day with somebody refusing to support the LGBT community?

Again I ask of someone in this situation. Is the issue here which you are dramatically outraged by the people questioning this, because you are a champion of a person's right to support what they wish? Or are you disingenuously claiming that is the true issue, when the truth is that you happen to agree with Reimer's stance on homosexuality and you don't like that he is receiving backlash for his antiquated ways?

Rylant

[Fighting_Emu]

Christians has been renouncing homosexuality for centuries. Demanding that 2 gay people shouldn't have the right to marry each other? That's clear renouncing.

And you are equating somebody not wishing to wear green on St. Patrick's Day with somebody refusing to support the LGBT community?

Again I ask of someone in this situation. Is the issue here which you are dramatically outraged by the people questioning this, because you are a champion of a person's right to support what they wish? Or are you disingenuously claiming that is the true issue, when the truth is that you happen to agree with Reimer's stance on homosexuality and you don't like that he is receiving backlash for his antiquated ways?

Rylant

Yes I am- if that supports equates to.wearimg rainbow socks.

I think people are reticent to say whether they agree or not cause its not really the point here but ftr I can comfortably say I absolutely support pride initiatives- I work at an outreach clinic for harm reduction around infectious diseases and drug use and the majority of my peers are lgbt... they literally laugh at this shit. Thats why I cited Jeffrey stars views as so funny here- when the person saying this is part of that community the counter argument crumbles pretty damn fast and that in itself is a good indicator to me that its not a great premise to begin with lol! Some have suggested thats because at its core its fake outrage stemming from a place of fear about being persecuted themselves. I'm not suggesting that but some.might

You're so eager to call someone a bigot here- its nuts! You have no idea who we are or what are experience is. You want to call Reimer views antiquated?? When someone doesn't agree with an ideology you support- for whatever reason- you immediately go on the aggressive! Thats as antiquated as it gets!

If you insist on standing up for you're God given right to shit on a guys belief system- go ahead! If you really feel that shaming people is a good catalyst for change then you do you- but id argue its not especially effective in the first place and its likely motivated by fear on your part or the feeling of superiority you get. Because that's what it is- its just bullying the other side now and bulies are the only ones who don't understand that.

If you think this is about supporting the individuals than your virtue signaling needs work This is (and always has been) about one side of the political spectrum being absolutely thrilled that they can tell you what to think. Do you think those same people who went through the treatment you're citing want Reimer to go through that? Maybe- but id imagine the majority of them- the ones with empathy- dont want anyone to go through that kind of social humiliation. The people I know are completely indifferent about the socks and wish no ill intent towards Optimus Reimer...

[doulos]

https://www.thebeaverton.com/2023/03...ins-in-game-7/