Flames' Pride Night slotted for March 28 vs. LA

[GullFoss]

1) As someone who believes inclusivity, it would have been nice if more players voluntarily wore pride jerseys.

2) As someone who believes in freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I'm comfortable with players choosing not to wear pride jerseys for whatever their reasons may be. And I support the NHLs positioning on this as well.

3) As someone who believes in freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I respect posters right to vent and criticize these players.

4) That said, I'm not a fan of antagonising, belittling, bullying and shaming people with different social views. While I think the aggressive approach plays well in an echo chamber, it's counterproductive in actually furthering sustainable progress. It's not the way the battle for hearts and minds are won. And it leads to a more polarized society with less room for the polite, open discourse that actually gives people the safe space they need to reflect on and alter their pre-existing viewpoints.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

I was already pretty damn proud and happy I won a jersey in the auction.

Posts from certain posters make me even prouder and happier.

Just out of curiosity, what are you going to do with it? Are you going to play hockey with it? Wear it to flames games? Keep it in the plastic bag? Frame it?

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Just out of curiosity, what are you going to do with it? Are you going to play hockey with it? Wear it to flames games? Keep it in the plastic bag? Frame it?

Can't speak for that person, but I bid on one and planned to have it framed. They're beautifully designed and the whole thing is within the logo of my favorite hockey team. A lot of thought went into it. The bidding got way out of my range, sadly.

[Red Slinger]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

4) That said, I'm not a fan of antagonising, belittling, bullying and shaming people with different social views. While I think the aggressive approach plays well in an echo chamber, it's counterproductive in actually furthering sustainable progress. It's not the way the battle for hearts and minds are won. And it leads to a more polarized society with less room for the polite, open discourse that actually gives people the safe space they need to reflect on and alter their pre-existing viewpoints.

I don't understand what the "different social view" is. Is that the view that it's not okay to be gay? Do the people that espouse that still believe that it's a choice? Is being Black or Indigenous a choice? Are there players refusing to wear the warm up jerseys for those events because of religious grounds?

The whole event is around inclusion. That's it. If they refuse to participate that's their prerogative, but it's a pretty clear sign that they don't believe in inclusion. If so, they deserve to be chided. Free speech is free from government intervention, but it is not free from consequences.

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

I don't understand what the "different social view" is. Is that the view that it's not okay to be gay? Do the people that espouse that still believe that it's a choice? Is being Black or Indigenous a choice? Are there players refusing to wear the warm up jerseys for those events because of religious grounds?

The whole event is around inclusion. That's it. If they refuse to participate that's their prerogative, but it's a pretty clear sign that they don't believe in inclusion. If so, they deserve to be chided. Free speech is free from government intervention, but it is not free from consequences.

That depends on the consequences to which you are referring.

[Yeah_Baby]

Originally Posted by BoLevi

That depends on the consequences to which you are referring.

You're still here?

[Engine09]

Overall this board is very supportive and forward thinking, it's encouraging, makes me feel good.

There will always be a couple Kid Rocks in every group, it's embarrassing and they're on the wrong side of history but I guess they enjoy being dip####s.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Just out of curiosity, what are you going to do with it? Are you going to play hockey with it? Wear it to flames games? Keep it in the plastic bag? Frame it?

Frame it.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by KelVarnsen

Frame it.

Post photos when you're done. I really want to see it. What side are you going to frame - the logo side or the number side? Usually, it's obvious. This time, not so much...

[CroFlames]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Post photos when you're done. I really want to see it. What side are you going to frame - the logo side or the number side? Usually, it's obvious. This time, not so much...

Judging by the auction prices he must have paid, he'll get his butler to alternate hanging it backwards and forwards every day.

[KelVarnsen]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

Post photos when you're done. I really want to see it. What side are you going to frame - the logo side or the number side? Usually, it's obvious. This time, not so much...

Logo side.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by Red Slinger

I don't understand what the "different social view" is. Is that the view that it's not okay to be gay? Do the people that espouse that still believe that it's a choice? Is being Black or Indigenous a choice? Are there players refusing to wear the warm up jerseys for those events because of religious grounds?

The whole event is around inclusion. That's it. If they refuse to participate that's their prerogative, but it's a pretty clear sign that they don't believe in inclusion. If so, they deserve to be chided. Free speech is free from government intervention, but it is not free from consequences.

What do you think chiding them accomplishes?

[GullFoss]

I picked up one of the pucks. It's much higher quality than I expected. I can't get over how great the design in. I might be a bit biased, but this is the nicest logo in the NHL by far.

[fliguy]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

1) As someone who believes inclusivity, it would have been nice if more players voluntarily wore pride jerseys.

2) As someone who believes in freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I'm comfortable with players choosing not to wear pride jerseys for whatever their reasons may be. And I support the NHLs positioning on this as well.

3) As someone who believes in freedom of speech and freedom of expression, I respect posters right to vent and criticize these players.

4) That said, I'm not a fan of antagonising, belittling, bullying and shaming people with different social views. While I think the aggressive approach plays well in an echo chamber, it's counterproductive in actually furthering sustainable progress. It's not the way the battle for hearts and minds are won. And it leads to a more polarized society with less room for the polite, open discourse that actually gives people the safe space they need to reflect on and alter their pre-existing viewpoints.

I could not have said it better. This is how we make progress as a society, not by belittling, name calling, intimidating, bullying. Civil and respectful dialogue is the key.

[Tbull8]

Anyone know if they’re making more merch with the logo? I’m hoping they do hats

[butterfly]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

I picked up one of the pucks. It's much higher quality than I expected. I can't get over how great the design in. I might be a bit biased, but this is the nicest logo in the NHL by far.

Seeing that photo sold me on buying one. Now they're sold out and there's none on eBay. If anyone sees one locally in Calgary, I'd be so happy to pay you to buy it and ship it here.

[GioforPM]

Originally Posted by GullFoss

What do you think chiding them accomplishes?

It points out to other people that this kind of attitude isn’t and shouldn’t be condoned.

If it was a night saluting women and a player says “Nah, they are inferior and shouldn’t be in an arena, they should be home making supper” we shouldn’t criticize that? Or if they say similar things about First Nations? Or Special Olympians?

[BoLevi]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It points out to other people that this kind of attitude isn’t and shouldn’t be condoned.

That plan backfired. Instead, the vitriol and bloviating directed at Reimer and others simply looked like bullying. It likely entrenched many bystanders in their negative views, albeit silently. That is, unfortunately, not a good outcome for the LGBTQ+ community.

The goal should be to convince Reimer and others that there is a better way to look at the world. I argue for the use of liberal principles partly because it gives you the moral high-ground and partly because it is simply more effective at accomplishing the goal. When the rhetoric becomes about "consequences" and "condone" and "be intolerant to intolerance", then you have lost at both gaining the moral high ground and effectively convincing people of anything.

Getting angry and lashing out makes people feel good in a dopamine-hit kinda way, and that's why they use such ineffective tactics. But it's the opposite of an elevated and intellectual approach to advancing LGBTQ+ equality and inclusion.

[GullFoss]

Originally Posted by GioforPM

It points out to other people that this kind of attitude isn’t and shouldn’t be condoned.

If people want to make it known that they disagree with that approach or that they are disappointed with a someone's decision, there's a way to do it respectfully. You can disagree with their decision without ripping their character or religion. You can disagree with their decision without chiding them.

"I'm disappointed not all players wore the jersey because..."

"I disagree with Reimers decision not to wear the jersey because..."

[powderjunkie]

I, for one, am shocked - SHOCKED!!! - that people say mean things on the internet.