Flames' Pride Night slotted for March 28 vs. LA

[ben voyonsdonc]

I’m guessing that you are referring to the intersectional approach point.

That is just a matter of understanding that many queer people aren’t only facing homophobia.

I’m a white gay guy. I don’t have to worry about many of the same things that a black gay guy does or a Muslim trans woman does. Queer people come from a ton of different experiences and face different forms of discrimination.

[Johnny Makarov]

Originally Posted by Robbob

Didn't the Catholic church or Pope even recently start to soften its stance? Makes no sense that the NHL start going the other direction.

Bettman is going to replace DeSantis as the Governor of Florida in the next few years.

[Cleveland Steam Whistle]

Am I the only one here that thinks Walsh's comment is giving the players / agents / PA a bit too much of a pass on this whole situation? The NHL needs to take even more heat over this and how they handled the jersey night situation for sure. But all Walsh's comment says in my opinion is "let the players choose", but is that really enough?

Part of why we are here is there was 0 consequence for players who chose not to participate in official events last year. The league clearly did the wrong thing, didn't take a stand and just back out, NOT good enough!

But I didn't (and maybe I missed it) see the NHLPA or any agents taking a stand either. What is the NHLPA or agents reaction going to be if the one of their players got benched for not wearing the warm up jerseys? Would we get the agents or the PA complaining that their clients were treated unfairly, or would we get the appropriate reaction showing support for inclusivity and backing up the decision of the coach / team making that choice?

It's super easy for an agent to say give them choice (which they should 100% have the options for on things like rainbow tape), it's harder to take a stand when someone opts out of something both the NHL and the NHLPA should stand for equally.

[Yeah_Baby]

The PA apparently reviewed and OK'd the memo.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by ben voyonsdonc

I’m guessing that you are referring to the intersectional approach point.

That is just a matter of understanding that many queer people aren’t only facing homophobia.

I’m a white gay guy. I don’t have to worry about many of the same things that a black gay guy does or a Muslim trans woman does. Queer people come from a ton of different experiences and face different forms of discrimination.

Honestly, I’d prefer not to further derail the conversation. My main point was that action was bigger than words around allyship.

Back on message: #### Gary Bettman.

[Jiri Hrdina]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

The PA apparently reviewed and OK'd the memo.

In my view the PA has always incorrectly focused on defending the few instead of the many.
- When a player is suspended for hurting another player, often there is an appeal. Seems to index towards the rights of the offender and not the impacts on the victim
- In this case, they have supported the memo, basically to defend the rights of the bigots amongst their members, such as the Staals. Instead of respecting what seems to be the more prevailing desire to support pride.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Has anyone seen the memo yet? Maybe I missed a link to it somewhere but I am curious to read it. Maybe it wasn't super explicit and the PA gave it a thumbs up without appreciating the implications?

[kipperiggy]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

"An ally agrees with my very specific ideology and lens through which I see power dynamics in society, which I have decided is automatically righteous, and engages in all activities and steps I personally expect them to do to support that ideology!"

Just a brutal, exclusionary, holier-than-thou approach to "inclusiveness".

The previous post read as inclusive to me. How is it exclusionary?

It's also fair that an ally shouldn't have to call themselves an ally at all. If someone said "I'm not racist, but..." then no, they're probably going to say something racist. Same with allyship. "I'm an ally, but..." well no, then you're probably not an ally.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Fun fact: today is National Coming Out Day. It would be a pretty good day to reverse this policy.

[Hot_Flatus]

Originally Posted by Jiri Hrdina

In my view the PA has always incorrectly focused on defending the few instead of the many.
- When a player is suspended for hurting another player, often there is an appeal. Seems to index towards the rights of the offender and not the impacts on the victim
- In this case, they have supported the memo, basically to defend the rights of the bigots amongst their members, such as the Staals. Instead of respecting what seems to be the more prevailing desire to support pride.

I'm not taking sides here, but isn't this today's society in general? The loudest are typically the ones that are heard versus the many. A great example is the anti-vax crowd or anti-flouride crowds.

It's the PAs job to speak for everyone and there are likely far more hockey players and other pro athletes across all pro sport voicing displeasure in participating behind the scenes than there are publicly. The PA wouldn't be taking this action if it were just the Staals and a few other dinosaurs making a stink.

[MoneyGuy]

https://twitter.com/user/status/1712154442416738618

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by kipperiggy

The previous post read as inclusive to me. How is it exclusionary?

The other poster said he didn't want to get into an argument about it and I don't either, so I'll explain what I meant and hopefully we can just leave it there.

I personally agree with or embody many of the things he listed, but I think setting a bunch of terms about ideological tenets that people need to believe (over and above the basic tenet that people should be afforded respect and not discriminated against due to their inherent traits), shibboleths they need to be prepared to state, and things they need to do (like showing up at a pride parade being a minimum requirement) is, in my view, highly unproductive, divisive, and is a sort of gatekeeping-via-moral-grandstanding ("Sure, maybe you say you're in favour of gay rights, but unless you think like I do and do the things I think are important, you're not a true ally").

Hopefully that explains my meaning and we can just drop it and return our focus to the NHL's bafflingly stupid decision.

[Yamer]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The other poster said he didn't want to get into an argument about it and I don't either, so I'll explain what I meant and hopefully we can just leave it there.

I personally agree with or embody many of the things he listed, but I think setting a bunch of terms about ideological tenets that people need to believe (over and above the basic tenet that people should be afforded respect and not discriminated against due to their inherent traits), shibboleths they need to be prepared to state, and things they need to do (like showing up at a pride parade being a minimum requirement) is, in my view, highly unproductive, divisive, and is a sort of gatekeeping-via-moral-grandstanding ("Sure, maybe you say you're in favour of gay rights, but unless you think like I do and do the things I think are important, you're not a true ally").

Hopefully that explains my meaning and we can just drop it and return our focus to the NHL's bafflingly stupid decision.

My eyebrow did raise when I saw that particular ask, but then I assumed ben meant that just showing up to Pride Parade and then never doing anything else to stand with the community is akin to the Catholic that only attends church at Easter and on Christmas but considers themselves faithful.

[MoneyGuy]

Players are coming out (not what you might think) against this decision. The league will have no choice to back down from this mandate. They’ll change it.

[ben voyonsdonc]

Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague

The other poster said he didn't want to get into an argument about it and I don't either, so I'll explain what I meant and hopefully we can just leave it there.

I personally agree with or embody many of the things he listed, but I think setting a bunch of terms about ideological tenets that people need to believe (over and above the basic tenet that people should be afforded respect and not discriminated against due to their inherent traits), shibboleths they need to be prepared to state, and things they need to do (like showing up at a pride parade being a minimum requirement) is, in my view, highly unproductive, divisive, and is a sort of gatekeeping-via-moral-grandstanding ("Sure, maybe you say you're in favour of gay rights, but unless you think like I do and do the things I think are important, you're not a true ally").

Hopefully that explains my meaning and we can just drop it and return our focus to the NHL's bafflingly stupid decision.

I agree that its best to focus on the issue at hand.

PS: Feel free to reach out via private messages if you'd like to chat more - I'm happy to have an honest discussion/answer your questions there.

[MRCboicgy]

In lighter news:

The thumbnail for this product was an ad in the news app on my phone just now:
https://shop.nhl.com/calgary-flames/...z-9-2725496917


Read the room, Fanatics! (i.e. your algorithm)

[manwiches]

Originally Posted by MoneyGuy

https://twitter.com/user/status/1712154442416738618

This is exactly what I'd do too. Got a problem with it? Too bloody bad.

[Locke]

Originally Posted by manwiches

This is exactly what I'd do too. Got a problem with it? Too bloody bad.

Ditto.

"Got a problem with it? Come and take it. F around and find out."

[Engine09]

Frank Seravalli saying you can't force anyone to participate.

Progress is difficult for some people, even more difficult for the small minded, superstitious crowd. Society needs a push forward sometimes, if they feel it's by "force", ok.

[powderjunkie]

Originally Posted by Yeah_Baby

ask 9 people you'll get 9 answers. Speaking up and challenging folks when you see or hear shady #### is a good place to start, because it takes the burden of the visibly queer or maybe even closeted person in the room.

Personally, I just hate the term 'ally' because I find it sort of used so much it's meaningless. I hear you though about speaking off the cuff etc. I can still #### up people's pronouns. It's a process and a journey and grace is a big part of that.

I am just tired of the 'be nicer, you'll use allies' arguement

I guess I just don't get the inclination to critique (or dare I say nit-pick) allies at all. It seems to be common to most social justice issues - and while it definitely feels like a bit of a trivial thing to grumble about from the "just trying to be a good cis-white-guy" bleachers - I think it really serves to suppress constructive conversation.

It can certainly be obnoxious to hear newly 'enlightened' old white guys proselytize with what seems like an undercurrent of gratitude seeking...but I think it's just part of the journey.