Posted on 04/30/2003 5:43:23 PM PDT by L.N. Smithee
Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Punishing Jones not the answer
I just read about Todd Jones' anti-gay remarks and the Colorado Rockies corresponding response. And the only adjective the Rockies can come up with in response to Jones' disgusting tirade is "unfortunate"?
If there were really any justice, Todd Jones would be suspended, or even fired, by either the team or MLB. Making anti-gay remarks like that is right in line with racist remarks in reference to Hispanics, African-Americans, etc. and there is no place in that for baseball, America or anywhere else. Somebody as blatantly ignorant as Jones should not be allowed to get off easy for saying such disparaging remarks about people who are probably far better human beings than him.
Would it be possible for you to write an article calling for harsh punishment on Jones for his comments?
Keep up the great work man, you're still my favorite writer.
-- Noah Potvin
Thanks for the kind words, Noah. But I'm afraid that I cannot, in good conscience, call for Jones to be "punished," because I think it's dangerous to punish people for saying things with which you and I don't agree.
Were Jones' comments offensive? Sure, to you and me. But Noah, you and I have both said things in the course of our lives that would have been found offensive by someone, somewhere. Should we have been harshly punished for them?
Noah, many, many people have spoken and written eloquently about the need, in a free society, for a near-absolute right of free expression. Just grabbing the first quote I ran across in Nat Hentoff's brilliant book, Free Speech for Me -- But Not for Thee ...
The history of intellectual growth and discovery clearly demonstrates the need for unfettered freedom, the right to think the unthinkable, discuss the unmentionable, and challenge the unchallengeable. To curtail free expression strikes twice at intellectual freedom, for whoever deprives another of the right to state unpopular views necessarily also deprives others of the right to listen to those views.-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., U.S. v. Schwimmer, 1928
Some will argue that while Todd Jones does have the right to say what he wants, he also has to "face the consequences." But when you punish somebody for something he's said, you're discouraging him and others from speaking in the future. See, the most important underpinnings of a free society are tied to vigorous and open debate, and once you start telling people what they can and can't say, you stifle that debate.
It's for exactly this reason that I criticized Major League Baseball for punishing John Rocker three years ago, and found myself in the strange position of appearing on television to argue an issue on the same side as Sean Hannity. And you know what? I'd be on Hannity's side again, if his side was the right of people to speak their mind without fear of punishment. No matter how "wrong" I considered their mind.
Let me stress that "not punishing" isn't the same as "not discussing." When Jones says something like "I wouldn't want a gay guy being around me," that should be a cue for all of us to consider whether he's representative of professional athletes and/or baseball players generally, and what Major League Baseball might do to make gay players -- because there must be some -- feel more welcome in the game. But suspending, fining, or even firing Todd Jones would do significantly more harm than good.
I hope that, sometime in the near future, a gay baseball player comes out, and that he's strong enough to fight through all the crap he's going to get from jerks like Todd Jones. To me, that player will be a hero, more admirable than just about anybody else in the game, right up there with Jackie Robinson and Curt Flood and the few other professional athletes brave enough to stand up for something other than ever-growing paychecks.
But punishing jerks for expressing their backward thoughts isn't going to make things any easier for the first player who comes out. We need to work on changing thoughts, not punishing people for having them.
Senior writer Rob Neyer writes four columns per week during the baseball season. His new book, "Rob Neyer's Big Book of Baseball Lineups," has just been published by Fireside. For more information, visit Rob's Web site.
Of course, they never put these questions in those terms, but that's what it really all comes down to. 'Someone who potentially has sexual interest in you is in a position to see you naked. Do you mind if that person is a man?'
It was very refreshing to read Neyer's opinion after flipping on the radio and hearing KNBR talkhost and Basketball Hall-of-Famer Rick Barry -- the man who brought me the first world championship of my lifetime as the star of the 1974-75 Golden State Warriors -- opine that if Jones had to make a comment at all, it should have been either that he didn't care, or that he wasn't going to entertain the question.
I hope that, sometime in the near future, a gay baseball player comes out, and that he's strong enough to fight through all the crap he's going to get from jerks like Todd Jones. To me, that player will be a hero, more admirable than just about anybody else in the game, right up there with Jackie Robinson and Curt Flood and the few other professional athletes brave enough to stand up for something other than ever-growing paychecks.
I admire Neyer's defense of Jones' free speech. However, I am weary of the constant longing for a homosexual "Jackie Robinson." There will never be any such person, and I will explain why.
Everyone who wasn't blind knew that Jackie Robinson was black. That's why he despite being an excellent baseball player, he couldn't be a Major Leaguer until the Brooklyn Dodgers' Branch Rickey forced the issue in 1947. On the other hand, there are no homosexuals who have been banned from the Majors because they are gay. In fact, there are two players who admitted being homosexuals after they retired -- Glenn Burke of the Dodgers and A's, and Billy Bean of the Tigers, Dodgers, and Padres (not to be confused with A's General Manager Billy Beane, formerly of the Mets, Twins, Tigers and A's). They chose not to come out of the closet while they were playing, but no one told them that if they did, they would be on the waiver wire the following day.
What Neyer in reality longs for is a ballplayer who is willing to tell us all -- without provocation -- that he has anal sex with men.
I have been a baseball fan since my single digits, and have never been curious as to what my favorite ballplayers did/do in bed. I could live the rest of my life without caring about the sexual proclivities of Will Clark, Jack Clark, Dave Dravecky, or Barry Bonds. But when the sports scribes splatter the details on the printed page, we are forced to confront it, such as when Sports Illustrated did a cover story on the shocking number of deadbeat dads in the NBA, or when a Mark Chmura was forced to admit drunken frolicking in a hot tub with teenage girls. And when those rare moments occur, what happens? Everyone has an opinion on it.
But the rules somehow change when the word "gay" is mixed in. We are only supposed to have a range of opinions that wouldn't offend gay activists.
I don't care if any of the athletes on my favorite teams are homosexual. I just don't want to hear about it. If it's none of my business what they do in the privacy of their own whatever, I say, keep it there.
If you want to flaunt your sexuality for my consumption, you also are offering it up for my approval or disapproval. I have a right to an opinion on you just as much as do those who think it's just dandy.
In the words of Fleetwood Mac: "Don't ask me what I think of you, I might not give the answer that you want me to."
Let us not forget that the Rev. Jaaaacksoooon used that exact word to describe the nightclub diaster in Chicago recently alerting me to the fact that I smelled a larger than mouse rodent. The good rev said it was "unfortunate" that the fire doors were chained shut as the panicing crowd attempted to leave the building. "Unfortunate"? What if the owners of the club were white or a public auditorium?
Or you may be in a similar situation, and if you're in a situation like that, there's only one thing you can do:
Walk into the shrink wherever you are, just walk in, say, "Shrink, . . . you can get anything you want at Alice's Restaurant", and walk out.
You know, if one person, just one person, does it, they may think he's really sick and they won't take him.
And if two people do it, in harmony, they may think they're both faggots and they won't take either of them.
And if three people do it! Can you imagine three people walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? They may think it's an organization!
And can you imagine fifty people a day? I said FIFTY people a day . . . walkin' in, singin' a bar of "Alice's Restaurant" and walkin' out? Friends, they may think it's a MOVEMENT, and that's what it is: THE ALICE'S RESTAURANT ANTI-MASSACREE MOVEMENT! . . . and all you gotta do to join is to sing it the next time it comes around on the guitar.
That's true. But I guarantee you that when he performs the song nowadays, Guthrie doesn't say "faggots."
Well said!
The .293 career hitter, along with labor attorney Marvin Mitchelson, opened the flood of free agency which has resulted in nothing but ever-growing paychecks.
I find it disturbing how many people support "free speech" only so long as they agree with what's being said.
I do. One of the reasons that someone roots for a team (aside from the hometown thing) is because he relates to the individual players on that team. Heteros don't relate to homos.
What an insult to Hispanics and Blacks....to have their race compared to sexual perversion. Sick.
Remember, what e-mailer Noah suggested was...
If there were really any justice, Todd Jones would be suspended, or even fired, by either the team or MLB.
I am of the opinion that Robbins and Sarandon's antiwar activism shouldn't have gotten that Bull Durham tribute cancelled. THAT was "punishment." It was a bush league move by Mr. Petroskey of the Hall of Fame, saying that their words had put American troops "in danger." It was a phony excuse. I think they should have been given the opportunity to make fools of themselves by turning a purely baseball event into a political debate. THEN Petroskey would be justified in pillorying them.
In addition, if Sean Penn is correct about being replaced in an upcoming movie because of his foolish decision to be a stooge for the Hussein government, THAT would be "punishment" (I doubt he is correct, because the guy who fired him -- Steven Bing -- is nearly as liberal as he is).
This, however, does not mean that I personally don't reserve the right not to patronize any movie that stars Sarandon, Robbins, or Penn. That is my free choice. Just as it may be the free choice of homosexual baseball fans not to see anymore Colorado Rockies games. But neither is "punishment."
Marvin Miller is the labor attorney you are thinking of. Marvin Michelson was the high-priced divorce lawyer who brought the "palimony" suit to American jurisprudence (see Marvin, Lee).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.