I just got my new Sports Illustrated.
Seems that the much ballyhood coming out of Derrick Peterson is over.
He now says that he was "experimenting" and was not really gay. He said that he was 100% sure that he was 100% straight.
Isn't funny that the Outsports home page still has him coming out? Time to do an update, I think.
Full Version: pro athlete goes in...
what a buffoon.
Man, and I had been in contact with a black gay columnist who was prepared to research a series of interviews with him.
Just for the Board: I don't think you go to your sponsor (Adidas, in this case) and ask for support to continue as openly gay if you're just experimenting.
Oh, well.....that's very sad - and even if he is 100% heterosexual, it's still too weird for words.
This is not just going to disappear. You can't go halfway with something like this.
I dare say he deserves whatever he gets, and it might not be fun.
Just for the Board: I don't think you go to your sponsor (Adidas, in this case) and ask for support to continue as openly gay if you're just experimenting.
Oh, well.....that's very sad - and even if he is 100% heterosexual, it's still too weird for words.
This is not just going to disappear. You can't go halfway with something like this.
I dare say he deserves whatever he gets, and it might not be fun.
I wonder what caused this turnabout?
We will have a full report within the week.
Pity the gay community isn't cohesive enough to make that 100% straight statement a self-fulfilling prophecy with regard to his potential partners. (Ah well, I suppose folks like Kevin Spacey would be better targets of such hypothetical solidarity, anyway...)
Here is the story on Derrick and what happened.
For Matt:
Would you elaborate on your post? I understand the English, but not meanings.
Would you elaborate on your post? I understand the English, but not meanings.
Seems like everyone involved here is on pretty shaky ground. Mr. Peterson's statement "one thing I will say for sure [is that] I'm definitely not heterosexual" is not exactly the equivalent of "I'm gay." At best it leaves open the prospect of bisexuality which would seem in agreement with his subsequent contentions. Beyond that we have the fact he drove into KC to hit the gay bars. He wouldn't be the first straight or bi guy to do that either. I agree, it's more likely he's homosexual (not the same as being gay - in my opinion) and just got nervous or pressured, by sponsors or the girlfriend. We may never know and I for one don't really care. He wasn't worthy of the attention Outsports gave him. Next time you want to profile a gay athlete, wait for someone more sure of himself who might actually inspire us. I suspect you were grasping at straws here.
TG, Let's not fault Jim & Cyd for doing some good journalism work. They researched, advised, interviewed and confirmed before they committed to writing. Peterson wants it both ways - i.e., HIS way. He sounds like an even flakier version of Carl Lewis to me, for those who can remember his doubletalk during the LA Olympics.
I'd call this fair journalism at best. I wasn't present at the interview but Mr. Peterson's comments as quoted in the article are equivocating at best. I'd have put him back on the plane to Missouri and had done with him. Not a good choice of subject. Research should have turned up the girlfriend and then caused them to question where they were headed with this. Let's assume that the whole thing is a pack of lies and that Mr. Peterson was out for a fun weekend cavorting around West Hollywood. Were any of Mr. Peterson's statements researched and corroborated? If he'd been hitting the KC bars since the age of 14 then someone ought to be able to verify. Reasearch and confirmation is more than asking this guy the same questions twice. They did no research other than with him and confirmed none of his contentions. They should have avoided the advice business altogether. Journalism isn't about giving advice. It's about objective reporting of the facts. If he want's to come out let him, it's his life. Don't get me wrong, I think Mr. Peterson has two faces and I don't much care for either. I think he clearly misled these journalists. Good journalism is nevertheless, in part, about not being so easily led down the primrose path.
[quote]Originally posted by Torgauer:
[QB] Research should have turned up the girlfriend....If he'd been hitting the KC bars since the age of 14 then someone ought to be able to verify. Reasearch and confirmation is more than asking this guy the same questions twice. They did no research other than with him and confirmed none of his contentions.
What "research" should have been done? If the guy was asked if he was seeing anyone and doesn't mention having a girlfriend, is a reporter supposed to call everyone he knows and ask them? How does a reporter do that if the guy is just in the process of coming out of the closet, and perhaps hasn't told a lot of people? Is a reporter supposed to call up the guy's family and friends and say, "Hey, we're doing a story about how your son/brother/friend is gay. Do you know if he's dating?" And how do you confirm a statement that a 14-year-old went to bars? With the bar owners/customers? Do you go to a bar and ask "hey, do you remember a 14-year-old kid who used to show up here a few years ago?"
This was a profile of an athlete and his personal life. You make it sound like they were doing an investigative piece on a political scandal.
[QB] Research should have turned up the girlfriend....If he'd been hitting the KC bars since the age of 14 then someone ought to be able to verify. Reasearch and confirmation is more than asking this guy the same questions twice. They did no research other than with him and confirmed none of his contentions.
What "research" should have been done? If the guy was asked if he was seeing anyone and doesn't mention having a girlfriend, is a reporter supposed to call everyone he knows and ask them? How does a reporter do that if the guy is just in the process of coming out of the closet, and perhaps hasn't told a lot of people? Is a reporter supposed to call up the guy's family and friends and say, "Hey, we're doing a story about how your son/brother/friend is gay. Do you know if he's dating?" And how do you confirm a statement that a 14-year-old went to bars? With the bar owners/customers? Do you go to a bar and ask "hey, do you remember a 14-year-old kid who used to show up here a few years ago?"
This was a profile of an athlete and his personal life. You make it sound like they were doing an investigative piece on a political scandal.
It wouldn't be too difficult to have attended a few meets prior to the interview and done some background research with other athletes, family, friends, coaches, officials at the event, anyone acquainted with Mr. Peterson. What's he like off the track, other interests, etc. This stuff is journalism 101. They might have asked Peterson if he was seeing anyone, boyfriends, girlfriends? Maybe they did ask. I don't know. Maybe he lied. They're reporters doing a profile of an athlete, no need to embelish beyond that, as to the "coming out" nature of the story, if maintaining Mr. Peterson's privacy until the big newsflash was an issue. Why would it have been? If he's about to come out in a national publication, he ought to be out to friends and family. The whole thing just doesn't ring true. You could almost see this coming. Mr. Peterson said he'd been going out to the KC bars "since" he was 14. It's not like he went out and made the rounds once to celebrate his fourteenth birthday. He claims he's been a regular for several years. I've been hitting the bars here for several years. If you trotted around my picture, people would recognize me. I'm not saying all or these bases should have been covered. You're right, it's a puff piece not a criminal investigation. However, any reporter will tell you that if you don't check your stories sooner or later you get burned and end up looking like a reporter who doesn't check his stories. Given the nebulous and incredulous statements made by Peterson, if they weren't willing to do the leg work, they should have dropped the story. Had they done the leg work, they probably would have decided to drop the story. The desire to get the scoop on Peterson's coming out overcame good journalistic practice. It's the oldest story in the business.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Torgauer ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Torgauer ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Torgauer ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Torgauer ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Torgauer ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Torgauer ]
Bisexual? Absolutely not. That's probably the compromise he hopes to strike, but it's a no-go. If he is truly bisexual, then he should have come out as bisexual.
The issue here (and I intend to sound angry becuase I am), is that a so-called professional African-American man with a Master's degree (does he have two?) spoke, on several, distinct occasions with his sponsors, professional established journalists that HE sought out, and then.....went through all the details of a national story process that he knew FOR SOMETIME was going to publication.
After these series of events, he was bestowed a gift of kind, astute journalists representing the LGBT community (in the Outsports staff), kind enough to go beyond the call of duty and assure Peterson of what, in their experience, he was getting himself into.
I speak as an African-American bisexual; and, separately, as a PM, I thanked the Outsports staff for their considerate efforts on Mr. Peterson's part.
It is absolutely clear to me that Mr. Peterson deliberately ignored honesty, forthrightness, and a basic survey of his social responsibilities in not reviewing his public statements and interviews. Had he done so, he might have called a few days later and cancelled the stories. He did not do this. He did even imply that he MIGHT WANT to this.
What did he hope to obtain from Outsports? Therapy sessions and an ongoing account of his psychological progress? I ask you guys to face it, this was Peterson's call, and these are the kinds of calls he obviously makes.
After the Genre story's publication, he denied ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING that he just did. And, when in contact with Outsports staff, was informed that he did not have to follow through (although this is what a professional ANYTHING owes us).
He might have said, at some appropritate point, that he had realized, upon more thinking, that he will have to get to the bottom of his situation with a promise to return with the proper interview.
I repeat: Peterson has a Master's-level education. He can play innocent and oblivious to the history he is playing with, but America doesn't have to accept his BS. If it's that big an issue for him he needs to get help. Not our problem, but at least that is what a man worth a career would do.
Think about it.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
The issue here (and I intend to sound angry becuase I am), is that a so-called professional African-American man with a Master's degree (does he have two?) spoke, on several, distinct occasions with his sponsors, professional established journalists that HE sought out, and then.....went through all the details of a national story process that he knew FOR SOMETIME was going to publication.
After these series of events, he was bestowed a gift of kind, astute journalists representing the LGBT community (in the Outsports staff), kind enough to go beyond the call of duty and assure Peterson of what, in their experience, he was getting himself into.
I speak as an African-American bisexual; and, separately, as a PM, I thanked the Outsports staff for their considerate efforts on Mr. Peterson's part.
It is absolutely clear to me that Mr. Peterson deliberately ignored honesty, forthrightness, and a basic survey of his social responsibilities in not reviewing his public statements and interviews. Had he done so, he might have called a few days later and cancelled the stories. He did not do this. He did even imply that he MIGHT WANT to this.
What did he hope to obtain from Outsports? Therapy sessions and an ongoing account of his psychological progress? I ask you guys to face it, this was Peterson's call, and these are the kinds of calls he obviously makes.
After the Genre story's publication, he denied ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING that he just did. And, when in contact with Outsports staff, was informed that he did not have to follow through (although this is what a professional ANYTHING owes us).
He might have said, at some appropritate point, that he had realized, upon more thinking, that he will have to get to the bottom of his situation with a promise to return with the proper interview.
I repeat: Peterson has a Master's-level education. He can play innocent and oblivious to the history he is playing with, but America doesn't have to accept his BS. If it's that big an issue for him he needs to get help. Not our problem, but at least that is what a man worth a career would do.
Think about it.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
Good article and journalism by both Outsports and Genre. Deric (or Derrick) Petersons public persona is as much his choice as his name.
Personally I would consider it progress for people to be able to explore their sexuality without fear of being stereotyped and pigeonholed.
It appears that his is something that Deric may have to sort out.
Wonder what his friend Jess Strutzel thinks of Deric's apparent change of heart.
Any info Jim?
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: sportinlife ]
Personally I would consider it progress for people to be able to explore their sexuality without fear of being stereotyped and pigeonholed.
It appears that his is something that Deric may have to sort out.
Wonder what his friend Jess Strutzel thinks of Deric's apparent change of heart.
Any info Jim?
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: sportinlife ]
I totally missed that, sportinlife. If he treats his own (supportive) friends like that, well.....
Shame on him.
Shame on him.
Derrick Peterson isn't the first person in the world to "In" himself. It's unfortunate, given the positive support he received, that he felt he had to do this.
I certainly don't question Cyd's integrity as a journalist on this matter. His version of the story seems totally believable.
Derrick knew he was going to be profiled as an Out professional athlete with all the risks and noteriety and benefits that entails.
Perhaps the stress on the himself, his family, his girlfriend(?), friends, sponsors(?), etc. is a lot greater than we imagine.
I certainly don't question Cyd's integrity as a journalist on this matter. His version of the story seems totally believable.
Derrick knew he was going to be profiled as an Out professional athlete with all the risks and noteriety and benefits that entails.
Perhaps the stress on the himself, his family, his girlfriend(?), friends, sponsors(?), etc. is a lot greater than we imagine.
[quote]Originally posted by Torgauer:
It wouldn't be too difficult to have attended a few meets prior to the interview and done some background research with other athletes, family, friends, coaches, officials at the event, anyone acquainted with Mr. Peterson. What's he like off the track, other interests, etc. This stuff is journalism 101.
Cyd, Genre and Outsports pass Journalism 101. With flying colors. Thank you very much.
I once had a professor that was a stringer for the "National Enquirer." She joked that the Enquirer at that time had high journalistic standards. To get a story published, you had to have TWO independent sources. If your sources weren't brother and sister, or husband and wife (or, in some parts of the country, both), the story was good to go.
What was the story here? The fallacy would be to assume that the story was Derrick (Deric?) Peterson was gay. That was not the story. If that were the story, that would have been an "outing." To run a story that was a forced outing, I would think that you would need, at least, to meet the Enquirer standard for independent sources.
But that wasn't the story. The story was this: Derrick Peterson decided to self-identify as "gay," or "far from heterosexual" or "man lover," or whatever. That was the story: his self-declaration. And, if someone declares himself to be gay, I assume he is gay. Case closed. End of discussion. Period. No photographic evidence necessary. There were multiple witnesses to his self-declaration. Story investigated. Story confirmed. Story in publishable condition.
Let's say I'm a reporter. And the Town's Congressperson has just declared that he plans to vote against the invasion of Iraq. Is that a news story? Is the self-declaration of his intent to vote that way a news story in and of itself? Or do I first have to investigate whether he's read anything about Iraq, or has Arab friends, or whatever? The answer: the declaration is a complete story. It's not shoddy journalism to print that declaration.
And that's what's happened here. The news event was the pronouncement, a recognizable athlete declaring himself gay, or someone who enjoys mattress time with his own gender. The pronouncement was not made to just one person. It was made to Eric "Gumby" Anderson. It was made to Cyd. It was made to Jess Strutzel. It was made to his sponsor, adidas, for godsakes. That's a story. That's independent confirmation of a story. And given all the media interest of gay athletes, it's a legitimate news story.
And the fact that the man who self-identified himself as a practitioner of the homosexual arts has now recanted his declaration: THAT'S NEWS TOO! We don't need to interview the alleged "girlfriend" to see if there's been actual penetration. We don't need to interview adidas to determine if there is now scientific evidence that he is, in fact, "less light in the track shoes," if you catch my drift. Are you saying the recanting should not be published until it can be confirmed that he's as heterosexual as Mike Piazza? After all, two wrongs wouldn't make a right, would it?
There is another story here as yet unwritten. Was there pressure on him to recant? Or is Peterson just looney tunes? Enquiring minds want to know.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]
It wouldn't be too difficult to have attended a few meets prior to the interview and done some background research with other athletes, family, friends, coaches, officials at the event, anyone acquainted with Mr. Peterson. What's he like off the track, other interests, etc. This stuff is journalism 101.
Cyd, Genre and Outsports pass Journalism 101. With flying colors. Thank you very much.
I once had a professor that was a stringer for the "National Enquirer." She joked that the Enquirer at that time had high journalistic standards. To get a story published, you had to have TWO independent sources. If your sources weren't brother and sister, or husband and wife (or, in some parts of the country, both), the story was good to go.
What was the story here? The fallacy would be to assume that the story was Derrick (Deric?) Peterson was gay. That was not the story. If that were the story, that would have been an "outing." To run a story that was a forced outing, I would think that you would need, at least, to meet the Enquirer standard for independent sources.
But that wasn't the story. The story was this: Derrick Peterson decided to self-identify as "gay," or "far from heterosexual" or "man lover," or whatever. That was the story: his self-declaration. And, if someone declares himself to be gay, I assume he is gay. Case closed. End of discussion. Period. No photographic evidence necessary. There were multiple witnesses to his self-declaration. Story investigated. Story confirmed. Story in publishable condition.
Let's say I'm a reporter. And the Town's Congressperson has just declared that he plans to vote against the invasion of Iraq. Is that a news story? Is the self-declaration of his intent to vote that way a news story in and of itself? Or do I first have to investigate whether he's read anything about Iraq, or has Arab friends, or whatever? The answer: the declaration is a complete story. It's not shoddy journalism to print that declaration.
And that's what's happened here. The news event was the pronouncement, a recognizable athlete declaring himself gay, or someone who enjoys mattress time with his own gender. The pronouncement was not made to just one person. It was made to Eric "Gumby" Anderson. It was made to Cyd. It was made to Jess Strutzel. It was made to his sponsor, adidas, for godsakes. That's a story. That's independent confirmation of a story. And given all the media interest of gay athletes, it's a legitimate news story.
And the fact that the man who self-identified himself as a practitioner of the homosexual arts has now recanted his declaration: THAT'S NEWS TOO! We don't need to interview the alleged "girlfriend" to see if there's been actual penetration. We don't need to interview adidas to determine if there is now scientific evidence that he is, in fact, "less light in the track shoes," if you catch my drift. Are you saying the recanting should not be published until it can be confirmed that he's as heterosexual as Mike Piazza? After all, two wrongs wouldn't make a right, would it?
There is another story here as yet unwritten. Was there pressure on him to recant? Or is Peterson just looney tunes? Enquiring minds want to know.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]
"i can't justsit back and let my name and my life be dragged throught the mud anymore, so i have to say that i am NOTGAY,(period)."
Wherever Peterson falls on the Kinsey Scale, he's certainly high on the Drama Meter.
NEWS FLASH
TOLEDO, OH - Despite the fact that everyone he meets obviously assumes he is gay, 34-year-old Toledo-area homosexual Jeremy Schuitt still thinks he's in the closet, local sources reported Tuesday.
Wherever Peterson falls on the Kinsey Scale, he's certainly high on the Drama Meter.
NEWS FLASH
TOLEDO, OH - Despite the fact that everyone he meets obviously assumes he is gay, 34-year-old Toledo-area homosexual Jeremy Schuitt still thinks he's in the closet, local sources reported Tuesday.
[quote]Originally posted by redsoxbreath:
NEWS FLASH
TOLEDO, OH - Despite the fact that everyone he meets obviously assumes he is gay, 34-year-old Toledo-area homosexual Jeremy Schuitt still thinks he's in the closet, local sources reported Tuesday.
That is the funniest thing I've ever seen in the Onion, a consistently side splitting satirical institution.
NEWS FLASH
TOLEDO, OH - Despite the fact that everyone he meets obviously assumes he is gay, 34-year-old Toledo-area homosexual Jeremy Schuitt still thinks he's in the closet, local sources reported Tuesday.
That is the funniest thing I've ever seen in the Onion, a consistently side splitting satirical institution.
From http://www.outsports.com/wire/20020720deric.htm :
>>
Defying stereotypes is something Déric does well. With two bachelors degrees and an MBA in progress from the University of Missouri, at the age of 23, he's no dumb jock. ....
<<
With the sort of integrity he's displayed and an MBA, he's ready to work for Enron. Unfortunately for Déric, Enron isn't doing much hiring these days.
>>
"I just love to see the look on peoples faces when they see that juxtaposition."
<<
Indeed he does.
>>
Defying stereotypes is something Déric does well. With two bachelors degrees and an MBA in progress from the University of Missouri, at the age of 23, he's no dumb jock. ....
<<
With the sort of integrity he's displayed and an MBA, he's ready to work for Enron. Unfortunately for Déric, Enron isn't doing much hiring these days.
>>
"I just love to see the look on peoples faces when they see that juxtaposition."
<<
Indeed he does.
I'm just astounded that Peterson thinks his retraction is going to fly with people who read about it, or result in any benefit for him. It's not as if he were outed in a gossip column after all, he gave an interview of his own free will in which he self-identified as something other than heterosexual. If his name was "dragged through the mud" by that little revelation, then he himself was the one doing the dragging.
As for a "straight" athlete fraudulently outing himself as a form of protest over racial inequity in the media... well, the sky must be an interesting color in the world where that makes sense.
bluebird, my earlier post was just me grousing about public figures jumping back into the closet in an attempt to have their cake and eat it too. I was saying, in effect, that I wish we could hold such figures to their claims of absolute heterosexuality. ("No boys on the side for you!")
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Matt the Bruins fan ]
As for a "straight" athlete fraudulently outing himself as a form of protest over racial inequity in the media... well, the sky must be an interesting color in the world where that makes sense.
bluebird, my earlier post was just me grousing about public figures jumping back into the closet in an attempt to have their cake and eat it too. I was saying, in effect, that I wish we could hold such figures to their claims of absolute heterosexuality. ("No boys on the side for you!")
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Matt the Bruins fan ]
Fear and a bit of idiocy obviously got the best of Mr. Peterson, but methinks he won't be estranged from man-loving for too long, girlfriend or no "girlfriends."
Now that he's banging with the hangers again, would some credible Black gay athlete person PLEASE COME OUT?
BTW, he wouldn't be the first homosexual with a girlfriend, and don't forget, some out and semi-out homosexual men (W.H. Auden, Leonard Bernstein, Tony Perkins, Bruce Chatwin, Barry Diller, etc.) actually do get married, for a variety of reasons.
Homosexuality is not only who you sleep with every night, but who you desire inside. It is sexual orientation, sexual object choice, sexual practice--and yes, sexual and social performance. I think Déric/Derrick probably satifies all four variables easily.
Now that he's banging with the hangers again, would some credible Black gay athlete person PLEASE COME OUT?
BTW, he wouldn't be the first homosexual with a girlfriend, and don't forget, some out and semi-out homosexual men (W.H. Auden, Leonard Bernstein, Tony Perkins, Bruce Chatwin, Barry Diller, etc.) actually do get married, for a variety of reasons.
Homosexuality is not only who you sleep with every night, but who you desire inside. It is sexual orientation, sexual object choice, sexual practice--and yes, sexual and social performance. I think Déric/Derrick probably satifies all four variables easily.
[quote]Originally posted by Charlie in the Trees:
There is another story here as yet unwritten. Was there pressure on him to recant? Or is Peterson just looney tunes? Enquiring minds want to know.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]
Derrick has told me and Eric Anderson, on a number of occasions, that he has had no professional pressure to go back into the closet and that this is just a personal decision.
There is another story here as yet unwritten. Was there pressure on him to recant? Or is Peterson just looney tunes? Enquiring minds want to know.
[ August 26, 2002: Message edited by: Charlie in the Trees ]
Derrick has told me and Eric Anderson, on a number of occasions, that he has had no professional pressure to go back into the closet and that this is just a personal decision.
For those that would wish better researched articles, exactly how much research time/money do you think should be spent when Jim & Cyd are doing it really for nothing?
Whatever Genre's involvement, I'm betting their expenses in getting him out [in Weho] before he went back [in wherever he came from] didn't leave a lot for a Big Investigative Piece either.
Short of having someone sign a complete "confession," renouncing All Things Hetero-Appearing, how can you ever insure that their won't be "blowback" from any piece you run?
It seems to me that Cyd et. al., went out of their way to be crystal-clear to D/D, both for fhe purposes of journalistic integrity, as well as an interest in his long-term well-being. I don't think those two values have to be diametrically opposed.
If there was a glaring error of some type, I'm sure we'd all point it out and let them handle it. We may even make comments here. But attacking the integrity/intelligence of Cyd or Jim really has no traction with me.
All questions, outrage, and finger-pointing needs to go only one way: At the man running as fast as he can back into that closet after regretting and recanting that he ever made it to the light of day.
Whatever Genre's involvement, I'm betting their expenses in getting him out [in Weho] before he went back [in wherever he came from] didn't leave a lot for a Big Investigative Piece either.
Short of having someone sign a complete "confession," renouncing All Things Hetero-Appearing, how can you ever insure that their won't be "blowback" from any piece you run?
It seems to me that Cyd et. al., went out of their way to be crystal-clear to D/D, both for fhe purposes of journalistic integrity, as well as an interest in his long-term well-being. I don't think those two values have to be diametrically opposed.
If there was a glaring error of some type, I'm sure we'd all point it out and let them handle it. We may even make comments here. But attacking the integrity/intelligence of Cyd or Jim really has no traction with me.
All questions, outrage, and finger-pointing needs to go only one way: At the man running as fast as he can back into that closet after regretting and recanting that he ever made it to the light of day.
Whether this gentleman is gay, bisexual or just plain curious or confused he is not the person that was played up on this web site.
If my memory serves me, the hype was that a current professional athlete was going to come out and that his sponser was supportive.
Unfortunately, he is not the gay Jackie Robinson. It is going to take a very special gay male athlete to come out and stay out. There will tremedous pressures on him to recant or hedge his sexuality. There will be cat calls and physical threats throughout the season. We also will need a Branch Rickey to support our gay closet breaker.
But just as JR broke the color barrier and allowed black athletes to play in baseball and to become superstars, there will be a gay groundbreaker who will do the same in baseball, football or basketball.
My post takes nothing away from the athletes who have come out before - Greg Louganis, Billy Bean, Rudy Gulindo et al.
If my memory serves me, the hype was that a current professional athlete was going to come out and that his sponser was supportive.
Unfortunately, he is not the gay Jackie Robinson. It is going to take a very special gay male athlete to come out and stay out. There will tremedous pressures on him to recant or hedge his sexuality. There will be cat calls and physical threats throughout the season. We also will need a Branch Rickey to support our gay closet breaker.
But just as JR broke the color barrier and allowed black athletes to play in baseball and to become superstars, there will be a gay groundbreaker who will do the same in baseball, football or basketball.
My post takes nothing away from the athletes who have come out before - Greg Louganis, Billy Bean, Rudy Gulindo et al.
The racial angle to getting his name "dragged through the mud" definitely sounds possible.
Good interpretation.
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
Good interpretation.
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
I have to admit I laughed several times at the Onion article.
Sometimes it's weird to think that there are inclusive heterosexuals that are, by virtue of their upbringing, education, and contacts way ahead of their LGBT counterparts on gay issues, gaydar, and general sensitivity.
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
Sometimes it's weird to think that there are inclusive heterosexuals that are, by virtue of their upbringing, education, and contacts way ahead of their LGBT counterparts on gay issues, gaydar, and general sensitivity.
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 27, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[quote]Originally posted by Charlie in the Trees:
Cyd, Genre and Outsports pass Journalism 101. With flying colors. Thank you very much.
The story was this: Derrick Peterson decided to self-identify as "gay," ... There were multiple witnesses to his self-declaration. Story investigated. Story confirmed. Story in publishable condition.
Very well put Charlie - Derrick was embarassed /pressured or is a mental case.(IMHO) Once you are out of the closet -why go back in? - the hardest part is over.
Cyd, Genre and Outsports pass Journalism 101. With flying colors. Thank you very much.
The story was this: Derrick Peterson decided to self-identify as "gay," ... There were multiple witnesses to his self-declaration. Story investigated. Story confirmed. Story in publishable condition.
Very well put Charlie - Derrick was embarassed /pressured or is a mental case.(IMHO) Once you are out of the closet -why go back in? - the hardest part is over.
While I understand that there was no pressure from sponsors to "in" himself, we have no idea about what family pressures, etc, he may have faced. I would tend to think it's something related to that.
Trevor
Trevor
IF that's the case, Trevor, and it very well could be, then his family is being selfish and bigoted, and Peterson will have to grow up.
It's his life, his accomplishments, his commitments. That said, if his family is that homophobic, don't you think he should have cleared things with a trusted family member to test the waters? I'm sure his family is knowledgeable familiar of the public persona that he is building, as well as the endorsement monies in question.
Please note: This is precisely how families screw, oppress and dominate their LGBT members. As long as the success, the royalties, and the perks are available, then all's well. But nobody (parents included) seems to want to be there as family when the sexuality decisions have to be made and the sexuality matters have to be discussed.
We are not just natuarally born stars; some of us have the talent at a young age, and some of us, like the rest of the world, employ elbow grease, connections, years of tear-jerking hard work, and many, many untold sacrifices - all in an dehumanizing atmosphere of homophobia and disgust for LGBTs.
On the recanting: Media professionals can't take the "my gramma was sick" type of excuse to the bank. They probably don't even accept it where he's getting his MBA.
He made commitments, and no matter what his reasoning, he is going to have field the fallout for some time to come.
There is absolutely no turning back on this one.
Some lessons are harder than others, especially when you involve the resources and emotions of others.
[ August 28, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
It's his life, his accomplishments, his commitments. That said, if his family is that homophobic, don't you think he should have cleared things with a trusted family member to test the waters? I'm sure his family is knowledgeable familiar of the public persona that he is building, as well as the endorsement monies in question.
Please note: This is precisely how families screw, oppress and dominate their LGBT members. As long as the success, the royalties, and the perks are available, then all's well. But nobody (parents included) seems to want to be there as family when the sexuality decisions have to be made and the sexuality matters have to be discussed.
We are not just natuarally born stars; some of us have the talent at a young age, and some of us, like the rest of the world, employ elbow grease, connections, years of tear-jerking hard work, and many, many untold sacrifices - all in an dehumanizing atmosphere of homophobia and disgust for LGBTs.
On the recanting: Media professionals can't take the "my gramma was sick" type of excuse to the bank. They probably don't even accept it where he's getting his MBA.
He made commitments, and no matter what his reasoning, he is going to have field the fallout for some time to come.
There is absolutely no turning back on this one.
Some lessons are harder than others, especially when you involve the resources and emotions of others.
[ August 28, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
I'm sorry, but I have zero sympathy for the guy. He's the Anne Heche of athletes. He seemed more than willing to be a media whore and to come out to WeHo and party but didn't seem willing/able to handle the heat. Nobody outed him, he came out on his own; and frankly, he's a runner, ie he's next to invisible in this country anyway. Of course, he totally loses points with me for falling back on that old chestnut: Blame the media! It's their fault! Er, no, it's yours. If he was being flown out to Palm Springs on private jets and feted on the morning talk shows, I somehow doubt that he'd be so angst ridden.
I wonder how many fundie nutjobs are cackling with glee because they can use his comments to say "See! We told ya! Homosexuals can change their sexual preference like they change brands of laundry detergant!". Sheesh.
I wonder how many fundie nutjobs are cackling with glee because they can use his comments to say "See! We told ya! Homosexuals can change their sexual preference like they change brands of laundry detergant!". Sheesh.
The Anne Heche analogy is arguably accurate: Derrick used the enthusiastic and aggressive gay press to gain publicity. From all I've read here, the guy never said he was gay, never said he had a boyfriend. He basically said that he'd experimented, liked both men and women, and that he'd been "dancing/going" to gay bars for years. Obviously, the coming out story was heavily pursued by both outsports and genre...for their own worthy motivations (publicity)...Peterson snared them and led them on. He's the idiot in the situation but the press must take responsibility for their (understandable) agendas as well.
So this is the part where Lillith and Frazier get into an argument over whether Peterson's fixation on jogging is a psychosomatic, metaphorical expression of his race against his homosexuality.
Why is it that nothing in the news ever surprises me anymore? This particular public fete really leaves no winners.
Adidas looks like caca on a trisket.
Peterson himself just gives me the creeps; Have you read some of his posts? Scary, angry, run-on-sentence-o'rama!
Why is it that nothing in the news ever surprises me anymore? This particular public fete really leaves no winners.
Adidas looks like caca on a trisket.
Peterson himself just gives me the creeps; Have you read some of his posts? Scary, angry, run-on-sentence-o'rama!
I guess what really torques my jaw (tm my Dad) is that I try, I really do, to give bisexuals the benefit of the doubt--that they truly are interested in both men and woman both as sex partners and potential romantic partners--but more often than not what it means is: I'll have sex with men (often in a furtive, clandestine way) but I'd never date them and when push comes to shove, I'll only date the socially acceptable women for public consumption. For me, it's saying "Men are good enough for sex but nothing more".
And yes, I know that there's a whole spectrum of human sexuality and some men here might be truly bisexual and so on and so forth, but frankly, I'm sick to death of men who want/enjoy the benefits of the queer life (ie sex and partying in WeHo) without standing up and being counted when the questions start. And more than anything, I'm f**king tired beyond all known words in all known languages with the euphemisms and evasions: "I'm not 100% straight" all that bullshit. Why does it seem that the euphemisms start when the man-on-man aspect is a factor, that when it's the man-woman aspect that's being put forth, the language is clear and unambiguous? I have no problem with stating that I slept with my best freind's sister when I was 18 to see what all the fuss was about--not much, frankly--and that I have never had interest in woman as sexual or romantic partners. See how easy that is? It's amazing how clearly stated words can convey so much!
Er, um, yeah, this is a hot-button issue for me. OK, the real reason is that I'm pissed because the Angels have blown a 5-1 lead to the feckin' D Rays and I'm taking it out on this thread.
And yes, I know that there's a whole spectrum of human sexuality and some men here might be truly bisexual and so on and so forth, but frankly, I'm sick to death of men who want/enjoy the benefits of the queer life (ie sex and partying in WeHo) without standing up and being counted when the questions start. And more than anything, I'm f**king tired beyond all known words in all known languages with the euphemisms and evasions: "I'm not 100% straight" all that bullshit. Why does it seem that the euphemisms start when the man-on-man aspect is a factor, that when it's the man-woman aspect that's being put forth, the language is clear and unambiguous? I have no problem with stating that I slept with my best freind's sister when I was 18 to see what all the fuss was about--not much, frankly--and that I have never had interest in woman as sexual or romantic partners. See how easy that is? It's amazing how clearly stated words can convey so much!
Er, um, yeah, this is a hot-button issue for me. OK, the real reason is that I'm pissed because the Angels have blown a 5-1 lead to the feckin' D Rays and I'm taking it out on this thread.
Go, Jim! Go, go!
I am here to correct you, buddy, by offering that there are verifiable bisexuals that are worthy of the "B" in LGBT. I have seen them, worked with them in fundraising on behalf of the LGBT community, and I try to pattern my life after some people, who among many, many others, are "true" bisexuals.
But let's please not mix the two (Peterson and bisexual). Remember: he has never uttered the term "bisexual", probably because he does not know what it means in our LGBT community.
Being truly bisexual is recognizing and acting upon one's membership in the LGBT community and working to forge national, if not global, clarity on sexual issues, create a nation where we all, regardless of sexual orientation, are treated equitably, and (whenever possible [probable?]) further the practice of "the homosexual arts (borrowed from a fellow Outsports member)".
I know, and offer empathy, regarding your experiences with certain kinds of bisexuals. I hae seen some wear earrings in public and at work in order to gather support for themselves as people and "causes"; but, when you ask them to join you at a GLOBE meeting they are reticent - they hestitate to laugh at perfectly acceptable (in the workplace), but gay-tinged jokes.....
In short, they know NADA (not a thing) about the gay/LGBT community. They're just following what they see as a "trend". By the way, when has it ever been "fashionable to be gay? Ever so often, I read headlines to this effect. I even saw one that asked, "Is Hollywood becoming too gay?" "Too gay"? They have never even produced the historically first 5 features with openly gay people in the lead! What kind of question is that?
Anyway, Peterson is turning out to be nothing but unqualified to represent anything sexual right now - including himself. I know of teenagers who are more clear about their place along the sexual continuum.
And, you know? Sexuality is fluid. You may have a change of heart at some point in your life; but again, this has nothing to do with Peterson because he can't even explain where he is from week to week.
[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
I am here to correct you, buddy, by offering that there are verifiable bisexuals that are worthy of the "B" in LGBT. I have seen them, worked with them in fundraising on behalf of the LGBT community, and I try to pattern my life after some people, who among many, many others, are "true" bisexuals.
But let's please not mix the two (Peterson and bisexual). Remember: he has never uttered the term "bisexual", probably because he does not know what it means in our LGBT community.
Being truly bisexual is recognizing and acting upon one's membership in the LGBT community and working to forge national, if not global, clarity on sexual issues, create a nation where we all, regardless of sexual orientation, are treated equitably, and (whenever possible [probable?]) further the practice of "the homosexual arts (borrowed from a fellow Outsports member)".
I know, and offer empathy, regarding your experiences with certain kinds of bisexuals. I hae seen some wear earrings in public and at work in order to gather support for themselves as people and "causes"; but, when you ask them to join you at a GLOBE meeting they are reticent - they hestitate to laugh at perfectly acceptable (in the workplace), but gay-tinged jokes.....
In short, they know NADA (not a thing) about the gay/LGBT community. They're just following what they see as a "trend". By the way, when has it ever been "fashionable to be gay? Ever so often, I read headlines to this effect. I even saw one that asked, "Is Hollywood becoming too gay?" "Too gay"? They have never even produced the historically first 5 features with openly gay people in the lead! What kind of question is that?
Anyway, Peterson is turning out to be nothing but unqualified to represent anything sexual right now - including himself. I know of teenagers who are more clear about their place along the sexual continuum.
And, you know? Sexuality is fluid. You may have a change of heart at some point in your life; but again, this has nothing to do with Peterson because he can't even explain where he is from week to week.
[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[ August 29, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
[quote]I am here to correct you, buddy, by offering that there are verifiable bisexuals that are worthy of the "B" in LGBT
Oh, exactly! An earlier draft of my rant indicated that I was totally aware of that, but I was so furious at the Angels for pissing away a 5-1 lead against the feckin' D Rays that I wasn't fully concentrating on what I was writing when I was editing it.
When I was getting sober, a guy who was a big help to me was openly dating both a man and a woman--no subterfuge, so I know such people exist. It's the way that some guys bury the mansex portion of the equation and loudly proclaim the hetero side of things--methinks they doth protest too much--that really pisses me off.
Oh, exactly! An earlier draft of my rant indicated that I was totally aware of that, but I was so furious at the Angels for pissing away a 5-1 lead against the feckin' D Rays that I wasn't fully concentrating on what I was writing when I was editing it.
When I was getting sober, a guy who was a big help to me was openly dating both a man and a woman--no subterfuge, so I know such people exist. It's the way that some guys bury the mansex portion of the equation and loudly proclaim the hetero side of things--methinks they doth protest too much--that really pisses me off.
[quote]Originally posted by bluebird48234:
I am here to correct you, buddy, by offering that there are verifiable bisexuals that are worthy of the "B" in LGBT. I have seen them, worked with them in fundraising on behalf of the LGBT community, and I try to pattern my life after some people, who among many, many others, are "true" bisexuals.
Not being bisexual, I guess I look upon it with some interest and bemusement. I do wonder, however, whether if we lived in a society in which there were no social, political or cultural sanctions against homosexuals, if it were totally accepted and acceptable by all, which choices many individual bisexuals might make.
A very close friend of mine, a woman who used to call herself straight, came out as a lesbian, then nearly married a man, then entered a long term relationship with a woman, and recently was going on about a hot man she liked. She told me that she literally has sex with people (male, female) that she's attracted to now. She recently described herself as a "bulldyke," but she has told me that she finds it easier to find men for casual sex than women. So is she still a lesbian? I guess it depends on how you view yourself within. She also has said that in general she finds women more emotionally engaged. Does that have any bearing?
Most of the male bisexuals I know have told me that they are more attracted to men than women. It's a small sample, but I do wonder, again, if society didn't frown upon homosexuality what they'd do. None have ever answered this question when I posed it. And nearly all try to have as much sex with men as possible--though only one, as far as I know, is open about this with his wife.
Another friend, who has said repeatedly that he is "gay," is married with several children. He stopped using the bisexual label a while ago.
Peterson, to loop back to him, sounds confused and somewhat deceitful. I guess we can be thankful that he didn't blame this on "God," as the (now ex) boyfriend of one of my buddies did--that is, before God allowed him to be gay again, and visit the clubs and bathhouses of Chicago....
I am here to correct you, buddy, by offering that there are verifiable bisexuals that are worthy of the "B" in LGBT. I have seen them, worked with them in fundraising on behalf of the LGBT community, and I try to pattern my life after some people, who among many, many others, are "true" bisexuals.
Not being bisexual, I guess I look upon it with some interest and bemusement. I do wonder, however, whether if we lived in a society in which there were no social, political or cultural sanctions against homosexuals, if it were totally accepted and acceptable by all, which choices many individual bisexuals might make.
A very close friend of mine, a woman who used to call herself straight, came out as a lesbian, then nearly married a man, then entered a long term relationship with a woman, and recently was going on about a hot man she liked. She told me that she literally has sex with people (male, female) that she's attracted to now. She recently described herself as a "bulldyke," but she has told me that she finds it easier to find men for casual sex than women. So is she still a lesbian? I guess it depends on how you view yourself within. She also has said that in general she finds women more emotionally engaged. Does that have any bearing?
Most of the male bisexuals I know have told me that they are more attracted to men than women. It's a small sample, but I do wonder, again, if society didn't frown upon homosexuality what they'd do. None have ever answered this question when I posed it. And nearly all try to have as much sex with men as possible--though only one, as far as I know, is open about this with his wife.
Another friend, who has said repeatedly that he is "gay," is married with several children. He stopped using the bisexual label a while ago.
Peterson, to loop back to him, sounds confused and somewhat deceitful. I guess we can be thankful that he didn't blame this on "God," as the (now ex) boyfriend of one of my buddies did--that is, before God allowed him to be gay again, and visit the clubs and bathhouses of Chicago....
IT IS A SHAME THAT DERIC LIED.. BUT SINCE NO ONE HAD HEARD OF HIM BEFORE THIS.. IS HIS GOING BACK IN THE CLOSET A BIG DEAL... ITS NOT LIKE HE WAS MAURICE GREENE OR SOMEONE IMPORTANT IN THE SPORT OF TRACK AND FIELD... HE WAS A NOBODY IN A SPORT THAT IS IN NO ONE CARES ABOUT IN THE US EXCEPT FOR DURING THE OLYMPICS...DONT WASTE ANYMORE TIME ON THIS BOARD ON HIM..
[oy... all those capital letters]
Is Anne Heche single again yet? Cuz maybe she and Deric would hit it off.
Is Anne Heche single again yet? Cuz maybe she and Deric would hit it off.
Ballplayer3, I think that we're clear that Peterson wasn't a track superstar. But, what we're working out is: how do LGBT professionals handle these fraudulent thefts of our time, especially in today's world when principled LGBT staffpeople, like those at Outsports, are running popular, solid websites in the start-up stages (read: without compensation)?
I bet you, if Peterson had been demented enough to try an "orientation change" with Sports Illustrated initially (as opposed to Genre and Outsports), even if he had discovered that he was actually attracted to albino Swiss hogs - he would have kept that eventuality to himself, at least until the time in his life when he could be forthright about his situation, coupled with the requisite apology to SI staff for being uncertain at the time.
Anyway, this Peterson thing is somewhat of a crime in that he breached a reasonable trust with his interviewers and with our community that we are addressing for the sake of having a proper future protocol ("get me once, your mistake; get me twice, my mistake").
Case in point: we need to keep on pushin' so that "no names" won't be able to do this to us anymore.
That, in my opinion, is worth an intensive thread.
[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
I bet you, if Peterson had been demented enough to try an "orientation change" with Sports Illustrated initially (as opposed to Genre and Outsports), even if he had discovered that he was actually attracted to albino Swiss hogs - he would have kept that eventuality to himself, at least until the time in his life when he could be forthright about his situation, coupled with the requisite apology to SI staff for being uncertain at the time.
Anyway, this Peterson thing is somewhat of a crime in that he breached a reasonable trust with his interviewers and with our community that we are addressing for the sake of having a proper future protocol ("get me once, your mistake; get me twice, my mistake").
Case in point: we need to keep on pushin' so that "no names" won't be able to do this to us anymore.
That, in my opinion, is worth an intensive thread.
[ August 30, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
This is a story only because Derrick made it one. He saw a need to go on various sites and strongly criticize the original story and reporting, putting our credibility at risk. After much debate, Cyd and I decided we needed to set the record straight in case anyone else chooses to write about it. If Derrick had quietly changed his mind we would not have been compelled towrite about it.
OH, I get it...
A straight man pretending to be gay pretending to be straight pretending to be...
Derric, Derrictoria
Give me that Jazz Hot Baby...
A straight man pretending to be gay pretending to be straight pretending to be...
Derric, Derrictoria
Give me that Jazz Hot Baby...
[quote]Originally posted by satxbuddy1:
A straight man pretending to be gay pretending to be straight pretending to be...
What a HOOT!
A straight man pretending to be gay pretending to be straight pretending to be...
What a HOOT!
Watch it. I love track and field 365 days a year every year. Indooor track and outdoor track too. And before indoor starts, there's the cross country season.
A lot of people fail to realize that there is more to track than the Olympics. While it may fail to grab the attention of most Americans except during an Olympic year, track and field is the second most popular sport in Europe . There is an entire circuit of Grand Prix and Golden League meetings that pit the best of the best against each other every week. There are also the Continental(Asian, Australian, African, and European) Championships which are huge. Believe me, track and field has a much larger following than most Americans realize.
Plus, without a doubt, track and field athletes have the absolute, most beautiful bodies
A lot of people fail to realize that there is more to track than the Olympics. While it may fail to grab the attention of most Americans except during an Olympic year, track and field is the second most popular sport in Europe . There is an entire circuit of Grand Prix and Golden League meetings that pit the best of the best against each other every week. There are also the Continental(Asian, Australian, African, and European) Championships which are huge. Believe me, track and field has a much larger following than most Americans realize.
Plus, without a doubt, track and field athletes have the absolute, most beautiful bodies
[quote]Believe me, track and field has a much larger following than most Americans realize
That's exactly the point. In America track exists once every 4 years. Period. It's great you're such a fan, but most people do. not. care. It's like Formula 1 racing--huge in Europe and Asia, almost invisible here.
That's exactly the point. In America track exists once every 4 years. Period. It's great you're such a fan, but most people do. not. care. It's like Formula 1 racing--huge in Europe and Asia, almost invisible here.
I have discussed this situation with my friends (all of us are African-American), and we all agree that this Deric situation could be an example of the wide chasm between the White gay community at large and the Black same-gender-loving community, which is far more reluctant to embrace the "gay" label, for a myriad of reasons.
I'd be very interested to know if Deric's previous experiences (male lovers, visits to gay bars, etc.) were Black ones or White ones, because that would make a difference, I believe, in how he chooses to embrace or reject the "gay" identity. Nowhere in that article did I read a direct quote from him that stated "I am gay". There were a lot of equivocal things like visits to gay bars and expressed interest in men, but nothing unequivoally stating or embracing the "gay" label or identity. I find that to be very common among same-gender-loving African-Americans who are more Black-identified than gay-identified. And I also find this identity to be very different than that of White gays. And here is where a "miscommunication" or "misunderstanding" between Outsports and Deric may have taken place.
He may have been quite willing to make a statement that was vague, embracing his interest in men and interest in gay bars... but actually stating that he is "gay", in his view, was in correct and going too far. I know plenty of my fellow Black men who fit into that category. In fact, it's so pervasive that there are same-gender-loving Black organizations that are trying to come up with a self-identifying catch phrase that they feel Black men can call themselves, as they do not embrace the "gay" identity and reject the predominantly White gay culture.
I'd be very interested to know if Deric's previous experiences (male lovers, visits to gay bars, etc.) were Black ones or White ones, because that would make a difference, I believe, in how he chooses to embrace or reject the "gay" identity. Nowhere in that article did I read a direct quote from him that stated "I am gay". There were a lot of equivocal things like visits to gay bars and expressed interest in men, but nothing unequivoally stating or embracing the "gay" label or identity. I find that to be very common among same-gender-loving African-Americans who are more Black-identified than gay-identified. And I also find this identity to be very different than that of White gays. And here is where a "miscommunication" or "misunderstanding" between Outsports and Deric may have taken place.
He may have been quite willing to make a statement that was vague, embracing his interest in men and interest in gay bars... but actually stating that he is "gay", in his view, was in correct and going too far. I know plenty of my fellow Black men who fit into that category. In fact, it's so pervasive that there are same-gender-loving Black organizations that are trying to come up with a self-identifying catch phrase that they feel Black men can call themselves, as they do not embrace the "gay" identity and reject the predominantly White gay culture.
[quote]Originally posted by YellaDawg:
He may have been quite willing to make a statement that was vague, embracing his interest in men and interest in gay bars... culture.
Why set up an interview to make a "vague" statement?
I can't understand what he was doing regardless of his color.
He may have been quite willing to make a statement that was vague, embracing his interest in men and interest in gay bars... culture.
Why set up an interview to make a "vague" statement?
I can't understand what he was doing regardless of his color.
[quote]In fact, it's so pervasive that there are same-gender-loving Black organizations that are trying to come up with a self-identifying catch phrase that they feel Black men can call themselves, as they do not embrace the "gay" identity and reject the predominantly White gay culture
Same gender loving? I sure hope that doesn't catch on. GLBTSGL?
It's basically semantics anyway. I hate the word "gay" in this context--it's too frivilous in it's other common meaning--but a man sleeping with men and going to men only clubs, no matter what you want to call that, is a hypocrite if he starts freaking out because *gasp* people don't think he's 100% straight.
As one who is not a big fan of White Gay culture, I understand the antipathy. But it seems to me that there's two dynamics at work here: a "Why bother! The white boys just. don't. get. it." kind of fatalism that leads to withdrawal and a desire to leave the door open to social respectibility. Well, if Peterson thinks that by just not saying the word "gay" he has an semantic out, he's wrong.
Same gender loving? I sure hope that doesn't catch on. GLBTSGL?
It's basically semantics anyway. I hate the word "gay" in this context--it's too frivilous in it's other common meaning--but a man sleeping with men and going to men only clubs, no matter what you want to call that, is a hypocrite if he starts freaking out because *gasp* people don't think he's 100% straight.
As one who is not a big fan of White Gay culture, I understand the antipathy. But it seems to me that there's two dynamics at work here: a "Why bother! The white boys just. don't. get. it." kind of fatalism that leads to withdrawal and a desire to leave the door open to social respectibility. Well, if Peterson thinks that by just not saying the word "gay" he has an semantic out, he's wrong.
Yella Dawg, I totally disagree.
I think I understand where you're coming from (being African-American bisexual), but the fact is that he pursued journalists and used their time, their credibility, and their good will in a national setting, and went back on his assertions.
I don't care if he loves green creatures from Saturn - he should have been a professional.
I can sympathize with people who continue to be rejected by White gay culture, some explicitly racist, some just mindless and inconsiderate; but this is a situation where actually Peterson did the discrimination, the slap in the face, and the "perjury", if you will - and I could not respect anyone who would not stand up to him and his backpedaling.
I had an African-American gay journalist lined up to interview him. I was almost very embarrassed.
Anyway, if this "gay" label does not, for some reason describe yourself or certain people of color, then you need to say something about in your own way - furthermore, in a way that celebrates us all.
BTW, creating another word without addressing the hurts and the racism you and others feel they have encountered borders on the separatist, but even then, so be it. Just be honest about it. Don't be a fraud like Peterson.
[ September 03, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
I think I understand where you're coming from (being African-American bisexual), but the fact is that he pursued journalists and used their time, their credibility, and their good will in a national setting, and went back on his assertions.
I don't care if he loves green creatures from Saturn - he should have been a professional.
I can sympathize with people who continue to be rejected by White gay culture, some explicitly racist, some just mindless and inconsiderate; but this is a situation where actually Peterson did the discrimination, the slap in the face, and the "perjury", if you will - and I could not respect anyone who would not stand up to him and his backpedaling.
I had an African-American gay journalist lined up to interview him. I was almost very embarrassed.
Anyway, if this "gay" label does not, for some reason describe yourself or certain people of color, then you need to say something about in your own way - furthermore, in a way that celebrates us all.
BTW, creating another word without addressing the hurts and the racism you and others feel they have encountered borders on the separatist, but even then, so be it. Just be honest about it. Don't be a fraud like Peterson.
[ September 03, 2002: Message edited by: bluebird48234 ]
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.