There is an interesting discrimination lawsuit filed in Seattle where three bisexual men –Steven Apilado, LaRon Charles and Jon Russ — say that were barred by the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance from participating in the Gay Softball World Series because they were insufficiently gay. According to the lawsuit, the men are playing center field in their private life and need to pick a team — totally gay or straight.
Beth Allen, the alliance’s attorney, insisted that the lawsuit is frivolous and the men “were not discriminated against in any unlawful manner.” That is an interesting choice of words in denying discrimination “in any unlawful manner.” Allen insists that the organization has the right to be exclusive in its membership, a position that I agree with. The interesting aspects of that position is that it is consistent with the position of religious organizations in fighting for the right to discriminate against homosexuals and others, as discussed in this recent column.
Since the organization uses public fields, it could raise the same issues as discussed in the column where homosexual organizations have sought to bar religious-based groups that discriminate. The organization bars teams from having more than two heterosexual players in the World Series.
The plaintiffs played on a team called D2 that qualified for the 2008 Gay Softball World Series. They say that they were called into a large meeting and grilled about their personal predilections. Sounds like a Saturday Night skit. They say that they were told “This is the Gay World Series, not the Bisexual World Series” and classified as “non-gay.” And Pete Rose thought that he had it tough.
It is not clear if the association has a minor league where the men can come back when they are more gay.
The men are demanding $75,000 each for emotional distress as well as reinstatement on the team.
For the full story, here.
You’re not gay enough.
Let’s look at that statement.
One either engages in same sex intercourse or one does not. To say “you’re not gay enough” is a lot like saying “you’re not pregnant enough” or “you’re not enough of a Nazi”. One either is or one isn’t. But wait! There’s more. Some people like both flavors of candy hence the term bisexual. They engage in same sex intercourse as well as diamorphic intercourse. Since the threshold for homosexuality is indeed defined by same sex intercourse, bisexuals are bi default both homosexual and heterosexual.
“You’re not gay enough.”? The logic fails. Your definitional bias has created a composition error.
looney-tunes time
Moral and Constitutional issues aside, the pragmatic problem with any system that prefers based on orientation of any type is the difficulty of proving or disproving a claim to membership in the preferred group (as seen by the comic antics of John Ritter). Therefore, the bisexual men should claim they’ve realized they’re fully gay and have no interest in women, can we come back in now?
Title should be renamed to: “Switch Hitters Can’t Catch Balls” or “Switch Hitters Foul Out” or “Bi-Men Balls are a No Hitter”
AY:
Many thanks for the morning chuckle!
Suckers. If they was any good they would play major ball, not gay ball.
Wow, the possibilities.
“Balls have been ground”
“Plight of the Fairy’s”
“Twinked out of the Dugout”
“Ballerinas on the Field”
“Field Suckers”
“Pansy League”
and the best,
“You don’t know Dick”
Actually, some pro ball players are gay. I know one AL player that is gay and he chooses to keep it quite. “It is in the best interest of the league.”