"Go Gay Go! SCORES!!!"

I was driving home from work today, as I often do, and was listening to an interesting conversation on the radio about gays in sports.  Mark Spector's recent column was the topic and Spector was on the show with TSN's Ryan Rishaug and Sportsnet's Jaime Thomas.  They were talking about how the pro sports world would react to whichever player was willing to come out and become the first openly gay active pro athlete in team sports.  There's been former athletes come out after their playing careers and several pro tennis players and golfers have come out (do your own research if you want to know who!) but so far nobody in any of the four major sports has been willing.

I say "willing" because, as was noted on the radio, the word "courage" would be somewhat disrespectful to players who aren't willing to make that public announcement.  It is their choice after all; it shouldn't come down to courage vs. cowardice dichotomy since it's hardly cowardly to want some privacy.  Yet it will be bold for someone to go public, that's a lot of attention on a personal subject and potentially a lot of backlash.  I suspect though that it won't be the kind of backlash we might think and that's what I want to eventually bring up. 

At the same time though, there's a pretty big benefit to being that first person.  Comparisons to Jackie Robinson will be made (and hopefully tempered heavily; there's sure to be some nastiness coming that player's way but it won't be as bad and there will also be a lot more support), there's TV appearances, certainly a book deal and maybe a movie.  I don't care if an athlete is gay or straight, they're all brands and you gotta cash in when you can!

There's two major challenges for an athlete in a team sport coming out.  First, obviously, is the degree to which they will be accepted by their teammates, opponents, fans and media.  I would think that teammates would be the group any athlete considering this announcement would be most concerned with.  They spend more time during the season with their teammates than with their family, after all.  It's not necessary that everyone be best friends of course, but a divided team will collapse at the first sign of hardship.  These are the truisms we've been taught by players and coaches so we'll just believe them and move on.  Imagine a team divided along lines substantially trickier than strategies and practice length and you can see how a player would hesitate at unleashing this kind of polarizing issue in their dressing room. 

That's where this debate becomes a little murkier and much more interesting.  Homosexuality in our society is a hot-button issue and gay marriage rights are the fault line of a major cultural identity crisis in the United States.  For a player contemplating this decision this kind of polarization is, seemingly, a major concern.  Is it though?  Here's a reasonable expectation for how each of the four above listed groups will react.

The media will be overwhelmingly supportive and congratulatory towards that player because, well, can you imagine what will happen if they are not?  Sure you'll get a few Rush Limbaughs who say exactly the wrong thing, there will be a few irrelevant preacher types who warn of the impending Apocalypse, but this will serve the player in the end because every else in the media will absolutely shit on their head.  Don't worry Mr. Gay Athlete, the media will be your loyal foot soldier because God help them or their editor if they are not. 

The fans will make jokes, be supportive, be spiteful, cheer loudly, boo when he (and this is a "he" we're talking about here, in no way are the same social issues present if Serena Williams says she's a lesbian) drops the ball or goes 0 for 5.  Fan will be incredibly supportive and caring, ignorant and horrible, distant and disinterested, and quickly distracted by the next game and a different channel.  The player will be pretty separated from all of that.  Players love the fans when they're cheering for them, are mildly annoyed or indifferent when they boo and are totally removed from any other opinion they might have.  Sure, that first game will garner them a pretty good cheer but after that fans will grow bored and will find something else to argue over.  It'll be a story that turns into a novelty and soon forgotten.

Opponents will be very interesting.  Which player is willing to be publicly flayed in the media and heavily fined over some comment meant only to get inside their opponent's head?  Apart from Sean Avery?  Think of the most famous attention whores in each sport.  Terrell Owens and Chad Ochocinco don't seem like they'd go that far, and besides that isn't about them so they won't care about it.  Fame sluts in the NBA only care about joining the Heat, baseball players don't often give those kinds of quotes, and even Avery or a Steve Ott might not push this one.  Hockey has its own set of accepted groups that are, apparently, considered fair game for discrimination: French Canadiens, Swedes, Russians, oh hell, all of Europe.  Homosexuality isn't the same and any trash talk in this direction would quickly go public and follow that linecrosser around for their whole career, like the Avery-Georges Laraque incident.  Leagues will come down hard on this kind of trash talking and it won't be worth it.

The most reactionary, backwards, ignorant comments, either from opponents or teammates, will come from league oddballs like... well, it's probably unfair to call players cavemen before they've done anything.  Carl Everett was a crazy, crazy man but he's retired now.  I really only wrote that sentence so I could link to those quotes.  Lots of people will agree with those comments but publicly only a minority will support anyone who comes out against homosexuals in sports and in society.  Maybe I'm being naive but I think that there's far more support for the first gay player than they think.  Those outlying voices will be written off and characterized as unfortunately relics of an era we soon hope to pass.

Here's where it's not so simple.  This player, wherever he is, will be a big, big deal when he comes out.  Interviews in every city, print and radio, for himself, his teammates, opponents, management, everyone. This will be a travelling circus long after the national interest has waned because each city will need to hear his story one more time.  Let's say then that the opposition this player faces from his own team isn't about his beliefs or his lifestyle but the distraction he'll cause for his team?  His teammates will all range in supportiveness but none will particularly enjoy the distraction after the novelty has worn off.  That's where the real centre of this debate lies to me because publicly the first gay athlete will be overwhelmingly hailed for his courage for paving the path for the future.  Again, maybe I'm naive, but I think it's a pretty clear path, media-wise, as long as the announcement isn't totally botched, like right before Game 7 or something.  It's the other public debate that will be misunderstood, miscontrued, poorly verballized and set up as a straw man:  Will it be okay to love the announcer but hate the announcement?