Doug Jones

[Bmr31]

If it was a gay disease, it would be relegated to Gays only. There is no proof at all that Gays spread or contract AIDS more than heterosexuals do. Vaginal, oral, and anal sex spread AIDS at the same rate, which is around 100 percent. Of course there are abberations along the line where someone who does engage in sex doesn't acquire AIDS, but it's an abberation.

ummm once again no. It is very very rare to get Hiv through oral sex. Education please.

[Guest hotsoxchick1]

ummm once again no. It is very very rare to get Hiv through oral sex.  Education please.

well only if you dont spit....... .......then i would say the chances are pretty good...........

[Bmr31]

well only if you dont spit....... .......then i would say the chances are pretty good...........

[Guest hotsoxchick1]

your shocked because????????? come on now.........

[cwsox]

ITS A f***ING GAY DISEASE. ....... THERE ARE GOING TO BE MORE PEOPLE WHO ARE STRAIGHT THAT HAVE IT.

More logical consistency.

 

 

There is a - what you may want to call it - a karma, a tao, a spirit of the zen, a "what goes around comes around" - it will hit you hard some day.

[Rex Hudler]

I am not getting into the argument of the morality of being gay. I posted the older column that Todd wrote because I felt it communicated his thoughts better than how it was written in the Denver Post.

 

I have met Todd and he is a nice guy. I don't think his comments were meant to be anti-gay in terms of him hating gay men. He admitted that he is uneducated on the issue and would be uncomfortable at first with a gay teammate. Those type of comments are very normal for someone that has never been exposed to someone that is gay. Uneasy feelings are natural to most guys. Most are uncomfortable with homosexuality at first. Fortunately, most people get over it once they are exposed to someone that is gay and they realize it is not a big deal.

 

I do agree however right or wrong it is, that in the beginning a gay player would be a distraction for a team. I know how athletes think and I don't think they would handle it well in "their world" aka, the locker room. Of course, they would eventually get over it as they learned a little more. There would be an adjustment period that no one knows how long it would take.

 

You can argue all you want whether that is right or wrong, but if it is reality then why argue it? If a player ever "comes out" then the situation will work itself out then. So whether you agree with Todd or not, understand that he was not just speaking for himself, he was speaking for how he thinks it would be in general. He had the balls to say it, no one else did. Nonetheless, it doesn't look good in print and like most things in print, it is open to a strong reaction.

[cwsox]

I am not getting into the argument of the morality of being gay.  I posted the older column that Todd wrote because I felt it communicated his thoughts better than how it was written in the Denver Post. 

 

I have met Todd and he is a nice guy.  I don't think his comments were meant to be anti-gay in terms of him hating gay men.  He admitted that he is uneducated on the issue and would be uncomfortable at first with a gay teammate.  Those type of comments are very normal for someone that has never been exposed to someone that is gay.  Uneasy feelings are natural to most guys.  Most are uncomfortable with homosexuality at first.  Fortunately, most people get over it once they are exposed to someone that is gay and they realize it is not a big deal.

 

I do agree however right or wrong it is, that in the beginning a gay player would be a distraction for a team.  I know how athletes think and I don't think they would handle it well in "their world" aka, the locker room.  Of course, they would eventually get over it as they learned a little more.  There would be an adjustment period that no one knows how long it would take. 

 

You can argue all you want whether that is right or wrong, but if it is reality then why argue it?  If a player ever "comes out" then the situation will work itself out then.  So whether you agree with Todd or not, understand that he was not just speaking for himself, he was speaking for how he thinks it would be in general.  He had the balls to say it, no one else did.  Nonetheless, it doesn't look good in print and like most things in print, it is open to a strong reaction.

Substitute the word "gay" for "black" and we are at 1946 all over again. Players didn't want disruptions in "their" locker room. They didn't want tot ake showers with "them." "They" were wrong.

 

Jones had balls? Then maybe so did George Wallace when he stood in the U of Alabama doorway - or Lester Maadox with his pick ax handles...

 

The "oh has guts to say what he thinks" is not really applicable unless you apply it to maybe Hitler in Mein Kampf, or perhaps any member of the KK with their hatred of blacks, Jews, Catholics, Masons, and gays...

 

A lot of people who spew hatred are nice guys. Timothy McVeigh was very well spoken and polite to his elders. And his comments did speak of hatred of gay men - as I quoted his own words earlier in this thread. And to say he has "never been exposed" to someone who is gay - bulls***. Gays are not some thing that one has to be exposed to... not is one free to hate what one does not acknowledging having known.

 

And I suppose we should never have allowed Jackie Robinson to play because he was such a distraction to his team. Why didn't they stay with their own kind and not disrupt our game?

[clujer420]

More logical consistency.

 

 

There is a - what you may want to call it - a karma, a tao, a spirit of the zen, a "what goes around comes around" - it will hit you hard some day.

Why are you quoting him in a way that takes his comments out of context? That's a big no-no.

 

Anyway, I agree with Bmr in this "debate", which shouldn't really even be a debate.

 

The bottom line, though, is that if people would start being responsible for their own actions and take the necessary precautions, diseases like AIDS (and all other STD's, for that matter) would cease to exist.

[cwsox]

not out of context - I took what he said in all caps and look what was in between, it was connective material to those thoughts.

 

If everyone practiced sexual responsibility it would be good. But since the dawm of time...

 

AIDS would still disseminate through iv transfusions at least. Being holier than thou does not cure disease.

[Rex Kickass]

*awkward silence, wanting the fightin and the feudin to end*

So ummmm.... *foot tap* how about that local sports team?

[Rex Hudler]

I am not getting into the argument of the morality of being gay.  I posted the older column that Todd wrote because I felt it communicated his thoughts better than how it was written in the Denver Post. 

 

I have met Todd and he is a nice guy.  I don't think his comments were meant to be anti-gay in terms of him hating gay men.  He admitted that he is uneducated on the issue and would be uncomfortable at first with a gay teammate.  Those type of comments are very normal for someone that has never been exposed to someone that is gay.  Uneasy feelings are natural to most guys.  Most are uncomfortable with homosexuality at first.  Fortunately, most people get over it once they are exposed to someone that is gay and they realize it is not a big deal.

 

I do agree however right or wrong it is, that in the beginning a gay player would be a distraction for a team.  I know how athletes think and I don't think they would handle it well in "their world" aka, the locker room.  Of course, they would eventually get over it as they learned a little more.  There would be an adjustment period that no one knows how long it would take. 

 

You can argue all you want whether that is right or wrong, but if it is reality then why argue it?  If a player ever "comes out" then the situation will work itself out then.  So whether you agree with Todd or not, understand that he was not just speaking for himself, he was speaking for how he thinks it would be in general.  He had the balls to say it, no one else did.  Nonetheless, it doesn't look good in print and like most things in print, it is open to a strong reaction.

Substitute the word "gay" for "black" and we are at 1946 all over again. Players didn't want disruptions in "their" locker room. They didn't want tot ake showers with "them." "They" were wrong.

 

Jones had balls? Then maybe so did George Wallace when he stood in the U of Alabama doorway - or Lester Maadox with his pick ax handles...

 

The "oh has guts to say what he thinks" is not really applicable unless you apply it to maybe Hitler in Mein Kampf, or perhaps any member of the KK with their hatred of blacks, Jews, Catholics, Masons, and gays...

 

A lot of people who spew hatred are nice guys. Timothy McVeigh was very well spoken and polite to his elders. And his comments did speak of hatred of gay men - as I quoted his own words earlier in this thread. And to say he has "never been exposed" to someone who is gay - bulls***. Gays are not some thing that one has to be exposed to... not is one free to hate what one does not acknowledging having known.

 

And I suppose we should never have allowed Jackie Robinson to play because he was such a distraction to his team. Why didn't they stay with their own kind and not disrupt our game?

CW, you missed my point completely. First of all, I didn't read hate into Jones's words. I read someone who is not comfortable with the situation and who described what he thought would be what it would be like were there an openly gay teammate.

 

I never said whether the prevailing opinion is right or wrong, but I do think it is reality. As i said, like when Jackie Robinson first started, there was an adjustment period and it would take time for the players to adapt. I know their world and that is reality. Right, wrong or indifferent, that's the way it would be right now. The media would make it worse.

 

And regardless of what you think, YES most men do need to be exposed to someone that is gay before they can be comfortable with it. Being gay is something that is not comprehendable for most hetero men. Most of us who have known someone that is gay begin to understand that because someone is gay it will not affect "my lifestyle". We becomre more comfortable with the situation. We learn that it is okay to hang out with a gay man and that he will not likely "hit on us". We learn that gay men are people like us, who just have different preferences. To think that most men should automatically understand this and think that way without every being around or knowing someone that is gay, is completely unrealistic.

 

The bottom line is, whether you agree with it or not, an openly gay player would not be welcomed into a professional sports locker room with open arms at this point. The key is, that the gay player has the choice to make his sexuality known or keep it to himself, where Jackie Robinson didn't have that choice. When a player is ready to come out into the open, he will. At that time, there will be an adjustment period whether you agree with it or not.

 

I think too much is being read into what he said.

[cwsox]

Rex, I am not going to argue with you. I like you a lot, respect your knowledge, and I read your words carefully and this is not a reply contra you, just comments in general.

 

A mature adult is aware that the world is quite diverse.

 

Maybe our athletges have been pampered too long into being the demi-gods of their high schools and minor league or college teams and never been exposed to reality because it is all about them. As would be natural in the struggle to make it through the sieve to the next level and to majors.

 

But unless we are talking about someone coming out of a cave, no one has been that unexposed to the diversity of life and the world in which they live. I wasn't all that old when I realized that people came in all kinds and that it was not for me to judge anyone. I expect some degree of sophistication from our well paid gladiators - perhaps wrongly. I went to the Colordao website today and there he still doesn't get it, he thinks he is in trouble for having said his thoughts out loud, not realizing that his thoughts themselves are the problem.

 

I agree totally that the first out player will have to be Jackie Robinson. In saying that, I am not too happy that is the way it is. We should all be beyond that by now.

 

The problem is thinking of "them" versus "us." Odds are overwhelming that Jones has played right along with gay players all of his life. On a team it should all be "us." In life, everyone who reaches maturity should see the "us-ness" of humanity rather than then the "them-ness" and making some people "the other." No 21st century baseball player shoudl be unfamiliar with this concept. Sports is no excuse for ignorance.

[BrandoFan]

The bottom line, though, is that if people would start being responsible for their own actions and take the necessary precautions, diseases like AIDS (and all other STD's, for that matter) would cease to exist.

 

It's like saying if people would only stop being so, um, people-y then all the inherent badness (and goodness) that comes with the territory would cease to exist...and we'd have us a perfect utopia under Heavenly roof....In other words, a nice pipe dream, an abstract nothing more.

 

Real world needs a more practical approach. Distraction to the team? Boo-hoo, cry me a f***ing river. They'll get over it or will just play/talk themselves out of the game. They are pros for crying out loud and even if they weren't...tough luck I am tired of all this babying. Almost as much as I am tired of this cowardly, unproductive, pseudo-devil advocatish "I have nothing against gays myself but look at it from their POV...." line that passively defends the status quo I hear so much. Whatever, get some cojones to speak your own mind...

 

Meanwhile it's only a matter of time before the "gay barrier" is broken in the Jockdom. Should be entertaining as hell if anything else. I wanna see the smirk on Toad Jones (or whomever) face when he gets slapped with a "hate crime" tag and gets suspended for indefinite period of time or even jailed for bullying/abusing his gay teammate or some variation thereof.

 

Morality shmorality, facts shmacts, pleas for reason and compassion shmo-whatever...nothing more "educational" (to say nothing of the sheer hilarity of it all) than wiping a homophobe's face in the proverbial cum of justice. If they don't want to "accept" change the easy way, I am sure it can be done the hard way- as in public humiliation and a possibility of a trip to the big house where I am sure they'll have plenty of experience with sodomizers whom they--what was the Todd Jones's excuse again, "don't understand much about?"...or was it "don't feel comfortable around/morally agreeable with"?

 

Hey Todd, you chubby babboon, I don't "understand" homosexuality either but the world doesn't revolve around my experience, whims, comfort zone, morality, pseudo-scientific theories on what's "good" for society or natural, religious doctrine, etc...you'll "get it" sooner than later when your daughter brings home her girlfriend, lol...and even if you don't, I am betting in 20 years time the mere possibility of (unprecedented) public backlash would lead you to wisely suppress your intolerant views...kinda like gays were/are forced to suppress a huge part of their existence/identity. Karma will be a he-b**** indeed.

 

Right, wrong or indifferent, that's the way it would be right now. The media would make it worse.

 

When in doubt blame the media.

[Rex Hudler]

Rex, I am not going to argue with you.  I like you a lot, respect your knowledge, and I read your words carefully and this is not a reply contra you, just comments in general. 

 

A mature adult is aware that the world is quite diverse.

 

Maybe our athletges have been pampered too long into being the demi-gods of their high schools and minor league or college teams and never been exposed to reality because it is all about them.  As would be natural in the struggle to make it through the sieve to the next level and to majors. 

 

But unless we are talking about someone coming out of a cave, no one has been that unexposed to the diversity of life and the world in which they live.  I wasn't all that old when I realized that people came in all kinds and that it was not for me to judge anyone.  I expect some degree of sophistication from our well paid gladiators - perhaps wrongly.  I went to the Colordao website today and there he still doesn't get it, he thinks he is in trouble for having said his thoughts out loud, not realizing that his thoughts themselves are the problem. 

 

I agree totally that the first out player will have to be Jackie Robinson.  In saying that, I am not too happy that is the way it is.  We should all be beyond that by now.

 

The problem is thinking of "them" versus "us."  Odds are overwhelming that Jones has played right along with gay players all of his life.  On a team it should all be "us."  In life, everyone who reaches maturity should see the "us-ness" of humanity rather than then the "them-ness" and making some people "the other."  No 21st century baseball player shoudl be unfamiliar with this concept.  Sports is no excuse for ignorance.

CW, I think we agree for the most part. I think the only part that you don't get is that even if I know the world is diverse and that there are many different types of people, it is natural for me not to know how to react when I first come into contact with someone that is openly gay. Especially if we are sharing the same showers. Like I said, that all passes, but the initial reaction is natural and real for a heterosexual male. Rather than criticize Todd Jones, perhaps someone should try to educate him. Of course, some learn slower than others and there are always a few rubes that never learn.

 

And lastly, I truly believe that Todd believes he was speaking for baseball in general and that he is not the only that feels this way.

[Bmr31]

More logical consistency.

 

 

There is a - what you may want to call it - a karma, a tao, a spirit of the zen, a "what goes around comes around" - it will hit you hard some day.

LOL!! SO im going to get whats coming to me because i present facts and im not in denial huh? Lol yeah okay.

[Bmr31]

More logical consistency.

 

 

There is a - what you may want to call it - a karma, a tao, a spirit of the zen, a "what goes around comes around" - it will hit you hard some day.

Why are you quoting him in a way that takes his comments out of context? That's a big no-no.

 

Anyway, I agree with Bmr in this "debate", which shouldn't really even be a debate.

 

The bottom line, though, is that if people would start being responsible for their own actions and take the necessary precautions, diseases like AIDS (and all other STD's, for that matter) would cease to exist.

He has to quote me out of context, or he would have to admit what he is doing is destructive. As far as agreeing with me, thank you. Im quite sure most people reading this and most human beings agree with me, but thanks for actually have the balls to say so.

[Rex Kickass]

I'm a human being and I disagree. Come to think of it, most of the human beings I know disagree.

 

Personally, I think most people who aren't gay can't understand the difference between being flaming and not worrying about whether or not you're getting found out, and potentially fired.

 

But, could we move this thread. It's so obviously OT

[Mathew]

Nobody is talking about world figures.  We're talking about US figures since, to be honest, that's all that most of us care about since they are more relevant to our lives.

Another topic entirely, but that is a big problem with the world and perhaps specifically the U.S.

[Mathew]

I kept thinking of that Planes trains and Automobiles scene while reading this scene..."So how 'bout those Bears?"

 

This thread has been beaten to death, and as usuall some posters that are quite akin to ignorrant judgements based on no fact whatsoever have once again reared their intolerant ugly heads....shameful but on the positive I thought this thread went very well and I applaud the posters on this board who have once again not taken such hate lying down.

 

 

The change is very difficult, espcially where I am, a part of the country that felt that Conservative wasn't far enough to the right, in every election in recent memory. I had a hockey coach who had his two kids on the team and in front of 15 12yr olds he told them if they ever "turned" gay he'd never speak to them again. All I can suggest to those of us who can manage our lives without inexplicable hate and biggottry to go and do what they can to help whomever they can, same reasons I coach hockey on the reservation and coach little league baseball, Ladies H S Rugby, and just volunteered a night as a waiter at a Calgary AIDS benefit. I am far from a good person(as you can tell from many of my less eloquent posts) but they world is a fantastic place because everyone is different and Bless anybody who recognises that?

 

There's all of my piffle for the night, can't wait to wake up and read Billy Koch's interviews tomorrow.

[Steff]

well, ok, straight people having sex with monkeys -

 

damn those straight people!

the same people who keep sending out all that bestiality porno spam -

 

not sure if the exact origin is known yet, but it was with the great apes or chimps -

 

now that is what I call perverted sex 

Dude youre so clueless. You know damn well that the majority of people in the united states who have HIV, are gay. Denial isnt going to help your stance.

Actually Bmr.. you are incorrect. The majority of AIDS victims are hetro. The #1 cause is blood transfusions followed closely by IV drug users.

No i am not incorrect. I said the majority of HIV victims in the UNITED STATES are gay men. Its a fact. Another fact is this. If people would stop doing things that are unnatural, like f***ing a monkey, pounding some guys ass, and sticking needles in their arms, Aids would not spread as it has. Its a simple fact that cannot be debated. Its RARE to get AIDS during natural, hetrosexual sex. Be aware of facts before you debate this. thank you.

I'm well aware of the facts on this Bmr. My mothers best friend contracted AIDS during a blood transfusion 11 years ago and I know a LOT about it. And again, you ARE incorrect. There are MORE hetro people in the US with AIDS than homosexual. The #1 way of contraction is blood transfusions.

Yes.. homosexuals, just like lesbians and hetro's, can pass it along. But they (homosexuals) are not the largest group of infected.

omg you just dont get it. Not to be rude but maybe you should go back to ummm math school. 92 percent of people are straight. If 10 percent of straight people have HIV that equals 9.2 people. If 80 percent of gay people have it, that equals 6.4 people. ITS A f***ING GAY DISEASE. Jesus........so even if EIGHTY PERCENT of gay people have it, and 10 percent of straight people have it, THERE ARE GOING TO BE MORE PEOPLE WHO ARE STRAIGHT THAT HAVE IT. My god.......why do i even bother.

You don't mean to be rude..? Well newsflash.. you've been a pretty good asshole in this thread.

 

In response to your juvinile comment.. since I never posted any figures I don't know why you had to be a DICK and suggest such a thing about my math abilities. I'm not ignorant, and neither are you. I stated what I know in a calm, rational, non-confrontational way, and you get f***ing nasty with me. :fyou

 

Now.. since you went a bit further in your explination - albit you were a jagoff about it - I'm not sure if you are aware but a LOT more than 10% of the US population is gay. And even more are bi (mostly females, too). And still the % of homesexual AIDS doesn't touch the % of hetro cases.

[BrandoFan]

Im quite sure most people reading this and most human beings agree with me, but thanks for actually have the balls to say so.

 

Ok, keeping in mind that this is the most reply-able and prominent thread going so far on Soxnet, and that the overwhelming majority of regulars here are either vociferously pro-"gay cause" or at least seem very supportive, open-minded and genuinely concerned about the issue even if they aren't exactly sure how the "human factor" can be overcome this soon in the Jockdom Jungle....this begs the conclusion....

 

Are you once again calling them cowardly liars, this time dissing nearly everyone in your usual backhanded-but-agitating sorta way? I mean outside of Clu420 noone (dozens if not hundreds of posters) agrees with you here which is amazing if you think about the fact that this is a SPORTS MESSAGE BOARD (sports is second only to military world in its deep-rooted conservative sexual politics) where you could very easily air your viwes however unpopular/un-PC without the fear of persecution and such....Hence the implication that most everyone here must be a ball-less liar if they don't spew simpletonish, baseless "theories" on why "f**gotness is so very bad for society"........

 

But then again, it's probably all Voodoo conspiracy, he must have hijacked the monikers, right?

[doubleM23]

omg you just dont get it. Not to be rude but maybe you should go back to ummm math school.  92 percent of people are straight.  If 10 percent of straight people have HIV that equals 9.2 people.  If 80 percent of gay people have it, that equals 6.4 people. ITS A f***ING GAY DISEASE. Jesus........so even if EIGHTY PERCENT of gay people have it, and 10 percent of straight people have it, THERE ARE GOING TO BE MORE PEOPLE WHO ARE STRAIGHT THAT HAVE IT.  My god.......why do i even bother.

Me bmr. Me club me food with big stick. Me no believe in science. Bible say AIDS gay disease and Bible only truth in world. All people who think science is truth are dumb.

[BrandoFan]

Me bmr. Me club me food with big stick. Me no believe in science. Bible say AIDS gay disease and Bible only truth in world. All people who think science is truth are dumb.

 

LMAO...you forgot the "me bmr...me knows Jimenez sucks" part.

[southsider2k5]

Some articles that might prove some points

 

The rate of infection is quickly dropping in homosexual males down by about 50% in a 5 year span.

 

http://www.aegis.com/news/re/1998/RE980607.html

 

Infection rates among women in Africa are much higher than males. Very clearly implying because of heterosexual reasons such as sex assults, and males not allowing condoms

 

http://www.aegis.com/news/ips/2000/IP000207.html

 

As a percentage of US population men who have sex with men have a higher percentage of AIDS infection. But the rates of infection are highest amongst intravenus drug users by far. The interesting number is that the rates of infection of heterosexuals and homosexuals are almost identical. So the perception that it is a "gay" disease is pretty much becoming a thing of the past. Espesially when you look at the trends in the rates, with the rate amongst homosexuals falling 50% from 93-98, and the some of the quickest increases in rates of infections being among minority heterosexual females.

 

http://www.nida.nih.gov/Infofax/DrugAbuse.html

[Guest hotsoxchick1]

I kept thinking of that Planes trains and Automobiles scene while reading this scene..."So how 'bout those Bears?"

 

wheres your other hand.. between two pillows.......those arent pillows.....sorry to interupt here, but i love that movie.......and that scene is funny.........a typical mans man type of moment......no need to admit they were perfectly comfortable while asleep.........