Sabres are having their Pride Night on Monday

[Pimlach]

8 minutes ago, Buffalonill said:

@Cascade Youth why do you disagree? Everyone is equal no matter the gender .

Damn.  We are equal?   Someone please explain that to my wife.  

[JohnC]

18 minutes ago, Cascade Youth said:

I am fine going with the flow.  It’s just unclear what direction it’s going and where the shore is.  If it’s ok to talk about someone’s sexual orientation as a “lifestyle choice” like they’re deciding what kind of car to drive, to me that seems pretty darned “political.”  But maybe the mods don’t see it that way?  It’s rather confusing.

There's nothing wrong with being confused when there isn't clarity. And in life there are plenty of things that aren't clearly defined. So you live with the confusion and try to deal with the it as best you can. Some people require neatness as they see it while others are more comfortable handling the untidy room as it exists.

[JohnC]

17 minutes ago, Pimlach said:

Damn.  We are equal?   Someone please explain that to my wife.  

The superior dominates the subordinate. That's the natural order. She doesn't need anyone to explain anything to her. She knows. Just graciously accept it.

[klos1963]

On 3/25/2023 at 7:40 AM, Happy Days said:

Why is there a need for sports teams to be involved with peoples sexual preferences? Keep politics out of the sport!!! Just play hockey!

It's not really politics, it's sports teams trying to be socially aware and good citizens. It's only politics to those looking to discredit the event. Calling it political is lazy thinking, no politicians are involved to the best of my knowledge.  Military appreciation night is more political as the POTUS is commander in chief of the armed forces and the govt funds the military.

[SABRES 0311]

I get with all the recent uproar with other teams why this is a topic of discussion. Still seems silly to me though. Guess we’re getting ready for the annual kill time til next season discussions.

[Eleven]

6 hours ago, Sidc3000 said:

just so the team can make a few extra bucks

I don't think that's how it works.

[K-9]

5 hours ago, JohnC said:

Maybe it would have been more suitable if he used the word "awkward" or "uncomfortable" for some players instead of "precarious"? 

 

 

To be fair, there’s a very real chance that some Russian players could be put in a precarious position given the laws enacted by everyone’s favorite fascist, Vladimir Putin. 

[apuszczalowski]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

The ethical statement becomes a political statement when it's public. 

If you're a celebrity/athlete/etc. what you do publicly gets noticed, and as such is a political statement. 

My own view is that the league should have it in the CBA that players must participate in team events such as pride nights and if they don't, fine, but no game cheque for that night. It's not asking that much really and fits in with code of conduct issues. I know some people will disagree with that, but it's hardly an issue of freedom or any sort of "I want to live in a country where they are free to follow their beliefs" type thing. There are lots of jobs - most jobs, for most people - where you have a dress code or at least have to dress a certain way or not wear certain other things and you get no choice in the matter or you get sent home without pay or fired. It's still a free country all the same. These people are privileged individuals who get a lot more freedom than the average person does and I have zero problem with their organization telling them to wear a jersey for the team's image and marketing on any given occasion. They'll still be free. That's not going away over this and you know it. 

What employer today would be able to dictate to its employees that they must wear something that could go against a religious belief, or be viewed as a political view, AND have the ability to send them home or not pay them if they refuse to wear it?

Work places have uniforms/dress codes/approved attire for the work place, but no business is going to have the right to make their employee wear something that would go against their personal beliefs or views. If anything, those requirements usually include not being able to wear things that would express these views/beliefs/etc. in the work place. Most workplaces would be looking at lawsuits if they told their employees they had to participate in  an event that required you to show support for a cause that was sexual/racial/political/religious in nature. Typically the only ones permitted would be ones based in medical issues because it doesn't matter what beliefs you have that are sexual/racial/political/religious in nature, everyone can be affected by Cancer/Heart disease/alzheimers/etc.

The problem is, outside of maybe raising money for a group through auctioning off the jerseys afterwards, these nights don't do anything except try an make the league/teams/players look like they give a damn. The players that refused to wear the jerseys/participate in it have all said the right things and have not shown they don't believe anyone in the LGBTQ+ community shouldn't be allowed to play or that they wouldn't accept them as a teammate or friend. Its a bit hypocritical to be pushing that those players need to accept the LGBTQ+ community, while not accepting the fact that there will be those that don't feel they can participate in events like this. The only ones that should be viewed negatively are the one that are actively doing something to take away rights from LGBTQ+ individuals, or attacking/ treating anyone differently because of they are LGBTQ+.

 

This has been going on for a while though, its nothing new. I would think many here remember the episode of Seinfeld where Kramer refused to wear the Aids ribbon. He was their to support the cause and was part of the walk, he just wouldn't wear the ribbon and was viewed as not supporting the cause because he didn't have one on. 

[SabresVet]

2 hours ago, klos1963 said:

It's not really politics, it's sports teams trying to be socially aware and good citizens. It's only politics to those looking to discredit the event. Calling it political is lazy thinking, no politicians are involved to the best of my knowledge.  Military appreciation night is more political as the POTUS is commander in chief of the armed forces and the govt funds the military.

The NHL scored low on DEI and therefore is taking steps to address that based on this report: 

https://www.nhl.com/news/nhl-releases-results-of-diversity-and-inclusion-report/c-336511848

DEI is very much political and organizations/corporations/businesses respond this way as an insurance policy by the entity against being accused of discrimination.  The NHL cannot run the risk of that happening or revenue will take a hit.  At the same time, fans are not overwhelmingly demanding more diversity, equity, or inclusion...so who is?  Answering that question shines some light on the issue as a whole.  

And there is no similarity to military appreciation night.  Recognizing people who served in the armed forces unites people in a way that DEI driven events do not, nor ever will.  As evidenced right here, there is a high likelihood of increased division between players and league administration not to mention among fans.   

 

[PerreaultForever]

10 hours ago, Sidc3000 said:

It’s not in the CBA (and I doubt it will) so they all the right to choose. If I was a deeply religious player, and that was in the CBA, I would then fight to have all religions be promoted by the NHL/teams. 

If that isn’t acceptable then you would have many players who are religious (or required by their counties laws) to not play in the NHL  If that’s the case then we wouldn’t have Ovechkin in the league  

 

If Ovechkin wanted to leave the league over that issue well good riddance and he can go ask his buddy Putin to pay him his salary. 

You're right about the CBA though. Nothing will ever change unless it hurts the bottom line financially. 

Lastly, any "religion" that discriminates against any group is a bad religion. Don't judge lest ye be judged and all that.

[Sidc3000]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

If Ovechkin wanted to leave the league over that issue well good riddance and he can go ask his buddy Putin to pay him his salary. 

You're right about the CBA though. Nothing will ever change unless it hurts the bottom line financially. 

Lastly, any "religion" that discriminates against any group is a bad religion. Don't judge lest ye be judged and all that.

So one person’s beliefs is greater than someone else’s 🤔. 

[LGR4GM]

9 hours ago, SabresVet said:

And there is no similarity to military appreciation night.  Recognizing people who served in the armed forces unites people in a way that DEI driven events do not, nor ever will.  As evidenced right here, there is a high likelihood of increased division between players and league administration not to mention among fans.   

What if you are firmly against war of any kind? Do you feel united when you are forced to recognize someone who actively participates in that process? What about the growing nationalist movement in this country which has pushed those in the military as a better class of citizen? Should we feel that is true and make sure we honor those who serve?

What about police, first responders, firefighters? Haven't seen a night dedicated to them and yet Buffalo just recently lost a firefighter in the line of duty. What about teachers? Do they not "serve"? Nurses and Doctors just went through a dumpster fire of the last 3 years, why is it that we do not unite and celebrate them? Should be stop any nights in hockey that honor black or minority hockey players because some will find that divisive?   

I am just asking questions that others might have after reading such a definitive statement as "recognizing people who served in the armed forces unites people" and I would like to add one more question. If someone served or didn't serve, are religious or are not religious, why are they opposed to equality for ppl who are not heteronormative? Maybe at the end the question is not did someone serve in the armed forces but why did they serve in the armed forces? Again, just asking some questions not necessarily presenting my views on this. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by LGR4GM

[Sidc3000]

7 hours ago, PerreaultForever said:

If Ovechkin wanted to leave the league over that issue well good riddance and he can go ask his buddy Putin to pay him his salary. 

You're right about the CBA though. Nothing will ever change unless it hurts the bottom line financially. 

Lastly, any "religion" that discriminates against any group is a bad religion. Don't judge lest ye be judged and all that.

Also Russian players are, well Russian citizens, and are subject to their laws. 

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Sidc3000 said:

Also Russian players are, well Russian citizens, and are subject to their laws. 

Oh so you must have an example of a Russian hockey player in the NHL wearing or saying something in support of LGTBQ+ and being punished for it legally in Russia then? I would be curious to read that and understand how it happened. 

[Sidc3000]

11 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

What if you are firmly against war of any kind? Do you feel united when you are forced to recognize someone who actively participates in that process? What about the growing nationalist movement in this country which has pushed those in the military as a better class of citizen? Should we feel that is true and make sure we honor those who serve?

What about police, first responders, firefighters? Haven't seen a night dedicated to them and yet Buffalo just recently lost a firefighter in the line of duty. What about teachers? Do they not "serve"? Nurses and Doctors just went through a dumpster fire of the last 3 years, why is it that we do not unite and celebrate them? Should be stop any nights in hockey that honor black or minority hockey players because some will find that divisive?   

I am just asking questions that others might have after reading such a definitive statement as "recognizing people who served in the armed forces unites people" and I would like to add one more question. If someone served or didn't serve, are religious or are not religious, why are they opposed to equality for ppl who are not heteronormative? Maybe at the end the question is not did someone serve in the armed forces but why did they serve in the armed forces? Again, just asking some questions not necessarily presenting my views on this. 

IMO the whole special warm up  jersey thing is complete *****. It is literally just a way to sell ***** jerseys. I think they need to do away with this practice 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Sidc3000
Change game worn to special warm up

[Sidc3000]

7 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh so you must have an example of a Russian hockey player in the NHL wearing or saying something in support of LGTBQ+ and being punished for it legally in Russia then? I would be curious to read that and understand how it happened. 

https://apnews.com/article/pride-blackhawks-nhl-3c21ac118b1160bc57f6e97cec703814

“The decision was made by the Blackhawks following discussions with security officials within and outside the franchise”

 

they may not have been punished yet but it seems there is a very real concern. 

Edited March 27, 2023 by Sidc3000

[LGR4GM]

Just now, Sidc3000 said:

https://apnews.com/article/pride-blackhawks-nhl-3c21ac118b1160bc57f6e97cec703814

“The decision was made by the Blackhawks following discussions with security officials within and outside the franchise”

 

they may not have been punished yet but it seems there is a very real possibility. 

So you don't have an example?  Also, I wouldn't trust what the Chicago Blackhawks said if they wished me good morning. That's a franchise that is known to lie to hide things that make them uncomfortable. 

[JohnC]

10 hours ago, K-9 said:

To be fair, there’s a very real chance that some Russian players could be put in a precarious position given the laws enacted by everyone’s favorite fascist, Vladimir Putin. 

Excellent point. When your country's leader is a combination of Stalin and Hitler, what you think, say or exhibit, could have deadly consequences for you and your family, including those who are back home. My world is far from their world. 

[Sidc3000]

6 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

So you don't have an example?  Also, I wouldn't trust what the Chicago Blackhawks said if they wished me good morning. That's a franchise that is known to lie to hide things that make them uncomfortable. 

Russian players (including Ovechkin) on other teams that are avoiding the Pride participation too but the Blackhawks are lying. Oooooook

[K-9]

8 minutes ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh so you must have an example of a Russian hockey player in the NHL wearing or saying something in support of LGTBQ+ and being punished for it legally in Russia then? I would be curious to read that and understand how it happened. 

There haven’t been any such incidents since Putin passed his first ant gay law in 2013. But Putin expanded the law in late 2022 and imposed heavier penalties for violating it so this is the first time Russian players would be wearing pride jerseys since then. Given Putin’s penchant for throwing people in jail, especially lately, Russian player concerns are understandable. They have families back home, Putin is a nut job, and they know it.

[LGR4GM]

6 minutes ago, Sidc3000 said:

Russian players (including Ovechkin) on other teams that are avoiding the Pride participation too but the Blackhawks are lying. Oooooook

They canceled their entire night for "security concerns" so yes they are lying. They didn't say hey, Nikita Zaitsev you don't need to participate because of the political climate back home." They scrapped the entire thing over "security concerns" of their only Russian player. If you have to cancel a pride night for the entire organization because you have 1 Russian that might be effected, maybe, you are essentially appeasing Putin and in that case you are being extorted by fear, meaning you are terrified, meaning you gave in to terrorists. Better not hold a military anything after you give in to terrorists. 

[LGR4GM]

I guess we will see if Buffalo cancels tonight citing the security concerns for Lybushkin... or you know if that is a legit threat, Boosh could simply not participate. No one would hold him in any less regards over that. 

[SabresVet]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

What if you are firmly against war of any kind? Do you feel united when you are forced to recognize someone who actively participates in that process? What about the growing nationalist movement in this country which has pushed those in the military as a better class of citizen? Should we feel that is true and make sure we honor those who serve?

What about police, first responders, firefighters? Haven't seen a night dedicated to them and yet Buffalo just recently lost a firefighter in the line of duty. What about teachers? Do they not "serve"? Nurses and Doctors just went through a dumpster fire of the last 3 years, why is it that we do not unite and celebrate them? Should be stop any nights in hockey that honor black or minority hockey players because some will find that divisive?   

I am just asking questions that others might have after reading such a definitive statement as "recognizing people who served in the armed forces unites people" and I would like to add one more question. If someone served or didn't serve, are religious or are not religious, why are they opposed to equality for ppl who are not heteronormative? Maybe at the end the question is not did someone serve in the armed forces but why did they serve in the armed forces? Again, just asking some questions not necessarily presenting my views on this. 

This is Grand Canyon quality reach.  If you can't appreciate a 19 year old boy drafted in in 1967 to serve in Vietnam who is now 70-something the team honors it doesn't mean you supported the Vietnam War.  But people recognize that guy or the others who served in subsequent (or even previous) wars.    

For the record, I served in a two way live fire and am firmly against wars waged for little purpose.  And if you ask most veterans, they are not pro-war because of how bad the experience often is.  Still, seeing some of the people the Sabres honor, especially PH recipients, should evoke something without meaning you pound the table for war.  And you watch in the arena how universally the applause comes down for that man or woman.  

A First Responders night at KBC or by other professional team would be a great idea.  Only thing is, that won't help the DEI rating because that's what Pride Night largely is: the NHL making public gestures to not be under criticism for a lack of DEI.  Again, as evidenced by this board, the Pride night and other social justice (DEI) causes are muted in audience response.  Because it's not about the audience...it's the corporation fending off the social justice warriors who will come.        

Edited March 27, 2023 by SabresVet

[Eleven]

1 hour ago, LGR4GM said:

Oh so you must have an example of a Russian hockey player in the NHL wearing or saying something in support of LGTBQ+ and being punished for it legally in Russia then? I would be curious to read that and understand how it happened. 

Just because it hasn't happened yet doesn't mean it won't.  It's easy for those of us in countries with safeguards for free speech to criticize, because we don't know what it's like over there.  But people have been punished for supporting gay rights in Russia (the band ***** Riot is one notable example) and for criticizing the Putin administration.  

1 hour ago, Sidc3000 said:

IMO the whole special warm up  jersey thing is complete *****. It is literally just a way to sell ***** jerseys. I think they need to do away with this practice 

I don't think they make money off of it.

[Zamboni]

This goes for any “support night/event”. The only way to advocate or support a cause is to put on a shirt, a pin, a ribbon or hat. Because others need to see it in order to believe you support a cause/group/idea.

Nope, no other way is accepted or believed. Only visual confirmation.

Inclusiveness seems to only be realized and believed if …