Thread: John Ahlers anti-gay comment

Originally Posted by Palffy3314

It's funny how some people get so bent out of shape over the Ducks anouncers, yet it's ok (and funny) for Wisniewski to give those gestures to Avery.

There you go.

Ahlers made the comment without realizing what he was saying. If called on it, he would be embarrassed, and not necessarily because he doesn't make similar comments intentionally in private - good naturedly, of course and not because he thinks there's anything wrong with that alternative lifestyle - just like everyone else on this board.

While we are on the subject, who does everyone think is the most talented openly gay NHLer?

Not sure where I stand on this one.

I agree with the standpoint he shouldn't have said it via broadcast, but ... let's say, what if he was able to bite his tongue just on time and no one would realize what was on his mind at the very moment - does that make him a better reporter/person, more deserving of his job? Just because he was able not to SAY something that was clearly on his mind?

Homopohobia goes beyond means of just language and speech imo.

Originally Posted by Vrankol

Not sure where I stand on this one.

I agree with the standpoint he shouldn't have said it via broadcast, but ... let's say, what if he was able to bite his tongue just on time and no one would realize what was on his mind at the very moment - does that make him a better reporter/person, more deserving of his job? Just because he was able not to SAY something that was clearly on his mind?

Homopohobia goes beyond means of just language and speech imo.

so by saying that statement, you've branded him as a homophobe?

btw, which one of those players was he calling gay? I mean, there has to be a "queer" in there for him to use that statement, right?

That's not an easy question to answer. My only assertion was that for the purposes of avoiding offending people/getting reprimanded by bosses/defamation lawsuit, Ahlers was extremely stupid to say what he said on the air.

Now, to take that a step further and judge his morals/ethics in the case he never said it but only thought it...I'm not really prepared to judge. Left-leaning, yes, but I'm also a big supporter of being un-PC. The stuff my friends and I have said to each other would get us all in trouble. But it is all said in jest and none of us take offense to it. We remain friends, and always will, but we're not scared to joke around.

I played "Smeer the Queer" when I was a child and was the queer a few times during the game.

I just realized that not one friend of mine that played the game with me was gay or turned out to be gay.

So as I see it, the queer in the game is not a gay person and is only just a boy who played the game. So it was not an anti-gay game or comment to all of us.

For a few of you out there who believe that Ahlers was referring to a gay person when he used the term queer, I am now upset because for all of the times my friends and I were calling the game "Smeer the Queer" and since none of us were gay or ended up gay, I guess we were just playing Dogpile! Now that sucks!

I now have to re-think about all my childhood games. Most likely I will find out that some of the games that we thought we were playing were actually called something else. I feel cheated. My friends will be so upset to hear the news.

Way to ruin the past. Be the ball!

Hrmm, I also played the game as a kid. Never once thought the name was derogatory towards gays. Maybe I was a naive kid but I always thought Queer = Different in this case. Similar to "Queer as a 3 Dollar bill" in it's origins was a way to say something or someone was odd, not a way to question their sexuality.

I can understand how people not familiar with the game would take offense, but to me the term Smear The Queer, conjures images of a bunch of kids tackling each other, not a bunch of guys beating up a gay dude. If Ahler said "Gay-Bashing" it would be a different story. I'm normally pretty sensitive to anti-gay issues, but I dont see the big deal here.

BTW, this post makes me sound old, but I'm only 34.

I also wouldn't equate it to using the N-word, because there is no ambiguity to the N-word. It's more like the usage of something like "niggardly" which isn't a racist term at all, but to those not familiar it just sounds awful.

Originally Posted by seabass45

I also wouldn't equate it to using the N-word, because there is no ambiguity to the N-word. It's more like the usage of something like "niggardly" which isn't a racist term at all, but to those not familiar it just sounds awful.

And here ladies and gentlemen lies the root of the problem. Completely ignorant? No problem, GRAB YOUR PITCHFORK!