What does the story about harassment have to do with maintaining their mostly-gay policy?

Are the 'straight' teams allowed to limit gay persons on their team?
What #1 said too.

Am pretty sure if a gay individual breaks a bat on someones leg for being harassed she/he would have it harder than like someone who got into a cat fight because "other girl was looking at his man" vice versa, or something. Sometimes things are unbalanced. And am not really in a point as to say if none of this examples are correct - graver than the other one - at any terms. But someone can conclude. (it would make a long post).

@guspasho - The examples of harassment in the non-gay league point to a need to maintain a gay league.

Have you ever participated in any adult rec league? They pretty much draw the kind of assholes who get into fights and talk shit, straight, gay, bi, whatever. You get square off two sets of competitive people and there are going to be fights, regardless of sexual orientation. I'm sure there are fights in the gay leagues as well.

Relinquishing exclusively gay softball leagues and bars is one of those things that goes along with finally gaining acceptance. It's a good problem to have.

(BTW, when MLB baseball desegregated, the first African American players were treated like absolute shit. They didn't respond by going back to the Negro League; the responded by sticking it out and kicking ass.)

THE MERCURY HAS A SOFTBALL TEAM. HOW HAS SMIRK NEVER EVEN GONE ONCE TO SUPPORT HER CO-WORKERS?!?!?! FOR SHAME!!!

FOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR SSSSSSSSSHHHHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAMMMMMMMMMMMMMMEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1`21`21``1`

@frankieb: According to SCOTUS, yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boy_Scouts_of…

I was in scouts as a kid and had fun. It's my understanding that the moron church taking control of the scouts is what lead to this anti-gay slant there now. A shame.
Chuck brings up several good points.
I remember waaay back when going to the gay bars with my good (yes, gay) friend, and in the Brig they would play hardcore gay porn on the TV's to, as my friend said, scare away the straights and keep it more 'gay'.
He said that if gays expected to be accepted into our society, then they would have to open their own society to straights as well.
Made sense to me.

"You, the bi-curious kid -- OFF THE TEAM! We only take full on 100% GAY on this team, you sissy. Get off the fence and play ball!"

well I play in the Portland city league games and I haven't seen any harassment but then again we haven't played any openly gay teams. lesbians don't catch any shit though, that much I can confirm.

This is all about the question of when and by what group discrimination is okay. The gay softball league appears to not have a problem with discrimination, they have a problem with discrimination by heterosexuals. They seem to feel that since they have been a target of discrimination, they should be allowed to discriminate against another group as some sort of payback. I think the high ground is that discrimination against a group by another group is wrong. Just end it, otherwise it continues.

@ joneser +1. Can't believe these "let me point out your logical fallacy, fancy free of all context or nuance" morons.

"I mean, how can we imprison people for kidnapping - OMG ITS LIKE THE SAME THING."

....because everyone knows that only I, Commentary COLON, am allowed to point out logical fallacy!

Just like to point out here that I could give a shit whether they allow do or do not allow more straight people per team, or straight people at all. These are the kind of first world problems that are almost too embarrassing to contemplate considering the real problems the rest of the non-softball playing world encounters.

All I'm saying is that, personally, I find it suspect that gay softball players in Portland or Seattle are really subjected to the slings and arrows of discrimination and harassment while playing softball because of their sexual orientation. If even an eighth of the fights I've seen after an intermural sporting event came to blows "because we were gay" then the gay population must be somewhere near 50 percent in Oregon.

@ Chuck/frankieb/others, I think you're getting to exactly my point (supporting joneser's): stuff like this is supposedly beneath contemplation because it has nothing to do with you, but somehow y'all are compelled to post about something beneath contemplation because you "suspect" one side is full of shit.

For most of you, what you find suspect/worthy of sympathy is annoyingly predictable. What's suspect are people unlike yourself and what's worthy of sympathy is what you like to think you are or could be.

While that's just how people are, it becomes supremely irritating when "what you think you are or could be" is "historically privileged people who can't or won't attempt to empathize" with the experience of those historically disadvantaged others that you knee-jerkily "suspect" are full of it.

Sports are dumb.

@CC Are you often accused of being arrogant?
For my own part, I posted because I cared about this. I really don't get this assumption on your part of what I consider beneath contemplation.

On sports... Woody
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=playe…

While that's just how people are, it becomes supremely irritating when "what you think you are or could be" is "historically privileged people who can't or won't attempt to empathize" with the experience of those historically disadvantaged others that you knee-jerkily "suspect" are full of it.

Right back at you re: N. Williams

lame

in fifty years, we've gone from jim crow and concentration camps to, "they called us names!"