Michael Sam vrs. Sara Mack

[JohnLocke]

Recently the St. Louis Rams drafted the NFL's first openly gay player, Michael Sam which got me to thinking.

Suppose instead the St. Louis Rams also drafted the NFL's first female player, let's call her Sara Mack.

Suppose you are the owner and General Manger of the St. Louis Ram's which of the following would you do:

1. Provide separate shower facilities for Sara Mack but not Michael Sam
2. Provide separate shower facilities for both Sara Mack and Michael Sam
3. Make no special arrangement and force both Michael am and Sara Mack to shower in the facilities and at the same time as the rest of the team.
4. Use the same facilities but segregate Sara from the rest of the team by scheduling separate times for use of the shower.
5. Use the same facilities but segregate Michael from the rest of the team by scheduling separate times for the use of the shower.

My suspicion is that an Owner and General Manager of an NFL franchise that forced its female players to shower with male players would be swiftly sued, prosecuted, and relieved of their NFL franchise by the Commissioner. Even if the every player on the team said they viewed Sara as a teammate and not as a female, if Sara felt this arrangement caused a sexually hostile environment, it is sexual harassment.

Why then, as most media sources seem to assume, is it not sexual harassment when a male player who finds the inclusion of an openly gay player in the shower causes a sexually hostile environment?

Personally I don't think that it is just to require someone to be naked in the presence of someone who they think might consider them a sexual object.

 

[Manic Spinoza]

Recently the St. Louis Rams drafted the NFL's first openly gay player, Michael Sam which got me to thinking.

Suppose instead the St. Louis Rams also drafted the NFL's first female player, let's call her Sara Mack.

Suppose you are the owner and General Manger of the St. Louis Ram's which of the following would you do:

1. Provide separate shower facilities for Sara Mack but not Michael Sam
2. Provide separate shower facilities for both Sara Mack and Michael Sam
3. Make no special arrangement and force both Michael am and Sara Mack to shower in the facilities and at the same time as the rest of the team.
4. Use the same facilities but segregate Sara from the rest of the team by scheduling separate times for use of the shower.
5. Use the same facilities but segregate Michael from the rest of the team by scheduling separate times for the use of the shower.

My suspicion is that an Owner and General Manager of an NFL franchise that forced its female players to shower with male players would be swiftly sued, prosecuted, and relieved of their NFL franchise by the Commissioner. Even if the every player on the team said they viewed Sara as a teammate and not as a female, if Sara felt this arrangement caused a sexually hostile environment, it is sexual harassment.

Why then, as most media sources seem to assume, is it not sexual harassment when a male player who finds the inclusion of an openly gay player in the shower causes a sexually hostile environment?

Personally I don't think that it is just to require someone to be naked in the presence of someone who they think might consider them a sexual object.

Has anyone from the St Louis Rams complained about this? What about the military? How many sexual harassment cases have straight males filed against gay males in the military over shower issues? I'm sure if you used communal showers at any point you were showering with someone who is gay. They're not out to stare at your junk.

As for Sara Mack, if she was fine showering with other males, and the rest of the team was cool with it, I don't see an issue.

 

[jayem]

MS played 4 years for Mizzou (and in HS before that.) I'm sure he shared shower facilities with his teamates. He came out "officially" last summer, and I've not heard that any Mizzou players have complained of feeling harassed, or uncomfortable. In fact, as I understand it, the team was very supportive. If college players can act like grown-ups about this, the NFL can as well.

 

[Paradoxum]

I'm not totally sure what I think about gendered bathrooms and changing rooms.

I personally don't care if there's a lesbian there. If anyone stares at you naked (straight or gay) that would be weird. I get changed in cubicles normally anyway.

So I'm not sure if sexual orientation is the main problem. Perhaps the number of people would make a difference.

Maybe it only really matters when the sexual orientations are compatible. What would lesbians think about changing with just other lesbians?

Or perhaps it's most psychologically problematic when there is compatible sexual orientations, but also a significant body difference (and so increase self-conciousness).

Maybe this only an issue because males and females are segregated when young. So there isn't anything inherently bad, embarrassing, or off-putting?

What if you don't want to get changed in front of anyone... why is it okay to force them to? Should women have to shower with any other women (same for men)?

Why is male and females showering together considered bad? I really don't know what to make of it.

 

[Supreme]

I would segregate based on gender. I don't care if you're gay or straight, I don't mind showering with you. Yet I'd feel embarrassed showering with women I was not going out with.

 

[leftrightleftrightleft]

Recently the St. Louis Rams drafted the NFL's first openly gay player, Michael Sam which got me to thinking.

Suppose instead the St. Louis Rams also drafted the NFL's first female player, let's call her Sara Mack.

Suppose you are the owner and General Manger of the St. Louis Ram's which of the following would you do:

1. Provide separate shower facilities for Sara Mack but not Michael Sam
2. Provide separate shower facilities for both Sara Mack and Michael Sam
3. Make no special arrangement and force both Michael am and Sara Mack to shower in the facilities and at the same time as the rest of the team.
4. Use the same facilities but segregate Sara from the rest of the team by scheduling separate times for use of the shower.
5. Use the same facilities but segregate Michael from the rest of the team by scheduling separate times for the use of the shower.

My suspicion is that an Owner and General Manager of an NFL franchise that forced its female players to shower with male players would be swiftly sued, prosecuted, and relieved of their NFL franchise by the Commissioner. Even if the every player on the team said they viewed Sara as a teammate and not as a female, if Sara felt this arrangement caused a sexually hostile environment, it is sexual harassment.

Why then, as most media sources seem to assume, is it not sexual harassment when a male player who finds the inclusion of an openly gay player in the shower causes a sexually hostile environment?

Personally I don't think that it is just to require someone to be naked in the presence of someone who they think might consider them a sexual object.

Can you not see the difference between 1 gay man in a locker room with 30 other straight men and one female in a locker room with 30 straight men?

In the one situation, you have one person who may potentially be attracted to the other 30, but the other 30 are not interested in the one. In the second situation you have 30 people potentially attracted to the one person and that one person also potentially attracted to the 30.

I think the minority/majority dynamic as well as the potential reciprocation of attraction are the reasons why it would be more appropriate and expected for Sara Mack to want a separate shower.

The gay man, as the minority, will be unlikely to harass the majority. Minorities tend not to harass majorities because of the social nature of in/out groups.

The majority is more likely to harass the female minority. Add to this any sort of mob mentality of the majority and the woman could be in a very uncomfortable situation.