Sexual Balkanization reflected in lawsuit

Every so often a news story comes across my desk that illustrates beautifully the human comedy.  Thus it is with a story that appeared  last week in the Los Angeles Times.  The article in question described a discrimination suit filed by bisexuals against gays.  The story illustrates not only the extent to which we have become a sexually Balkanized society, but why our court system is so clogged with specious lawsuits that it frequently is impossible to have legitimate suits heard in a reasonable amount of time.

According to the April 20th Times story, a lawsuit has been filed in federal court in Seattle alleging that the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance, which organizes the annual Gay Softball World Series, improperly discriminated against three bisexual men from the San Francisco area by taking away their team’s second place finish because the bisexual players on the team were “non-gay.”  The tournament at which the alleged discrimination took place was the 2008 series held in Seattle, Washington.

This lawsuit, if it is permitted by the court to proceed, certainly will make for some interesting pleadings and testimony; but what is intriguing at the outset is that the lawyer for the alliance asserts that, as a private organization, the North American Gay Amateur Athletic Alliance should be free to decide who its members can be.  Hmmmm.  This sound suspiciously similar to arguments that various Christian organizations and groups such as the Boy Scouts make, in defending against lawsuits seeking to force them accept into membership non-Christians or gays.  Like I said — interesting.

44 comments Add your comment

Liking Barr more every day.

April 28th, 2010
6:13 am

Half of me agrees. Half of me disagrees.

Bipartisan

April 28th, 2010
6:34 am

Half of me agrees. Half of me disagrees.

And the other half is properly aroused!

just passing thru

April 28th, 2010
6:44 am

bipartisan has 3 halves? to be gay and not bisexual must you have NEVER had sexual relations with the opposite sex? would oral sex with the opposite sex be acceptable? if not what about foreplay? breast feeding? how long must one abstain from straight sex before being gay and not bi? reminds me of when i used to smoke. when did i become a nonsmoker, exactly? couldn’t the men argue “i was bisexual but that was my last chick, i swear.”

T-Town

April 28th, 2010
7:07 am

Just when you thought it was safe to into the water.

T-Town

April 28th, 2010
7:09 am

Too early in the AM: was safe to GO into the water.

Aquagirl

April 28th, 2010
7:38 am

Men fighting over balls…not a pretty sight.

Greg in the Highlands

April 28th, 2010
7:44 am

I can’t join the Temple because I’m not Jewish, 100 Black men of Atlanta because I’m not black, nor the Boy Scouts of America because I’m gay. I have no problem banning someone because they’re bi-sexual.

AAhhhhnuld

April 28th, 2010
7:45 am

So what were the contests in the games? Speed knitting, feather dusting, shoe shopping, baking.

neo-Carlinist

April 28th, 2010
7:54 am

Bob, first off ALL civil lawsuits are specious. specious is just a word used by lawyers to get before a judge, who will then “judge” one party or the other to be specious. that said, this is evidence to support same-sex marriage. namely, if heterosexuals are exposed to the malice, injustice and exploitation of the Family Law enterprise, why should gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender American not “enjoy” the same liability?

Byron Mathison Kerr

April 28th, 2010
8:08 am

Sadly, bisexuals get dumped on by both gays and straights, and this is certainly nothing new. Sexual orientation, though not a complicated subject, is still so widely misconstrued. And one has to wonder why. After all, Alfred Kinsey had it all pretty much figured out and published by the late 1940s.

neo-Carlinist

April 28th, 2010
8:26 am

I guess we’d really have to see the lawsuit (read it). is the NAGAAA alledging that bisexuals are not “gay” OR are they alledging that the male “bisexual” players were “fake” gays? OR are they suggesting that there is a distinction between being “gay” and being “bisexual”? AND, that this distinction somehow affords bisexuals some competitive advantage over gay softball players (which is redundant – rimshot!)?

saywhat?

April 28th, 2010
8:27 am

False equivalency, Bob. The NAGAAA can keep bisexuals out of their club and choose their own members, just like any other private organization, UNLESS, like the Boy Scouts they recieve taxpayer money, or subsidized use of taxpayer owned facilities. As for Christian organizations, they have never been forced to accept members against their liking, they have just been told they can’t discriminate when it comes to employment. Neither, I assume, can the NAGAAA. But this case doesn’t seem to involve employment. While I disagree with the NAGAAA’s apparent actions in regards to disqualifying the second place team, it is completely within their rights, unless they recieve public funds.

See! Not complicated at all.

Tyler Durden

April 28th, 2010
8:49 am

I agree that Americans are WAY too litigous and will sue over anything. But the living definition of hypocrisy is when Converatives wail and gnash their teeth over unnecessary lawsuits and the toll they take on the courts, and then scream for the Attorney General to sue over healtcare reform. It passed Congress legally, just like the laws you like & support, yet states are supposed to waste precious resources on pursuing your partisan agenda when everyone knows it will not result in anything other than watsed time & money…

The GOP will never let reality or the facts get in the way of their ideology…

hryder

April 28th, 2010
9:02 am

Loser pays law would eliminate the majority of specious suits jamming the civil courts.

Richard

April 28th, 2010
9:02 am

Greg in the Highlands,

Find me one Temple that wont let you join because you’re not Jewish. I’m having trouble believing that.

TwoTopicBob

April 28th, 2010
9:02 am

Impeachable Bob, have you got anything on your mind other than sex and guns? Try a little harder please.

TINSTAAFL

April 28th, 2010
9:03 am

Tyler Durden

Just because a law passes congress does not mean that it’s legal. Go read up on separation of powers, and checks and balances.

The Truth Hurts

April 28th, 2010
9:14 am

Why don’t we just have a North American Pervert Amateur Athletic Alliance.

That would solve all the problems.

neo-Carlinist

April 28th, 2010
9:16 am

OK, since we’re off the rails here, consider this; lawsuits are like wars. they’re more often than not filed because there is big money to be made by the “merchants” who sell the wares (attorneys). Justice is (and probably always has been) a commodity (like bombs and bullets). try this on for size; replace Military-Industrial Complex with Judicial Enterprise Complex and see what you get. What you get is a “jobs program” run by the state couched as “administration of justice” and profiteers who claim to be able to provide (for a fee) what the Constitution says is already yours (freedom, protection, justice). I’m speaking in the abstract here, but neither the Department of Justice (and subsequent courts, etc. down to the local level) nor the Departments of Defense and Homeland Security (and subsequent law enforcement agencies through the local level) do not care about individuals. they merely see the day-to-day human experience (theft, drugs, disagreements, discrimination) as revenue streams for their own self-interests.

Ragnar Danneskjöld

April 28th, 2010
9:24 am

At risk of reinforcing stereotypes, I would repeal employment discrimination laws, the core weapon of American thought-police. I respectfully believe the market is smart enough to punish mindless prejudice, and to reward efficiency.

Of course, in the essay in question, there is no “emplioyment” involved, merely an allegation that one group asserts a right of free association (or, in the immediate instance, right of free non-association.) A rational judge would punt this case out of court, but of course this is California.

Common Sense

April 28th, 2010
9:25 am

From the orginal article several days back, the NGAAAAAAA stated that the bisexual guys were not gay “enough”.

Tyler Durden – just because a law passes congress does not make it Constitutional, thus the lawsuits

saywhat? – I am guessing they were playing softball on public fields, and no doubt Seattle CAVB supported the World Series with direct or in kind gifts, no doubt with money generated from hotel and motel tax, so there is public money

The Tar and Feathers Party

April 28th, 2010
9:36 am

I agree with The Truth Hurts, but only if it is a lethal sport, two go into the ring, none comes out.

For The Record

April 28th, 2010
9:37 am

There’s more to the story …

Each team can have two “non-gay” players. This limitation was put in place because teams on the West Coast who enjoy a more liberal and tolerant sports community were stacking their teams with non-gay players so they would have a competitive edge at the Series. It’s probably outdated these days but when it was put in place it was intended to foster fair competition.

This particular team had seven non-gay players and they were protested for lying about it. When each player was asked to identify who their two were, they each had a different answer.

There’s nothing wrong with Freedom of Association, quite the contrary. If you are a private organization that is privately funded and all members have a voice in setting the rules that govern the organization, what could be more American?

JDL2

April 28th, 2010
9:48 am

Sauce for the goose…

Monroe Burbank

April 28th, 2010
9:54 am

Tar and Feathers Party and The Truth Hurts, let’s do this instead. Start a North American Ignorant Conservatives League (similar to this Tea Bag thing). They could sponsor a game show called “Are You Smarter Than an Ignorant Conservative”.

Now that would be hilarious to watch.

neo-Carlinist

April 28th, 2010
9:56 am

Ragnar, as you note, the irony is; laws or no laws, people (ususally as part of any larger group) discriminate against and patronize others. if the “two bisexuals per team” rule is true, this would be an example of gays (not that there is anything wrong with it), discriminating against bisexuals (which apparently is “wrong” to a gay person). maybe the NAGAA needs to adopt a DADT policy? I am reminded of the MLB baseball player, who when asked how he would react to a gay teammate replied; “I have always operated under the assumption I have had many gay teammates during my career. it’s a non-issue.” Are we talking about what happens on the softball diamond or in the bedroom (or K-Mart mens room in Gainesville)?

William

April 28th, 2010
10:00 am

It is showing its ugly head again. It is not about sexual preference but simply to make everyone accetp it as NORMAL. It aint gonna happen.

Fix-It

April 28th, 2010
10:07 am

No More Progressives!

April 28th, 2010
10:53 am

Monroe Burbank

April 28th, 2010
9:54 am
Tar and Feathers Party and The Truth Hurts, let’s do this instead. Start a North American Ignorant Conservatives League (similar to this Tea Bag thing). They could sponsor a game show called “Are You Smarter Than an Ignorant Conservative”.

Now that would be hilarious to watch.

And the first question would be “Do Rachel Madcow and Keith Olberdork have a registerable IQ’s?”

Andrew Dice Clay

April 28th, 2010
10:56 am

There is no “Bi-Sexual”. I thought I was very clear on this point.

Church of the Latter Day Dude

April 28th, 2010
10:56 am

The Dude minds. This agression will not stand, man.

I want a lawyer, man. I want my rights, man.

neo-Carlinist

April 28th, 2010
11:16 am

what would George Harrison do? “You serve me and I’ll serve you, swing your partners, all get screwed. Bring your lawyer and I’ll bring mine, geet together, and we could have a bad time. It’s affidavit swearing time. Sign it on the dotted line. Hold your Bible in your hand. Now all that’s left is to Find yourself a new band . . . We’re gonna play the sue me, sue you blues. We’re gonna play the sue me, sue you blues. Hold the block on money flow. Move it into joint escrow. Court receiver, laughs, and thrills, but in the end we just pay those
lawyers bills.”

Mike

April 28th, 2010
12:15 pm

This organization is going on record as saying that they have to maintain an exclusively gay sports organization because straight people are better athletes?

Maybe they are – here in Atlanta the athletic-looking gay men spend six days training for leaning against a wall at Blake’s…

Chris

April 28th, 2010
12:28 pm

I’m pretty sure a man that claims to be “bi-sexual” is straight up flaming no matter what he tells a woman.

Everyone knows there’s no crying in baseball.

jconservative

April 28th, 2010
12:57 pm

“Sexual Balkanization.” Is this one of those “change’ operations you can get in Sweden or someplace?

neo-Carlinist

April 28th, 2010
1:24 pm

Chris, Andrew Dice, et al. Agreed, there are no “bisexual” men. There are homosexual men who have “experimented” with women. Or, maybe they approach sex from an “any port in a storm” point of view. And Mike, I too am confused. Since the NAGAAA appears to favor type-casting or employ sterotypes, it would seem to me that gay/bisexual men would be a liability. I am consuded. Are they saying gay women (lesbians) make the best softball players? Or gay/effeminate men do not (of course, they run and throw like HETEROSEXUAL girls), so they do not feel threatened when gay women compete against gay men, BUT they cry “foul” when bisexual men compete against gay women? And where do the transgender softball players fit in? Can a woman, who was once a man, but now a lesbian play, but a formerly female player, who has become a man (Chaz Bono), not play because in becoming “male” she/he is now technically “straight”? This case has Abbott and Costello “Who’s on first” written all over it.

Joel Edge

April 29th, 2010
4:50 am

If it’s a private organization then let them set their own rules.

Appellate Court

April 29th, 2010
6:43 am

I think the judge will rule for the sassy.

nelson

April 29th, 2010
6:46 am

That is why people have 3 children, one of each.

Whiner's man crush

April 29th, 2010
7:05 am

Aquagirl

April 28th, 2010
7:38 am

Men fighting over soft balls…very sad

Jefferson

April 29th, 2010
4:01 pm

Sounds like a good case for the courts to settle. Don’t let it bum you out Bob.

ATLguy

April 29th, 2010
6:46 pm

Okay, so what the heck IS “sexual balkanization”? Who cares if the first baseman “plays for both teams”… so long as he’s cute and can turn a double play!!!

Gary Kilgore

April 30th, 2010
6:04 am

Everyone knows that gays make better softball players than bi’s. (Gays own the equipment). Actually, Gays are better at all team sports, like softball, or accessorizing, or smear the queer, and pin the tail on the donkey.

And leap frog. don’t forget leap frog.

Donna

May 19th, 2010
8:17 am

This whole issue is really silly but I would love to spend an evening drinking & swapping stories with neo-Carlinist & saywhat?.