MLB and Doublethink
by Bill Baer on September 9th, 2011Posted in MLB, Philadelphia Phillies | Print | 50 Comments »
In his book Nineteen Eighty-Four, George Orwell coined the term “doublethink”, which is “the act of simultaneously accepting two mutually contradictory beliefs as correct”.
Recently, the Phillies joined the numerous other teams in baseball that have participated in the ItGetsBetter.org anti-bullying campaign, which is aimed at LGBT youth in America. You can watch the video below:
Throughout most of the season, Michael Stutes has been on the receiving end of a rookie hazing ritual. As he goes to the bullpen before the start of a game, he must walk with a pink backpack carrying nourishing goodies for his ‘pen mates, seen below:
Doesn’t this seem hypocritical to anyone else? The Phillies participate in the ItGetsBetter.org campaign and also allow their players to pull a prank that marginalizes a player’s masculinity by associating it with a feminine color? Dan Savage thinks so:
Yeah, yeah: I’m playing the role model card. But when pink backbacks and feather boas trickle down to Little League and high school teams, as they inevitably will (if they haven’t already), boys who have yet develop the ability to laugh this kind of teasing off—boys who aren’t as secure in their sexualities and masculinities as these professional athletes are—will be subjected to the same humiliating treatment. For boys who are still going through puberty, for boys who are still developing a sense of what it means to be a man, for boys who have yet to realize that they get to define manhood for themselves, being called a girl or a fag can be devastating. And while it may be rookie relievers who come in for this playful teasing in the major leagues, on high school and Little League teams it’s going to be those boys who are already under suspicion for being queer—boys who are perceived to be sissies—who are going to be abused.
To the Phillies, and any other forward-thinking MLB teams, put the kibosh on the pink backpack prank. It’s not as harmless as you think.
(Tip of the cap to Rob Neyer, who directed me to the Savage article in his Friday Filberts.)
Loading ...
50 Responses to “MLB and Doublethink”
By Rob on Sep 9, 2011
Interesting point, but I think there is a larger issue. As yet no one feels comfortable “coming out” as an MLB athlete. Unless you believe that through an extraordinary statistical anomaly there are no gay baseball players, this is indicative of a widespread perception within the sport’s gay players that a gay athlete would not be welcome on an MLB team. In any industry there will be some people who feel more comfortable “in the closet”, but the fact that NO gay baseball player has come out shows this is not a personal choice but something greater.
By Bill Baer on Sep 9, 2011
Excellent point, Rob.
By Brad on Sep 9, 2011
Nice article, Bill; I totally agree.
By Gaël on Sep 9, 2011
Rob,
There was a short piece written about specifically that a few months ago, when New York passed its homosexual marriage bill. It’s pretty indicting and depressing. Here it is:
http://www.sportsgrid.com/mlb/mets-player-gay-teammate-neanderthals/
By Corinne on Sep 9, 2011
Hazing a rookie by making him wear a backpack intended for a little girl is, in fact, a harmless prank. Gender stereotypes are not inherently bad or homophobic. This kind of complaint could perpetuate a ridiculously false sense that gay people desire a complete departure from traditional masculinity or femininity. It is funny to dress a major league player like a little girl not because it’s “gay” but because it’s a little girl. A plea from a proud gay Phillies fan: let’s all tone down the sensitivity a little bit.
By Ryan on Sep 9, 2011
I think there’s something to be said about intentions. I don’t think teams mean this to be anything other than a joke that is part of some teams’ structure.
By JL3 on Sep 9, 2011
Come on! This is ridiculous… you mean that guys, men, can’t be men anymore??? This whole feminization of America has to stop! If the Phillies, or any other professional sports team, wants to have a little fun at the rookie’s expense, then there is NOTHING wrong with that. It’s been going on since the dawn of time… it actually helps build team camaraderie. And if you don’t understand that then you have never been part of a team. A men’s team.
If you’re worried about this trickling down to Little League, then it’s up to the coaches – the adults – to put the the kybosh on it. The coach just tells the kids “when you get to the Majors you can wear all the pink back packs you want, but not here.”
And you can’t tell me that J Roll, Chase, Ryan, or any other player on the Phils for that matter, are really going to condemn a teammate if that teammate told them that he was gay. It’s 2011 in America… people are sensitive to other people’s sexual preferences… but that doesn’t mean a men’s professional baseball team has to stop having fun.
By Dave on Sep 9, 2011
i dunno, Bill. to me it’s walking a thin line to really demonize this. on the one hand, preemptively putting the kibosh on the practice would help protect proper ideals about sexuality in sports… i’m concerned about what happens when you start politicizing the clubhouse. certain things are beyond the pale. i don’t think this is one of them. just me though.
By carrots on Sep 9, 2011
JL3: Are you really suggesting that getting RID of pink backpacks is feminization? Think what this behavior is really suggesting. That being called a woman is an insult, because what’s worse than being a woman am I right? Yes, I get the juxtaposition of these professional ball players and a backpack made for a young girl is just HILARIOUS, but certainly we can think of another joke that doesn’t involve marginalizing 50% of the human population.
I don’t imagine many people here have really read a lot into gender studies (and that’s ok), but homophobia has part of its foundation built on misogyny. The Phillies’ participation in the It Gets Better project and the hazing described in this blog post are not compatible. There was a NYTimes article about these backpacks and the Padres have funny Yoda and R2D2 backpacks that are equally ridiculous and funny. What’s wrong with switching to something like that?
By Richard on Sep 9, 2011
“It is funny to dress a major league player like a little girl not because it’s “gay” but because it’s a little girl.”
You know, the arguably homophobic potential of the practice hadn’t occurred to me, but when I was talking about this hazing with my wife, she quipped “yes, because nothing is worse than being associated with a little girl”.
Obviously, the two ideas are intimately related, but it’s interesting that it’s “funny” because it’s a “little girl”. (Meanwhile, why are little girls associated with such things?)
By Cosmo on Sep 9, 2011
The backpack is a little loud for my tastes, and wearing it in public would embarrass the hell out of me… because it is tacky.
Wearing it in public would not, though, make me less of a man. Among people my age, that backpack would be a conversation starter. (The conversation would center around “Why the backpack?”, but still, some people like the attention)
I’m not saying there aren’t those out there that would see a man in a pink backpack and let loose a string of slurs without thinking twice. What I’m saying is, if there isn’t any malicious intent involved, we shouldn’t read extra into the action. I hope that makes sense.
By JL3 on Sep 9, 2011
@carrot I’m not suggesting anything… I’m stating a fact. The hypersensitvity/political correctness/feminization of this county is out of control. I’m not marginalizing anyone. Women fans of the Phillies, and other ball clubs, think this “hazing” is funny.
Heck, Corinne in a comment above even said “A plea from a proud gay Phillies fan: let’s all tone down the sensitivity a little bit.”
I’m proud to be a LIFE LONG Phillies fan, and I’m proud that Corinne is a fellow Phils fan too. But I’m also a proud, American man, and I’m a little tied of having to always consider a minority group’s ‘feeling’ any time I go to do any thing anymore. Like watching baseball!
Geez… save the social psychology for the classroom. I have a 5 year old son who will grow up to respect another person’s sexuality. But he’s also going to have fun when he goes to the ballpark.
By JL3 on Sep 9, 2011
*tired
By Richard on Sep 9, 2011
“feminization”
So it’s bad to be associated with feminine traits. Check.
Meanwhile, in reality, this culture is rabidly hyper-masculinist and militaristic.
By Corinne on Sep 9, 2011
Richard,
Humor is found in the avoidance of expectations. A grown man wearing a little girl’s backpack is certainly unexpected. It’s not wrong to be a little girl, it’s not wrong to be a strong man, but the combination of the two is not culturally expected and therefore might be found funny. There’s nothing more to read into this.
By Kevin on Sep 9, 2011
Just another case of the “pussification” of America.
By carrots on Sep 9, 2011
JL3: I am a white, american male and disagree that this subject is an example of hypersensitivity. Having rookies wear pink boas hasn’t been part of watching baseball until the last few years.
Commenter Richard tells just how subtle this is until you have it pointed out. These are behaviors that have become normalized to us where maybe we should stop and think about what we’re actually saying here and how that might affect other people (like those mentioned in the Dan Savage quote).
It’s good discussing this with you. Often people get angry and defensive when this is brought up and I find it an interesting subject.
By Richard on Sep 9, 2011
Corinne – that’s a reasonable answer. And I suspect that’s all there is to it, intent-wise. But do you think it’s at all possible that an unintended message is sent to boys (and girls) who might not be sure about where they fit in? I think this is the point of the connection Bill is making in bringing this up. (For the record, I personally wouldn’t want those bags anywhere near my daughter, but that’s a separate set of albeit related issues.)
By Nill Bye on Sep 9, 2011
The other day the first base coach patted a base runner on the bum after he was thrown out on a simple infield play.
Now my son constantly pats men on their bums. This is very alarming and should not be allowed in sports. Perhaps a ban should be instituted on any touching without a leather mitt on. This would prevent young men from getting the wrong idea and thinking it’s okay to touch other men on the bum.
Just my opinion but perhaps major league baseball should look into this. My son and I are unable to think or interpret anything for ourselves and simply mirror what major league baseball players do.
By Gaël on Sep 9, 2011
Nill Bye,
Nice strawman.
By Corinne on Sep 9, 2011
Richard: No, I don’t think there’s an unintended message. I don’t think there are men, women, boys, or girls who feel uncomfortable questioning their identity in an environment of major league ballplayers wearing pink backpacks. I respect your right to disagree
By Richard on Sep 9, 2011
Do you think unintended messages exist, at all?
“I don’t think there are men, women, boys, or girls who feel uncomfortable questioning their identity in an environment of major league ballplayers wearing pink backpacks.”
This is a remarkably literal reading of the proposed problem.
By Scott G on Sep 9, 2011
Does anyone else think the problem here is that people see a pink Hello Kitty backpack, and associate it with people being offensive? I feel like that’s the real problem. Pink is just a color. Hello Kitty is something for little kids. Michael Stutes is a rookie, and a young player.
I think it’s kind of ridiculous that people need to explain these types of things. For example, when in the presence of both sexes, public speakers often feel the need to correct themselves if they use casual language like “guys” when addressing the entire crowd. It’s not like it’s being intentionally done to disrespect women, it has just become part of people’s lingo.
This has also been carried over into things like collegiate team names: Syrace Orangemen being reduced to Syracuse Orange. The last time I checked, the plural of woman was women. Maybe we should just call them wo and woes respectively.
By jonny5 on Sep 9, 2011
This is pushing the PC thing much too far.
By AGH on Sep 9, 2011
While we’re at it, we should probably outlaw coaches slapping players on the rear in congratulations. There’ll be big trouble once that starts to trickle down to Little League–except maybe in Florida, where I’m pretty sure the age of consent is 12.
Without getting overtly political, more (or stricter) rules aren’t always the answer. I consider myself firmly left of center on most issues–for example, I think the Boy Scouts policy towards gays is ridiculous and that they should forfeit any preferential treatment as a result. I understand the dangers of subtext, but this goes too far. Hazing is a tradition and in many cases actually serves to strengthen bonds by demonstrating to new members of a group that approval must be earned.
By Tom on Sep 9, 2011
is it too late to change major league baseball to the “no fun league?” oh wait that acronyms taken
By JL3 on Sep 9, 2011
@Corinne I love ya… you’re spot on!
@Richard This country was built on masculinity and rugged indiviualism. The military defends it, which allows all of us to live like no other people in the history of mankind. Because of this Americans are able to help those who have not been able to taste the freedoms and opportunities we have.
@Carrot I appreciate you’re point of view as well, but I’ll have to admit I begin to get angry because this is just baseball. A game, and a team, I have loved since 1976 – or about as far back as I remember. As someone who tries to stay well informed, and sensitive, to my surroundings I just wish that there was something out there that wasn’t politicized in order to curry favor of some minority group.
Bottom line… again, this is baseball. An escape from day-to-day life. However, even with that being said baseball, like so many other facets of American culture, DOES attempt to be as inclusionary as possible. I have a 29 year old mentally retarded sister, and thanks to the Challenger Leagues, and of course Special Olympics, she has been able to play baseball/softball since she was seven (Challanger is affiliated with Little League). So lets enjoy the game, and let the players enjoy there time with their teammates as they feel fit.
By Pete on Sep 9, 2011
It is just fun. I’m sure almost all adult men, whether gay or straight, would take this ‘hazing’ in stride.
Don Savage’s whole point, though, is valid. It’s the issue of younger kids seeing this and trying to emulate it. I know – parents need to teach kids proper values – but kids will always look up to athletes. Especially if that athlete plays the sport that the kid plays. I could see the trickle-down effect taking place especially in high school, and it would just take one instance of it getting out of control to make this a national headline. Maybe not a likely scenario, but possible.
Still, I’m all for funny hazing like this… why not just do something like make them wear clown shoes and a clown nose over their spikes for the walk?
By Scott G on Sep 9, 2011
Then we’d be hearing from all the offended clowns, no?
By Pete on Sep 9, 2011
@ Scott G – LOL I was thinking the same thing as I was typing it. We could be perceived as Clownophobic. The more I think about it though, the clown getup would make me laugh more than a pink backpack.
By Heather on Sep 9, 2011
I have to admit I was befuddled when I first saw an “It Gets Better” ad. It wasn’t this one, but another one, and all they kept saying was variations of positive messages…not who the positive messages were for, what the organization’s aim was, etc.
Why don’t they state more clearly what they are doing? Why doesn’t Chase state: “For kids confused about their sexual orientation, high school can be a scary time.” Why doesn’t Mayberry say, “I know kids can be nasty when you don’t conform to stereotypical gender norms.”
Instead the message is so generic I wonder what the heck they’re talking about. Is this another political correctness thing, that they’re not even allowed to say specifically who they’re targeting and who the message is for?
Instead, they make a message for LGBT teens but never make it clear that that is who they’re talking to. Unless you’re already aware of the campaign, you have no clue who they’re specifically talking to. Are they ashamed of saying the target audience? I don’t get it.
By MaddogDW on Sep 9, 2011
It’s sad really. Why does this project have to be focused on LGBT bullying? Why not tackle bullying in general? I see it as a far greater issue then simply LGBT. How about obesity? Or kids who wear glasses? Or those who are short? Or the ‘computer nerds’ Why do we have to direct these type of ads at kids (I’m talking pre-teens here) in relation to sexuality?
Let him wear the darn pink backpack. Heck, let Joe Blanton carry his own donuts. Do we let players still chew tobacco? That sends a bad message too ya know.
By bernie on Sep 9, 2011
I never associated the pink backpack with homosexuality until mentioned here. When I was a kid pre-PC, the worst insult you could give a guy was “you throw like a girl”. Hazing, when done properly, is not bullying. It teaches humility, respect, and teambuilding, but should never result in physical harm or extreme isolation. When I see shots of the pen or the bench, Stutes, Bastardo, Worley, and Mayberry all appear to be a part of the team.
If they made Stutes chug a fifth of Mad Dog, then run laps until he puked, I’d be concerned. If he had to wear a rainbow headband to the pen, I’d be a little offended. Not this – call off the PC dogs.
By Bliz on Sep 9, 2011
You can’t protect every single kid in America from everything all of the time. In fact, you can’t protect most kids from most things most of the time. At some point, children grow up. Part of growing up is learning how to deal with name calling, hazing, etc. What happens when kids don’t learn to deal with stuff like this? Well, they complain about major league baseball players and pink back packs…
By Heather on Sep 9, 2011
@Maddog: Are you angry that the Susan G. Komen Foundation only raises awareness for breast cancer? Are you angry that Jerry Lewis’s telethon only raises money for “Jerry’s Kids”? Are you angry that St. Jude’s Children’s Hospital only helps kids and not adults?
C’mon, man, every organization has a specific focus. It doesn’t make it bad, or mean they don’t care about other things, that’s just what this particular organization chooses to focus on.
By wallypip on Sep 9, 2011
Ive got a handful of gay friends, both male and female…..I live in San Francisco…….we all think fags are funny in one way or another when they wear pink boas or are super flamboyant. Sorry.
By Jack on Sep 9, 2011
@AGH What preferential treatment do the Boy Scouts receive? Do you mean their Constitutional rights?
By jauer on Sep 9, 2011
Whether the hazing is appropriate among the Phillies themselves is irrelevant; I don’t see how you can argue that the pink backpack nonsense is anything other than contradictory to the ItGetsBetter video.
I’ve always hated this ridiculous tradition. Now I have a legitimate reason.
By Bill Baer on Sep 9, 2011
I think most of you are missing the point. Whatever your views are on gays in society, you have to admit the Phillies (and other teams) are being hypocritical when they participate in the IGB videos and then tacitly allow the pink backpack hazing.
By Jon on Sep 9, 2011
Disagree with you on that point, Bill (tho thanks for stating it more directly).
I applaud the Phillies for being willing to stand up and participate in the IGB video series, but even if you’re willing to make the assumption that the Hello Kitty backpack and boa are “gay” (and I’m not entirely sure why you would, unless you have an agenda to be on the lookout for everything that might possibly be anti-gay like Savage is) that doesn’t make them hypocrites for not trying to end subtle anti-gay inferences in every way, shape and form in society.
The Phanatic, for instance, often uses his bulk as part of comedy routines. Would it be hypocritical for Phillies to take part in any sort of physical fitness campaign?
Unfortunately complaints about ridiculously mild things like a pink backpack (or in another case of minority rights, people who complain about the use of the masculine tense for the generic plural) marginalize legitimate complaints about actual discrimination. Cheers to the Phillies for taking a stand against real wrong, and it’s unfortunate that there are people willing to nitpick imaginary injustice.
By Grant on Sep 9, 2011
Traditionally this isn’t an argument or discussion I’d get involved in; especially on this website where I tend to stick to facts and figures. That being said this discourse really got me thinking so here’s my two cents:
1st cent: The “It Gets Better” ad campaign is a wonderful idea that I fully support and I’m proud that the Phillies organization felt it was a worthwhile cause to participate in. The campaign initially began as a message to LGBT youth that the experiences they were having would improve and acceptance came with age and experience. Since the movement began however it has sort of taken on a life of its own, and has since been embraced more fully as an anti-bullying movement. I would like to stress fully why the Phillies bullpen hazing ritual does not violate either of these two motives.
First and most importantly the silly hello kitty bag and boa in no way should be taken as a “gay” or homosexual way. For a very eloquent argument as to why please refer to Corinne’s wonderful post about humor.
Secondly this is not bullying, as it doesn’t target the individual but rather the role. The target of this hazing is the NEWEST member of the pitching staff and has switched from Michael Stutes to Schwimmer and back (and will switch again). The “It gets better” campaign focuses on making the youth who feel repeatedly abused because of who they are or their specific lifestyle choices. This is not what is happening here. Instead this hazing is actually significantly more benign. Which brings us to….
Second cent: This ritual is more of male bonding ritual than anything else. While the hazing that garnered much media attention on college campuses and in the military was often deplorable and needed to be exposed and shunned ALL hazing is not a terrible thing for our societal norms. Hazing that is done in good spirits and is non-malicious can be a very elegant way of uniting social groups, specifically, but not uniquely, male social groups. As ALL newcomers will undergo this process it works as a means of bonding the “pack.” Furthermore once a newer member enters the previous target will than have “graduated” or “grown” into a full member of the “pack.” Attempting to remove these practices would be futile at best and dictatorial at worst. These social habits are ingrained in our very species, and are often required for multiple virulent males to coexist peacefully.
I’m sorry if this post has gotten overly psychoanalytical or collegiate, but as I mentioned in the opening this online debate really got my brain working to fully formulate why I was taken aback by the position of the author.
- Grant
By Chareth on Sep 9, 2011
As a person that fully accepts lesbian and gay culture, fully supports gay marriage (or unions or whatever you want to call it), and doesn’t believe that there is anything even remotely wrong or immoral with their lifestyle:
I don’t find this hazing ritual to be at odds with the It Gets Better campaign or hypocritical at all.
If anything, it is borderline sexist, not homophobic. I would think you’d only find it to be homophobic if you buy into the false notion that gay men are more feminine than straight men (which I do not).
By Scott G on Sep 9, 2011
Bill,
How does the pink backpack have anything to do with LGBT? The only way you can compare these things is if you’re just arguing against hazing in general?
By RR on Sep 10, 2011
Such pieces tend to reveal more hatred and hypocrisy than they call out.
By Jay on Sep 10, 2011
Wow, I really hope that we don’t take ALL the fun out of this. I think we can all agree that it’s simply impossible to avoid offending everyone, but this type of political correctness should be kept out of the clubhouse. Sure people see Stutes (and might I add, other rookies around the league) with a pink backpack. That is obviously the point, but if this is something that genuinely affects you, it might be time to see a therapist. I don’t mean that in an insulting manner, but life will be very tough for that individual. Do we not think that LGBT individuals have absolutely NO sense of humor about this if the intentions are misconstrued? And what about the connotations of not being masculine automatically makes them seem homosexual/homophobic? It’s not as if they have him wrapped in a rainbow flag while walking out to the bullpen. That would be an entirely different issue.
Also, it doesn’t stop here. The backpack is the tip of the iceberg. They dress the rookies up as Hooter’s girls, cheerleaders, superheroes, babies, etc on road trips. It’s essentially like Halloween. Some of these fall into the same category as the pink backpack, some don’t. I’m just surprised that people pick up the pink backpack as the one that “went too far”.
Personally, as a baseball fan, I’d be honored to be on a big league roster and being “hazed” to this minimal degree by strapping on a girl’s backpack on my way to playing on a major league team. Many of these guys go through it and it’s a minor “rite” of passage.
By Nat on Sep 10, 2011
So can someone tell me how making Stutes (or Schwimmer when he came up) were a pink backpack is improving his skills as a baseball player or making the Phillies a more dominant MLB team? While some people find this funny and others don’t, it doesn’t matter because is it completely unnecessary. Remember, they are role models for tons of kids and for the most part are being positive ones. So what happens when a middle school, high school or college team starts doing this to their freshmen pitchers. Then as it is doing in the MLB, each year it has to be ‘funnier’ and more degrading. In the school system, this would be looked at as hazing and would be punished, but when they see pro athletes doing it and the media and fans cheering it on, it confuses them and they think it is okay. Feminizing or not, singling out a player or players is just like bullying and does nothing to create team unity or improve athletic skill.
By RR on Sep 10, 2011
Agreed. The alleged hypocrisy and the introduction of political philosophy DOES suck the fun out of it. Unless the alleged hypocrisy represents a fatal organizational flaw that will manifest itself in the playoffs, let’s leave the tyranny of political labels and moral rectitude to the professionals who haunt Sunday morning television.
By RR on Sep 10, 2011
Agreed with Jay, that is. … BTW, the Phillies clubhouse is not the school system. The Phillies are all adults of a kind. Children, on the other hand, need guidance and protection.
By wasthursday on Sep 10, 2011
Maybe the players can follow up with “Trust me, when I question teammates’ manhood, they don’t seem as affected as they used to”.
If the campaign is needed, it is important not to look like a hypocrite. I suspect most people who defend the prank don’t really care for the campaign itself.
Also, pranks are tricks. This isn’t. This is making someone do something perceived as humiliating to themselves. Mildly creepier mental state.
No one should be punished or told they can’t do this, but it just signals whether they really support the cause they say they do, so I would hope they choose not to continue.
To console the “comedy” lovers, I think there was little humor left the 3rd time. The 1000th time won’t be funnier.
By Bill Baer on Sep 10, 2011
Yeah, I’m very surprised (appalled is a better word) at how many people aren’t indifferent to the dumb pink backpack thing, but actually in favor of it. The amount of latent misogyny and homophobia among Americans is scary to think about.