ESPN’s cameras were in place Saturday when St. Louis Rams coach Jeff Fisher called Sam at his agent’s house in San Diego to tell the former University of Missouri defensive lineman that they had selected him in the seventh and last round of the draft.
What the cameras caught next was something remarkable — and certainly rarely seen on Disney-owned ESPN: a tearful Sam receiving congratulations from his boyfriend, Vito Cammisano, complete with a kiss between the two men.
Congratulatory kisses are common in sports, although they usually occur between husbands and wives or boyfriends and girlfriends. This one drew alternating waves of shock, anger and gratitude from around the Twittersphere and elsewhere after ESPN aired it, on a tape-delayed basis, at 6:40 p.m. EST Saturday followed quickly by a replay on the NFL Network.
Some, like GLAAD (the organization formerly known as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Discrimination), said it was “a significant milestone,” according to Ross Murray, its director of news. “It was touching,” Murray said.
But many — including some players — recoiled: “Im not watching @espn until this Michael Sam story dies. It’s gross. I’m not tryna watch 2 dudes kiss on a sports show,” was one of the milder anti-Sam sentiments on Twitter. Miami Dolphins player Don Jones tweeted, “OMG,” though he later deleted it, and another critical comment, and apologized.
The coverage of Sam’s big moment took several months of planning by ESPN, which began preparing to follow Sam’s progress in the draft shortly after he publicly came out in February. “We talked about it in production meetings for months,” said Seth Markman, who oversaw ESPN’s draft coverage. “We knew he’d be in the draft, but we didn’t know what round. We knew we had to figure out a way to attack it.”
Was the outrage expected or unexpected? Is America ready for a gay football player? Is America, in a post-Brokeback Mountain era, ready to see PDA between same-sex couples? Is the outrage we are seeing in the media because two men are kissing? Would the outrage be different if two attractive women were kissing? From what I am seeing on TV, there is a lot of that and no outrage. In fact, I have been told lots of men like to watch, if you get my drift.
Finally, many of those who are outraged that ESPN would show PDA between a gay couple have declared that they will no longer watch ESPN. I am not believing it. The big game comes on, they will be watching. However, what was ESPN’s point? Were they being in-your-face over Michael Sam’s gayness? I am not sure why they chose to exploit this situation. It seems to me that Michael Sam could have quietly, yet openly, gone to the NFL without ESPN trumpeting his arrival cloaked in what obviously would be controversy. I am not sure the network did him or gay athletes any favors.
Lastly, I have no problem with Sam and his significant other. I have no problem with their obvious affection. I simply feel that a less forceful entry into the public eye would have better served acceptance of gay folks in a world where the ultimate hetero male exists. In other words, why beat everyone over the head with it, especially those who are not ready. Progress has been slowed because of ESPN’s greed.
“By 1840, both Lincoln and Speed — now 31 and 26— were considered well past the marrying age. Both bachelors reportedly were hesitant to tie the knot, but it was a de-facto requirement to have a wife if you wanted to move in political circles — or at least create the perception of interest in marriage. Both Speed and Lincoln dreaded this “requirement,” as evidenced by Lincoln’s letters. Speed takes the marriage plunge first and moves back to Kentucky, leaving Lincoln. At this precise time, Lincoln suffered a mental breakdown. Historians have been all over the map as to what caused the breakdown, but it was so intense that friends, including Herndon, worried he would take his own life. Lincoln only recovered after Speed invited him to visit him and his new wife in Kentucky. “
“Lincoln, according to author Adam Goodheart (1861: The Civil War Awakening), seems to have developed almost a “schoolboy” crush on the much younger and much shorter Ellsworth, who stood just 5’6.”
From historical records, one can conclude that Lincoln enjoyed sleeping with men. He did so when it was acceptable in youth and poverty, and also when he was older and successful. While it is documented that Lincoln slept with several men, there is only one confirmed woman who shared his bed — Todd. (Most Lincoln historians dispute an account that he was involved with a female prostitute.) Of the men, we don’t know how many reciprocated with emotion. To find one same-sex soul mate in the culture of the 1800s seems a miracle; Lincoln may have sought others when Speed went on to have the life that was expected of men of the time. In that period, only one man in 300 did not marry. And Speed was apparently the love of his life. Lincoln resisted marriage as long as he could, only marrying after Speed was well-entrenched in his own marriage — a phase that coincided with Lincoln’s “mental distress.” – See more at: http://www.washingtonblade.com/2011/10/25/abraham-lincoln-a-life-in-the-closet/#sthash.IXHWgnS8.dpuf
Rick, We’ve already established that you know very little about life in the 19th Century and have no desire to educate yourself. Only a truly ignorant person thinks there weren’t gay people 150 years ago, so I’m not surprised to see you try to advance such a foolish strawman.
Especially when I’ve already said that there have been major historical figures that were gay and that there may have been gay presidents. Just not Lincoln. Subject to change if more convincing evidence is discovered. You see, that is the key difference. I base my opinions on weighing the evidence and will change my opinions if the evidence changes. You however, sift through the evidence, picking out the scraps that support your preconceived conclusion, and ignore the mountain that contradicts your conclusion. The funny part is your probably think of yourself as being more realistic, even though you are just wrong.
That was sarcasm, Furby. the point is, there were gay people then, but they remained closeted. I don’t think there’s any reasonable way given the evidence that you can assert that Lincoln was not gay. I could see arguing that he might no have been. But to argue that he definitely wasn’t?
It seems to me almost a certainty that he was. I wouldn’t think that the term bisexual is appropriate; he became disconsolate when Joshua Speed married, and when faced with the prospect of settling into married life. When his wife wasn’t around, he slept with a guy for no particular reason – you want to believe it’s nostalgia for the good old days? He was gay; he had a somewhat tormented life. It’s “Brokeback Mountain”, real-life.
It’s not terribly important to me that you or anyone else accept that he might have been gay. The issue of gay rights is resolving itself quite well these days. But I’m as capable as anyone else of interpreting the evidence … I say he was no straight, was not bi, was not asexual … every single piece of evidence and the whole story of his life points to “gay”.
“every single piece of evidence…that you choose to look at…”
FTFY