This past weekend James DiFiore wrote a well-thought-out argument for nuance regarding the NHL compelling its players to become activists. The topic at hand as James puts it is, “it doesn’t matter what the issue happens to be, because the principle is the compelled activism, not the issue itself ”  You can and should read the whole article here.

My problem with the argument for nuance is that I’m exhausted by only one side being required to show nuance and understanding. (Both sides are now saying “YEAH!”) In the same way that I took the time to read James’ article and understand and accept some of the basic underlying concerns from James, I’m a lefty, liberal cuck. Whereas a right-wing fearmonger has probably already given up on this article. (For the record James is neither of those things. James and I have, and I hope still have, a great relationship)

If any player does not want to be an activist for a given topic and they choose to sit out, I’m okay with that, but let them get dunked on for their opinion. Let their jersey sales suffer or endorsements fade. Cause and effect. Perhaps it’ll give pause to someone else who might see what’s happening to their peers publicly and force them to stay closeted Christians (or whatever the topic). I think there’s irony there, but I’m not sure. Besides, there are other leagues in the world to play in if a player is really so against whatever the NHL is offering.

I’m not going to address the obvious hypocrisy of Christians playing in a league that encourages physical violence, playing on Sunday etc., but refusing to wear a piece of clothing over their religious beliefs. Let’s stick to compelled activism and nuance.

I would argue that representation matters. So let’s do some rough math here. The latest estimates that I could find show that approximately 3.5% of the US population identifies as LGBTQ. There are approximately 736 players in the NHL. This tells us there are probably about 25 players (give or take) in the NHL who identify as LGBTQ. So far ZERO have stepped forward to openly identify. Why? There are probably a number of reasons, but it has to be about acceptance.

And yet, in the past two weeks, 3 players have stepped forward as openly Christian. Why? Acceptance.

So these symbolic gestures matter to the player in the closet who does not feel accepted. Not just at the NHL, NBA, or MLB level, but in the minors or high school.

James argues that we are good with nuance in certain situations. I can make the case that we aren’t.

“We are good at nuance in certain situations. When we heard people say “All Lives Matter’ many of us understood the nuance immediately – sure, technically all lives do matter, but we are talking about black lives for a reason right now. Every rational person understood that nuance.

Similarly, those of us with a working brain knew that Colin Kaepernick wasn’t kneeling on the memory of fallen soldiers, or disrespecting the country as a whole when he took a knee. What he was doing was raising awareness over the loss of black lives by law enforcement.”

I’d argue that nuance was not the intended approach that most took when they said “all lives matter” or misconstrued what Colin Kaepernick was kneeling for. Those were deliberate misrepresentations of the intended message. The opposite of nuance. If nuance had been involved. “All lives matter” wouldn’t be a thing and Kaepernick might be known as a quarterback, not an activist.

I’m also not opposed to “compelled activism”. Sometimes Mom and Dad have to make you eat your vegetables and brush your teeth because they know what’s good for you.

As a child, you didn’t have much of a choice, but as an adult, you don’t have to eat your vegetables or brush your teeth but don’t be surprised by the consequences.

***I sent this to James before publishing and we had an additional chat about it over the phone. You know, like adults. This isn’t a black-and-white topic. No topic is. There are shades of gray to everything. But the key to progress is the conversation. Not the stance.