Connect with us

Kobe Bryant: The Real Outrage Isn’t That He Said “Fag”

Published

on

The real outrage is that at a time when anti-gay name-calling and bullying are leading causes of LGBTQ teen suicide, saying “fag” enables and encourages millions to continue harassing our youth.

Kobe Bryant, the Lakers’ superstar basketball player, Tuesday night looked straight into a TNT TV camera and called the referee a “fucking fag.” Bryant’s defense? “Frustration.” It took Bryant three attempts and twenty-four hours to reconcile the situation with the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender community and their allies, but if his attempts — at least at first — felt half-hearted, perhaps it’s because they were. While Internet platforms like Twitter and Facebook voraciously took to the controversy, it was plain Bryant’s fans and defenders out-numbered his LGBT-supporting opponents — if not in number, at least in volume.

Ironically, Bryant’s words could not have been more relevant. Just hours earlier the NBA, the Ad Council, and GLSEN had been taping a public service announcement against anti-gay language as part of GLSEN’s “Think Before You Speak” campaign, to be aired during the NBA finals, in an effort to show the league as more “gay-friendly.” And this week marks the fifteenth anniversary of GLSEN’s “Day of Silence,” an effort during which “hundreds of thousands of students nationwide take a vow of silence to bring attention to anti-LGBT name-calling, bullying and harassment in their schools,” according to GLSEN.

“The words expressed do NOT reflect my feelings towards the gay and lesbian communities and were NOT meant to offend anyone,” was Kobe Bryant’s initial defense — short and none-too-sweet. And perhaps taking his cue from Senator John Kyl’s lie last week, (Kyl told Congress and America, “If you want an abortion, you go to Planned Parenthood, and that’s well over 90 percent of what Planned Parenthood does,” only to be forced to retract it later by saying it was “not intended to be a factual statement,”) Bryant offered, “What I said last night should not be taken literally.” Bryant never explained how one could take the term, “fucking fag,” literally, but added, “My actions were out of frustration during the heat of the game, period.”

 


What I said last night should not be taken literally,” Bryant offered — never explaining how one could take the term, “fucking fag,” literally — adding, “My actions were out of frustration during the heat of the game, period.”



 

U.K. rugby star and straight-ally Ben Cohen had a few words for Kobe Bryant about frustration. The 32-year old gay-friendly icon called Bryant’s outburst “disappointing,” and added, “As a professional athlete and rugby World Cup champion, I understand the heat and passion of competition at the highest levels. But we must all remember that strong bodies must be balanced with strong characters, and work toward that end. Our positions as role models demand it.”

Cohen may have put his finger on one of the key aspects in this now national debate. Some, generally the more conservative of Americans, feel sports figures don’t bear responsibility for their roles as role models. But as President Franklin Delano Roosevelt said, “power must be linked with responsibility, and obliged to defend and justify itself within the framework of the general good.” In other words, “with great power comes great responsibility.”

Watch: “Kobe Bryant Calls Ref A “Fucking Fag” On Camera (Video)“

Kobe Bryant abdicated that responsibility when he was accused of adulterous rape in 2003, (reportedly, the charges were dropped when the victim refused to testify in public,) and did so again Tuesday night. Bryant had said his words “were not meant to offend anyone.” How could they have been meant to do anything but offend? (No one says, “fucking fag,” without looking to get a strong reaction.)

And they did offend. And worse than offend, they sent a strong message from a strong, national role model, that it’s OK to use anti-gay epithets when the chips are down.

What Bryant may have failed to understand the very moment he opened his mouth, is that like it or not, he is a role model to millions, especially millions of children. And in a split-second, caught on camera, he told those millions — adults and children alike — that it’s OK to denigrate, hate, and verbally abuse, gay men and lesbians, and bisexual and transgender folks.

The story itself took a life of its own, and The New Civil Rights Movement published a total of ten (this will be eleven) play-by-play articles, which drew a great many comments from all sides. But one reader may have said it best. “Kobe Bryant’s behaviour is more damaging to children than Janet Jackson’s boob. People need to realize that Bryant is the kind of role model that bullies look up to.”

Read: “USA Today Asks “Did Kobe’s Punishment Fit The Crime?” America Disappoints“

Before Bryant’s “heartfelt,” actual apology, GLAAD President Jarrett Barrios put his concern in more professional terms, properly stating, “Professional sports players need to set a better example for young people who use words like this on the playground and in our schools, creating a climate of intolerance and hostility. The LA Lakers have a responsibility to educate their fans about why this word is unacceptable.”

(To date, the L.A. Lakers organization has not commented, although NBA Commissioner David Stern did fine Bryant $100,000 — a powerful statement of condemnation, given the comparatively steep fine.)

But GLAAD’s and HRC’s messages — if they were even heard by more than a few — were lost on the madding crowd Wednesday. Many Internet comments supported Bryant. Of those, many were of the “gays are too sensitive” variety. Or, “gays need to calm down.” Or, “That term is used very loosely around the country everyday.” Or, “get over it.” Others blatantly supported the “fucking fag” term.

 


“If a young student was called the N-word every day for weeks or months on end, and after repeated cries for help finally took his own life, how quickly do you think citizens of all races would take to the streets to protest?”



 

Bryant, a 32-year old shooting guard, ultimately managed to call the president of the nation’s largest LGBT organization, the Human Rights Campaign, to offer what President Joe Solmonese described as a “heartfelt” apology. Solmonese, who in immediate response to Bryant’s Tuesday night slur had called it “a disgrace,” added two important caveats to his homage of Bryant’s apology.

“He told me that it’s never ok to degrade or tease, and that he understands how his words could unfortunately give the wrong impression that this is appropriate conduct,” and, “At the end of a difficult day, I applaud Kobe for coming forward and taking responsibility for his actions.”

These were important because Solmonese rightly knows he has a responsibility to help shape public opinion. And the public needed to know that Kobe Bryant thought he was wrong to call the referee a “fucking fag,” that Kobe Bryant was sorry, remorseful, regretful, and that Kobe Bryant wanted America to know “that it’s never ok to degrade or tease.”

Sadly, the message, trumpeted by HRC, was not equally amplified by Bryant, the Lakers, or the NBA. And sadly, nowhere do we have a direct quote that says, “I’m sorry and I was wrong. Don’t repeat my mistake, folks.”

Solmonese, while awaiting an apology prior to the Wednesday evening telephone conversation, had warned Bryant and the Lakers organization that “America is watching.”

And they were watching– but not so much for an apology as for how far the LGBT community would take this. After all, it was just a word and gays should get over it, right?

Wrong.

Words have power and, in the wake of the anti-gay bullying teen suicides America saw last fall, America needs to remember that. We know that words from role models on the basketball court, and from bullies on the street corner, have power, meaning, and in many cases, can kill.

There are an estimated 5,000 suicides by Americans aged 15-24 every year, and studies show LGBTQ teens are three times as likely to die by suicide than their heterosexual peers. Simple math tells us then that over 100 LGBTQ 15-24 year olds die by suicide every month.

Yet America was shocked in September 2010 when the media reported five teens died by suicide due to anti-gay bullying. At The New Civil Rights Movement we were able to uncover at least ten, knowing that was only ten percent of the story.

Read: “September’s Anti-Gay Bullying Suicides – There Were A Lot More Than 5“

“If a young student was called the N-word every day for weeks or months on end, and after repeated cries for help finally took his own life, how quickly do you think citizens of all races would take to the streets to protest?,” asked Keli Goff, an African-American author, in October 2010, just after the rash of September anti-gay bullying suicides. Goff continued, asking, “Or better yet, how quickly would Al Sharpton and Co. demand accountability from the school and elected officials under the threat of casting the kind of media spotlight that people like Don Imus have nightmares about?”

“Which makes me think that the kids doing the bullying are not really the ones at fault,” she writes. “They are simply taking their cues from adults. And the message they are receiving is that today in 2010 it may not be okay to call someone the N-word on the playground, but it is okay to call someone the F-word.”

So what if Kobe Bryant’s “penalty” was not a $100,000 fine, but 100 hours spent counseling at-risk LGBTQ teens? Talk about a win-win-win. A win for LGBTQ teens, a win for Bryant, and a win for America, whose out-of-control media superstars would think twice before using anti-gay slurs publicly.

But America, by and large, has a very short-term memory and is not thinking about teen suicides. America is thinking that the LGBT community is too sensitive. America is thinking that, regardless of age, we should just roll with the punches. America is thinking Bryant’s “punishment,” a fine that amounts to about zero-point-zero-zero-two percent of his annual income, was too harsh.

 


“The problem we have now is because of the way we don’t address homophobia, the ultimate insult to a man is to tell them either they’re like a woman or worse, that they’re gay,” says John Amaechi, the first gay NBA star to come out.



 

How do we know? Ask your neighbors. Or, look at this USA Today online poll that as of this writing says that 53% of Americans think “a heartfelt apology should have been enough.” In other words, Kobe got the shaft. (Note the author’s phrase, “should have been enough,” as in, “How much more do you people want?”)

So, what explains this? Why does America think it’s OK to use hate speech and anti-gay slurs? In a word, prejudice. Dumb, unfounded, un-scientific, baseless prejudice. And it’s prejudice promulgated by some religious institutions, and by some “non-profit” anti-gay groups and anti-gay hate groups, like the National Organization for Marriage, the American Family Association, and Americans for Truth About Homosexuality.

America, despite our slow but forward-moving embrace of same-sex marriage, despite our overwhelming support of the repeal of Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell, still hasn’t had enough direct, personal experience with LGBT people.

I reached out to Clinton W. Anderson, PhD, the Director of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Concerns Office, at the American Psychological Association. “Although many people have negative feelings and hostile attitudes toward homosexuality, no scientific research has ever found differences between lesbian, gay, or bisexual people and straight people that justify such prejudices,” Dr. Anderson told me, via email. He adds, “In fact, as straight people come to know gay people better, their prejudices decrease, which is exactly opposite of what would happen if the prejudices had some factual basis.”

Anderson says, “Similarly to members of other minority groups who are the targets of prejudice, many lesbian, gay, and bisexual people experience prejudicial acts, such as the use of epithets. Having to cope with such acts is a real psychological burden.” Quoting a CDC study, Anderson says this affects adversely LGBT students as well, noting, “lesbian, gay, and bisexual students in schools reported missing school due to fear, being threatened by other students, and having their property damaged at school more than heterosexual students did.”

Dr. Anderson says over time, “as straight people come to know gay people better, their prejudices decrease.” A great example of this is the defection last week of the National Organization for Marriage’s online and grassroots strategist, Louis Marinelli, who said he sees himself now as “a supporter of civil marriage equality,” after five years of working against the LGBT community, and says, “I agree that what the gay community are fighting for are their civil rights.”

Kobe Bryant merely said what was at the forefront of his mind when it searched for the meanest slur it could find in a moment of anger and “frustration.” And Kobe Bryant merely said what many Americans say every day, whether or not the subject of their frustration is a gay man, a lesbian, or a bisexual or transgender person — or not. “Fag,” or “faggot” is one of those words some people use to make themselves feel better, because portraying someone else as a second-class citizen, as “less-than,” makes some people feel better, and feel better about themselves.

The problem with what Kobe Bryant said is not so much that he said it, it’s that so many Americans say it every day, do not understand the damage words like that can cause, and do not see anything wrong with it.

“The problem we have now is because of the way we don’t address homophobia, the ultimate insult to a man is to tell them either they’re like a woman or worse, that they’re gay,” says John Amaechi, the first gay NBA star to come out, in an interview with USA Today Thursday.

Amaechi, an African-American, is now a psychologist who works with Fortune 250 companies. He adds, “We have to take it as unacceptable as a white person screaming the N-word at a black person. … I can tell you that I’ve been called a f——- fairly routinely, and yet people seem to hold off on calling me the N-word. We’ve got to mirror that progress.”

There's a reason 10,000 people subscribe to NCRM. You can get the news before it breaks just by subscribing, plus you can learn something new every day.
Continue Reading
Click to comment
 
 

Enjoy this piece?

… then let us make a small request. The New Civil Rights Movement depends on readers like you to meet our ongoing expenses and continue producing quality progressive journalism. Three Silicon Valley giants consume 70 percent of all online advertising dollars, so we need your help to continue doing what we do.

NCRM is independent. You won’t find mainstream media bias here. From unflinching coverage of religious extremism, to spotlighting efforts to roll back our rights, NCRM continues to speak truth to power. America needs independent voices like NCRM to be sure no one is forgotten.

Every reader contribution, whatever the amount, makes a tremendous difference. Help ensure NCRM remains independent long into the future. Support progressive journalism with a one-time contribution to NCRM, or click here to become a subscriber. Thank you. Click here to donate by check.

News

Platner Scorched Over ‘Taking Time’ Video After New Accusation

Published

on

Maine Democratic U.S. Senate nominee Graham Platner is under fire after releasing a video declaring that new allegations against him are false, yet he is “taking time to reflect” on a path forward.

Politico on Monday afternoon reported that a woman who dated Platner, Jenny Racicot, “says he forced her to have sex with him nearly five years ago despite her repeated objections, an allegation Platner denies.”

“Racicot said she had an on-and-off relationship with Platner,” Politico reported, “for more than two years before he entered her rural Maine home uninvited one night in late 2021, deeply intoxicated, and forced himself on her while she repeatedly told him to stop. She said she cut off contact with him after telling him the encounter was not consensual.”

In a video posted to social media eleven minutes after the Politico story dropped, Platner says, “I wanted to directly address the troubling, serious, and false allegations against me. Any accusation of nonconsensual behavior is categorically false.”

He said he and his supporters “were united in a love of Maine, a belief that our politics must change, in a focus on defeating Susan Collins.”

“So, regardless of the inaccuracy of the reporting, but mindful the political reality will inflict, we are taking the time to reflect on the best path forward for the state that I love, the people that I love, the movement I belong to, and the goal of defeating Susan Collins.”

“Those were the goals when we launched this campaign. And they remain my goals today.”

“Throughout it all, you never turned your back on me. And I will not turn my back on you now. Every one of you deserves to see that vision come to fruition and see Susan Collins defeated. And we will use every tool at our disposal to do so.”

The Bulwark’s Tim Miller, a political commentator who served as the communications director for the Jeb Bush 2016 presidential campaign, blasted Platner.

“I’m sorry but ‘we are taking time to reflect on the best path forward’ is not an option on the table,” Miller wrote. “Either it’s false and you campaign with vigor or it’s true and you get out / apologize to everyone you let down.”

Journalist Ryan Grim, commenting on Platner’s video, noted that Platner “strongly suggests he is considering dropping out. Already Troy Jackson and Chellie Pingree, both gubernatorial candidates, are being kicked around in Maine circles as potential replacements.”

Several others, including Puck News’ Peter Hamby, predicted Platner will be dropping out.

Platner had postponed several campaign events before the Politico story was published.

Continue Reading

News

Trump Sparks Fury Online After Posting Unblurred Video of Muslim Kindergartners in Hijabs

Published

on

President Donald Trump is facing backlash after posting a video of children — including showing their unblurred faces — graduating from kindergarten, with some of the girls purportedly wearing hijabs.

“President Trump posted a captionless video of graduating kindergarteners on Truth Social on Monday, goading his supporters into verbally attacking little children simply for being Muslim,” The New Republic reported. “The clip is from Gateway STEM Academy, a majority-Black K-8 public charter school in St. Paul, Minnesota. It shows about 21 children in caps and gowns on stage singing a song together. Most of the girls are wearing hijabs.”

The original post of the video which Trump reposted reads: “Public school in St. Paul, Minnesota. Every girl is in a hijab … in kindergarten.”

Trump did not add any comments. TNR called the post “Islamophobic, weird, and creepy,” while noting that the comments section of Trump’s post was filled with calls “by racist, xenophobic MAGA supporters” to “deport the children and ban hijabs.”

TNR also noted that it “should come as no surprise that Trump isn’t above attacking children who just learned how to read, but this post is still particularly discomforting—and will certainly contribute to the already potent level of anti-Muslim sentiment in the U.S. and in Minnesota.”

Critics blasted Trump.

“There is something deeply unsettling about the president of the United States—the most powerful person in the world—going after kindergarten schoolchildren in Minnesota because they wore hijabs, as Trump has done this morning on his website,” The Bulwark’s Sam Stein wrote.

One social media commentator wrote, “Trump posted an unblurred video of more than a dozen Muslim kindergartners to Truth Social, exposing the children’s faces while targeting them for their religion.”

Another added, “Trump is a bigot. The president took to Truth Social to attack kindergarteners in hijabs. These are little kids. The president isn’t just a bigot, he’s also a coward.”

The original video was posted to the X social media platform in June.

U.S. Rep. Nancy Mace (R-SC) at the time commented, “If you are in a public school in America, you should be speaking english.”

 

Image via Reuters 

 

Continue Reading

News

One Legal Maneuver Threatens to Undo Everything E. Jean Carroll Won

Published

on

President Donald Trump’s apparent efforts to delay releasing the $5.8 million civil judgment to E. Jean Carroll are being met with a warning by the journalist’s legal team, who suggest there could be a legal maneuver for Trump to employ to forgo paying the judgment in either of the two cases he lost.

According to The Guardian, on July 4, U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan ordered Trump to release the $5.8 million judgment, which is in escrow, to Carroll by this coming Tuesday — or explain why he would not do so.

Carroll’s attorneys think Trump may be trying to buy time to mount another legal strategy, telling the judge that Trump’s request for an extension “appears to be little more than yet another play for time.”

“The case is separate from Trump’s appeal of a Manhattan civil jury’s 2024 award of $83.3m to Carroll for defamation,” The Guardian explains. “But her lawyers have suggested a legal scenario in which the president might seek to conjoin the cases and further delay payment of both.”

Carroll’s attorney Roberta Kaplan (no relation to the judge) wrote, “We can only assume that defendant is seeking … to buy time so he can try to concoct some new basis to put off paying plaintiff presumably in connection with his forthcoming petition and motion for a rehearing.”

Trump’s former attorney, Justin Smith, in one of his final acts, wrote to the Supreme Court suggesting that his client would be appealing the $83.3 million civil judgment.

Smith argued that the Supreme Court “may wish to consider the petitions together,” given they involve the same parties.

The larger judgment case involves possible questions of presidential immunity, and that has Carroll’s attorneys concerned.

“A conjoined case, Carroll’s lawyers fear, could result in both judgments being wiped out,” The Guardian reports.

The president has also made clear he is no fan of Judge Kaplan, after the jurist made several rulings that “angered” Trump.

“What else can you expect from a Trump Hating, Clinton appointed judge, who went out of his way to make sure that the result was as negative as it could possible be,” Trump wrote on Truth Social in 2023, “speaking to, and in control of, a jury from an anti-Trump area which is probably the worst place in the US for me to get a fair ‘trial’.”

 

Image via Reuters

 

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2026 AlterNet Media.