In September of 2011, the NFL added sexual orientation to it’s anti-discrimination policy agreement with the NFLPA. I’m sure there are also relevant state anti-discrimination laws that may come into play.
Now we just need a plaintiff.
And even if sexual orientation isn’t protected, it’s still illegal to discriminate based on marital and family status. Seriously, I don’t see how anything good can come out of this line of questioning.
Personally, I would answer “Do you like girls?” with “No, I prefer adult women”.
The funny thing is, I see the question as less likely meant to discriminate against homosexuals than as to get a sense of what kind of inducement might work to attract a given player to sign with their team.
Wasn’t there a sports agent who recently got banned for obtaining sexual services for his clients? Even if it doesn’t go that far, it might be a matter of whether or not taking a guy to a strip club to talk to him is a good idea.
The only problem with that is that NFL teams draft their players, the players don’t have to be induced to sign with a team, they’re selected. It is extremely rare for a player not to sign with the team that drafted them. So NFL teams don’t really have to worry about enticing these guys with sex.
The NFL is investigating:
"It is league policy to neither consider nor inquire about sexual orientation in the hiring process. In addition, there are specific protections in our collective bargaining agreement with the players that prohibit discrimination against any player, including on the basis of sexual orientation.
“We will look into the report on the questioning of Nick Kasa at the Scouting Combine. Any team or employee that inquires about impermissible subjects or makes an employment decision based on such factors is subject to league discipline.”
From here
“Do you like girls?”
“They’re cute and all, but I really prefer women. Besides, look what happened to Sandusky.”
“Do you like girls?”
“Only fake ones”
“There’s this one girl who’s kind of special. Her name is Lennay and she went to Stanford. She works in construction and travels all around the world helping kids…”
And the players complain the question wasn’t fair because they had a really cute guy asking.
Q: Do you like girls?
A: Nah. Sex in the City was my shit, though.
I’ve always assumed “girls” was one of the commodities used to pay college and professional athletes. The NFL is just asking what form of payment the recruit likes.
Pretty sure this is targeted at one player and one player only: Manti Te’o.
“Have you ever murdered someone?”
“Yes.”
“OK, have you ever tortured dogs?”
“Sure!”
“Awesome, well, this interview is almost over, one last question though…how do you feel about the 'gina?”
Hamlet:
- NFL teams frequently try to make arrangements with potential draftees before the draft
- Offering such “inducements” might be a tactic to get the draftee to agree to a lowball (pun semi-intended) offer
- Teams sign undrafted players after the draft has passed
I’m not sure I get what you’re saying. Who cares what happened with T’eo? Nothing illegal happened; no one was harmed. Why should the NFL need to take precautions?
Because she was fake! We can’t have our heroes and role models fapping to fake women like the rest of us!
What if they answer, “The younger the better.”?
It was widely discussed if the Te’o catfish/gay speculation/etc, fiasco would affect his draft pick. A lot of people see it as a huge embarrasement.
Perhaps the team(s) asking this line of questions want to shy away from that perceived public spectacle?
To be frank, I think it’s within reason to conclude that Te’o possibly being gay wasn’t the problem. But more so; a fake, dead, girlfriend who happened to be the son of a pastor…
That’s really what they should be asking.
See:
There’s really no reason to think that’s “the problem.”