The NHL needs to man up and reduce derogatory language in its league
The decree is out. The National Hockey League has decided: Cheap shots are in this year.
Just so there’s no confusion, we’re not talking about blindside hits to the head here. The league has – commendably, albeit belatedly – come to the realization that concussions are a nasty business, especially when they happen to sideline its most marketable player. No, the cheap shot in question occurred about a week before this year’s NHL campaign was set to begin, during a preseason game between the Philadelphia Flyers and New York Rangers, when cameras caught Flyers left winger Wayne Simmonds uttering a homophobic slur.
We’ve all heard the word before. As far as words go, it’s an ugly one, because it singles out and implicitly denigrates a whole section of the population based on something as arbitrary as sexual orientation. In this case, it was directed at Rangers’ forward Sean Avery, who is a vocal supporter of gay rights and was active in the successful campaign to legalize gay marriage in the state of New York. Simmonds, ironically enough, is a member of a minority himself, being of African-Canadian descent. He was at the centre of a different preseason controversy three weeks ago when a fan in London, Ontario, threw a banana at him – a tasteless and offensive jab at the colour of his skin. Then, Simmonds achieved something rather remarkable: In one week, he transformed himself from a victim of prejudice, to prejudice’s poster boy.
Perhaps the most surprising element of this sad story is the league’s reaction to Simmonds’ behaviour. While the league issued a statement in the wake of the incident asserting that Simmonds’ use of such a derogatory term was “absolutely unacceptable,” they declined to take any kind of disciplinary action. Their reason: Simmonds denied having said anything offensive and they just couldn’t figure out who to believe, despite the fact that, as the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD) notes in their press release on the matter, “It is abundantly clear from video footage that an instance of anti-gay bias occurred.”
GLAAD’s acting president, Mike Thompson, also correctly points out that the National Basketball Association, when faced with a similar incident involving star player Kobe Bryant, fined the responsible party for his irresponsible behaviour. The only difference is Bryant publicly apologized almost immediately, making it easier for the league to justify punishment. However, just because Simmonds did not feel like owning up to his words does not mean the league gets to abdicate the responsibility of holding him to account. Even a simple fine would have meant something; losing $50, 000 won’t hurt a pro athlete very much, but it sends a strong signal to the rest of the world about the place of hate speech in sports.
By failing to take any action at all, the NHL missed a tremendous re-branding opportunity. For quite some time the league has been a breeding ground for antiquated, hyper-masculine social mores. This is a sport that still relies on fighting – honest to goodness hand-to-hand combat on skates – as a means of boosting attendance and allowing players to prove their manhood. It also promotes an environment in which former team executives are given Saturday night pulpits to bemoan the “pansy-fication” of the game, and where standing up for a teammate is paramount – even if that teammate has just put an opponent in the hospital with a vicious hit.
For once, however, this most reactionary of sports leagues had a chance to shrug off its past and become a progressive voice for change. Swift and unequivocal punishment would have made it clear to the next generation of NHL stars that it is simply not acceptable to taunt someone based on sexual orientation. Instead, the league predictably chose the safe path of non-intervention, reinforcing stereotypes about hockey culture that many fans – this writer included – wish would disappear.
So who is most at fault here? Is it Simmonds, the league, or the culture that surrounds both? In a way, it doesn’t matter. The slur used by Simmonds is a relic of a bygone era, meaning the league is in danger of becoming irrelevant if it remains unresponsive.
Sure, the league wants to maintain its tough, masculine image – we get it. But that’s not incompatible with change. Executives and players, from Chairman Gary Bettman on down, must be brave and take a stand against hurtful and dangerous language.
Or, to put it in terms a league official would understand: It’s time to act like men.
Recent Comments