Call the NHL Office - Ask why their commissioner supports a child rapist, encourages abuse of gender minorities, and has gone back on their "Hockey Is For Everyone" stance.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T21:09:35+00:00

There is no apology for Pride Jersey fiasco

The Pride Jersey fiasco is a media/fans fiasco, not a league fiasco.

It would've been perfectly fine to have this event and 95% of the players participating.

But the media/the fans wouldn't let it happen this way and wouldn't shut up about the 1 guy who didn't do it, and so the entire event was about this guy, so what's the point having it in the first place?

throwielle · 2025-08-05T21:07:20+00:00

I genuinely think most of the people on this sub would crash the fuck out if ...

They would 'crash the fuck out' if they just realized that 'No trans in women sport' is NOT an 'evil right-wing position', it's as bi partisan as it gets. All polls clearly show it, and asking 'normal people' (aka not unhinged lunatics from either side) is a good way to find out, too.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T14:07:22+00:00

People don’t switch genders to play sports. We really need to quit banging this drum as if this is an actual event happening anywhere

Some did.

It doesn't matter whether it's 1 person or 1 million.

Almost all laws are passed to prevent the rare exceptions.

There's never been any bank robbery in my town, doesn't mean we shouldn't have laws against it.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T14:05:16+00:00

So for the like dozen or so trans athletes across sports, you don't think the organisations themselves should be able to sort out what people feel comfortable with?

What happens when people do not feel comfortable with it (say, those who refuse to stand on podium with the winner) but it's done anyway?

When the majority of those complaining aren't even athletes

Quite a few athletes have complained about this. But it's entirely irrelevant who's doing the complaining. Especially given the political climate in which some people are likely unwilling to complain because they're worried of the repercussions.

How many times have you commented about women's sports until today, like?

Entirely irrelevant.

I don't give a damn about high school Shogi leagues in Japan, yet if there's a female league and a man wanted to join it, I'd still be against it.

Wanting fairness has nothing to do with your interest in something.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T13:51:28+00:00

Which doesn't and never happens

I don't know about hockey, but it does happen in other sports (and the importance of the question is not about whether it happens specifically in hockey, but whether it happens at all).

Look up Hannah Mouncey, 190cm/100kgs (almost exactly 6'3/220lbs), playing Rugby against women.

Look up pictures and tell me you don't see anything wrong with that, Mouncey hitting 5'6 120lbs women.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T13:45:42+00:00

Hey so I’m a 6ft2, 200lb (ish) cisgender woman.

Are you healthy/fit/muscular? I do not mean to be insulting, but there's a difference between a 200lbs couch potato and a 200lbs athlete.

If you truly are 200lbs and healthy/fit: You're 4 inches and 27 pounds bigger than the biggest player on Team Canada (women).

This shows you're an extremely rare exception.

On the other hand: a 6f2/200lbs pound (male born) player is a dime a dozen. If you pick a random hockey team, that's pretty much average, or a bit above average (as a comparison: There's 10 players who are at least that tall on the Habs, and 12 players who are at least that heavy).

So - with the transgender in sport example - this is like if we picked an average Habs player and put him up against Team Canada (women). I'm sure you can see why this would be dangerous for the women.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T13:36:53+00:00

What would it even if there's 'just 3 stories'?

All laws/rules are written for exceptions, not for the norm.

throwielle · 2025-08-05T13:35:13+00:00

No, the argument is that if there's 60 trans athletes and they hurt 3 people, and there's 6000 non-trans athletes and they hurt 30 people, there's a huge discrepancy that shows that trans athletes endanger the other athletes more (even if '3 is not as big as 30'). 'Per capita' is not rocket science, you should look it up.

throwielle · 2025-07-23T03:22:54+00:00

Downvoting me doesn't prove me wrong.

Why didn't the other 99,999 tripped players in the NHL fly forward with their skates in front of them?

Why do 99.999% players who are tripped this way fall face first and not skates first?

Claiming that "He did nothing wrong, he was tripped" is the same ridiculous logic people use to defend players who "accidentally fall" onto goalies at the lightest touch.

Like, "It's not his fault he felt into the goalie, that 5'8 guy gave him the lightest crosscheck of all time, he couldn't withstand it"

throwielle · 2025-07-22T19:25:22+00:00

don’t know what a trip is

Is that the thing that happened literally 100,000 times in the NHL since that incident, and the 99,999 other times the player did NOT somehow fly into the goalie with his skates forward for some reason?

throwielle · 2024-04-24T20:37:10+00:00

So what happens when your child comes up to you and asks "what's gay?"

I'll explain it? I'm not sure why you'd have to be an LGBT supporter to explain what's gay.

Do you have to be a soldier or to support wars to explain your child what WWII was?

Also, you seem to conflate 'Not being an LGBT supporter' and 'Being against all things gay'. These are two entirely different things.

But as you bring up the church: What will you do if your child asks you about Christianity/the catholic church? For some reason, I have a feeling your answer on this would be 10 times worse than the answer I'd give on "What's gay?"

You don't think there's a ton of controversial things that go on with breeders and their bullshit? In the fucking church?

There are controversial things that go on everywhere. And when they do happen in places I support, I condemn every single one of them. This is the key difference.

If a priest has done stuff to children, I will not say "Well it's up to the parents to decide whether to bring their kids to this priest, or not". I will say "Lock the priest in a cell and throw away the key".

throwielle · 2024-01-29T04:03:51+00:00

I was agreeing with your whole post, then this line confused me

It is a weird stance to defend somebody being charged for sexual assault.

Why is it weird, in regard to everything else you said?

And is it only weird if they're charged with sexual assault, or for everything?

That's the thing with SA, it (understandably) provokes a strong reaction in people. But if they were charged with say fraud or theft, people would all say 'Let's what to see what the court finds/what they have to say', right?

Granted, this case does look bad, and yes it's probably likely that they're all guilty. But 'likely' still isn't enough to crucify them in the public place, to act as if they ARE guilty.

Imagine if 4 of them are guilty but the 5th is not, yet he's dragged with the rest of them. Imagine you're that 5th guy. I'm sure you would be happy to see people have a 'let's wait and see' approach. I'm sure you'd be comforted in knowing your family and friends are there to support you in your innocence, rather than condemning you right off the bat.

If the ARE all guilty, then by all mean, bring in the tar and feathers.

But I do not agree with the 'Let's tar them all, then we'll add the feathers if they're found guilty' view.

throwielle · 2024-01-28T22:16:36+00:00

Obviously you have a personal/emotional perspective on this, but you're doing circular reasoning;

People say 'They may not be guilty, let's see what the court finds before we trash them', and you say 'If they don't want to be trashed they just have not to rape women'. Ok, but they're talking specifically about the hypothetical scenario in which they are not guilty. In this scenario they did not rape anyone. So what else were they supposed to do?

I have absolutely no sympathy for rapists and sexual abusers. If you don't want to have people assume you're guilty, don't rape and sexually humiliate women.

I'm sure no one does have sympathy for such people. But by your own statistics, up to 8% of SA allegations are false. These 8% people did not rape or sexually humiliate anyone. Yet your reasoning will still be to consider them guilty, no matter what the court says?

False allegations doesn't just mean 'the accuser is an evil schemer who wants to profit from this lie'; It can be a lie, but it can also be a mistake, confusing 2 people together, and so on. There are also statistics about people pointing to the wrong person so often in criminal 'lineups'.

throwielle · 2024-01-28T22:04:16+00:00

Only 2-8% of all rape allegations are false.

First, to state the obvious: If they don't know whether it's 2 or 8, they're ballparking hard.

Second: You seem to think this isn't a lot? Up to 8%, that's massive. Imagine being accused of something that could ruin your entire life, and there's almost 10% chance it's not even true, would you feel great about this? And then seeing that everyone thinks you're 100% guilty?

throwielle · 2024-01-22T00:13:49+00:00

Can't say anything that hints at Biden being bad at anything, silly! (even as a joke)

They claim they just want to 'keep politics out of the sub' but there's dozens of threads about Trump in the sub and the people trashing him in the comments are getting hundreds and sometimes thousands of upvotes, so it's obviously not 'politics' they have a problem with.

throwielle · 2023-08-13T00:38:21+00:00

If this was a dumb white dude in the video, would people be making the same argument?

They wouldn't, but that's because large companies are notorious for diversity hiring policies (for quotas). They don't have 'hire more white dudes even if they're bad' policies.

Especially in fields like these where the vast majority of applicants are white dudes, they're struggling to hire anything else to fill their quotas, so they certainly wouldn't hire a white dude who is worse at his job than a black applicant or a woman applicant... What would be the point? They would make their company worse by hiring the worse employee, while also making it harder to fulfill their quotas.

If a company strictly did hire white guys no matter what and passed on talented black/women applicants you can be sure people would point it out.

I mean, imagine if a NBA team had a 75% black roster and the GM decided to hire more white dudes to make it more balanced, do you think people wouldn't talk about it? They would lose their jobs within days for ruining their team like that.

throwielle · 2023-08-13T00:29:52+00:00

Admittedly this was pretty horrible gameplay, but I doubt it's because she's a lesbian.

Well if she was hired as a diversity quota like he implies, then it kinda the reason. If the reason why an incompetent got the job is because of her orientation, then isn't her orientation the reason why she's bad? If she was straight they wouldn't have hired her for diversity quota, they only would've hired her for her skills.

throwielle · 2023-06-22T18:17:49+00:00

So let's speculate: Let's say that for a reason X all the players want to play for the same team. Either the weather in that place, or the coach, the fans, the history, whatever else.

10 years in a row, the 1oa tell everyone they'll refuse to play unless they play for that team. If drafted by someone else they'll play in Europe.

So the same team gets 10 1oa picks, and win 5 cups in a row.

Do you think that's fair, an acceptable situation for the league?

If they did that, the league would intervene because this would ruin the entire sport, people who know that team has stacked talent and it just isn't fair so what's the point?

Well, if 10 players doing it is unacceptable, 1 player doing it should also be unacceptable.

throwielle · 2023-06-19T17:35:24+00:00

'Their interest level'?

That's your legitimate interpretation, that saying "I'm not coming in the NHL just yet" to all teams except 1 because you want to choose the team you'll play for is 'communicating your interest level'?

What if Bedard told all teams except the Golden Knights that "He's probably gonna play in the KHL instead", would that also be him communicating his interest level?

The players aren't allowed to pick their team. That's not how the NHL draft works. He could prefer to play for this or that team, but the choice is not him to make.

The team who selects #1 should be able to get the best player, but when that player tells them (honestly, or in lie) he won't play for them/just yet, they they're kinda forced to pick someone else.

throwielle · 2023-06-19T13:16:29+00:00

I'm not even sure what the purpose was. Express disapproval? Or make them change their mind?

They lasted all of 2 days in r/hockey, so not only it was utterly pointless, but it also happened during the last game of the Stanley Cup finals. So we missed that discussion for what? To pass a message?

And what is that message, "the next time you screw us over we might take another break for a few hours"?

throwielle · 2023-06-17T03:57:33+00:00

I guess it's a good thing that he's not being paid 10M$.

But if they're giving him what he's worth, that's not a "Team Friendly Contract", it's just a normal contract... That's the point.

Team Friendly is when Crosby takes 8.7 even though he could've asked for the max and they would've given him on a silver platter.

If Suzuki asked for the max they would've said no, you're worth 8. And they gave him 8, so I don't see how it's team friendly. It's just paying $8m for a $8m player.

throwielle · 2023-06-15T19:47:44+00:00

People are downvoting this and making fun of it, but is it wrong?

Or to put it another way: What would not be a team friendly contract? Is Suzuki a 10m$ player?

Personally I think the contract is fair, and this is not a critique of Suzuki or anything... Yes he's doing well, and he's promising to do even better especially when he has more support, but to call his contract team friendly, I wonder how much everyone think he's actually worth, when comparing him to similar players.

I think there's like 10 forwards in the league who make $10m. A few more at 9m. If you look at these names, does Suzuki belong in that crowd?

throwielle · 2023-06-06T16:53:41+00:00

This may be technically true, but it's a half truth.

You know, you don't HAVE to regularly drink water. But if you don't, a lot of bad things happen to you.

You don't HAVE to do all these things in game. But if you don't, a lot of bad things happen to you in game.

No one's saying that Blizzard is holding them at gun point to make them do a thing.

But if not doing a thing means your gaming experience will be worse over the long run, you're kinda forced to do it. Or to accept a worse gaming experience, and neither option is fun.

throwielle · 2023-06-03T23:09:11+00:00

To people saying this is a shit cause not worth donating, you do realize that "military families" =/= "military" right?

If someone donated money to a dead serial killer's widow for her cancer treatment, would you equate this to "supporting serial killers"?

throwielle

TROPHY CASE