Mediaboss Marketing

This story is part of a documentary project on Gender Queer and the Culture Wars in Michigans Libraries. To watch the video, click here.

Nobody could predict a little library in Ottawa County, just southwest of Grand Rapids, would ignite a literary culture war across Michigan when it chose not to pull a handful of LGBTQ books from its shelves in 2022.

At the heart of the issue was Gender Queer: A Memoir, by Maia Kobabe, which made waves within the community serviced by Patmos Library in west Michigan. At library board meetings, whether to keep or ditch the book, and others like it was characterized as outright war a battle of good versus evil.

The story centers on Kobabes journey coming out as a non-binary, asexual person and the internal and external struggles e faced as a result. Part of that story, though, involves Kobabe who uses the pronouns e/em/eir recounting sexual experiences or fantasies via illustration, leaving little to the imagination.

Its led to a divide in communities across Michigan. At public and school libraries, books like Gender Queer have sparked outrage on whether the materials should be available at all and what roles libraries play in preventing children from viewing materials on sex, gender and sexuality.

As a graphic novel, some feel the medium inherently caters to children and take offense to the sex and imagery within. Others, however, say simply because the book contains pictures does not mean it is marketed to young children, meaning those claiming the book is meant to introduce sex acts to children are doing so in bad faith.

For Kobabe, the memoir is not meant for young children, with the audience for Gender Queer considered to be high school level and above.

It would have meant the world to me to find a book like Gender Queer as a teen reader ... it would have saved me like 10 years of questioning and confusion and uncertainty about who I was, Kobabe told MLive. I could have known sooner more about who I am as a person and, because of that, moved on to different questions, different learning, different experiences earlier if I had been able to read this kind of book and have some of these questions answered.

But despite what Kobabe thinks, some parents and community members arent mollified and believe the book should be kept away from where children could have access to it.

I think theres definitely a danger in children opening the book and maybe being encouraged to do things that theyre not ready for and that they should not be responsible for, said Laura Parkes, a mother of five who is in favor of the Lapeer Library removing Gender Queer from its shelves.

I dont believe we should give that burden or responsibility to our children to embrace so many sexualities at such a young age. They need context, they need time. ... Too much information is confusing.

Others, however, see the books as no different than any other item referencing sex or sexuality. And given many of the challenged books focus LGBTQ subjects, proponents here are quick to argue this isnt about protecting children but minimizing or erasing queer stories from public view.

I think its a slippery slope, and it sets a precedent for us to pull other books that are deemed not safe ... We start banning books like Gender Queer, then we start silencing other voices and having more of a monolith shown in our libraries, said Erin Cavanaugh, a mother of three and clinical social worker in Lapeer whos in favor of keeping the book on shelves. Its just not something we can do.

And in the middle? Libraries and their staff, who bear the brunt of this rage and the consequences of these efforts.

Challenging library books isnt new, but it is one that has steadily gained public attention over the last several years, topping out in 2022 at 359 books challenged across Michigans libraries.

Thats compared to just eight books challenged in 2017, according to the American Library Association, a nonprofit promoting libraries and library education internationally.

Clare Membiela, library law consultant for the Library of Michigan, said libraries frequently prune their collections to best serve their communities needs.

But challenging libraries to remove a book from their system comes with a high bar, she said. Simply demanding a book be removed because of its subject matter regardless if a person or group thinks the topic is obscene isnt enough to warrant taking it off shelves.

A public librarys mission is to permit the exercise of the First Amendment right to information and children also have those same rights. ... Its not up to the library to police what the children check out, Membiela said. Thats a job for their parents.

Thats especially true considering obscenity has a legal definition, with a test to determine it created by the U.S. Supreme Court as part of the 1973 ruling in Miller v. California.

A work as a whole must fail to meet contemporary community standards, describe or depict sexual conduct in a patently offensive way and lack serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value to be truly considered obscene.

Simply depicting a sex scene or containing nudity, such as in the case of Gender Queer, is not enough to warrant a book obscene.

And because Michigan recently amended its civil rights act to explicitly include protections for LGBTQ residents, Membiela said libraries are in a precarious situation when it comes to removing like-issue books from shelves.

If you have a library thats removing all of their LGBTQ-themed materials, and a library is supposed to reflect its community, then is there a discrimination issue here now? ... Theres some other facets to this that go beyond just the intellectual freedom question, she said.

Its something Kobabe echoed, saying the criticism of the work isnt personal, but removing the book completely from a library is.

I think that an attack on libraries, an attack on free speech, is an attack on every single American citizen, myself included, Kobabe said. So, I take it very personally in the sense that I feel like I am seeing the freedoms of our country being degraded. But I do not take it personally in that I think that I have written a bad book.

For Parkes, the parent who would like to see the book removed, it isnt a question of all LGBTQ narratives, but rather what to do with Gender Queer.

I dont believe that removing the book from the library is going to suppress an entire community ... I dont believe thats a valid argument, she said. I know we can get very emotional talking about these things, but were talking about one book. And I cant believe, in that community in the LGBTQ community that your identity lies in a single book. How can that be true?

But for parents like Cavanaugh and her wife, Lisa, keeping these types of stories available in the library means providing a safe environment for a person who sees themselves reflected in the pages of Gender Queer.

Imagine if you were that kid, and you were trying to sort through these feelings by yourself, and you didnt have any resources and all you had were maybe parents that werent supportive and telling you that you were wrong, Cavanaugh said. This books helps you to be seen, and have a light out of that darkness.

The American Library Association noted 1,269 demands to censor library books and resources in 2022. Its the highest number since the association began tracking those numbers more than 20 years ago.

Of the top 10 most challenged books, Gender Queer came in at No. 1 nationwide, and seven of the 13 novels three novels tied for 10th place as the most challenged were specifically challenged for containing LGBTQIA+ subject matter.

In Lapeer, Library Director Amy Churchill accused the county prosecutor of publicly trying to intimidate the library into removing the book after receiving a FOIA with an official Lapeer County Prosecutors Office letterhead earlier this year.

The book is currently under review, with County Prosecutor John Miller telling Bridge Michigan in March that the memoir could rise to the level of accosting, enticing or soliciting a child for immoral purpose. In Michigan, that charge carries a felony punishment of up to four years in prison.

The story is the same at Kalamazoo Countys Galesburg-Augusta high School and Bear Creek Townships Petoskey Public Library, where complaints of the books sexual imagery has caused residents particularly parents of school-aged children to push back against the contents of the graphic novel.

And for Patmos, its own community defunded the library after staff made the decision not to remove Kobabes memoir from shelves. Barring new funding, the library is slated to close in mid-2024 after two operating millage proposals failed in the midst of fervor surrounding the book.

Cierra Bakovka, a former adult services librarian for the Patmos Library, said the book was kept on the shelves out of a need for patrons to have all the choices they could ever need.

For her, to hear that libraries were potentially in legal hot water over simply stocking books was frightening. To see Patmos at risk of closing over it was heartbreaking especially considering that, to Bakovka, there was never a real question over whether to pull the book.

A lot of people like to read books that they relate to, that are about them, but its super important to know that not every community is made up of the same people, she said. Some people might have a majority, some people might have a minority in their community, but that doesnt make their experience any less valid or any less important to be represented and seen. ... You do your best to make sure everyone is represented. Not just whos the loudest.

With the library clamor growing, its garnered the attention of lawmakers in Lansing. Its whats prompted state Rep. Neil Friske, R-Charlevoix, to come up with his own solution to keep both sides happy: make an age restricted, 18-and-up section of the library.

Friske introduced a bill earlier this year which would require the governing body of a library to create and enforce a policy addressing obscene or sexually explicit matter, which could be potentially available to children.

What constitutes as obscene isnt defined under the bill, and Michigans oldest library association has already indicated that, legally, no library in-state carries obscene books.

When confronted with that statement, Friske pointed to a graphic novel on sex education hed checked out from a Michigan library and questioned how someone could defend a 10-year-old being able to pick up the book and leaf through detailed drawings of sex and genitalia.

Im not trying to remove the material, thats not what this bill is about. Its just to limit the access to it, Friske said.

For Membiela, the Michigan Library law consultant, rehoming books considered obscene to an age-restricted section of a library creates more problems than it solves, including determining what a child can and cant read, effectively overruling their own First Amendment rights.

There is also a concern for space and whether it would even be physically possible for a library to create a secluded, monitored 18+ section.

How do I delicately put this? Just from a public access standpoint ... putting all of the more adult materials in back, in a room thats sequestered, is kind of inviting some problems of another kind, Membiela said.

As Democrats oversee both the state House and Senate, theres little hope of the bill even receiving a committee hearing.

Still, Friske sees it as a matter of principal, keeping adult-level books away from children, and said arguments to the contrary like debating what constitutes obscene materials and whether libraries have the space to enact his bill are weak in his eyes.

Im not at all targeting LGBT community people, necessarily. Im not really targeting anybody, he said. Im just trying to protect kids.

And thats what it seems to boil down to: At the heart of the matter, those for and those against keeping books like Gender Queer on library shelves viewed themselves as having the best interest of children, and the broader community, top of mind.

The book is currently stocked at more than 100 public libraries across Michigan, with even more likely to have LGBTQ-related novels on their shelves as well. With the fervor surrounding book challenges, its unlikely the issue will simmer any time soon.

Its not something Kobabe ever thought would be an outcome when e published Gender Queer in 2019 mostly, e said, because initial reception to the graphic novel was overwhelmingly positive.

Even when pushback began to mount in 2021, and into the last two years, e admitted the positive feedback still outweighs the negative five-to-one.

When I wrote this book, I didnt know if anyone would relate to it. I also didnt know if anyone, aside from the people who knew me personally, would read it, Kobabe said. It has really been amazing to see this book find readers outside of my own sort of small circle of community.

And anyone who read it: I am in community with you. I see you, I support you, and I hope you can understand that these attacks on this book, and the attacks on other queer books, are not a reflection of your identity, or the validity of your identity.

More from MLive

Michigan voters rejected extremism at the polls, but culture wars still loom large

Defunded over book controversy, West Michigan library eyes changing how it selects new titles

Michigan libraries dont stock obscene books GOP reps bill would age-restrict, group says

Gender Queer graphic novel may be removed from Southwest Michigan school library

Algoma Township voters overwhelmingly reject leaving Kent District Library system

View post:
Outright war: Gender Queer and the attack on Michigan libraries - MLive.com

Hardly anyone could be more qualified than Timothy Keller to receive the Kuyper Prize for Excellence in Reformed Theology and Public Witness. It should have been the culmination of a remarkable career.

Keller applied Reformed theology to the heart of American culture while preaching at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan, which he planted in 1989 with his wife, Kathy. Kellers writing introduced Kuypers theology of vocationhis vision of God who claims every square inch of creation for his gloryto new generations of Christians around the world.

But the reaction from many Princeton Theological Seminary (PTS) students and alumni revealed just how much American culture had shifted since 1989 when Keller stepped down from the pulpit in 2017. Kellers views on womens ordination and homosexuality countered the prevailing norms at PTS and other mainline seminaries, not to mention the broader culture.

By this evolving standard, Abraham Kuyper wouldnt have been eligible for his own award. Under pressure from various advocacy groups, PTS leaders rescinded their decision to grant Keller the 2017 Kuyper Prize (which has since been hosted by Calvin College). The renowned pastor seemed poised to become yet another casualty in the ever-expanding culture wars.

Or not.

Keller did not receive the prize, but he agreed to give the lectures anyway. PTS did not want to reward him, but he still tolerated them. And for all the preceding protest, enthusiastic applause greeted Keller when he stepped to the podium on April 6, 2017. PTS president Craig Barnes got the message once again when he returned to dismiss the crowd.

I didnt attend the PTS lectures, but I understand the surprising affection for Keller.

As a teenage evangelical convert in the late 1990s, I knew my faith was not welcome in the halls of power, whether that was in the classrooms of an elite private school or in the offices of the US House of Representatives. I never expected my zeal for Christ would make me popular or famous or rich. I just wanted to be faithful to God and obedient to his Word no matter where he led. I wanted to share my faith without reserve, even among hostile crowds.

And in 2007, I found an exemplar who modeled how to do that in Americas most secular settings. Timothy Keller shared the gospel boldly in the idioms of his day, without demeaning or demanding anything but faith and trust in our faithful, trustworthy Savior.

When the tragedy of 9/11 gave way to a new and more virulent outbreak of the culture wars, Keller demonstrated a different way. As an associate editor for Christianity Today in 2007, I reported on the first public event of The Gospel Coalition (TGC), which Keller cofounded. My initial read of TGCs Theological Vision for Ministry, drafted by Keller, set forth an agenda I could follow as a young Christian coming of age in this contentious 21st century.

Keller centered me on the gospel of Jesus, which fills Christians with humility and hope, meekness and boldness, in a unique way. The biblical gospel isnt like traditional religion, which demands obedience for acceptance, or like secularism, which weve seen make American culture more selfish and individualistic.

The gospel, Keller taught with a nod to his late friend Jack Miller, says, We are more sinful and flawed than we ever dared believe, yet more loved and accepted in Jesus than we ever dared hope.

Steady amid hostility

Rare among preachers, Keller could engage the heart as much as the head. His books introduced me to social critics whose writing I could barely comprehend. But somehow, Kellers books also struck me as profoundly simple in their consistent emphasis on the gospel of grace.

You can see this dynamic at work in his PTS address, which engaged with Lesslie Newbigins 1984 Warfield lectures at PTS. In these lectures, which became the 1986 bookFoolishness to the Greeks: The Gospel and Western Culture, Newbigin argued for a missionary encounter with Western culture, which had become post-Christian. I dont know many Christian leaders who can simultaneously claim the heritage of Abraham Kuyper, famed Old Princeton theologian B. B. Warfield, and missiologist Lesslie Newbigin.

But that was Kellers gift. Its no clichhe never stopped learning or growing. In my book, Timothy Keller: His Spiritual and Intellectual Formation, I describe his intellectual and spiritual development as rings on a tree.

Keller retained the gospel core he learned from mid-century British evangelicals such as J. I. Packer, Martyn Lloyd-Jones, and John Stott. He grew to incorporate such varied writers as Charles Taylor, Herman Bavinck, N. T. Wright, and Alasdair MacIntyre. And he somehow synthesized them with Kuyper, Warfield, Newbigin, and dozens more in the middle.

Kellers final task, the great unfinished project he left to us, was charting a course for mission in the 21st-century West that bore scant resemblance to the middle-class context in Allentown, Pennsylvania, where he grew up in the 1950s.

Keller didnt even believe his own successful ministry in New York would offer much guidance for the generations that would succeed him. Keller followed Newbigin, who identified the post-Christian West as the most resistant, challenging missionary frontier of all time.

None of the traditional Christian reactions to culture would suffice as the basis for an effective missionary program under these contemporary conditions. If anything, these responses could only warn Christians of what not to do. Christians must not withdraw like the Amish, pursue political takeover like the Religious Right, or assimilate like the mainline Protestants.

Keller matched these categories to his friend James Davison Hunters workTo Change the World: Defensive Against (Religious Right), Relevance To (mainline), and Purity From (Amish). Hunter proposed faithful presence within as a more promising alternative, which Keller adopted as his own perspective in Center Church.

As many American Christians began to shift their social and political tactics in 2016, Keller came under increased criticism and scrutiny from fellow evangelicals. But anyone who followed his work over the decades could see that he was not the one who had changed.

Keller did not court such opposition. Anyone working with him could attest to his extreme aversion to conflict. In all our personal conversations, I cannot recall hearing a single critical comment from him directed toward a fellow believer.

His steadiness under this growing hostility gave courage and comfort to younger leaders who became disillusioned by the fall of so many of our former heroes. Even I worried about uncovering unflattering secrets when I began writing his biography. Instead, talking to dozens of Kellers close friends and family members who knew him from childhood only confirmed my personal experience of him.

But growing closer to Keller didnt lead me to idolize him. It simply allowed me to witness 2 Corinthians 4:7 in action, a flawed vessel carrying the most valuable treasurenothing less than the surpassing power of God.

Love the local church

Keller may have demurred at his ability to anticipate new challenges for the late-modern West. But he still laid out an agenda that could radically reshape evangelicals prioritiesif only they would turn off the cable news and listen. Kellers PTS lectures proposed seven steps for a missionary encounter in the post-Christian West.

First, he called for public apologetics in the vein of Augustines City of God. For this, readers could start with Kellers Making Sense of God, one of his overlooked classics. Second, he proposed a third way between the mainline concern for social problems and the evangelical concern for spiritual problems: Justification must lead to justice. Third, he challenged Christians to critique secularism from within its own framework, not from an outward construct. Borrowing from Daniel Strange, Keller called this process subversive fulfillment.

Fourth, as Keller had insisted so many times before, he encouraged laity to integrate their faith with their work. Non-Christians must see the difference faith makes in day-to-day living. Fifth, he encouraged Americans to learn from the global church. Keller admitted in his 2017 PTS lecture that conservative evangelicals in the United States put too much faith in their own methodology and struggle to see the kingdom of God apart from American national interest.

Sixth, Keller highlighted the difference between grace and religion. As Richard Lovelace showed Keller in his first class at Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary in 1972, missionary encounters that produce social change depend on grace, not on the rules of religion. Only grace brings spiritual transformation. Apart from the Spirit of God, were helpless to effect lasting change in our fallen world.

Keller would have excelled as a professor if hed stayed at Westminster Theological Seminary instead of moving to New York with his young family and planting Redeemer. He made enough money on his books and speaking that he would never have run out of venues inviting him to pontificate. But God called Keller to pastoral ministry, and that is what so often set him apart.

Even when Keller chastised evangelicals, he spoke and wrote as a pastor with love for his flock. Kellers only mentor, Edmund Clowney, helped him to love the local church, warts and all. As easily as Keller quoted obscure academics or New York Times columnists, he aimed to build up the local church. And in the explosive early growth of Redeemer church, and again in the dark days after 9/11, Keller witnessed the Spirit moving in unexpected and powerful ways.

Seventh, and lastly, Keller left American evangelicals with a vision for Christian community that disrupts the social categories of our culture. These thriving communities lend credibility to the transformative power of the gospel.

Keller cited the work of Larry Hurtado in Destroyer of the gods: Early Christian Distinctiveness in the Roman World. In this incisive study, Hurtado showed how the persecuted early church wasnt just offensive to Jews and Greeks. It was also attractive. The first Christians opposed abortion and infanticide by adopting children. They did not retaliate but instead forgave. They cared for the poor and marginalized. Their strict sexual ethic protected and empowered women and children.

Christianity brought together hostile nations and ethnic groups. Jesus broke apart the connection between religion and ethnicity when he revealed a God for every tribe, tongue, and nation. Allegiance to Jesus trumped geography, nationality, and ethnicity in the church. As a result, Christians gained perspective so they could critique any culture. And they learned to listen to the critiques from fellow Christians embedded in different cultures.

Instead of delivering this lecture at PTS, Keller could have challenged the administration and canceled his talk. This would have gained greater attention and support from his fellow conservative evangelicals. He could likely have raised more money for his ministry too. But Keller put his teaching into practice. He had told Christians for years that the gospel offers a distinct alternative to the intolerance of secularism and the tribalism of religion.

I dont yet see widespread evidence that evangelicals have taken Kellers advice or followed his example. Intolerance has been met with intolerance, hostility with more hostility.

But I suspect, if the Holy Spirit blesses us with another awakening, our churches will look more like what Keller envisionedwhere grace will once more find a way through the tangles of religion and secularism.

Collin Hansen serves as the vice president of content and editor in chief of The Gospel Coalition and is the author of Timothy Keller: His Spiritual and Intellectual Formation.

[ This article is also available in espaol,Portugus,Franais,,,Indonesian,,and . ]

See more here:
Tim Keller Practiced the Grace He Preached - ChristianityToday.com

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. (AP) The Walt Disney Co. announced Thursday that it was scrapping plans to build a new campus in central Florida and relocate 2,000 employees from Southern California to work in digital technology, finance and product development.

The decision follows a year of attacks from Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Legislature because the company opposed a state law that bans classroom lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades. Disney filed a First Amendment lawsuit against DeSantis and other officials last month.

More on Disney and Florida

Disney had planned to build the campus about 20 miles (30 kilometers) from the giant Walt Disney World theme park resort, but Josh DAmaro, chairman of the parks, experiences and products division, said in a memo to employees that new leadership and changing business conditions prompted the company to abandon those plans.

I remain optimistic about the direction of our Walt Disney World business, DAmaro said. We have plans to invest $17 billion and create 13,000 jobs over the next ten years. I hope were able to do so.

Disney and DeSantis have been engaged in a tug-of-war for more than a year that has engulfed the GOP governor in criticism as he prepares to launch an expected presidential bid in the coming weeks.

DeSantis spokesman Jeremy Redfern said the state had been unsure whether the new Disney campus would come to fruition since it was announced nearly two years ago.

Given the companys financial straits, falling market cap and declining stock price, it is unsurprising that they would restructure their business operations and cancel unsuccessful ventures, Redfern said.

Florida Sen. Joe Gruters, a former chairman of the state Republican Party, called Disneys decision a huge loss.

I hope we can put this conflict behind us and get back to a more normal working relationship with a company thats been one of our best business and tourism partners that weve had over the last 50 years, Gruters said. Two thousand jobs and a billion dollars worth of investments into our state, I would say thats a serious blow. The market is much better at dealing with companies rather than heavy-handed government.

Democratic Rep. Anna Eskamani, who represents the Orlando area in the Florida House, released a statement blaming the governor for the lost jobs.

Governor Ron DeSantis is a job killing moron who cares more about his own political ambitions and culture wars than Florida and our future, Eskamani said. According to him, woke makes you go broke but this is another example of how its actually the complete opposite. DeSantis is not who you want for President ever.

The feud started after Disney, in the face of significant pressure, publicly opposed the state concerning lessons on sexual orientation and gender identity in early grades that critics called Dont Say Gay.

As punishment, DeSantis took over Disney Worlds self-governing district through legislation passed by lawmakers and appointed a new board of supervisors. Before the new board came in, the company signed agreements with the old board stripping the new supervisors of design and construction authority.

In response, the Republican-controlled Florida Legislature passed legislation allowing the DeSantis-appointed board to repeal those agreements and made the theme park resorts monorail system subject to state inspection, when it previously had been done in-house.

Disneys suit against DeSantis alleges the governor waged a targeted campaign of government retaliation. It asks a federal judge to void the takeover of the theme park district, as well as the DeSantis oversight boards actions, on the grounds that they were violations of the companys free speech rights.

The creation of Disneys self-governing district by the Florida Legislature was instrumental in the companys decision in the 1960s to build near Orlando. Disney told the state at the time that it planned to build a futuristic city that would include a transit system and urban planning innovations, so the company needed autonomy. The futuristic city never materialized, however, and instead morphed into a second theme park that opened in 1982.

Follow this link:
Disney scraps plans for new $1 billion Florida campus amid fight ... - The Associated Press

Howard BryantESPN Senior WriterMay 19, 2023, 07:50 AM ET7 Minute Read

Twenty-one and a half years ago, one of the greatest baseball games ended one of the greatest World Series ever played. There was, in the cacophony of the moment, so much to process with virtually no time to do so. The 2001 New York Yankees had lost the World Series in the bottom of the ninth inning, missing the chance to win a fourth straight World Series and conclude a dynasty with a championship. The Arizona Diamondbacks, in only their fourth year of existence, had done something the Boston Red Sox hadn't done since 1918, the White Sox since 1917 and the Cubs since 1908. They were champions, and needed just 48 months to do it.

How to encapsulate it all? The valiant Yankees, who probably deserved to be swept, mercilessly or gentlemanly, extended the series to seven games hitting .183 by producing magic, and then producing it again with soul-sucking (or dynasty-affirming, if you're from the 917, 212 or 718 area codes), late-game home runs in Games 4 and 5. Curt Schilling or Randy Johnson, when starters still mattered, won all four games for Arizona. Yankees reliever Mariano Rivera proved human in Game 7. And then there was America, wounded, mourning, vulnerable, briefly unsure if it wanted a hug or revenge (it would emphatically choose the latter) in the numbing, ashen haze of 9/11. The athletes had given so much that the actual winner of that Series remains to this day secondary to the gift of its existence.

In the clubhouse postgame, the defeated Yankees captain Derek Jeter encapsulated it all his way, by repeating the mantra he first used in 1997, and would repeat in each of the following years until 2009 -- and for five more years when he retired. "If we don't win the World Series," Jeter said, "the season's a failure."

Two decades later, Jeter's alpha found itself challenged in the form of Milwaukee Bucks superstar Giannis Antetokounmpo, who responded to a reporter's question of whether he felt the Bucks' season was a failure after top-seeded Milwaukee crashed out of the playoffs in the first round in a five-game stunner to the Miami Heat, an eight-seed that had to win two play-in games just to qualify for the postseason.

"Michael Jordan played 15 years, won six championships. The other nine years was a failure? That's what you're telling me? I'm asking you a question, yes or no?" Antetokounmpo said. "... It's the wrong question. There's no failure in sports. There're good days, bad days. Some days you are able to be successful, some days you are not. Some days it is your turn, some days it's not your turn. And that's what sports is about. You don't always win."

As much as the last decade has been defined by protests and pandemics, it also has seen a shift in the perception of the athlete's mission, from complete victory to philosophy. In taking control of the profession by countering prevailing attitudes -- many self-introduced -- the professional athlete can be General Patton or the Dalai Lama. The considerations of mental health, work-life balance, political world view and labor relations have provided ample grist for the culture wars that undergird the anger over players having the agency (read: financial freedom) to reshape their working conditions. The response to Antetokounmpo has been to view his philosophy as strength, where that sort of response once was viewed by some as weakness. Male players once ridiculed and culturally ostracized by fans, teammates and their own front offices for even thinking about family during the season, now take paternity leaves -- even during the playoffs, as Boston Celtics guard Derrick White did last year during the Eastern Conference finals. From Serena Williams to Naomi Osaka to Angelique Kerber, female athletes are having children without announcing their retirements. Some players in individual sports are taking time away from the sport and then returning at their pace. Simone Biles lost her way athletically, and a generally compassionate sports public has given her all the time she needs to rediscover it.

Sports has always existed in the world of the "winner/loser, hero/goat, do/die" binary. The absolutism has been just as essential to the framework of creating the athlete colossus as militaristic cliches are to raising the stakes of this battle fantasy. It stokes the mythology, gives it the requisite dramatic components, allows us to separate the poor from the exceptional and the exceptional from the legendary. The players who embrace the binary ally themselves with fans in the suggestion that they care as much about winning as the ticket buyers. It buys them the currency of protection.

There's no tomorrow because sports have mastered the illusion of appearing deathly important -- and yet, of course there is always a tomorrow -- and people like Giannis are dousing that part of the fantasy. The Jeter position always felt like an unrealistic pander to the ridiculousness that is the overwrought and unrealistic expectation by Yankees fans, for only one team wins the final game of the season. The wonders and discoveries of a season cannot be negated by not winning a championship. By these metrics, the team that doubles its win total from the season before is a failure, as is the team that makes the playoffs for the first time in 25 years, as is the team that started the season losing its first 10 games but finished 10 games over .500, as is the team that discovered it had a future Hall of Famer on its roster. Thirty teams, 29 failures.

And yet, Giannis is only partially correct. Under no circumstances is he ever a failure in life, comparing his Greek-Nigerian upbringing and the prospects for him as a child against the life he now lives. There is not a day in his life, from now until the end, when he is not a winner.

All of which is a different dynamic from the obvious: The Boston Bruins won more games in a regular season (65) than any team in the storied history of the National Hockey League. They had an unprecedented season in their home building, losing only seven times, four in regulation. They amassed more points than any team in history, and like the Bucks, lost in the first round of the postseason. The Bruins were the No. 1 overall seed heading into the Stanley Cup playoffs. They lost three games at home to the Florida Panthers. They lost a 3-1 lead in games. In a Game 5 home elimination game, the Bruins never led. In a Game 6 elimination game, they lost two third-period leads and eventually the game. In the Game 7 clincher at home, the Bruins led with 60 seconds left in the game -- and lost in overtime.

Was the Bruins' regular season a failure? Of course not, but nor was it a coin toss where sometimes you win, sometimes you lose, sometimes it rains. The way the hockey season ended in Boston was a colossal disappointment.

Milwaukee was the top seed, won 16 straight games at one point this season and had plans to avenge last season, when it felt injuries robbed it of the chance to defend its NBA title. The Bucks lost in five games to the Miami Heat, including consecutive games with double-digit fourth-quarter leads. There's no philosophy in this: It was a collapse, and for it, Milwaukee coach Mike Budenholzer got fired.

If the fear is that Antetokounmpo's ability to put his life in the proper perspective will undermine the gladiatorial fantasy and its accompanying clichs of warriors, intestinal fortitudes, clutch genes and all the other rhetorical nonsense sports relies upon so desperately, then it is a fear that will be largely unfounded for two primary reasons. First, for every Giannis, there remains a Jeter -- and an enormous, enraged subsection of the fanbase that is never in the mood after crashing out of the playoffs for metaphysical analysis. Second, although Giannis might have been measured in how he spoke of his season ending, he emerged with even more respect because, for all of his mature perspectives, there was nothing in his play charging him with an athlete's greatest crime: playing as if he doesn't care. He simply recognized publicly and without clich, that losing is an inevitability that cannot and should not reduce a six-month journey into meaninglessness, even if -- as seen in Milwaukee and Boston -- there was so far to fall.

There is also a third reason, and it goes back to that November night in 2001: The final score is rarely the most comprehensive measure of victory. Ask anyone who lived through those weeks and months when something as ephemeral as hitting a ball with a stick contained the restorative power to motivate some people to get up in the morning. Failure because the Yankees lost a game was the last thing on anyone's mind.

Link:
From Jeter to Giannis, failure is a matter of perspective - ESPN - ESPN

WASHINGTON For the past few years, the culture wars have been a dominant force in American politics. The debate over what kind of country the U.S. should become and how fast it should change have been themes at the national and state level.

Now, a new poll from NBC News suggests the nation might be more accepting of a need for societal change than some have theorized, at least in some areas. The numbers indicate Democrats might have an advantage on some big cultural issues with the national electorate.

One of the broad debates in politics over the past few election cycles has been over the need (or lack of need) for greater social justice in the U.S. Democrats have largely trumpeted the concept, while Republicans have largely criticized it as a Trojan horse for more liberal policies.

The new poll finds large support for the idea of social justice.

Overall, 70% of those polled said they believed the country needs to do more to increase social justice. That number is surprising. In 2023, getting 70% of Americans to agree on anything is something of a rarity, but thats especially true for an issue many saw as polarizing.

There are, of course, splits along party lines. Among Democrats, the needs to do more number was a stratospheric 91%. Independents came in lower, at 67%. But even among Republicans, the idea was perhaps more popular than expected, with 50% agreeing to the idea.

The data at least suggest that phrases such as social justice warrior," which conservatives sometimes use pejoratively, might not be resonating with the public. Thats not to say liberals have carte blanche on the idea. Needs to do more doesnt mean needs to do everything possible. But the data suggest there is nothing inherently risky about politicians advocating for social justice at least nationally.

That attitude is evident in other areas of the poll, as well. For instance, Americans seem supportive of increased acceptance of the LGBTQ community.

On the whole, 61% of American adults in the poll say they want the country to become more tolerant and accepting of the LGBTQ community. Thats obviously lower than the social justice number but still impressive.

The partisan splits are wider on this topic. For Democrats, the figure for more tolerant and accepting is 87%. Independents sit right at the national figure, 61%. But Republicans are far lower, with only 38% saying they want the country to become more accepting of the LGBTQ population.

The numbers suggest the issue could be a complicated one in 2024. Republican candidates might see an advantage in opposing greater LGBTQ tolerance in their primaries to appeal to GOP voters, but if and when they reach a general election, those stances could be a problem. That depends on the specific race and electorate, of course, but the differences in attitudes between Republican-leaning adults and the rest of the population are stark.

There might be at least one culturally divisive area in which Republicans hold a small advantage: how the nation feels about the transgender population.

The poll found a small plurality of those surveyed believed we have gone too far in accepting transgender people. In total, 48% in the poll said they agreed with that statement, while 43% said the nation has gone far enough in ending discrimination against transgender people a 5-point gap.

And the partisan splits on this question were particularly sharp. Only 19% of Democrats in the poll said they thought the country had gone too far in accepting trans Americans. For independents, the number was 50%. And among Republicans, the number was much higher, at 79%.

The data suggests Republican candidates have an issue that might be able to motivate their base and probably not hurt them in the general election, but the larger point in the numbers may be their unsettled nature. The poll numbers slightly lean toward gone too far, but not decisively. Ultimately, the power of the issue is likely to be tied to the specific electorate in question and how far it leans Republican.

And, as a reference point, the unclear attitudes about accepting transgender Americans look somewhat similar to another recent issue over which attitudes shifted quickly, gay marriage.

Less than 20 years ago, those surveyed in the NBC News/Wall Street Journal poll opposed same-sex marriage by more than 30 points only 30% favored allowing it, while 62% opposed it. Those numbers are more negative than the current attitudes toward transgender Americans.

The climb to acceptance of gay marriage happened steadily and quickly, however. By last year, the numbers had more than reversed, with 65% saying they favored allowing it and only 20% opposing. Its a reminder that American cultural attitudes arent set in stone, particularly in the evolving areas of gender and sexuality.

But the larger message in the latest NBC News poll may be about the power of the culture wars as 2024 approaches. Issues like social justice and LGBTQ and trans rights might be big in the political conversation, but their influence on the electorate is far from clear.

Dante Chinni

Dante Chinni is a contributor to NBC News specializing in data analysis around campaigns, politics and culture.

Read more:
Most Americans want societal change but are divided on specifics - NBC News