11/17/24
August 23, 2005
Discrimination?: She was accused of sexual assault following a party at her Marina del Rey condo.
Less than a month later, a similar allegation would be leveled against Los Angeles Lakers star Kobe Bryant by a Colorado hotel worker. The athletes shared more in common than the specter of a criminal trial. They also worked for the same corporate family, an L.A. institution that would treat the two ballplayers—one famous and the other relatively obscure—very differently.
posted by lilnemo to basketball at 05:03 PM - 35 comments
Well, clearly there is a double standard -- the question is, which double standard (men vs. women, gays vs. straights, big money vs. small money, or what). They dropped her like a hot rock at the very allegation -- not charges, not a trial, nothing. To say that it had nothing to do with her dismissal is clearly bullshit. And if you want to say that it was just the last straw, fine, but how can you make that argument when it eventually turned out to be a non-event? Byears was and is a great player. I'm glad she's sticking it out in Turkey just to stay playing, and I hope she gets reinstated. Good luck to Byears with her suit, and props to Lisa Leslie for standing up for a teammate. Punk-ass Sheryl Swoopes wouldn't have, that's for sure.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 05:56 PM on August 23, 2005
Punk-ass Sheryl Swoopes wouldn't have, that's for sure. You've peaked my interest, can you elaborate?
posted by lilnemo at 06:16 PM on August 23, 2005
She's a big ol' member of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes and has been known to do some FCA-inspired dirty dealings towards lesbians.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:26 PM on August 23, 2005
But she's still okay with earning a check that is partially paid by a segment of the gay/lesbian community right? A check for $X why thank you. Now go to hell. Hypocrite.
posted by lilnemo at 06:45 PM on August 23, 2005
Interesting Byears wasn't drafted either, despite the numbers she put up in college. The only complaint I have about the article is it feels like the authors glossed over some of Byears negatives in order to drive home the "they fired her because she was gay!" point.
posted by yerfatma at 07:12 PM on August 23, 2005
let just agree that nothing good comes from white women
posted by david at 07:23 PM on August 23, 2005
What the hell does being a white woman have to do with this conversation?
posted by tdheiland at 07:30 PM on August 23, 2005
yerfatma, based on having seen her play, I'd say that clearly she had something of a hot temper, and she was the enforcer. But there are other "negatives" that people don't talk about and that shouldn't be. For example, I think pretty clearly the league is a lot more positive about its "feminine" players and feels that it needs to hide, or at least downplay, the rest. I remember a couple of years before the WNBA All-Star Game, they had this huge feature thing -- not really a pre-game show -- that more or less headlined Lisa Leslie and Sheryl Swoopes going to the spa to prove that they're still feminine enough. It's disturbing. Clearly, for someone like Lisa Leslie, that's genuinely her preferred style...but it's a damn shame if someone like (for example) Byears, for whom that's not the preferred style, gets punished for her lack of so-called femininity. Shades of A League of Their Own.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 07:39 PM on August 23, 2005
It appears to me Byears got a really shitty deal here, and that Los Angeles folded up like a cheap tent when push came to shove. She apparently did her job and did it very well, and the team had no real problem with her when she was shoving bodies around in the paint. That said, Byears also has to be intelligent enough to realize that having a DUI conviction and a somewhat spotty past is not going to earn you a lot of second chances in most jobs (Kobe Bryant notwithstanding). Quotes like this about her week-long stint in retail ... "It's not that the work was bad," Byears says. "I just couldn't take it. Playing basketball is what I've been doing since high school, and it's all I really know how to do." ... are not going to help either. I'm not going to sympathize with you much if you couldn't be bothered with cracking the occasional book with the same vigor that you cracked skulls on the court. lbb, I agree about the WNBA's marketing of its "more attractive" players. I find it as disturbing as I find the LPGA's need to gussy up its golfers for ads and promotions.
posted by wfrazerjr at 08:04 PM on August 23, 2005
lbb, I definitely see what you're talking about. I meant the suggestions in the article that she might be more trouble than she's worth in terms of ability. fraze really summed up what I meant better than I did. Doug Bruno, DePaul's head coach . . . found Byears to be "a pleasure to coach" and "inside is a really good person," she's "a nonconformist who knows she needs to conform, but sometimes has a tough time with that." Coupled with other points in the article, it just sounded like she was a player that required a coach (though Bruno and Michael Cooper had no complaints) to keep an eye on/ develop a rapport with for her to be successful. That certainly could be a factor in her not getting picked up by another team.
posted by yerfatma at 06:08 AM on August 24, 2005
yerfatma, agreed. Not just the allegations, but other circumstances would have made her hard for another team to pick up. She was part of what you'd have to call the best starting five in the game (at the time) and coming off a championship, so she would have been both tricky and expensive (by WNBA standards) to take on as a starter on another team, and at a time of year when all the teams had just spent their allowances on the draft and figured out their rosters. The tussle with Marciniak really was legendary, too -- Marciniak came back swinging, and it was a standout incident in a very physical rivalry between the two teams. As an aside, I'm more and more an admirer of Michael Cooper. He commanded a tremendous amount of respect from Byears among others, and while he did have a lot of talented players to work with, I think that the way that the Sparks have fallen apart this year really shows how strong his positive influence was.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:23 AM on August 24, 2005
Great Link! I had never heard the full "Byears story" before. I must say that I was moved somewhat by the story.
posted by daddisamm at 06:51 AM on August 24, 2005
I dont really see the contrast between Kobe and her. If Kobe had allegedly raped a guy then maybe you put these two together. How can you expect the league to allow her to play when she probably really scares a lot of the other women (players and coaches), none of the guys that Kobe had to work with were scared of Kobe. And why are we still even talking about Kobe? The broad dropped the criminal case and went straight for the money, we all know what that was about.
posted by Drallig9399 at 11:24 AM on August 24, 2005
Here's a couple of contrasts for you, Drallig: - Byears was never charged with a crime. Bryant was charged and brought to trial. - Byears was immediately dismissed on the mere allegation of a crime. Bryant not only retained his position without forfeiture of any pay or benefits, the team went to both trouble and expense to accomodate his presence at the trial. ...but of course, right-thinking people like yourself know the truth: homosexuals are all sex maniacs, incapable of appropriate conduct, unable to keep their hands of members of the same sex, and ignorant of the meaning of the word "no". Idjit.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:40 AM on August 24, 2005
Dude you are a fucking tard. If I meant that homos couldnt understand the word no, then I would have typed it myself. My point was if you are a woman accused of sexual assault against a woman in a woman's league then you are screwed because at the very least you are making coworkers uneasy. If you are a man accused of assaulting a woman, but you play in a men's league there isnt the same problem. You act like chicks never ever lie about being raped. I am not saying that they all do, but plenty will say whatever they have to get some loot. Kobe's broad dragged his ass through the mud, and then was like "Nevermind, can I have my money now?" And by the way she wasnt a great basketball player, she was a great women's basketball player. There is a huge difference in our game and theirs.
posted by Drallig9399 at 12:17 PM on August 24, 2005
Dude you are a fucking tard. If I meant that homos couldnt understand the word no If this place ever needs a maitre d', you're my choice.
posted by yerfatma at 12:25 PM on August 24, 2005
Drallig: 1. I agree that if you are a woman accused of sexual assault against a woman, and you play in a women's league, you are screwed, at least in the WNBA. That's what Byears' case demonstrated quite amply: that there are a lot of idiotic bigots out there who feel that because they feel "uneasy" about a coworker, for totally unfounded reasons, that coworker should be fired. However: 2. Has it ever occurred to you that homosexuals spend their whole lives using the same locker rooms and bathrooms as members of the same sex? If you took a straight adult and suddenly put him/her in a situation where there were members of the opposite sex in the locker room, he/she would most likely have a meltdown. This is because he/she is totally unused to being naked, or partly naked, or under the suggestion that he/she might be naked behind a partition, around a member of the opposite sex without that being a sexually-charged situation. But just because straights don't know how to handle it, don't assume that gays don't. Gay people have to know how to handle it. Being around a member of the same sex is not automatically a sexually charged situation for gay people. Furthermore: 3. If you read the article, you'd know that teammates Tamecka Dixon and Lisa Leslie, who would have shared a locker room with Byears, had no problem with her. And, to turn to your strawman regarding Kobe Bryant: 3. You have no knowledge of whether "Kobe's broad", as you put it, was lying or telling the absolute truth. All you know is that she dropped the charges. As to why, well, you don't know anything about that either. All you know is that she did. Receiving threats and abuse from fair-minded induhviduals such as yourself might have had a lot to do with it. And to wind it up: 4. Asses make assumptions, and real big asses make real big ones. I'm one of only five, but we do exist here.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 12:36 PM on August 24, 2005
Dude you are the only one assuming. I am not knocking gays by any means. I could not care less what some other cat does. I wish all the men in the world were gay, thats more pussy for me. I guess that I am the only one here that feels that these are two situations are completely diff, thats ok, I can accept that. What I cant accept though is you acting like you are reading my mind. So by your logic women arent scared of, or atleast wary of, PEOPLE who are rumored to be sexually abusive towards women. Hmmmm, let me think about that, nope I dont agree.
posted by Drallig9399 at 12:48 PM on August 24, 2005
That chick dropping the case only means one thing to me, " want my money" I am sorry but that is what you are telling the world when you pull some shit like that. You can think she is a victim all you want but if she truly wanted justice she would have put him in jail where rapists belong.
posted by Drallig9399 at 12:53 PM on August 24, 2005
"I want money!"
posted by Drallig9399 at 12:53 PM on August 24, 2005
So by your logic women arent scared of, or atleast wary of, PEOPLE who are rumored to be sexually abusive towards women. That's not by my logic, that's by your strawman -- dude. But thanks for playing.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 01:13 PM on August 24, 2005
I still agree that it appears Byears got a raw deal in comparison to Kobe, but let's recap a few pieces of this story: 1) Byears wasn't just being investigated for sexually assaulting another woman. She was being investigated for sexually assaulting a former Sparks player. That may have had just an eensy bit of pull with Sparks management, and guess what -- maybe the management believed the alleged assaultee more than they believed Byears. 2) Yes, Leslie and Dixon say they had no problem with Byears while she was with the team. But notice neither one of them says they want her back on the team, either. And Leslie says the Sparks "inititally" hung out. So what happened? 3) Why did this case take two years to wrap up? Maybe it's because the alleged victim is now overseas, or maybe it's because there was evidence of an assault, but they just didn't have enough to take the case to court. Maybe the victim just got sick of the process. And maybe, as noted earlier, the team believed the accuser more than Byears and cut bait. Drallig, your methods are crude and heavy-handed, but point taken. Bryant's co-workers had nothing to worry about from him -- hell, many of them probably sympathized or traded yuks with him about groupies, as shitty as that is. Byears, OTOH, allegedly committed her offense against someone the same sex as WNBA players. It was even against a former WNBA player. As enlightened as we hope all of the league's women are, just because two players say they were comfortable with her being gay doesn't mean all WNBA players (or even the two of them) will still be cool with Byears after learning she supposedly assaulted one of them.
posted by wfrazerjr at 01:31 PM on August 24, 2005
Say what you say. I cant believe I am arguing online with some cat about a WNBA basketball player. Can someone remind me why this article is even news?
posted by Drallig9399 at 01:39 PM on August 24, 2005
Dude you are the only one assuming. That's fucking classic. You can think she is a victim all you want but if she truly wanted justice she would have put him in jail where rapists belong I guess she is supposed to do that without the help of the prosecution? Sounds rather difficult.
posted by chris2sy at 02:02 PM on August 24, 2005
In the spirit of actually living in the 21st century, Caterpillar actually produces a nice excavator for some SF-ites to use, so they don't have to keep digging deep holes with their mouths.
posted by jackhererra at 02:07 PM on August 24, 2005
wfrazerjr: 1) Byears wasn't just being investigated for sexually assaulting another woman. She was being investigated for sexually assaulting a former Sparks player. That may have had just an eensy bit of pull with Sparks management, and guess what -- maybe the management believed the alleged assaultee more than they believed Byears. So, the Sparks management took a statement from the alleged assaultee? Do you know that they had any contact with her, or access to her statement to the cops? I don't see anything in the article to suggest that the Sparks were directly involved at all. 2) Yes, Leslie and Dixon say they had no problem with Byears while she was with the team. But notice neither one of them says they want her back on the team, either. And Leslie says the Sparks "inititally" hung out. So what happened? Maybe she's referring to the period of time when Byears was on the team. And were Leslie and Dixon asked if they wanted her back? It sounds like that was pretty clearly not even an option. 3) Why did this case take two years to wrap up? Maybe it's because the alleged victim is now overseas, or maybe it's because there was evidence of an assault, but they just didn't have enough to take the case to court. Maybe the victim just got sick of the process. And maybe, as noted earlier, the team believed the accuser more than Byears and cut bait. Who knows why it took two years to wrap up? IANAL, are you? What's pretty straightforward is that Byears got accused of sexual assault by someone that she didn't share a locker room with, and got canned, no ifs ands or buts. We don't know if there was any actual evidence of any contact between the two at all. We do know that she was never able to confront her accuser in a court of law. She lost her job and her career on an allegation, without being given any opportunity to defend herself. In contrast, in the case of Kobe Bryant, he kept his job, they chauffered him around to his court appearances, they gave him every benefit of the doubt. There's your difference right there: Bryant, innocent until proven guilty; Byears, guilty -- and we're not interested if you ever succeed in proving yourself innocent. I hope she wins her suit in a big way and takes that organization to the cleaners.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 02:15 PM on August 24, 2005
Me too. Let's not all hide under the 'gay means different rules' banner and pretend that there isn't a tremendous amount of injustice being done to this woman. I'm not sure if comparing this to the Kobe trial is particularly useful - seeing that it leads to a comparison of alleged crimes and activities, for two very different situations.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 02:47 PM on August 24, 2005
So, the Sparks management took a statement from the alleged assaultee? Christ. No, but do you think the Sparks weren't aware that it was one of their former players? You don't think the organization had an opinion of this player, and that it might not have been higher that that of Byears? Given what Byears brought to the club, I find it somewhat difficult to believe the Sparks would have just dumped her out of her ass if they didn't think there was a reasonable amount of merit to the allegation. What persuades you to believe otherwise, lbb? And were Leslie and Dixon asked if they wanted her back? It sounds like that was pretty clearly not even an option. Why would it have to be a viable option for either of them to say, "You know what? I really wish she was with us now." Athletes say that about other players all the time. Why wouldn't Leslie or Dixon come out and put it that way? It's semantic, but you're using them as character witnesses for Byears. I'm saying what they said was easily readable as all past tense. IANAL, are you? Nope, don't even play one on television. However, neither are you, so don't pretend to have a better grasp of the vagaries of local police and the court system than I do. You want to argue she's innocent because charges weren't filed. I'm saying given the reaction of the Sparks, the length of the investigation and the unwillingness of the remainder of the league to touch Byears, I find it more likely something happened, something the Sparks felt was worth them cutting her loose. Or are we arguing that anyone who is found not guilty really isn't guilty? Again, in my estimation, she got jobbed. But do I have a better feel for Byears and the situation than the organization that employed her? No, I don't ... and neither does anyone in here that's jumping in to hammer them with both hands. I hope she wins her suit in a big way and takes that organization to the cleaners. Yup, that'll make the world safe for gays.
posted by wfrazerjr at 03:17 PM on August 24, 2005
You know what? The last statement isn't fair. Byears deserves her day in court, and I hope she gets her due.
posted by wfrazerjr at 03:21 PM on August 24, 2005
So, the Sparks management took a statement from the alleged assaultee? Christ. No, but do you think the Sparks weren't aware that it was one of their former players? You don't think the organization had an opinion of this player, and that it might not have been higher that that of Byears? Given what Byears brought to the club, I find it somewhat difficult to believe the Sparks would have just dumped her out of her ass if they didn't think there was a reasonable amount of merit to the allegation. What persuades you to believe otherwise, lbb? wfjr, I didn't just hear about this case yesterday. I heard about this when it happened, but it was waaaay, way hushed up; it was impossible to find out anything about it except that there was this allegation and that Byears had been canned. I really have no idea what the Sparks knew or who they talked to, or what other information they may have gotten through the other half of the LA organization (possibly connected to the men who were allegedly involved, about whom nothing seems to be known). I'm sure that LA was aware of Byears' value as a player; OTOH, you have no idea how fast many organizations will throw someone out of the sleigh to avoid "gay taint" -- and believe it or not, this is a problem that's worse in women's sports than in the rest of the world, not better. So, yeah, I do find it quite possible that LA shot from the hip on this one -- but as I've said several times now, I don't know. And were Leslie and Dixon asked if they wanted her back? It sounds like that was pretty clearly not even an option. Why would it have to be a viable option for either of them to say, "You know what? I really wish she was with us now." Athletes say that about other players all the time. Why wouldn't Leslie or Dixon come out and put it that way? It's semantic, but you're using them as character witnesses for Byears. I'm saying what they said was easily readable as all past tense. That's possible; however, given what was written elsewhere in the article (opinions about Byears weren't uniformly positive), I doubt that the author simply included the good bits of what Dixon and Leslie said, and that the real message was, "She was nice but then she stopped." As for the "I really wish she was with us now," well, some of what was said (particularly by Dixon) could be interpreted that way. Seems like Dixon was saying that they had a combination that worked and then they didn't any more, and that she regretted that. IANAL, are you? Nope, don't even play one on television. However, neither are you, so don't pretend to have a better grasp of the vagaries of local police and the court system than I do. I didn't pretend that. You want to argue she's innocent because charges weren't filed. I didn't argue that. I argued that she got railroaded. I'm saying given the reaction of the Sparks, the length of the investigation and the unwillingness of the remainder of the league to touch Byears, I find it more likely something happened, something the Sparks felt was worth them cutting her loose. I understand how you find it that way; I'm saying that I can come up with explanations that fit those facts as well if not better and that paint a different reality. The bottom line is that that's what we're both doing, speculating on explanations that fit the available facts, which are quite scanty. Byears has been candid; the Sparks organization has not. Or are we arguing that anyone who is found not guilty really isn't guilty? You know "we're" not. But if you got fired from your job on an allegation, and the allegation was not later substantiated, would you think you should have your job back? Or would you slink off into your hole, believing that you shouldn't get your job back because you can't prove your innocence? I hope she wins her suit in a big way and takes that organization to the cleaners. Yup, that'll make the world safe for gays. [add.] You know what? The last statement isn't fair. Byears deserves her day in court, and I hope she gets her due. Yeah, we'll see. I have no idea how wrongful-termination suits go, where the burden of proof is or anything like that. If she was indeed wrongfully terminated, it will be hard for them to make up the loss of those seasons to her. I think what's driving the suit is that she really just wants to play basketball, and if she's vindicated...well, it's just a sad thing. As for it making the world safe for gays, in a way, it probably will help. The whole "lesbians in the locker room" thing is an issue that women's sports has to come out, pardon the pun, and confront and deal with. Men's sports, I think, is much further away from having to acknowledge or deal with it.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 04:17 PM on August 24, 2005
Have to agree with everything you've said, lbb. I am always amazed about how same sex issues manage to cause such a stir in the US. You may remember Michele (Tank Girl) Timms from the Phoenix Mercury, one of my favourite players, who was never willing to hide her athleticism or sexuality under a bushel. She is now one of Australia's most highly regarded and well loved sports commentators. And she has never scared any red blooded Australian girl (or their parents) away from competitive sport. It can be done. There are these old fashioned values called justice, equality and tolerance.
posted by owlhouse at 05:24 PM on August 24, 2005
Before I even start here, lbb ... I have to say I have more fun debating with you than anyone else here. We must be damned near polar opposites, but thanks for making me think. That being said ... OTOH, you have no idea how fast many organizations will throw someone out of the sleigh to avoid "gay taint" ... What makes you so sure I don't? Why do you assume you have more knowledge of this than I do? It's entirely possible you do ... and entirely possible you don't. And what does the fact that you heard about this a long time ago have to do with anything? Have you been researching a book on Byears? Have you been able to "unhush" matters? It takes a pretty nifty leap of faith for me to say the Sparks were ditching Byears just to be spiteful and nasty. This is a two-time defending champion that pitched an apparently well-liked player out the window on a whim? If it happened, it's definitely wrong and a horrible double standard. I just don't believe it happened. Oh, and you say Byears has been candid ... again, you know this how? Just because she admitted she has no other skills than basketball and at one time she wanted to be a pimp? ...given what was written elsewhere in the article (opinions about Byears weren't uniformly positive), I doubt that the author simply included the good bits of what Dixon and Leslie said, and that the real message was, "She was nice but then she stopped." I agree about the reporter including everything -- that's what makes it feel weird. I think if Leslie or Dixon had even leaned slightly in that direction, the author would have been very happy to have it in the story. But it wasn't. Just seems a strange place to stop, you know? Fine, I was wrong about the lawyer thing. Seeing "IANAL, are you?" just pisses me off, though. I do have experience in police and court matters -- I was a police and court beat reporter and did plenty of arrest and trial stories. Two years is a long goddamned time for a sexual assault investigation. My experience makes me believe it was because there was something substantial to investigate. Cops don't like to waste time chasing horseshit. I just wish we could get past all this. I'm not the most tolerant person on the face of the earth, but my wrath is aimed at those who won't give gays a fair chance, not at gays themselves.
posted by wfrazerjr at 06:33 PM on August 24, 2005
wfjr: Before I even start here, lbb ... I have to say I have more fun debating with you than anyone else here. We must be damned near polar opposites, but thanks for making me think. D'you really think we're polar opposites? I don't think so; you're someone whose comments I always look for, and they generally make sense to me. OTOH, you have no idea how fast many organizations will throw someone out of the sleigh to avoid "gay taint" ... What makes you so sure I don't? Why do you assume you have more knowledge of this than I do? It's entirely possible you do ... and entirely possible you don't. And what does the fact that you heard about this a long time ago have to do with anything? Have you been researching a book on Byears? Have you been able to "unhush" matters? Uggggh. I didn't mean "you have no idea" as in, "you, wfrazerjr, don't know anything about this"; it was more in the nature of a way of saying, "many organizations will throw someone out of the sleigh really, really fast to avoid 'gay taint'." And, in fact, most people do not know. In an era with some very visible advances in gay rights, most people don't know that basic rights actually guaranteed by law are only found in 31 states, for example. As for the fact that I heard about this, not "a long time ago" but shortly after it happened, my point was that information about this incident just hasn't been out there -- nor is it out there now. I don't think the Sparks were "acting on information", I think they had a panic reaction to "get rid of the undesirable". And I believe that a lot of what made Byears undesirable, to a league that blatantly favors "feminine" women (read: straight-looking straight-acting), was her frankness about her sexual preference. That explanation fits the facts at least as well as the explanation that Byears was let go because of the last straw (which turned out to be a non-straw) in a series of problems: if that had been the case, wouldn't the Sparks have cited those problems? I agree about the reporter including everything -- that's what makes it feel weird. I think if Leslie or Dixon had even leaned slightly in that direction, the author would have been very happy to have it in the story. But it wasn't. Just seems a strange place to stop, you know? Well, there was that mention of the Sparks publicist hovering and repeatedly instructing the Sparks players to, "Don't answer!" and the fact that Leslie was essentially defying her to speak. Fine, I was wrong about the lawyer thing. Seeing "IANAL, are you?" just pisses me off, though. I do have experience in police and court matters -- I was a police and court beat reporter and did plenty of arrest and trial stories. Two years is a long goddamned time for a sexual assault investigation. My experience makes me believe it was because there was something substantial to investigate. Cops don't like to waste time chasing horseshit. I'm sure they don't; but OTOH we don't know what happened over the course of those two years, or how things might have been complicated by the alleged involvement of the two mysterious unnamed men. I just wish we could get past all this. I'm not the most tolerant person on the face of the earth, but my wrath is aimed at those who won't give gays a fair chance, not at gays themselves. Yeah, well...Latasha Byears could be guilty as sin, or she could be completely innocent, or she could be somewhere in between; she could have made an advance that's no more "sexual assault" than the sort of pass that a man might make at a woman in a bar on a Friday night, but because it was coming from a member of the same sex, the "victim" freaks out and tries to turn it into a case of sexual assault. Or any number of other possibilities. It will remain impossible to get past "all this" as long as the Sparks keep shouting, "Don't answer!"
posted by lil_brown_bat at 06:17 AM on August 25, 2005
In an era with some very visible advances in gay rights, most people don't know that basic rights actually guaranteed by law are only found in 31 states, for example. And the District of Columbia.
posted by bperk at 08:23 AM on August 25, 2005
I'm not entirely sure that Byears was released because of her sexual orientation more than because of the negative PR the charges would bring. Though I don't doubt that it could be true. The WNBA's paying public, like all other professional sports leagues consists of a number of gay/lesbian fans. I can remember reading in the local paper how the Sparks had set up an event at a gay/lesbian bar to drum up support (and PR) from their fans. I seem to remember the event being cancelled. I'm not sure if the WNBA is being picked on for being a "marginal" league that is shunning a fan base. Or if the WNBA is trying to be vanilla, so as to be all things to all people. I don't recall this happening in other leagues? Do you?