Pride Night shows how tolerance turns into coercion
I stand with NHL players who refuse Pride Night. Inclusion isn’t coercion, and real courage means saying no when the mob demands obedience.
Every year, some NHL teams roll out Pride Night campaigns. Teams wear rainbow-themed warmups, logos get the rainbow treatment, and marketing departments crank up the PR machine. Teams bill it as a night of “inclusion,” but the reality is something far more sinister: It’s become a loyalty test.
The leftist social media mob applauds players who participate and vilifies those who don’t.
And here’s the kicker: Those who quietly say “no thanks” aren’t disrupting anything. They aren’t calling for Pride Night to be canceled, or storming the ice with protest signs. They’re choosing not to wear a jersey or not to skate in a warmup.
Yet for this peaceful refusal, I’ve seen so many on social media brand them as hateful, bigoted, or worse. A few small-time hockey writers. mainly on X, demanded lifetime bans for these players.
So let’s call it what it is: Authoritarian rage disguised as “progress.”
The real double standard
In 2023, Philadelphia Flyers defenseman Ivan Provorov made headlines for refusing to wear a Pride Night jersey, citing his Russian Orthodox faith. San Jose’s James Reimer did the same, along with the Staal brothers in Florida.
Every single one of them made the same point: They respected people’s choices, but weren’t gonna wear the sweater and violate their own beliefs.
That should’ve been the end of it. A difference of conviction in a supposedly “inclusive” league.
Instead, some ripped to shreds. Headlines labeled them hateful, columnists smeared their character, and social media mobs went for the throat. The same people screaming “inclusion” had zero room for religious conviction, personal choice, or even quiet non-participation.
So let’s be blunt. If your definition of inclusion requires ideological conformity, it’s not inclusion. It’s coercion.
The hate comes from the Left
Irony alert: The same progressives who claim to be fighting hate are the ones spewing it. They answer peaceful defiance with insults, threats, and demands for punishment.
Let’s flip the script for a second. Imagine the outrage if players were forced to wear Christian crosses on their jerseys and those who refused were branded as “anti-faith” bigots. The outcry would be deafening. And yet, when it’s a rainbow instead of a cross, the same critics cheer for punishment.
It’s hypocrisy on full display. And it proves the point that “tolerance” in this context isn’t about acceptance, but enforcing the moment’s cultural orthodoxy.
Hockey shouldn’t be a political test
At its core, hockey’s a sport. It should be about skill, grit, and the pursuit of the Stanley Cup. Not political litmus tests.
Fans pay to see slapshots, saves, and sudden-death thrillers. A lot of them don’t want to watch their favorite players forced through ideological show trials. When did we decide that strapping on skates also meant strapping on the approved political messaging of the league office?
The NHL claims to value diversity, but true diversity isn’t just about who you love or how you identify. It’s also about respecting differences in belief, conscience, and conviction. That means recognizing that not every player should be forced to wave the same flag, or else.
I stand with players who refuse
I support the players who back out of Pride Night, and I wish more of them had the courage to follow their example.
Why? Because real courage is standing firm when the mob calls you a bunch of names for quietly refusing to betray your beliefs.
And make no mistake: the hockey writers, pundits, and “progressive” fans hurling venom at these players are the ones spewing hate. They’ve turned “inclusion” into a one-way street, and they’ll bulldoze anyone who tries to walk the other way.
Freedom of conscience matters. Respect cuts both ways, and if we’re gonna keep politics out of the game, that means refusing to make ideological conformity a condition of suiting up.
The NHL has a choice. It can keep pretending that coercion equals inclusion, or it can step back and let hockey be hockey.
I know which one most fans would rather watch.
Never part of the “inclusion” mob
A reader’s first mistake would be to think I’m in the “inclusion” mob because, ironically enough, one of my favorite characters, Liza Fury, is bisexual. This was never intentional, nor did it have anything to do with “tokenism,” DEI, or inclusion.
I’ve said it many times that Liza’s political stances reflect mine. She’s hardcore libertarian, a bit of a firebrand, and someone who writes for anarcho-capitalist publications under a pen name.
She just got attracted to “the hottest woman I’d ever seen.” And to be frank, I’d’ve been in love with Kress Conway, myself. The olive skin, toned build, thick, shoulder-length black hair, no-nonsense demeanor. Yeah, Kress is pretty hot.
Anyway, if you wanna meet Liza Fury, check out her origin story of when she discovers her powers. No, Kress ain’t in that one, but if you go on to read Catch 22, you’ll meet her.
