I think that story is and was a bit skewed and unfair to Mulkey, even though I am no Mulkey fan and think she is probably someone who a reporter does not want to cross (much like Jim Calhoun, anyone remember the legendary "not a dime back" retort and some of the reporters he blowtorched?). The thing is that the Baylor handbook did urge gay students to repress their homosexuality so that Mulkey was only telling her player to obey the student code, like it or not. The other thing is that various UConn women's players were not openly gay while at UConn (e.g. Sue Bird and Stefanie Dolson), and it's probably not unusual elsewhere either, and there could be numerous reasons for that totally apart from anyone telling them to suppress it.
And lastly, since when should anyone, gay or not, be open about their sex life? I do not discuss my sex life at work, with my family, or even on this completely anonymous board. The reason why is it's private and it's irrelevant to everything else I do or say or any opinions I give. So I do not really see what the harm is to Griner, and I see this as a no harm, no foul situation. To the extent that Mulkey told Griner to keep her sex life private, she likely did Griner a favor, as far as I am concerned. During her career at Baylor, Griner gained a lot of notoriety for punching a player during a game and she really did not need her private life being examined any more than it already was. Because of the punching incident, she was often portrayed as a brooding bully, and any further information and discussion on her private life was not likely to help. So as far as I can see Mulkey was looking out for her player's well being and did her a favor in the greater scheme of basketball and life and her portrayal in the media, also considering reports I have heard that while at Baylor, Griner was a very, very sensitive kid, which may have been what led to the punching incident.
