Its an interesting concept that a guy can gamble $1,500 and possibly never play again, but the guy in this very thread can be accused of multiple sexual assaults and is viewed as a franchise changing player. Odd world we live in.
Bit of a false dilemma fallacy at work here.
Both of these things are bad.
One of these things is substantially worse than the other, allegedly.
One of these things is allegedly an assault on women, which, while objectively terrible, unacceptable, and creepy, does not jeopardize the integrity of the sport.
The other thing, while socially less objectionable, does actually have potential to jeopardize the integrity of the sport.
Apples / oranges
it doesn’t really say anything about society. Society largely agrees that gambling is not as problematic as (alleged) sexual assault.
That said, if the GJ had indicted Watson, and evidence of rape or other such had come out, I’m reasonably certain Watson’s career would be in equal or greater jeopardy than Ridley’s. But since he was acquitted, there’s only so much the league can and will do.
Context does matter. Ridley is facing punishment for violating the league’s policy about players gambling, and Watson will face punishment for his violation of the PCP.
It’s a stretch to associate these two things and conflate their respective punishments as some sort of statement about what the world we live in cares more about. The world we live in ain’t got nuthin to do with it.