Jump to content

Oslo 2022


kernowboy
 Share

Recommended Posts

A gay choir...Yeah...

The idea seems good at first sight and a great reaction to Russia's games. Let's just hope no one gets deluded and fooled by that, and what looks like a clumsy attempt to look like the heaven of tolerance.

This is not something that the final decision will be based on, and I've met the most homophobic people of my life while I was living in... Denmark. Things aren't as simplistic as the oslo machine seems to want people to believe, and I'm sure most of the LGBT community will be clever enough to know that.

Nowhere is perfect but all the Nordic countries are some of the most advanced societies in the world when it comes to LGBT rights.

Norway bans all anti-gay descrimination, has had partnership recognition since 1993 (only the second country in the world to do so) and full marriage equality and adoption rights since 2009. Assisted conception was also made available to married or cohabiting lesbian couples on the same terms as for heterosexual couples.In 1981 it also became the first country in the world to enact an anti-discrimination law protecting LGBT people. It's had an equal age of consent since 1972.

Let's consider the other bidding countries...

Kazakhstan co-sponsored a statement opposing a declaration on LGBT rights at the UN. The country does not recognize same-sex unions in any form. LGBT people in Kazakhstan face discrimination and prejudice on the grounds of their sexual orientation or gender identity during the course of their everyday lives. Manifestation of negative attitudes toward LGBT people, such as social exclusion, taunting, and violence often cause the victims physical, psychological and emotional harm. In order to avoid danger many LGBT people feel compelled to keep their sexual orientation or gender identity a secret from almost all people in their lives. The majority regard it as necessary to conceal their sexual orientation or gender identity from people in the workplace in order to retain their jobs and avoid hostility from bosses and co-workers. Attempts to report homophobic and transphobic violence to police are often met with resistance and even hostility on the part of law enforcement officers

China has no recognition at all of same-sex relationships. No civil rights law exists to address discrimination or harassment on the basis of sexual orientation or gender identity. The media tends to censor positive depictions of gay couples in films and television shows and households headed by same-sex couples are not permitted to adopt children and do not have the same privileges as heterosexual married couples

Poland and Ukraine have homophobia enshrined in law with a constitutional ban on same-sex marriage. Ukraine has no protection against homophoboic discrimination. In Poland, a 2008 study revealed that 66% of Poles believe that gay people should not have the right to organise public demonstrations. The only anti-discrimination rules apply to employment, there are no other protections. Homosexuality is considered a taboo subject in Ukraine. There is little social support for LGBT people and a high degree of verbal and physical harassment exists. Prior to the May 25, 2013 Kiev pride parade the head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Patriarch Filaret, stated that people supporting LGBT rights would be cursed and Archbishop Sviatoslav Shevchuk of the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church denounced homosexuality as a sin tantamount to manslaughter.

Compared with Russia, and indeed many countries, Norway and the other Nordic countries are indeed paradise and I see this is a powerful statement, especially given the timing, rather than a 'clumsy attempt to look like the haven of tolerance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guys, could you tell me what in your opinion is deciding about being not safe/safe ?

- finance condition?

- guarantee of public support, attendatnce, popularity?

- security issues?

any other?

Well, as others have pointed out there is sort of a spectrum of definitiions.

I would be inclined to go with something as simple and colloquial as this: "A safe host is one where the IOC has very few worries or question marks about the overall success of the Games."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/\/\ But this is turning the Olympics into an LGBT agenda. It shouldn't be. There are the Gay Games for sports competition centered on sexual orientation. What if the hetero world turned those Games into a 'hetero' agenda? How would the LGBT forces like that??

No it isn't. Gay rights are human rights. Norway is sending out a postive message of inclusion and diversity when the current Olympic host country is doing exactly the opposite.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that it is safe financially and militarily. Is it safe in terms of Games organization, spectator turnout and atmosphere? No. The Koreans know nothing about the majority of winter sports. PC has a very spotty record for snow. Based on the biathlon World Championships and the dismal turnout, yes, there is reason to be concerned.

If PC did not made the IOC at least somewhat nervous, why did it take them three bids to win?

As Gangwon said, I don't think low turnout at the biathlon world championships is much of a reason for concern. If the biathlon worlds were held in the U.S. or Canada, I'm sure there would be very low turnout as well, yet the biathlon events at the Salt Lake and Vancouver Games were sold out and had a great atmosphere. PC isn't planning huge spectator capacity at many of the snow venues, so while the crowds will be smaller, I do think the seats will be full.

IMO, the reason why PC did not win the 2010 and 2014 bids was largely due to timing. PC lost the 2010 race by 3 votes, which suggests to me that much of the IOC were comfortable with PC but didn't want back-to-back Games in Asia and instead opted for a very strong Vancouver bid. I'm not sure there's anything PC could have done in the face of Putin for 2014. PC's timing was right for 2018, but there's not much evidence to suggest to me that the IOC thought they wouldn't have organized a competent Games for 2010 or 2014.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here too, it all depends on what you consider to be "safe". In terms of a guarantee to hold games that will run smoothly , I see no reason not to consider Krakow as a safe host.

But if by "safe" you are automatically thinking about a traditional host, then I told you the necessity to spread the games and to avoid giving them to the same places eternally was just as important (if not more). And in that perspective, I said in my previous that Krakow indeed sounded like the good balance, the good compromise. But then again, I see no reason not to think Krakow could be a safe choice after all.

And anyway, there's no way to be sure that the IOC will go for a "safe" choice , which you seem to be sure of.That's your bet, I'm making the opposite one, We'll see I certainly hope the IOC won't be unadventurous or wimpish, trust new places, and make something different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here too, it all depends on what you consider to be "safe". In terms of a guarantee to hold games that will run smoothly , I see no reason not to consider Krakow as a safe host.

But if by "safe" you are automatically thinking about a traditional host, then I told you the necessity to spread the games and to avoid giving them to the same places eternally was just as important (if not more). And in that perspective, I said in my previous that Krakow indeed sounded like the good balance, the good compromise. But then again, I see no reason not to think Krakow could be a safe choice after all.

And anyway, there's no way to be sure that the IOC will go for a "safe" choice , which you seem to be sure of.That's your bet, I'm making the opposite one, We'll see I certainly hope the IOC won't be unadventurous or wimpish, trust new places, and make something different.

But Krakow still has quite a bit to do in comparison to Oslo. That's why it's the 'safest' choice of the 2022 lot. Although, I would say that Krakow could come second in comparison to the many other deficiencies of the remaining applicants.

And what's the matter, Vicky. The "moderate pragmatism" Honeymoon over already?! Lmfao! :-D :-P But I actually totally 110% agree with Athensfan here in regards to Norway. It's really a no-brainer as long as they remain in the race. The IOC has pushed the new horizon envelope quite a bit recently. It's time to take a practical & reliable break for a change, considering all the "pragmatic" variables which you seem to be plainly ignoring.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Gangwon said, I don't think low turnout at the biathlon world championships is much of a reason for concern. If the biathlon worlds were held in the U.S. or Canada, I'm sure there would be very low turnout as well, yet the biathlon events at the Salt Lake and Vancouver Games were sold out and had a great atmosphere. PC isn't planning huge spectator capacity at many of the snow venues, so while the crowds will be smaller, I do think the seats will be full.

IMO, the reason why PC did not win the 2010 and 2014 bids was largely due to timing. PC lost the 2010 race by 3 votes, which suggests to me that much of the IOC were comfortable with PC but didn't want back-to-back Games in Asia and instead opted for a very strong Vancouver bid. I'm not sure there's anything PC could have done in the face of Putin for 2014. PC's timing was right for 2018, but there's not much evidence to suggest to me that the IOC thought they wouldn't have organized a competent Games for 2010 or 2014.

Your points about 2010 and 2014 are valid. Regarding atmosphere, we'll just have to wait and see what happens. To me there is some question in PC, whereas there is none in a city like Oslo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your points about 2010 and 2014 are valid. Regarding atmosphere, we'll just have to wait and see what happens. To me there is some question in PC, whereas there is none in a city like Oslo.

IMO, a potential lack of atmosphere at some venues does not really represent great risk to the IOC. To me, risky bids are ones like Sochi, Rio, and Athens, in which there is considerable concern about safety and the ability of the host to finish all of the venues on time. I don't think the IOC should have any concern that PC will have all of the venues ready and stage a safe and successful Games. Maybe it won't have the atmosphere of Lillehammer, Salt Lake, and Vancouver, but again, that doesn't really make the bid "risky." There are plenty of past Games that have had less than ideal atmospheres at some events.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

/\/\ But this is turning the Olympics into an LGBT agenda. It shouldn't be.

Human rights and the universality of mankind is one of the keystones of the Olympic movement. And if you learn nothing else from these discussions, could you please understand that these are issues for everybody, not just the LGBT.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's watch the hyperbole. They're hardly "giving them to the same places eternally."

Indeed. First of all, the number of countries that can viably stage Winter Games is limited, new horizons or not. These are concentrated in only few regions of the world. Scandinavia is one of them and it will have been 28 years since that region (and country) hosted. In those 28 years, two other viable regions, although with different countries, will have hosted twice: East Asia and North America. It is only logical to consider goung back to that region after such a time span. Even more so when another region able to host, the Alps, is blanked out for a while.

I actually think most who consider Oslo as the fave here are much more favourable towards Kraków than some of those (sorry, injurious wording) militant Kraków supporters are towards Oslo. A bit of sense for reality and less presumptousness wouldn't go amiss for a certain few.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If the biathlon worlds were held in the U.S. or Canada, I'm sure there would be very low turnout as well, yet the biathlon events at the Salt Lake and Vancouver Games were sold out and had a great atmosphere. PC isn't planning huge spectator capacity at many of the snow venues, so while the crowds will be smaller, I do think the seats will be full.

Most of the tickets for '02 were sold in packages, most of which included a cross-country or biathlon ticket.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, risky bids are ones like Sochi, Rio, and Athens, in which there is considerable concern about safety and the ability of the host to finish all of the venues on time. I don't think the IOC should have any concern that PC will have all of the venues ready and stage a safe and successful Games

To some, though, having the Games right at the door step of a loony-tune, with nuclear capabilities (such as North Korea), would cite that as a "safety concern".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. First of all, the number of countries that can viably stage Winter Games is limited, new horizons or not. These are concentrated in only few regions of the world. Scandinavia is one of them and it will have been 28 years since that region (and country) hosted. In those 28 years, two other viable regions, although with different countries, will have hosted twice: East Asia and North America. It is only logical to consider goung back to that region after such a time span. Even more so when another region able to host, the Alps, is blanked out for a while.

I actually think most who consider Oslo as the fave here are much more favourable towards Kraków than some of those (sorry, injurious wording) militant Kraków supporters are towards Oslo. A bit of sense for reality and less presumptousness wouldn't go amiss for a certain few.

That is true of me anyway. I have nothing against Krakow. I am interested to see what they propose. I just have a feeling that Oslo will still feel like a slam dunk to the IOC.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. First of all, the number of countries that can viably stage Winter Games is limited, new horizons or not. These are concentrated in only few regions of the world. Scandinavia is one of them and it will have been 28 years since that region (and country) hosted. In those 28 years, two other viable regions, although with different countries, will have hosted twice: East Asia and North America. It is only logical to consider goung back to that region after such a time span. Even more so when another region able to host, the Alps, is blanked out for a while.

Exactly. Especially when one of those 'militant' Krakow supporters (which love the phrase btw) cite that same logic as to why North America (the U.S. in particular) should host more often. Go figure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The irony here for me is this.. how many people here have talked about how great the `94 Olympics were and wouldn't it be great if the Winter Olympics could return to that, even though to get that in the 21st Century is probably impossible. And how Norway was and is such a great Olympic host. But now, here they are in a race and some are barking "no, it's too soon, a nation that small shouldn't get another Olympics!" Well, look at what they're up against? There's no Munich in this race. A Stockholm bid, which may have been doomed anyway, is out of the picture. When Krakow is the next best option, Oslo starts to look like a better option, doesn't it.

Here too, it all depends on what you consider to be "safe". In terms of a guarantee to hold games that will run smoothly , I see no reason not to consider Krakow as a safe host.

But if by "safe" you are automatically thinking about a traditional host, then I told you the necessity to spread the games and to avoid giving them to the same places eternally was just as important (if not more). And in that perspective, I said in my previous that Krakow indeed sounded like the good balance, the good compromise. But then again, I see no reason not to think Krakow could be a safe choice after all.

And anyway, there's no way to be sure that the IOC will go for a "safe" choice , which you seem to be sure of.That's your bet, I'm making the opposite one, We'll see I certainly hope the IOC won't be unadventurous or wimpish, trust new places, and make something different.

Spreading the games is not a 'necessity.' Even still, we're talking about 1 Olympics. Far too often, people here get too wrapped up in the bigger picture and things like "well if this country gets 2022, then that means this for 2024 and 2028 and 2032). We need to focus on the dynamics of this bid and these cities and 2022. And I imagine that IOC members, by whatever logic their choose the best city are largely focused (not always, because we know that 1 bid can sometimes be affected by the next) solely on what's the best choice for 2022.

To treat "safe" and "unadventurous" as a negative stigma against Oslo is unfair. Maybe Krawow and the Polish folk can wow the IOC and convince them they're the place to hold the 2022 Winter Olympics. But if we're talking about the IOC being wimpish and not trusting new places.. well, they took a leap of faith with Sochi. They're taking another leap of faith with PC. So for them to have put 2 straight Winter Olympics in a country that hadn't hosted one before, it's hardly unadventurous for them not to do so 3 times in a row, even if it's a country and a city that might not seem so attractive if other cities were bidding.

Pixie, that's what I don't understand about your logic. You have these theories about what the Olympics *should* be, but then you have to apply it to who the bid cities and countries actually are and what makes sense for the IOC in that case. Poland has only bid for a Winter Olympics once before. They didn't make the short list. And at least Russia and South Korea (well, sort of for Russia) have experience hosting an Olympics before. That's what makes Poland a risk. In other circumstances, maybe they'd look a little better. In this bid and off the heels of Sochi, they are a lot riskier than Oslo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Everyone just needs to accept the reality that purely because of the age of the Modern Olympics, we are entering an era where there will be more repeat hosts. There are only so many countries and cities that make sense. Of course as a new horizon becomes capable it's wonderful to take the Games to new shores, but the search for new ground should not overshadow every other consideration. The Games are much more familiar now than they were last century. Each future edition is likely to differ less dramatically from its predecessors. At a certain point the focus must move away from the novelty factor and back to to putting on an enjoyable, world-class, international, multi-sport event.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

In Poland, a 2008 study revealed that 66% of Poles believe that gay people should not have the right to organise public demonstrations.

And those bad homophobic Poles elected in the October 2011 parliamentary elections an openly gay deputy, Robert Biedroń.

They also elected Anna Grodzka, she the only remaining openly transgender MP in the world. The best part is that she is heavily against the 2022 Krakow bid :)

Of course Norway has better law regulations when it comes to the LGBT, but this is a process and it's especially hard in a country like Poland where Catholic Church was a significant factor that preserved national tradition or even Polish language from being wiped out. Step by step, I think we'll get there finally

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wouldn't get too worked up with the gay choir issue. It's basically a gimmick that probably has a purpose but is irrelevant for the 2022 decision anyway. To avoid misunderstandings:of course it is important to highlight the (lack of) equal rights in host and bid countries, but when it comes down to the vote, it may not be highest in the IOC's priorities.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...