Jump to content

U.S. to Boycott Sochi?


Soaring
 Share

Recommended Posts

Russia isn't going to sacrifice the ego trip of hosting the Games and hogging the limelight for the sake of their homophobia. I genuinely believe that by the time the Games begin, Russia will put on a mask of being tolerant and welcoming.

problem solved! good work everyone.

celebrate with cronuts?

Edited by krow
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Various quotes from President Obama today about Sochi 2014:

"I do not think it's appropriate to boycott the Olympics," Obama told reporters. "We've got a bunch of Americans out there who are training hard, who are doing everything they can to succeed."

Obama also said he was deeply offended by Russia's new law cracking down on gay rights activism that sports officials have said would be enforced during the Games in February. He suggested that the policy could work against Russia in its quest for Olympic gold.

"One of the things I'm really looking forward to is maybe some gay and lesbian athletes bringing home the gold or silver or bronze, which would, I think, go a long way in rejecting the kind of attitudes that we're seeing there," the president said. "And if Russia doesn't have gay or lesbian athletes, then, it'll probably make their team weaker."

http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory/obama-rejects-boycott-olympics-russia-19919957

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, no matter what, the games must go on??? So if Russia comes back and clarifes that, yes, they do intend to throw any athlete, spectator or media member in jail if they say anything about being gay... oh, well??

dang, you're such a bore. There is absolutely no chance of Russia doing that during the games. The IOC is seeking clarification, they'll receive assurances and the games will stay in Russia. What you're doing is nothing more than being sensationalist.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

dang, you're such a bore. There is absolutely no chance of Russia doing that during the games. The IOC is seeking clarification, they'll receive assurances and the games will stay in Russia. What you're doing is nothing more than being sensationalist.

Agreed on that. I understand zere post, but unfortunally this ideal is mostly an idealistic and utopic chance of things. This is exactly the same problem at the UN. The best we can hope is a bubble of tolerance and more mediatic preasure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Russia isn't going to sacrifice the ego trip of hosting the Games and hogging the limelight for the sake of their homophobia. I genuinely believe that by the time the Games begin, Russia will put on a mask of being tolerant and welcoming.

That mask isn't going to fool anyone. There will still be protests. If it is only a temporary repeal of the law and people realize the LGBT community in Russia is going to be regressing once more to suffering and fear under the iron fist of the anti-gay regime once the Games are over, then there will be hell to pay. I think it will almost be worse if they do put on that mask, because it is a blatant insult to the intelligence of the LGBT community worldwide to assume that people will be happy if Russia suddenly acts all transparent about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be wonderful if someone somewhere could get hold of a photo or two of Vladimir Putin visting a gay bar or enjoying a romantic tryst with a former boyfriend! I could imagine nothing better to expose the hypocrisy and utter absurdity of Russia's repressive new anti-gay laws! :angry:

IMO the time cannot now be far off when homophobic laws will be treated on a par with racist laws. Countries like South Africa were rightly banned from international sporting competitions while it practiced apartheid. Countries that practice legalised homophobia must be seen in the same light as racist ones. The well-worn argument about 'cultural differences' should no longer be allowed as justification.for countries that persecute innocent people on ANY grounds!

The IOC, FIFA and other international sporting bodies are soon going to have to place legalised homphobia on a par with apartheid and racism and exclude any country that practices them from consideration as future sporting hosts!.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And let's not forget, the IOC were granted permanent observer status at the UN four years ago, and this was the high-minded announcement they greeted this with.

http://www.olympic.org/content/news/media-resources/manual-news/1999-2009/20091/10/17/ioc-becomes-un-observer-/

Can you imagine if all the exposure on LGBTI rights in Russia had occurred a year ago during the London Olympics? Sochi House would have been shut down.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And let's not forget, the IOC were granted permanent observer status at the UN four years ago, and this was the high-minded announcement they greeted this with.

http://www.olympic.org/content/news/media-resources/manual-news/1999-2009/20091/10/17/ioc-becomes-un-observer-/

Correction: the IOC was only granted "observer status;" NOT "Permanent Observer status. There is a subtle difference. Here is the Official List of states and bodies with Permanent Observer Status. The IOC is at the end of the list:

http://www.un.org/en/members/intergovorg.shtml

The IOC really cannot sit alongside the other fully recognized bodies because it is a self-appointing body which only promotes sport...and from the looks of it, spectacle. It just cloaks itself in all the 'feel-good' language of any self-respecting int'l body in order to gain more credibility. But "sport" is not really a fully acknowledged field in the eyes of the UN--otherwise, they would be recognizing the federations of the Universaides, the Paralympics, how about the Gay & OutGames organizations? And then, here is this 'guest' organization pushing an agenda based on sexuality. I don't think the IOC will go so far as to be snickered at behind their backs at the UN.

And it all doesn't mean that much. Russia, China, India, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. also ALL BELONG to the UN. The 'equality for everyone" ideal is all well and good...but when brought into the TRULY international arena, they are mere words. Part of having an int'l organization like today's UN function is a "...live and let live..." policy. The more conservative societies haven't rocked the boat by saying "...you, you decadent countries, you are too liberal and permissive for our ways..." have they?? Having worked in the UN, you have to respect certain things and know which battles to pick in order to at least be in civil contact with each other. The "...out of cultural differences..." thing may be around for awhile. I hope I'm wrong.

Note too that the Vatican, Palestinian, the League of Arab States and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation do have full Permanent Observer status.

The IOC is at the end under the category: Other entities having received a standing invitation to participate as observers in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and maintaining permanent offices at Headquarters alongside the Red Cross, the Red Crescent and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.

So in other words, the IOC can only 'Observe" at this time but NOT Permanently. The whole issue should be looked at and placed in proper context. The IOC does not exist to eradicate poverty and disease, nor the betterment of the starving masses of the world. It's very motto - Higher, Faster, Stronger -- is for the advancement of Individual Achievement and Glory...not food, water and health of the 3rd world. I dunno...adding an element of sexuality just seems odd. Maybe, it might bring some change. But it'll never work in the more than 1 billion earthlings who believe in the muslim cult...and unfortunately modern-day Russia is a centuries-old blend of conservative Orthodoxy and islamic populations, and that is what one is up against.

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Correction: the IOC was only granted "observer status;" NOT "Permanent Observer status. There is a major difference. Here is the Official List of states and bodies with Permanent Observer Status. The IOC is at the end of the list:

http://www.un.org/en/members/intergovorg.shtml

The IOC really cannot sit alongside the other fully recognized bodies because it is a self-appointing body which only promotes sport...and from the looks of it, spectacle. It just cloaks itself in all the 'feel-good' language of any self-respecting int'l body in order to gain more credibility. But "sport" is not really a fully acknowledged field in the eyes of the UN--otherwise, they would be recognizing the federations of the Universaides, the Paralympics, how about the Gay & OutGames organizations? And then, here is this 'guest' organization pushing an agenda based on sexuality. I don't think the IOC will go so far as to be snickered at behind their backs at the UN.

And it all doesn't mean that much. Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. also ALL BELONG to the UN. Those ideals are all well and good...but when brought into the TRULY international arena, they are mere words. Part of having an int'l organization like today's UN function is a "...live and let live..." policy. The more conservative societies haven't rocked the boat by saying "...you, you decadent countries, you are too liberal and permissive for our ways..." have they?? Having worked in the UN, you have to respect certain things and know which battles to pick in order to at least be in civil contact with each other. The "...out of cultural differences..." thing may be around for awhile. I hope I'm wrong.

Note too that the League of Arab States and the Organization of Islamic Cooperation do have full Permanent Observer status.

Correction 2 - the IOC is actually there at the bottom under the category:

Other entities having received a standing invitation to participate as observers in the sessions and the work of the General Assembly and maintaining permanent offices at Headquarters

alongside the Red Cross, the Red Crescent and the Sovereign Military Order of Malta.

So in other words, the IOC can only 'Observe" but NOT Permanently. In other words, if they open their mouth at the wrong time, they may be demoted to a NON-observer status.

You put the nail on the head. Remarking my comment, the UN has the same problem. Actually the LGBT rights is one of the main topics of controversies inside the organization and the ONLY relevant issue which didn't came as an accepted resolution by the Human Rights Act -Even in cases like discrimination against women and ethnic background got a better response-.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGBT_rights_at_the_United_Nations

Also, if you check the map, even more of the signatures in favor came in "hypocrital" countries like Ukraine, Georgia, Marshall Islands and other and the worst part, we have more abstentions, which means a lack of better response.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Human beings first have to get their food, water, shelter, basic education, literacy and health before they can even consider thinking about LGBT issues. I mean who are at the forefront of LGBT causes? The educated, reformist-thinking, relatively prosperous and healthy societies with almost fool-proof socialized networks to fall back on, and who don't have to scramble for food, shelter, clean water, repressive regimes or jobs, etc., the way the masses still do in India, China, Africa...heck, even Haiti and Brazil.

I dunno...is there an order of things in which to get to a better world?

****************************************************

Funny, I am looking back at my one season at the UN. My immediate boss in the Protocol Section was a very, on the surface, 'progressive' young Russian technocrat (with a very attractive young wife as well). However, Mr. T had a rather 'strange' smell about him; and he was--again on the surface--a more amiable man than the Department Head who was the son of, if I got the story right, the Chamberlain in the late King Farouk's court in Egypt, but who was nothing the a big vainglorious, pompous ass. (But heck, who knows, Mr. T and wife might've actually been very suave KGB agents too?) There was also another very nice lady from Venezuela (who took care of the Latin American countries) but who had a terrible case of halitosis. I dreaded having to speak with her close-up. Anyway, the point is, and I was low man on the totem pole there (with only a seasonal contract), and one had to, literally... hold one's nose if one wanted to collect a paycheck; which I did. The job market was pretty bleak at that time. (Oh yeah, my other offer at that time was a lucrative one, because I was a single male then, to be the point man of this ad agency in their Riyadh, Saudi Arabia office. Perks were good; I was going to have my apt, own car, fully-paid vacations, salary still in US$ tax-free, etc., etc. Just the idea of Middle Eastern heat really fazed me. At the last minute, I walked away from it--even after having already bought a warm-weather wardrobe. Just didn't fancy spending 2 years of my life in an Arab hell-hole. And there was nothing else except this clerk's position at the UN. My unemployment had run out, so I took it.) But I digress...

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get tired of constantly having to hear about LGBT stuff. Especially the T. I mean should those things even be grouped together and why?



I might be a little insensitive......but some of my best friends are...


oh never mind.





…bottom line they should not be discriminated against and certainly it’s unbelievable for a country to create LAWS that do just that.



BUT……


NOBODY REALLY CARES ………and nothing will happen cuz the IOC is our little “pretend to do good and we care about the world and people and bridging together” organization that’s only really out for cash and status. The athletes and we are their game pieces.


Edited by paul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wouldn't it be wonderful if someone somewhere could get hold of a photo or two of Vladimir Putin visting a gay bar or enjoying a romantic tryst with a former boyfriend! I could imagine nothing better to expose the hypocrisy and utter absurdity of Russia's repressive new anti-gay laws! :angry:

Maybe that's the real thing behind these new anti-Gay laws. It's really Putin's way of dealing with his denial. lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny, I am looking back at my one season at the UN. My immediate boss in the Protocol Section was a very, on the surface, 'progressive' young Russian man (and a very attractive young wife as well). However, Mr. T had a rather 'strange' smell about him; and he was--again on the surface--a rather nicer man than the Department Head who was the son of, if I got the story right, the Chamberlain in the late King Farouk's court in Egypt, but who was the very embodiment of pomposity. (But who knows, Mr. T and wife could've been very suave KGB agents?) There was also another very nice lady from Venezuela (who took care of the Latin American countries) but who had a terrible case of halitosis. I dreaded having to speak with her close-up. Anyway, the point is, and I was low man on the totem pole there (with only a seasonal contract), you had to, literally... hold your nose if you wanted to collect your paycheck; which I did. The job market was pretty bleak at that time. (Oh yeah, my other offer at that time was a lucrative one to be, because I was a single male then, the point man of this ad agency in their Riyadh office. Perks were good; I was going to have my own car, fully-paid vacations, etc., etc. Just the idea of Middle Eastern heat really fazed me. At the last minute, I walked away from it--even after having already bought a warm-weather wardrobe. Then there was nothing else except this clerk's job at the UN. My unemployment had run out, so I took it.) But I digress...

That's actually kind of cool, I love reading that kind of stuff, you should turn your experiences into a manuscript and self-publish.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get tired of constantly having to hear about LGBT stuff. Especially the T. I mean should those things even be grouped together and why?

I might be a little insensitive......but some of my best friends are...

oh never mind.

…bottom line they should not be discriminated against and certainly it’s unbelievable for a country to create LAWS that do just that.

BUT……

NOBODY REALLY CARES ………and nothing will happen cuz the IOC is our little “pretend to do good and we care about the world and people and bridging together” organization that’s only really out for cash and status. The athletes and we are their game pieces.

I care. And so do other tens of millions of people. It doesn't affect you, but that doesn't mean its the same way for others. What else don't you care about?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I get tired of constantly having to hear about LGBT stuff. Especially the T. I mean should those things even be grouped together and why?

I might be a little insensitive......but some of my best friends are...

oh never mind.

…bottom line they should not be discriminated against and certainly it’s unbelievable for a country to create LAWS that do just that.

BUT……

NOBODY REALLY CARES ………and nothing will happen cuz the IOC is our little “pretend to do good and we care about the world and people and bridging together” organization that’s only really out for cash and status. The athletes and we are their game pieces.

Yea, you are a little insensitive if you think that way. People like to accuse the LGBT community of having an agenda they're trying to push on the rest of the world. It's not an agenda.. they're just try to erase centuries of religious gospel that told the world that "a man shalt not lie with another man" and that homosexuality is a sin. It's only in recent times have people finally learned that God doesn't really care who you're sleeping with. Looking outside the scope of the IOC and the Olympics.. you're exactly right that all the LGBT world wants is to not be discriminated against. I can understand their frustration when a country like Russia passes a law against promoting non-traditional relationships. But no, promoting sex between a man and a woman is fine, no problem with that. That's a double standard that those of us who believe in basic human rights like freedom of expression are not okay with. And yea, far be it from the Western world to tell the rest of the planet how to live, but either way, shame on those who promote and teach prejudice to others.

[end rant]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's a double standard that those of us who believe in basic human rights like freedom of expression are not okay with.

As Ronnie Reagan said...there you go again, Quaker...blasting another for his views which happen to differ from the rest here. FGS, we're all different. I may not agree with Paul sometimes, but I respect his stand and am fine with it. We're each entitled to view things as we see them regardless of peer pressure. Isn't that the very core of "...basic human rights like freedom of expression"?? Pot calling the kettle black again?? Jeez. :rolleyes:

Edited by baron-pierreIV
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As Ronnie Reagan said...there you go again, Quaker...blasting another for his views which happen to differ from the rest here. FGS, we're all different. I may not agree with Paul sometimes, but I respect his stand and am fine with it. We're each entitled to view things as we see them regardless of peer pressure. Isn't that the very core of "...basic human rights like freedom of expression"?? Jeez. :rolleyes:

In an effort to echo runningrings' sentiment from earlier.. there YOU go again, baron... cherry-picking a quote from a post and then taking it out context. So thanks for completely missing the point of my post and in the process, confirm where you stand on this issue. And maybe I'm mis-reading paul's intentions, but "I get tired of constantly hearing about LGBT stuff" is not really a stand so much as "I don't really give a crap, so why am I still hearing about it." Sounds like you don't want to talk about it either, yet you're in the middle of the discussion.

The double-standard I'm referring to is Russia, not paul. I'm not blasting his views.. I'm blasting a country's. If they don't want to accept homosexuals, good for them. But for them to pass a law that basically encourages them to be discriminated against is wrong. For some reason, if a man and a woman were making out in public in Russia, that's all well and good. If 2 men are holding hands, they can be arrested. Again, I know it's their issue not ours, and who are we to tell them how to live, but it's still wrong. That's the freedom of expression I'm talking about. And I'm talking about it in the context of it being a basic right that Americans and most well-meaning countries hold very highly. I'm not talking about peer pressure in the sense of, say, posters here who push a city and won't shut up about it even though everyone else disagrees with them.

It's interesting.. I just did a couple of Google searches for "russia anti gay law" and the like, and a lot of the hits that come up relate back to the IOC and the Olympics. So clearly this is an issue, whether we want to think it is or not. You know what.. I'm kinda tired of hearing about all this too. But yet here we are with a 27 page thread started less than a month ago because it IS an issue whether everyone wants to acknowledge or care about it or not. It would be nice if we lived in a world without discrimination and prejudice. But we don't. We are ALL prejudiced. For a government to promote that though.. yea, I don't wanna hear about it either, but that government is in a country about to host the Olympics. So we're going to hear about it for the next 6 months whether we want to or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a hypothetical: the IOC awards Tulsa the 2024 Games. Tulsa signs the host city contract. Then the US passes anti-ginger legislation outlawing red hair. Wouldn't the IOC be justified in saying, "This is not acceptable. You made a commitment to us to welcome the athletes of the world, including the redheads. We respect your sovereignty, but you must honor your commitment to us."

Redheads stage Ginger Pride march at Edinburgh Fringe -BBC

_69218201_ginger.jpg

Edited by paul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NBC ran a short feature on the new law during its coverage of the IAAF Worlds today, and they are planning a longer feature for tomorrow. I'm glad to see that despite the initial statements from NBC officials, they're not shying away from covering this.

Well, that's going to win them friends in Sochi for sure. But that's to be expected. Just makes you wonder why NBC wore kid gloves in Beijing and the Chinese record on human rights, but are willing to take Russia to task.

Just to be clear, nothing would make me happier than to see athletes in the OC marching past Putin and having rainbow ribbons on their uniforms. It's not a political statement, it's a human rights statement. Besides, what's the IOC going to do, disqualify entire delegations?

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...