When talking about Russia’s anti-gay/anti-trans clampdown and the upcoming 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, Russia, some raise the example that African-American Olympian Jesse Owens set by going to the 1936 Nazi Olympics and winning more gold medals than anyone else at the games.
The only problem is that if the International Olympic Committee (IOC) has its way, gay and trans athletes will never have their Jesse Owens moment because the IOC thinks they should remain in the closet.
In a rather un-clarifying clarification, an IOC representative made the startling claim to a gay Web site that the Olympic Charter bans “Pride House,” a safe for haven for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender athletes that was set up at the 2010 Vancouver and 2012 London Olympics. The Russians have already banned “Pride House” from taking place, while the IOC was famously noncommittal about standing up to the Russian ban. Now it seems the IOC has taken sides, and is siding with the Russians, and more generally, homophobia:
We also asked if the IOC would provide a safe space – or Pride House – for LGBT athletes, spectators, dignitaries and others during the games to celebrate gay sport and community.
But their spokeswoman told us: ‘Regarding your suggestions, the IOC has a clear rule laid out in the Olympic Charter (Rule 50) which states that the venues of the Olympic Games are not a place for proactive political or religious demonstration.
‘This rule has been in place for many years and applied when necessary.
Yes, the International Olympic Committee just said Pride House is banned.
And even worse, the IOC is claiming that the simple fact of being gay – of anyone finding out that you are gay (or trans) – is a banned “political demonstration.” So gay and trans people need to stay in the closet, or they’re banned from the Olympics. Talk about accepting the Russian’s perverted prejudice hook, line and sinker.
More from Mark Joseph Stern at Slate:
By the IOC’s logic, gay people should be keeping quiet about their sexuality no matter what, in accordance with Rule 50. If they speak out and get arrested under Russian law—well, it’s not the IOC’s fault that they just couldn’t keep their mouths shut…
[T]he notion that voicing support of gay people and gay rights, or that being gay, is a “demonstration” of “political propaganda” in violation of Rule 50 is obtuse and insulting…
Of course, the IOC’s bizarre intimation that being openly gay is somehow political propaganda has deep roots in homophobic culture. Consider the complaint, still common in parts of this country, about people who seem particularly gay: I don’t have a problem with homosexuality, but why do they have to shove it in my face? Where heterosexuality is the norm, any indication of homosexuality might seem like a belligerent affront. That’s certainly how the IOC sees it.
There is no finer definition of homophobia than what just came out of the IOC. The notion that it’s always the “fault” of the gay person if someone finds out they’re gay. That the gay person must have been “flaunting” their sexual orientation, or no one would have known. The proverbial “she was asking for it” defense.
What the old me at the IOC fail to understand is that there are lots of “innocent” ways people find out you’re gay. There are official documents, for starters – immigration papers, passports, official Olympic documents – that could easily list the legal spouses of gay Olympic athletes, now that gay marriage is legal in more than a dozen countries.
There’s also not-very-flaunting conduct, such as an Olympic athlete going for a drink at a gay bar (it’s not conclusive proof, but the speculation will be out there that they’re gay). Or the more conclusive non-flaunting proof, an Olympic athlete is seen being excitedly greeted by their (gay) spouse after winning a gold medal. Or is such familial-flaunting only permitted by heterosexuals under the Olympic charter?
Or will straight couples at Sochi be banned from holding hands under Rule 50 as well?
And why stop there? Being Jewish must also now be a verbotten political demonstration per the newly-Russianized Olympic Charter. After all, how would anyone know you’re Jewish unless you told them? Oh right, there is that “Israeli Olympic team” problem (why do they always have to flaunt it?) So is the IOC banning Jewish athletes from wearing Stars of David around the necks, and more importantly, from letting anyone know they’re Jewish during interviews, since coming out of the closet about being a Jew must also violate Rule 50 of the Olympic Charter? And while we’re at, perhaps we should ban the Israeli flag (along with the Israeli fag), since you can’t be too careful about Rule 50.
And let’s not even start with Christian Olympic athletes – take those crosses off from around your necks, boys and girls, lest someone get the wrong idea.
Of course, the IOC also needs to explain why Pride House is now banned by Rule 50 at the Sochi Games, but it was fine for the London and Vancouver games, both of which had Pride Houses. I’m very curious to hear the IOC wriggle out of this one.
More from Dominic Dezzutti at CBS Denver about how the IOC’s newfound embrace of Russian homophobia complicates our Jesse Owens Olympic moment:
What complicates matters is that as Jesse Owens ran, it was clear for all the world to see his race. Unless certain Olympians come out or have already announced their sexual orientation before they go to Sochi, the world may have to wait to learn of the history they make until after the medals are won or lost.
I guess according to the IOC, Jesse Owens’ only mistake was refusing to tell the Nazis that he simply had a very dark tan.
John Aravosis
@aravosis | Facebook | Google+. Editor of AMERICAblog, joint JD/MSFS from Georgetown, worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, and as a stringer for the Economist. A frequent TV pundit, he has been on The O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline & Reliable Sources. Full bio and article archive.
Weekly: Recap top stories, occasional action alerts.
Daily: Get each day's posts in one email.
0 comments:
Post a Comment