Comments by "Mat Broomfield" (@matbroomfield) on "Olympic Committee Forbids Athletes from Speaking Against Anti-Gay Laws" video.

  1. They did. Initally tey were told that there would be no action against gay athletes, then a few days later that was revised and they were told that openly gay athletes would potentially face imprisonment.
    1
  2. A one party system is an ideological choice,and you cannot prove that it's worse than the so-called democracy of america or britain. There's no such thing as "just" the olympics If I were a child murderer and I hosted a game of poker and invited the town's high flyers would it be "just a game of cards"? Of course not: attendance sends a message, and the same is true here. If people simply want to compete, they can do it elsewhere. If they showed solidarity, they could demand a venue change.
    1
  3. That is absolutely right. The olympics has been utterly corrupted, and it's a pity that so many athletes waste their entire youths training in the hope of the pyrrhic victory of an olympic gold. Like Louis CK said; the scandal was not that Phelps was a fallen idol, rather that he ever became a national hero in the first place.
    1
  4. Nor is it the place of politicians. And this issue is over and done with. No civilised person is still trying to argue against homosexuality. Oppositon to it is an anachronism from bronze-age values about masculinity. Putin is a scumbag, and this law is just one more example of why. Gay athletes should not be holding pride rallys at the olympics, but nor should they have to hide ther sexuality.
    1
  5. Yeah, so so long as they don't kiss each other, or be who they really are, they'll be fine. That sounds totaly reasonable.
    1
  6. You are living in a fantasy. You think if John Wayne Gacy had hosted a game of cards from his cell, that it would ever have been "just a game of cards"? The political careers of anyone who participated would have been ruined forever, and any non-politician would have been subject to years of suspicion. Your "let's just play and don't look at the abuse" attitude is truly baffling. It's a sign of compartmental thinking.
    1
  7. Russia was challenged on wheter gay athletes would face sanctions, and the initial response of their minister was that gay athletes would not face any sanctions, but a few days later he revised that on the record, saying that any openly gay athletes would face the same laws as their own residents, which is to say that they would be imprisoned if they expressed their homosexuality in any way publicly.
    1
  8. I agree completely. This is what happens when bigotry is given a place in the political system, and why America should be so disgusted that people like Rick Perry, Sarah Palan, Michelle Bachman, and Rick Santorum ever gained a foothold in politics.
    1
  9. Russians are already alienated from the international community.
    1
  10. Nonsense. By competing, they give tacit approval to discrimination that can actually prevent some of the best athletes from competing. And even if that was not the case, the athletes' mere presence says that the athletic community will simply ignore any abuse of human rights for the sake of a medal chance.
    1
  11. If this was about racism not homophobia,how would you feel if all the black athletes were told, "So long as you wear white paint, there'll be no problem"? Why should these athletes hide who they are because Putin's a neanderthal?
    1
  12. Yeah, and why can't people just leave pedophilia out of it when making donations to the catholic church, and the corruption of corporae sponsorship out when deciding what party to vote for? Oh I remember - because it's directly relevant! Because some of the best athletes will be unable to compete because they cannot go to Russia without fear of arrest. Because we shouldn't be rewarding fascist states with the marketing tool of international recognition.
    1
  13. Yeah, that is actually somewhat ironic. Just like banning blacks from sitting at the front of the bus made the journey to school about racism, and not public transport.
    1
  14. The IOC are a bunch of spineless old bigots themselves. Just like the Nobel committee.
    1
  15. Hear hear!
    1
  16. A sports competition where a number of the athetes are prevented from competiting simply because of their sexuality is as meaningful as one where they are prevented because of their race. It's a travesty. There's no such thing as "just the the olympics".
    1
  17. What's that supposed to mean? That I have to be perfect before making a moral stance against something? That because I live in an increasingly fascist country that on a personal level I can't be opposed to the behaviour of an even worse state?
    1
  18. But who can risk competing under such terms? And who would want to compete in a competition where your fellow athletes were under such duress?
    1