Friday, January 17, 2014
Lead By Example
The Sochi Olympics start in 3 weeks and so far all we know is that Russia doesn't want gay people acting gay on its streets.
In response to that the U.S. (President Obama) named a delegation of gay athletes, chief among them Billie Jean King and figure skater Brian Boitano. King never played in the Olympics (she did coach) and Boitano wasn't even out until last week when he did so in order to accept this honor.
You see the selection of King, Boitano et al, was based on one factor, they're gay.
And that's what prompted Mario Pescante, an IOC member from Italy to say "it's absurd that a country like that sends four lesbians to Russia just to demonstrate that in their country gay rights have (been established)."
And if I had to choose sides in this debate, I would side with Pescante, but allow me to state his point a little more delicately.
If the U.S. is trying to prove that gay people are equal on all counts, including and especially sporting prowess, and therefore we shouldn't judge people or select people for honors based on the sexuality.
Wouldn't it be an outrage to give such an honor only to heterosexuals? So why is it ok to give the honor to only homosexuals?
I know the counterarguments to what I am saying: we have to make an issue of this and bring attention to the harsh policies in Russia and elsewhere. Basically the pendulum is pulled to one side, that we have to pull it to the other side, past the center, if we ever want it to rest in the middle.
That seems completely logical, but I disagree. I don't see how violating the very thing you're fighting for (people and athletes should not be judged by the sexual preference) helps further your point.
In my experience, the best way to influence the behavior of others is to be the person you want them to be.
So the U.S. should have named Boitano, and the usual raft of dignitaries and brown nosers, and made its point all the same, with a little less hypocrisy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I was going to disagree vehemently, then half agree and now I disagree again.
I don't think this "honor" is more than a figure head role. It's not like someone else who earned it is missing out or where an athlete earned their right to compete.
It's a political bitch slap to the Russians who by all accounts have butchered the economics around these Games. The violence toward gays in Russia is pretty bad. Is it overkill? Maybe. But sending a political message on the world stage by not 1) pulling athletes ala '80 & '84 and 2) not sending the message though the competing athletes themselves is actually quite tactful in my opinion. (not saying you are)Saying there's no room for politics in the Olympics is naïve because the Games are engulfed in politics.
I would love for some athlete to be brave enough to send a message or show of support during the games.
I agree with Bill and respectfully disagree with Paul. If I were in a position to take a stand against an entity that was anti-Semitic, I would send only Jews as a big f-you. I love what Obama did here and I'd do exactly the same.
The approach you're both advocating is likely to make you feel good, and embolden those on your side, but it will do nothing to solve the problem, will only anger those who oppose your viewpoint and make them more vehement in their opinions.
Much like Walter White, I don't believe in half measures. I completely understand your point about long-term problem resolution, but I don't think Obama is trying to resolve the issue overnight. I think he's taking a public shot at Putin and kind of showing him up, and I love it.
I agree with Bill and Damino on this. Opinions on such matters are deeply rooted and you can't change people's minds. So might as well throw the big F-you out there.
Post a Comment