12/21/24
December 14, 2010
Blatter: No Sex for Gays at Qatar World Cup: Gay soccer fans should refrain from sex during the 2022 World Cup in Qatar, FIFA President Sepp Blatter advised in an interview. Asked if he could foresee cultural problems arising during the tournament, Blatter responded, "I'd say they (gay fans) should refrain from any sexual activities." Homosexuality is illegal in the Islamic country, which sentenced an American in 1996 to six months imprisonment and 90 lashes for homosexuality and deported over 20 Filipinos in 1998 on suspicion of being gay, according to the UN High Commission for Refugees.
Well, it's a good thing human rights is one of the factors FIFA evaluates candidates for. Oops, my bad, I forgot the only factor they care about is bribery and acting like they are doing something important.
posted by Bonkers at 09:37 PM on December 14, 2010
Grant Wahl tweeter today, repeatedly, that he had from good sources that Qatar paid each FIFA ExCo member a minimum of $10M for their 2020 vote. If this turns out to be publicly proven...
posted by billsaysthis at 10:58 PM on December 14, 2010
Grant Wahl was just re-tweeting from Jonathan Alter ... He is the journalist claiming to have the source saying the bribes were given.
posted by Ricardo at 12:03 AM on December 15, 2010
If this turns out to be publicly proven...
I hate (ok, i actually enjoy it) to be cynical, but does it really change anything? Over here in America, soccer's kind of a meh....EUROCUP!!!....2 years.....WORLD CUP!!!.....meh....rinse and repeat. Then you have Europe league soccer where, while I don't follow it, I get the impression a number a teams are already in a great deal of financial debt and financial issues are a way of life. Plus, in US, we have Congress to try bring sports in line (if you think that's the government's job, which is really besides the point on this topic). If it turns out FIFA's utterly corrupt, who or what is going to do anything about it?
Also, it looks like Jonathan Alter is the original Twitter poster of the vote purchasing, though I don't use twitter. Ever. So I have about a 10% clue if I followed the links correctly.
posted by jmd82 at 12:04 AM on December 15, 2010
Brevity and no real point to my post wins me the round.
Ricardo - 1 jmd82 - 0
To post something with the slightest bit of substance ... I do follow much of what goes on in the soccer world over here in the US, but I am in the minority. I think most of the interest in soccer lay in the foreign community. Your average born-and-bred American could care less. I know it's more visible than before and getting bigger, but it's still a last resort for many.
And while it's nice to have someone to villify (FIFA's ExCom members), I agree with the above ... it doesn't really change anything. We've already lost out on hosting 2022 and I don't see that changing whether any evidence surfaces or not.
Hopefully somewhere down the line, FIFA will adopt more transparency around this type of situation so at least countries don't waste good money trying to win the right to host.
posted by Ricardo at 05:59 AM on December 15, 2010
You want a unique World Cup, Blatter's got you covered, from vuvuzelas to vulvazealots.
posted by beaverboard at 08:08 AM on December 15, 2010
This is a nasty upshot of FIFA corruption combined with the outsized power of the minnows in a one-country, one vote system. Probably never happen, but this would be a good opportunity for a boycott, not just by fans or individual players, but by teams themselves. That would mean paying more than just lip service to human rights and the idea of the World Cup as an opportunity to civilize the world, so it may never happen.
Or maybe all the fans, gay, straight, and other, could pledge to have gay sex at least once while they were there. It would make a great telethon.
Fuck FIFA, fuck Qatar, and motherfuck intolerant assholes.
posted by Hugh Janus at 09:08 AM on December 15, 2010
That's what I like about Qatar. They don't discriminate - they circumcise both men and women.
posted by owlhouse at 09:08 AM on December 15, 2010
Over here in America, soccer's kind of a meh ...
24.4 million people watched the 2012 Final in the U.S.
Then you have Europe league soccer where, while I don't follow it, I get the impression a number a teams are already in a great deal of financial debt and financial issues are a way of life.
The British Premiership is one of the richest sports leagues on the planet, with $2.87 billion in revenue in 2008-09. Some of the several dozen franchises in the sport's top-four levels have had financial troubles, but no more severe than in Major League Baseball with the Rangers and the NBA with the New Orleans Hornets.
If it turns out FIFA's utterly corrupt, who or what is going to do anything about it?
If they are caught selling the Cup, it will be a huge global sports scandal.
posted by rcade at 09:17 AM on December 15, 2010
24.4 million people watched the 2012 Final in the U.S.
That settles it. Rcade is indeed from the future.
posted by Ying Yang Mafia at 09:44 AM on December 15, 2010
Shazbot! I blew my cover.
Probably never happen, but this would be a good opportunity for a boycott ...
That's too horrible to contemplate. The countries could all change the names of their teams to Redskins and be sponsored by Michael Vick's dog-fighting operation and I still would watch.
posted by rcade at 10:03 AM on December 15, 2010
Yeah, unfortunately, me too. That's why the telethon is such a good idea. I'd sponsor a dozen fans. Fill that country to the brim with gay sex, make hosting the World Cup unattractive to shithead countries like Qatar. If the civilized world can't make them think twice about their intolerance, maybe we can make them think twice about hosting the World Cup and all the gay sex it encourages.
posted by Hugh Janus at 10:41 AM on December 15, 2010
I am not sure why they gay community is upset with the guy. I mean, I can't relate to gay sex but lets say hypothetically I was a pot smoker in a place where laws are very lax regarding marijuana. Why would I take offense if a FIFA official issued a warning to pot smokers that it is illegal in Qatar to smoke pot and penalties are extremely harsh.
So remember smoke whatever you smoke at your own risk in Qatar ( or any intolerant Islamic country) as there are countries that will put you to death for adultery, homosexuality, marijuana, blasphemy, selling alcohol, sending your daughter to school, making fun of Islam or a whole list of things we infidels accept as everyday normal behavior.
posted by Atheist at 11:02 AM on December 15, 2010
The reason to take offense is that Blatter's comments accentuate the fact that FIFA is rewarding a country with a World Cup that imprisons people for being gay. Why is that even remotely acceptable? If Blatter tells Jews to hide their faith at the event, would that also be received as helpful advice?
Blatter makes it worse by laughing off the question, as if gay persecution is a lark.
posted by rcade at 11:14 AM on December 15, 2010
I am not sure why they gay community is upset with the guy. I mean, I can't relate to gay sex but lets say hypothetically I was a pot smoker in a place where laws are very lax regarding marijuana. Why would I take offense if a FIFA official issued a warning to pot smokers that it is illegal in Qatar to smoke pot and penalties are extremely harsh.
The issue isn't whether gay people attending or competing in the World Cup in Qatar could refrain from having sex for the duration of the WC. It's that regulating private consensual behavior between adults is a blatant violation of human rights. Respecting human rights is supposed to be a necessary precursor to acceptance the world community, much like elementary civilized behavior is a necessary precursor to acceptance in a local community. Behave like a barbarian, at any level, and the rest of the community doesn't want to have anything to do with you -- that's how a standard of civilized behavior is enforced. The ability to participate in the international community is both a carrot and a stick to get countries to renounce barbaric ways, and it plays out in many ways: in formal diplomatic venues, for example, but also in sports, and with some success (ref. South Africa in the apartheid years).
posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:17 AM on December 15, 2010
Probably never happen, but this would be a good opportunity for a boycott ...
That's too horrible to contemplate. The countries could all change the names of their teams to Redskins and be sponsored by Michael Vick's dog-fighting operation and I still would watch.
As long as the teams show up, I will watch. I would have no problem missing it if teams decided to boycott though. I get my share of soccer and if it improved my future soccer experience, then so be it.
posted by Ricardo at 11:18 AM on December 15, 2010
there are countries that will put you to death for adultery, homosexuality, marijuana, blasphemy, selling alcohol, sending your daughter to school, making fun of Islam or a whole list of things we infidels accept as everyday normal behavior.
So why should we endorse it?
posted by yerfatma at 11:27 AM on December 15, 2010
So why should we endorse it?
Or, with a wink and a smile, give a "warning" about the danger?
Look at it this way, if the NFL awarded the Super Bowl to the new franchise city of Redneckia, then "warned" blacks that they might want to skip it, as they're just not welcome there, are they as guilty as the Redneckians? By choosing an intolerant place, then joking about the intolerance, the league, or FIFA, becomes complicit in the behavior.
posted by tahoemoj at 12:09 PM on December 15, 2010
Guess I need to cancel my hotel
posted by Debo270 at 12:51 PM on December 15, 2010
So why should we endorse it?
Is it an endorsement? I don't know if I want FIFA to be a moral arbiter. Though, yeah, I don't like Qatar's laws. So... I don't know. This is a confusing subject for me.
posted by tron7 at 02:10 PM on December 15, 2010
Is it an endorsement? I don't know if I want FIFA to be a moral arbiter.
I don't think it's a matter of being a moral arbiter (which implies that you're the boss and call all the shots) as much as it is for taking a position based on conscience (and sometimes taking a hit as a result). There is a lot of precedent in sports. Again, see the boycott vs. South Africa, or for that matter, read the Olympic by-laws.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 03:02 PM on December 15, 2010
There are many forms of reality: two of which are political reality and monetary reality.
posted by graymatters at 05:40 PM on December 15, 2010
Hey, can unmarried people bang like drums at the 2022 World Cup? Just wondering. Where's Qatar going to import hookers from? I hope they're gold-plated.
posted by yerfatma at 07:40 PM on December 15, 2010
The reason to take offense is that Blatter's comments accentuate the fact that FIFA is rewarding a country with a World Cup that imprisons people for being gay. Why is that even remotely acceptable?
Just to play Devil's Advocate: Lawrence v. Texas came down in 2003, nine years after the US hosted the World Cup.
posted by Ufez Jones at 01:17 AM on December 16, 2010
Just to play Devil's Advocate: Lawrence v. Texas came down in 2003, nine years after the US hosted the World Cup.
That it did; however, every state where a 2003 World Cup venue was located had already repealed its sodomy laws, had them struck down by a state supreme court, and/or decriminalized sodomy.
posted by lil_brown_bat at 11:19 AM on December 16, 2010
I totally disagree with the notion of allowing any of these Islamic intolerant country to participate in anyway with anything that is western and allows them to profit. I was just commenting on the fact the if FIFA allows Qatar to host which is wrong and was probably the result of a bribe, the warning was just that a warning. But I agree with those that are questioning the rationale that allows Qatar to be involved in the first place.
posted by Atheist at 11:59 AM on December 16, 2010
That it did; however, every state where a 2003 World Cup venue was located had already repealed its sodomy laws, had them struck down by a state supreme court, and/or decriminalized sodomy.
Okay, but I was referring to the Men's Cup in '94, which had games in Orlando and Dallas. Florida and Texas were two of the states that had active anti-sodomy laws until Lawrence. I'm not saying it's a perfect analogy, nor am I comparing pre-Lawrence America to Qatar, but I do think it's a valid point to raise.
posted by Ufez Jones at 07:11 PM on December 16, 2010
I totally disagree with the notion of allowing any of these Islamic intolerant country to participate in anyway with anything that is western and allows them to profit.
Not to oppose your sentiment, but what is this "profit" thing of which you speak?
- (signed) South Africa 2010
posted by owlhouse at 08:29 PM on December 16, 2010
If you want them to change I think there's something to be said for including them internationally. It ain't going to happen overnight. Of course, international isolation seemed to work for change in South Africa in a fashion.
Not that this is the way to do any of that, though Sepp. Nor do you much care it would seem.
posted by WeedyMcSmokey at 10:19 PM on December 16, 2010
It's a good thing I'm not a soccer fan :-(