In 2016, Steven van de Velde pleaded guilty to three counts of raping a 12-year British schoolgirl. On Sunday, the registered sex offender was knocked out of the Paris Olympics.
How is there no mechanism to remove him? I mean, ideally he shouldn’t have been selected in the first place but under the insanely charitable assumption that it was sloppiness and not active negligence that recruited him.
It’s not the Olympic organizers’ job to disqualify someone based on how immoral, criminal, of poor character or despicable a person is (on who’s laws anyway?). This is a major failure on the country’s olympic committee selecting these people to represent themselves to the world.
On the one hand that’s supposedly to do with competitive advantage. It makes sense to try to even the playing field, which should have nothing to do with objection on ‘moral’grounds. I’d argue this is mostly a good thing given the iffiness of many groups’ morals.
Case in point, your exact examples, which brings me to the other hand. Banning trans athletes on ‘fairness’ grounds is bullshit. In most sports there’s no known competitive advantage. Where there’s an imbalance they tend to show disadvantage. The rare cases with an advantage for trans athletes tend to disappear the moment you correct for size/weight, which is not something we’d exclude cis athletes for. None of your examples should have happened. They do not hold water on fairness grounds, and any moralistic reasons behind it are reprehensible.
Cool, thanks for sharing. I know that the criteria is sketchy at best, but interesting to see where the line is drawn, and how this is still a “problem” that the IOC are facing.
It’s almost like you would have a physical advantage by being born male.
See no issues with transwomen competing with men though. Technically the mens divisions are the “unrestricted” entries.
Pretty interesting read, but far from conclusive. As they said in the study. 15-23 random people from each group gathered from social media isn’t exactly what I would call bulletproof.
Just by going through male puberty you would have a physical advantage by being taller.
Obviously it’s a murky subject on the topic of intersex and transgender athletes participating in the ladies’ competition. However on the whole, the focus is on matters related to achieving a fair competition to a sport rather than someone’s morality. The IOC, with consultation from a multitude of countries, dropped many of the testosterone and sex testing criteria for this year, where before the 2016 olympics, trans and intersex athletes were barred completely without genital surgery.
All Olympic athletes sign a declaration saying they’ll strive to be a role model or something similar. I’d say a convicted rapist shouldn’t be considered a role model and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to compete.
I get your point, but a convicted criminal who is rehabilitated could also be considered a good role model. Not saying he is, but not really a means to disqualify him.
Yeah, I thought the same when I wrote the comment. I’ve read a bit more about him and what he was charged with. In the UK he wasn’t convicted of grooming - they prosecuted him for it but he was found not guilty. I think it was a consensual relationship, but of course a 19 year old having sex with a 12 year old is rape regardless of consent in the UK and he was (rightly) convicted of that. In the Netherlands however the law is different, it wasn’t considered rape but something like “morally offensive actions”. So from the Dutch pov he’s not actually a rapist, which might explain why the Dutch Olympic committee don’t seem to think it’s that big a deal. Despite that, I still think a convicted pedophile rapist should not be allowed to compete in the games, but that needs to be made clear in the eligibility requirements by the IOC, rather than the wishy-washy “role model” contract.
Why shouldn’t the Dutch delegation select him? And what rules would prevent a selection of any convicted criminal?
Olympic athletes are representatives of their home country. Why the fuck would you pick a child rapist to be your representative? Were the cannibals unavailable or something?
Isn’t volleyball a team sport? How are his teammates okay with being on a team with a child molester? How are his opponents okay with playing in a game against him? Even if there’s no official mechanism, couldn’t all the players just be like “Nah, fuck that, he goes or I do”. The only time I’ve every knowingly ran into one I couldn’t have been civil towards them if I wanted to let alone actually work together on something.
How is there no mechanism to remove him? I mean, ideally he shouldn’t have been selected in the first place but under the insanely charitable assumption that it was sloppiness and not active negligence that recruited him.
It’s not the Olympic organizers’ job to disqualify someone based on how immoral, criminal, of poor character or despicable a person is (on who’s laws anyway?). This is a major failure on the country’s olympic committee selecting these people to represent themselves to the world.
Yet they’re more than happy to disqualify and otherwise exclude people based on their biology. Curious… 🤔
On the one hand that’s supposedly to do with competitive advantage. It makes sense to try to even the playing field, which should have nothing to do with objection on ‘moral’grounds. I’d argue this is mostly a good thing given the iffiness of many groups’ morals.
Case in point, your exact examples, which brings me to the other hand. Banning trans athletes on ‘fairness’ grounds is bullshit. In most sports there’s no known competitive advantage. Where there’s an imbalance they tend to show disadvantage. The rare cases with an advantage for trans athletes tend to disappear the moment you correct for size/weight, which is not something we’d exclude cis athletes for. None of your examples should have happened. They do not hold water on fairness grounds, and any moralistic reasons behind it are reprehensible.
Who have they disqualified?
Transgender and intersex athletes.
https://www.insidethegames.biz/articles/1143198/restrictions-transgender-paris2024-games
https://www.vox.com/culture/364032/trans-athletes-olympics-2024
https://www.thenation.com/article/society/trans-athletes-paris-olympics/
https://www.reuters.com/sports/athletics/were-being-hounded-french-transgender-sprinter-decries-olympics-ban-2023-05-09/
https://www.leidenlawblog.nl/articles/are-transgender-and-intersex-athletes-banned-from-the-olympics
https://www.theguardian.com/sport/article/2024/jun/12/transgender-swimmer-lia-thomas-out-of-olympics-after-losing-legal-battle-swimming
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/transgender-athletes-banned-from-track-and-field-competitions-rules-tightened-for-semenya
https://www.context.news/socioeconomic-inclusion/which-sports-will-allow-trans-athletes-at-the-paris-olympics
Cool, thanks for sharing. I know that the criteria is sketchy at best, but interesting to see where the line is drawn, and how this is still a “problem” that the IOC are facing.
Damn, maybe cis women should git gud instead of being scared of trans folk.
It’s almost like you would have a physical advantage by being born male. See no issues with transwomen competing with men though. Technically the mens divisions are the “unrestricted” entries.
It’s almost like that isn’t even true and you’re just a transphobe and misogynist.
Pretty interesting read, but far from conclusive. As they said in the study. 15-23 random people from each group gathered from social media isn’t exactly what I would call bulletproof. Just by going through male puberty you would have a physical advantage by being taller.
Obviously it’s a murky subject on the topic of intersex and transgender athletes participating in the ladies’ competition. However on the whole, the focus is on matters related to achieving a fair competition to a sport rather than someone’s morality. The IOC, with consultation from a multitude of countries, dropped many of the testosterone and sex testing criteria for this year, where before the 2016 olympics, trans and intersex athletes were barred completely without genital surgery.
Sure, but how did they end up selecting him and why can’t they recall him?
That is a very good question and quite shameful for the Dutch Olympic Committee that they did not.
On what grounds would he be removed though? Is there a reason countries shouldn’t select athletes that have been to prison?
On the grounds that the Olympic Games is mostly a propaganda event and he’s absolutely terrible propaganda?
Well on that same vein, the IOC unilaterally disqualifying a country’s chosen athlete is likely to be even more politically problematic.
All Olympic athletes sign a declaration saying they’ll strive to be a role model or something similar. I’d say a convicted rapist shouldn’t be considered a role model and therefore shouldn’t be allowed to compete.
I get your point, but a convicted criminal who is rehabilitated could also be considered a good role model. Not saying he is, but not really a means to disqualify him.
Yeah, I thought the same when I wrote the comment. I’ve read a bit more about him and what he was charged with. In the UK he wasn’t convicted of grooming - they prosecuted him for it but he was found not guilty. I think it was a consensual relationship, but of course a 19 year old having sex with a 12 year old is rape regardless of consent in the UK and he was (rightly) convicted of that. In the Netherlands however the law is different, it wasn’t considered rape but something like “morally offensive actions”. So from the Dutch pov he’s not actually a rapist, which might explain why the Dutch Olympic committee don’t seem to think it’s that big a deal. Despite that, I still think a convicted pedophile rapist should not be allowed to compete in the games, but that needs to be made clear in the eligibility requirements by the IOC, rather than the wishy-washy “role model” contract.
The fact that he’s a fucking child rapist. No need to be an apologist for the pedophile, he’s a shit person and it’s ok to call him that.
Yeah but that’s not really what my question was about.
Why shouldn’t the Dutch delegation select him? And what rules would prevent a selection of any convicted criminal?
Or are we talking about the IOC specifically banning people convicted of child rape offences?
Olympic athletes are representatives of their home country. Why the fuck would you pick a child rapist to be your representative? Were the cannibals unavailable or something?
Because olypians aren’t chosen based on the morality of their character but how much they excell at their sport (just like most major sports)
“We’re totally fine being represented by rapists because we wanna win, godammit.”
Isn’t volleyball a team sport? How are his teammates okay with being on a team with a child molester? How are his opponents okay with playing in a game against him? Even if there’s no official mechanism, couldn’t all the players just be like “Nah, fuck that, he goes or I do”. The only time I’ve every knowingly ran into one I couldn’t have been civil towards them if I wanted to let alone actually work together on something.
The olympics have athletes competing from countries where being gay is a crime, like the girl from Algeria, it’s not on them to be the world police.