to all of you, i just got this statement from USAT's CEO, Rocky Harris:

"USA Triathlon recently became aware of the rule amendment made by the International Triathlon Union concerning 'athlete demonstrations' at events. We are in direct communication with the ITU in an attempt to learn more, and to address the resulting concerns this rule change represents for the LGBTQ community. We take pride in the fact that our sport – and ITU – has historically been a leader in equality and inclusivity, so we anticipate this decision will be reviewed more closely."

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Some things are immoral regardless of cultural norms, yes. Do you disagree? Or is everything acceptable if a different culture says so? That's not open-minded; that's making morals and rights irrelevant.

---

The point is, ladies and gentleman, that speed, for lack of a better word, is good. Speed is right, Speed works. Speed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit.

I'll be curious what your going to assume/think if the ITU answers your questions and/or gets more info out there that this wasn't a move against anyone and essentially shoulder shrugs to the "outrage"?

IE- if they respond with this ruling was done to "get back to triathlon" and take out all the other stuff, what will your response be? I've personally thought that as long as your not "demonstrating" your not going to ever get pinged by the officials. So the guy with the rainbow tat, I dont think you have a worry in the world, for the same reason a person wearing a cross won't either. But pick up a rainbow flag or drag a cross w/ thorns across the finish line and there is the "demonstration" stuff they don't want.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Are you advocating your ideal or reality? Because the reality is that they do sometimes demonstrate their religious beliefs or attitudes toward sexual orientation. Per the article on the main page, which covers the spectrum toward openly displaying a rainbow flag at one end to wearing overtly religious wear like a cross on a necklace or religious headgear.

Somewhere in there is presumably the line between "propaganda" (using publicity as a stage to advocate my beliefs) and "just following my beliefs." Where that line is isn't entirely clear.

Wetfeet wrote:

ITU athletes represent their country and display their nation’s flag, not sexual orientation, religions beliefs, etc.

From the article on the front page:

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

See the issue I have with all this is this. If we are equating someone wearing a cross under their jersey that may or may not bounce around to the same thing as someone waving a big ass flag at the end of the race, I'd just rather not have a conversation with that person because I think "common" sense is gone at that point.

ETA: For some reason I'm curious why a runner with a cross wasn't included in the pictures for the article, is it because it's so obscure that it never really materializes into anything and only something as big as a 3'x5' flag does materialize into something?

I mean we can all differentiate the difference right, between someone doing something with their own personal beliefs that don't "bother" others like wearing a cross and someone using a large external item for demostration?

Like isn't the whole point of waving a big ass flag at the end of the race basically a "demonstration"? Or else they'd be using it the whole time, but they don't so it's pretty much used specifically to make a point, yes?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I don't think we are trying to equate those two things. I think we are saying that if someone grabs a rainbow flag from someone in the chute and caries it over the finish line, they should not be DQ'd for it.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

But isn't the fact that you grab it at the end going to the finish line, the very point that your trying to make a "statement"? Your trying to use the finish line as some demonstration with an external item- whether national flag or otherwise- Rainbow flag for whatever reason you want (some assume it's for gay rights, etc).

Whereas someone with a cross or some woman fully wardrobe isn't really doing anything external to prove a point, or atleast they are using it for the entire race and it's "their" thing. So they aren't going across the finish line holding up crosses, etc. Dan you used the rainbow flag as evidence, so if you can show me an athlete holding a cross across the line as some regular event, I'll be glad to be proven wrong.


So I just dont think you can tell me it's not a demonstration by grabbing a flag at the end....and I'll say this for the nationality flags as well. The whole point of doing that is to showcase something other than themselves. So I'm actually cool if they "ban" all flag totting "moments" so that it's a clear and concise rule.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

The whole thing is a swamp. On the front page the argument is made that the pride flag should be allowed because some groups are less privileged than others. In the shifting sands of societal acceptance who gets to decide? Are polygamist flags not allowed today but tomorrow okay? On a university campus these days advancing certain traditional ideas would get you ostracized for sure.

When some folks talk about diversity what they are really saying is they don't want a mere multiplicity of human characteristics and types but rather a preference for certain groups over others. "Diversity" never means that Algeria must accept more Frenchmen or Zimbabwe more English farmers of course.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

That is pretty much my view.

---

They constantly try to escape from the darkness outside and within
Dreaming of systems so perfect that no one will need to be good T.S. Eliot

The point is not the flag. The point is the addition of the sexual orientation conveniently right before a race that could be sensitive to non- heterosexual displays.
Sadly there is a reason that there are groups for LGBTQ athletes, or athletes of color, or women. Us white straight guys don't get profiled by police, or locked up because of color or sexual orientation. Dan's point is that triathlon is a place for everyone. And if someone doesn't get it why that statement is necessary, get real, don't pretend like racism and sexism etc are not omnipresent.

---

NO

The righties creamed their pants over Tim Teebow bowing in the endzone to thank Jesus for another touchdown and then collectively lost their damn minds over Collin Kaepernick being concerned with something bigger than himself.

Is the fact that USAT is looking into it, a direct result of this thread that alerted you, Dan who got in touch with USAT?

The point is not the flag.

-----

But isn't that the point what I said that ITU is getting back to the place where it's about "athletics" and not using races for demonstrations of any manner. Again I think we can all understand there's a difference in "demonstration" for a guy wearing a cross around his neck on a necklace that is rarely seen by others and a guy flying any flag at the end of the race.

So is the whole point by not letting people fly a rainbow flag that we are infringing on their rights or making them 2nd class citizens? I know for sure all types of people have hardships, I'm just not sure why we have to use the athletic field to demonstrate on? Maybe my middle class whiteness is getting in the way, but I'm just not understanding things, if ITU is simply saying "just race". They aren't saying you can't, aren't they basically trying to take all the demonstrations out of the sport? But they aren't saying who can and can't race, they are simply saying how they want their race raced, right??....novel concept in a sporting event.


I guess I'm missing the point that we are infringing on athletes by not not letting them showcase their sexual orientation in a race. I'd assume going back to the basis of what sports are- competition is a good thing.

So is the issue that people are pissed that the rainbow flag waving guy will be DQ'd but the cute white christian girl with a cross on her necklace wont? Which as I said I can see the difference in the 2. If people can't, and that's the beef, fair enough.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

they've created an NFL problem. which was avoidable.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

i don't know. i saw the thread. then i read the story in outsports. then i contacted both the ITU and USAT. then i contacted jack bristow. i don't know how USAT got wind of this. maybe it was from me, i don't know. but the OP was pretty quick to get on it. if i ever get scooped, it's usually not another portal; it's usually by my own forum.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

Carrying any flag across the finish line is a demonstration - typically of pride and solidarity with whatever group is represented by the flag. Obviously that is usually a national flag. As far as I am concerned, as long as the flag does not advocate repressing or harming other people, they can go for it.

Expressly prohibiting a group that is historically oppressed from being able to openly associate themselves with that group - an expression that can help other members of it find acceptance and comfort, that is simply perpetuating oppression.

Banning all representations of anything that can be construed to mean anything other than "I am a triathlete" is pretty insane. Also it would make it even harder to make a living as a professional in this sport than it already is. This whole thing is supposed to be fun, anyway.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

    
This whole thing is supposed to be fun, anyway.

------

Fun competition, and isn't that the point they are trying to make by installing this rule? Simply you know get back to racing and see who's the best, not who's the best gay or best black or best white or best straight athlete.

IE- you seem to suggest that X is allowed because it's cool and not repressing, but Y isn't because well maybe it's negative and a repressive group.

But isn't the ITU saying let's just ban A-Z and get back to the fun competition? And yet they are being villified?


ETA: It sorta baffles me that your telling me your angry at the ITU but in the same light say that some groups should be allowed to demonstrate because they are for everyone, but others cant because they are oppressive. Like it seems to me that the ITU is trying to take it all out, so I'm not sure how they are keeping people down? I dont understand that logic. It seems to me the ITU is simply saying let's get back to clean, fun racing devoid of all the drama.


ETA #2- I've coached openly gay athletes, straight athletes, males, females, hell I've even coached a transgender person (female to male), and not once did anyone want to use any part of their race to "demonstrate". I'd think you'd want to spend the whole race as a demonstration of who you are, and not the final 20s of your event, or else your just doing it to make some type of specific statement....Which isn't the whole point that the ITU wants you to spend the last 20s of the event the same way you did the previous 99.8% of the event. Isn't that the whole rule, but because you cant now carry your flag, your feeling oppressed???

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

i could find exactly one incidence of a rainbow flag at the finish of an ITU race. one.

so, when the ITU makes a rule on the basis of this, the only logical conclusion is that some entity with juice, and that is anti-civil-rights, is making a complaint, and the ITU is giving in to that entity. if that is not the case, fine. but i think the onus is on the ITU to explain, transparently, how this singular issue (that happened in a race in the UK) gave birth to this rule.

if my suspicion is right, then, no, it's not a swamp. it is using sport as a whip, to keep a historically threatened community of people quiet and compliant.

that makes me angry. i hate bullies. no straw men, logical fallacies or whataboutisms will solve this for me.

---

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman

it is using sport as a whip, to keep a historically threatened community of people quiet and compliant.

-------

How? Aren't they basically creating a rule that takes out everything but simply athletics? They want everyone to shut up and race. But answer me this, did the one incident that you found, did he carry the flag the whole time or only at the end? I'm going to guess he picked it up at the finish line, so 99.9% of the time he was cool with being just an random athlete, you see him racing you wouldn't know him as straight/bi/homesexual/catholic/baptis/atheist/good person/bad person....but only at the end was when the identity of the athlete came out right?

ETA: Seems to me the ITU wants to make it 100% you see the racers and you don't know their sexuality/religion/thoughts/good person/bad person, you simply see an athlete racing. And if you are trying to tell me they should take out cross necklaces, sure just please dont equate that and demonstrating your beliefs at the end of a race when you weren't doing that previously as the same thing.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

With this logic, the ALS/ Blazeman roll is also a demonstration. How about firemen racing with all of their gear? I have seen crosses carried and even charity flags. What else would you like to throw in the pot? How about we learn to respect others no matter what they stand for?! Does seeing someone pass by with a flag really harm anyone?

How about we learn to respect others no matter what they stand for?! Does seeing someone pass by with a flag really harm anyone?

------

Where did I say I don't respect any particular group? I've simply said let's have a race be a race, as I dont care what you are in a race. Which is my whole point that I think ITU is getting at. ETA: I've stated that a guy wanting to wear a rainbow ribbon or armband to me isn't "demonstrating" in the same light a white christian wearing a cross isn't "demonstrating" (in my viewpoint), but the moment you get to the finish line and bring some external item into the "field of play", that's where I see the error at. So hell no, I'm not trying to put any group down, in fact I'm advocating taking all that "external" stuff out of the field of play. You either are fast or not fast based on you the athlete, not you the religious/political/sexual person.

So my point was, it seems that 99.9% of the race this guy was cool with just being an athlete, right? He wasnt putting his views out there until the very end, yes? He "respected" the race for what it is, a race that doesn't matter what you believe, doesnt matter color of your skin, doesn't matter who you like, it matters if you trained or not.

And FYI I'm fine with banning all demostrations- that's my point. I'm cool with them banning even athletes picking up national flags. Race the damn race, leave the other stuff for another venue. Or is that viewpoint meaning I'm "hating" on certain groups?

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

I really don't understand this thing about demonstrating only at the end instead of throughout the whole thing? How does that matter at all?

How is he not respecting the race and the other racers by carrying that flag? Who does he harm by carrying that flag?

If we ban all "demonstrations" then we must have no sponsor logos because companies DO stand for things and invoke certain ideas. Team in Training, and Ironman Foundation kits must be banned. Any tri teams with kits displaying their name or logo must not stand for anything other than racing. Does any of this make any sense?

Edit - Also, these kinds of things are pretty rare anyway. Why worry about it at all? All these years without the rule, and virtually no displays of LGBTQ rights. We have identified one. Any more? It really does seem like a repressive government is using their money influence and world championship venue to try to impose their nationally sanctioned civil rights abuses to the ITU, who have tried to quietly comply. Maybe. It is a question worth asking.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook

Who does he harm by carrying that flag?

--------

In the same light, how is he or the group he's standing for harmed by now not being allowed to carry the flag? They aren't not being allowed to race are they? They aren't being made to change the person they are. You just can't openly demonstrate your viewpoint in the field of play, but tell me again how that's now keeping you down?

Because it's taking an place away for you to demonstrate your viewpoints?

Help me understand that part of it. When for the whole race you aren't using the event to demonstrate your viewpoints, until the very end, but now because that's being taken away, you arenn't good with just going back to being an "regular" athlete? ETA: I dont really give a shit if your gay or atheist or a "bad" person, when you enter an event to me your just an athlete. As I said I've coached openly gay athletes, I've coached transgender athletes, I've coached straight, lesbian athletes, fat people, skinny people, professionals, MOP, BOP, fast people, slow people, black, Asian, white, non-Americans, Americans- none of that shit matters to me, and I'll more than gladly help them with whatever movement they want. But if your telling me because now you can't showcase your sexual orientation, your now feeling "prosecuted", I just dont find much empathy in terms of you saying you need the field of play for that showcase. To me that's the last place I'd want demonstrations as you sprinting down the finish line mano y mano none of that matters.

---

Brooks Doughtie, M.S.
Exercise Physiology
-USAT Level II

Because until recently, they have had to keep that part of them hidden. If they didn't they would be ostracized, physically harmed, even murdered. So being able to express it publicly - and while doing something that they are also proud of - is an important step in welcoming them into society as they always should have been. We have made progress in most Western countries on this issue, but there is still a long way to go and many people who fear living their life openly. So these displays are a message to them that they do not have to feel alone.

That is why it is important for people to be allowed to make these expressions. Banning it is at minimum blocking the progress society is making and preventing further healing to happen.

---

-------------
Ed O'Malley
www.VeloVetta.com
Founder of VeloVetta Cycling Shoes
Instagram • Facebook