Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

Australian Olympic athlete in anti-straight room discrimination claim

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Hmmmm, well it is a bit silly that he is not allowed to board with his wife but his argument of gay couples being allowed to do so is silly and it would appear completely unfounded!

    1. I can see the rooming with his wife thing both ways. Most professional sports players are kept away from their partners during competition.

      However, that doesnt appear to be the motivation here.

      I do think his lashing out at these supposed “gay couples” who appear not to exist is childish and makes him look ridiculous.

  2. So I see… Australia lists all its athletes by sexual orientation…. ???

  3. Talk about comparing apples and oranges. They are a couple and couples are not allowed to room together. Their assumption that if two unassociated gay people end up in a room together they will automatically ‘become a couple’, to be euphemistic, is ridiculous and homophobic on the face of it. They are comparing couples with non-couples and hoping to make a point. It’s not a good one, and any other good points they have to make are therefore going seriously awry.

    1. Thank you. I couldn’t make any sense of what they were saying and you’ve explained it.
      They are indulging in gratuitous and silly homophobia.

  4. Suddenly Last Bummer 16 Jul 2012, 3:00pm

    Anyone else get the heeby geebies when they read the words “Australian” and “gunman” in the same sentence?

    1. Ned Kelly?

      1. Suddenly Last Bummer 16 Jul 2012, 4:05pm

        Bogans and bullets, a fatal combo. Literally.

        1. He’s a typical Australian bogan homophobe trying to gain some publicity for his bang bang competition. Very phallic indeed!

  5. Well if their are gay couples sharing a room, then yes this is discrimination. But as none are I don’t see his point.

    However I also think it’s stupid that a couple can’t share a room, I mean is this still school or summet.

    1. its 2 single beds… i guess its something like male and female dorms. So technically, gay couples can be allowed to have a room. I suppose there should be a choice to who you want to stay with during the period of time, like your couple for example.

    2. There do not actually have to be people experiencing the unfair advantage, it is enough for the rules to be clearly likely to have the effect or indirect discrimination.

      I agree it is stupid rule making by the Olympics people.

      1. Where is the unfair advantage?

  6. This guy is really creepy!! Agree that it’s stupid that he can’t room with his wife. To have a rant about “all the gay couples” is equally stupid. To say “it will motivate me to shoot better” is frightening…

    1. shoot straighter maybe?

  7. Sorry but this is just repetition of homophobic prejudice – that of the couple themselves and, of course, the Daily Mail.

    1. I agree. The couple’s assertion that they are discriminated against because they are heterosexual reminds me of a Brazilian politician’s claim that gay pride parades discriminate against heterosexuals. Equally stupid and homophobic.

    2. Spanner1960 16 Jul 2012, 6:10pm

      Really?
      Maybe you should read their comments for yourself, and not make sweeping assumptions:
      http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2174261/Olympic-shooter-forbidden-sharing-room-athlete-wife–gay-couples-share-beds.html

  8. He’s making it up for publicity, just read it in the Daily Fail where they focused more on the accusations of gays getting extra rights.

    1. The Daily Heil, never missing a chance to go on about gays.

  9. Jesus Moran 16 Jul 2012, 4:58pm

    Jajaja hehehe jijiji, discriminated against give me freaking break what about those same sex couples in Australia not being able to marry not to mention that full of hate ” gay panic law or whatever is called” this guy needs concentrate in what he came to London for period!

  10. Call me a hair-splitter, but what the hell is ‘athletic’ about firing a gun? Competitor he may be, and a jolly good onefor all I know; althletic?, no.

    1. Spanner1960 16 Jul 2012, 6:12pm

      athletic adj 1 said of someone or their build: physically fit and strong. 2 relating to athletics. 3 said of a physical type: distinguished by having well-developed muscles and a body that is in proportion.

      1. Hmm, now let’s see: could it be (1), (2) or (3) that’s most appropriate in this instance?

        How odd, I seem unable to decide …

  11. What a plonker.

  12. “Tons of gay couples”? I only know of one openly gay Australian competing, and that’s Matthew Mitchum. His boyfriend is not competing, so he will not allowed to stay in the Olympic village.

    1. Be*

      1. believe I read there is a female volleyball player as well. her girlfriend also plays volleyball, but did not make the Olympic team. so no rooming for them either.

  13. Discrimination is when there is active oppression against a person or persons because of their part or apparent part in a social group. It is “You can’t have X, because you are Y”, and this doesn’t fit that formula at all. This problem is due to segregated-sex accommodation, and although it does allow gay couples to live together in the Olympic village and not straight couples, which is indeed unfair, it is NOT discrimination against heterosexual couples because nobody decided to make the rules thinking “I know what’ll get at those damn straight couples!!”

    1. stephennyc 16 Jul 2012, 6:56pm

      It seems to me that he is complaining about one of the few advantages same sex couples enjoy. Before I was out, I loved that my parents let me have a “friend” share my room, while my straight siblings saw their boy-/girlfriend housed as far away as my mother could manage.

    2. If regulations or actions have an adverse effect on one protected group, but not on another then it can be “indirect discrimination”. A ban on mixed-sexed sharing of accommodation, but not same-sex, could well be indirect discrimination against a mixed-sex couple, unless same-sex couples were equally separated, and a ban on married couples (or civil partners) sharing, but not unmarried (or un-partnered) would be direct discrimination on the grounds of marriage (or civil partnership); although it is not unlawful (in England and Wales) to discriminate against the single, unmarried or un-partnered.

      Seems to me sports organisers really need to grow up. Universities ended requiring single-sex accommodation decades ago.

      Accusations of homophobia agains a guy complaining that he s not allowed to room with his female partner when same-sex couples would be allowed really are a misuse of, and devalue the term.

  14. This is outright homophobia.

    As happens so often bugging up the comparator i.e. Tonnes of gay couples when there aren’t actually any sharing!

    They sound a right pair of red necks with aside who poses for men’s magazines with her bits out and a husband who feels that he needs to prove his manhood by sharing a room her for the weeks the olympics are on.

  15. GingerlyColors 17 Jul 2012, 7:27am

    What is the Olympic Village’s policy on unmarried straight couples sharing a room? Equality works both ways and if gay couples are allowed to share but not straight couples then it can cause resentment towards gays.

    1. LOCOG stated in an interview in March that allocation of double or single rooms would be a matter for each individual Olympic team. LOCOG stated that, if not all, the vast majority of accommodation would be single sex.

      I am unaware of any gay couples where both were selected for any Olympic team, so there can be no actual discrimination here (although there may be a perception – although if so, that is down to the Australian team choices here and since they have no gay couples common sense dictates there is no discrimination).

      Its much more clearly implicit homophobia by the shooting couple than any discrimination against them

  16. Russell Mark is a wanker and his comments are deliberately, ‘homophobic’!

  17. It just goes to show you don’t have to be smart to be an Olympic team member. Lauryn and Russel Mark have tried to make this seem like a anti-straight discrimination issue, which it clearly is not. They are the kind of embarassing rednecks I normally associate with gun ownership, the only difference being they can shoot at an Olympic standard.

    Any straight couple could argue that women-only gyms are discriminatory against straight people because Lesbian couples are allowed to go to the gym together whereas heterosexual couples are not. They could argue that but they don’t, because they take a moment to think before opening their mouths. They use their common sense before turning a simple policy of same-gender accommodation into a political issue.

    Gays still suffer significant discrimination in society and the Mark’s are trying to make it seem like gays are an over-privileged minority which is a complete distortion of reality.

    I am ashamed that Australian Olympians behave this way.

  18. Its great to see straight discrimination – makes a change from all the gay discrimination around. He is such a cry baby. Another straight wanting it their own way. About time everyone was treated equal.

  19. Gee, must be hard to be marginalised because of your sexual orientation. Can’t imagine what it must feel like,

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all