Positives and negatives of the Olympics.

I did love it! Just the way it was put, made me smile.

Ooh that is cool about the Saudi women, LRD!

Back to another of your points namechange - If Paul McCartney had said "men first, now women" or "boys first, then girls" then I don't think there would be any issue. Wouldn't you find it odd if Chris Evans started talking about "boys' football" like he did about "girls' football" to a player (see other thread)? That's how I feel about Macca. It's unconscious sexism, but it is sexism.

Also - the thread title is positives and negatives of the Olympics, not of LOCOG.

I don't follow why men couldn't do synchronised swimming and rhythmic gymnastics, really? That seems a bit shit.

Btw ... it is possible I'm banging on, or just more naive than you lot, but I've been reading up on the Saudi Arabian women, and there was a quotation in CiF that put it in a really funny way:

'It's common knowledge that Saudi women are not allowed to pursue higher education, have major surgery or leave the country without their male guardian's written approval. So it's hard not to see a gleeful irony in the fact that the International Olympic Committee has turned the tables by stipulating that Saudi men can only participate if accompanied by Saudi women.'

I hadn't thought of the Saudi women accompanying the men and thus making it possible for them to attend - but it's true!

How many countries play beach volleyball then?

Makes sense I guess. Rugby is played in the Commonwealth + Italy, France and Argentina which probably swung it.

Googled netball last night. Apparantly, it's only played in Commonwealth countries so isn't widely enough played for the Olympics. Like cricket, I suppose. Netball is played in the Commonwealth Games.

Gender disparity in events

Someone up thread asked about the difference in men's and women's events.

From the above link "Examples of event inequality exist in Athletics, Canoeing, Rowing, Wrestling, Shooting, and Boxing. Additional events for men are in some cases more demanding that the event offerings for women (for example 50 km walk or the Decathlon)." They have also missed swimming where men do 1500m and women 800m.

On a positive note, Gemma Spofforth deserves a medal in the 100m backstroke, after the awful couple of years she has endured. Gold will be tough, but I hope she gets on the podium.

Namechangeguy, in the thread about the wpmen's football, the OP didn't realise that this was standard for the Olympics and applied to men too. Once she did, she changed her position. This happened about 6 posts in, I think.

If she had been correct in her initial assumption that all events except women's football happened after the official start, it would have been worthy of comment.

Not a whinge, just an error.

I'd like to add Rebecca Adlington as a great thing about this Games and every time I see her. She's just so HAPPY to be there, it is lovely.

Yes, it looked an amazing race!

(And thanks ... it is great and IMO it's why it matters so much to think not just about the individuals competing but also about how much they're influencing people ... they are role models and there are some really impressive ones.)

ah that is great re your friends DD LRD - I really enjoyed the women's cycle yesterday. They had such dreadful conditions to race it, and it looked really treacherous. The race went down the bottom of our road & I am hugely impressed that anyone can get from Richmond Park to the Mall in 10ish minutes (on any vehicle). I can get from one end of the road to the other in that time!

Lizzie Armistead is my hero today!

Well, I think it is perfectly relevant, since it occurred at the olympics. You may not. We can disagree, it's allowed.

I'm not quite sure it merits calling other people 'ludicrous', though. That's a bit OTT.

Your points are very interesting.

Anyway, to go back to the point of the thread ... another positive for me today: my friend's DD, who has been scared of riding her bike since she fell and broke her arm, is back up again after watching the women's race! Isn't that lovely? She is nine.

LRD. The thread is called 'Positive and Negatives OF THE OLYMPICS'. Bringing Saudi Arabian cultural practices into a discussion about THE OLYMPICS is not relevant, as Saudi Arabian cultural practices are a separate issue from THE OLYMPICS, and the OLYMPIC committee can have no direct influence. I am sorry. I cannot make it any clearer than that. That was my first point. You disagree. That is fine, we are both adults entitled to a view.

My other points were related to attitudes towards the following;

1. Why was the GB women's football team opening the Olympics seen as a negative? I saw that as a whine.
2. Someone complained that the women's marathon was being relegated behind the men's marathon, and broadcast second, when in fact it is taking place a week earlier than the men's event. I saw that as a whine, and frankly totally inaccurate.
3. Here is another - in the OP, the reference to nurses in the opening ceremony being mostly women. Well, most nurses are women. Nurses have been the backbone of the NHS since it's inception. They should be recognised and celebrated for doing a thankless task for little monetary reward. Yet this is in the negative column. I think that is a whine.
4. Here is another one for good measure - there is a complaint in the OP about Paul McCartney's reference to 'girls' and asking them to sing along second, as if it is some sort of snub. I think that is a whine, and cannot quite get my head around it to be honest.

the saudi arabian woman is under pressure from her father, according to a news report.
I really hope she can compete and win a medal!

That's true, that's a nice one.

or it might even have raised the profile...

namechangeguy I agree with your point that it has raised the prfoile of women's football by having it start before the Opening Ceremony. I think it was a great honour to be the event that kicked off (ha) the whole Games.

CrackFox, Saudis are the world's largest oil producers, and are therefore close allies of the USA. South Africa does not. That is the way of the world I am afraid.

So, sorry, what are you complaining about?

Or what is someone whining about, according to you?

I'm just lost here.

I'd say the majority of this thread is positive, btw - I was really enjoying that aspect of it.

LRD, I don't mind the name thing, it's fine. And as I have said twice already, SA's practices in this regard are abhorrent. But it wields massive international power and influence due to oil, as we all know. The fact that the IOC were able to overturn what the majority of that country's Wahhabi-ist clerics want should be the headline. That was my point. There is a 90 per cent positive spin on this story. Your point about discussing SA policies is valid - I cannot tell anyone what they should or should not discuss. I just thought that for once, we could have a positive spin on something significant. International sport can play a huge part in changing internal attitudes.

Saudis aside, I'd be interested to have any feedback on my other points though.

I hadn't looked at it that way crackfox. But I did hear that apparently some imans believe it's haram for both men and women to make money from sport, or to get too into sport (please correct me if I'm off the wall here, it was a comment on a blog, so not from a reputable source). If that's true, perhaps some of the same people who don't want women competing would also be happy to see their entire country not competing, and that would be different from South Africa, where they wanted to compete?

TBH the Olympics felt it was justified to exclude South Africa during the days of apartheid. However, countries that treat women like shit seem to suffer no similar sanctions.

I meant you, sorry (and apologies, I think there is a poster called networkguy and, if you by some slim chance see this, no, I wasn't think of you at all! Pure stupid mistake!).

I don't quite get why you think we wouldn't bring up an abhorrent cultural practice in a discussion of an event in which that abhorrent cultural practice was displayed?

What am I missing here?

I thought was were talking about positive and negatives of the olympic games, because presumably we're all watching on TV and we'll have lots of common ground to discuss. So, when I commented for example on the bloke who hugged his coach, sure, I'm well aware that wasn't integral to his sporting prowess. But I noticed it. So I commented.

Yet, you don't seem to mind that. You only get fretful when we comment on things like Saudi Arabia's attitude to women ... as if really feminists should not focus on such trivia?

I find it puzzling. Doubtless I am a bear of little brain.