Paris Olympics set record for number of openly LGBTQ+ athletes
Paris (AP): When Charline Van Snick flirted with another female athlete after winning the bronze medal in Judo in the 2012 London Olympic Games, she said her coach told her she needed to stay in the closet for the future of her career.
“It was a moment when I didn't feel like myself,” the 33-year-old retired Belgian Olympian said. “He said, Charline, you have to fit in the box. Everyone is looking at you and you have to be straight. ... I understood that it's not a place to be yourself, it's not a place to be LGBTQ+."
While the Olympic Games have made giant strides in the years since — the Paris 2024 Olympics set a record for the most athletes who are openly LGBTQ+ — advocates and athletes say international athletics have a long way to go in opening up to the queer community.
In the Olympic opening ceremonies, Thomas Bach, president of the International Olympic Committee, sent a message in his speech to the world: “In our Olympic world, we all belong."
Parisian officials continued their push for inclusion Monday night with the opening of the Olympic Pride House, located on a boat floating on the city's famous Seine River. Amélie Oudéa-Castéra, French Minister for Sport and the Olympic and Paralympic Games, told The Associated Press they were “sending a message of inclusion” in these Games.
“It's important to Paris, to keep fighting against all types of discrimination," Oudéa-Castéra said. "We need to drive this progress in society and the reason I am here today is because sport is a very powerful agent to do that.”
The Paris Olympics broke a record by having 191 openly LGBTQ+ athletes competing, according to Outsports, a website compiling a database of openly queer Olympians. The count surpassed the 186 athletes at the COVID-19-delayed Tokyo Olympics held in 2021.
The Olympic officials' messages and the record were welcomed by many in the LGBTQ+ community like 31-year-old Matt Clark, among those celebrating the inauguration of the Pride House. Clark said Paris has “started a legacy that is going to continue in other Games.”
“It is going to continue with other athletes and young people everywhere that it is okay to be gay and it is okay to be queer and you have a future in front of you,” Clark said. “Five, 10 years ago you had coaches telling their athletes don't come out, it will ruin your career. Now it has become a springboard for people's careers.”
Clark cited British diver Tom Daley's rise to celebrity as an example.
The number of openly LGBTQ+ Olympians has skyrocketed in recent decades. Jim Buzinski, co-founder of Outsports, said when they started tracking athletes at the Sydney Olympics in 2000, they counted only around five who were openly LGBTQ+.
“More and more people are coming out,” Buzinski said. “They realize it's important to be visible because there's no other way to get representation.”
Van Snick said it took her a long time to be truly comfortable with her own sexuality, and that she was really only able to do so when she stepped out of the spotlight.
She noted ongoing debate, an in some cases, exclusion of transgender athletes in Olympic events as disappointing.
“The world has grown since I was an Olympic medalist," Van Snick said. “But when I think of the trans question, we have a long way to go.”
Still, Buzinski and LGBTQ+ advocates see the Paris Games as an opportunity for athletes who hail from parts of the world where competitors can't be openly gay because of harsh restrictions on queer populations.
“Coming to Paris, coming to France, they are able to be their true selves," said Jérémy Goupille, co-chair of the Pride House at the Paris Olympics.
The Pride House, which debuted at the 2010 Olympics, is located on a boat floating on the Seine River and acts as the hub for the queer community during the competition.
Goupille said security concerns still remain for many athletes. Dating apps like Grindr, Bumble and Tinder have long been used as a shield for gay athletes who want to connect with other queer people in the countries where they are competing but don't want to feel publicly exposed.
But he said in previous Games, some have tried to expose athletes that are not officially out by checking heights, weights and locations of people on those apps.
Because of that, Grindr announced that in Paris they have disabled location-based features within the Olympic village where athletes stay and other official Games areas, saying it would allow LGBTQ+ athletes to connect “authentically without worrying about prying eyes or unwanted attention.”
The app made the same decision for the 2022 Beijing Olympics.
“If an athlete is not out or comes from a country where being LGBTQ+ is dangerous or illegal, using Grindr can put them at risk of being outed by curious individuals who may try to identify and expose them on the app," Grindr said in a statement.
Disabling those features was met with some criticism on social media last week after some users reported problems accessing the app in the Olympic village.
“You have to protect them because so many bad people exist. At the same time, there are so many beautiful athletes," Goupille said. "They want to meet someone and it's difficult.”
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Single higher education regulator bill tabled in LS; Oppn flags ‘centralisation,' JPC likely
New Delhi: A bill to set up a 13-member body to regulate institutions of higher education was introduced in the Lok Sabha on Monday.
Union Education Minister Dharmendra Pradhan introduced the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, which seeks to establish an overarching higher education commission along with three councils for regulation, accreditation, and ensuring academic standards for universities and higher education institutions in India.
Meanwhile, the move drew strong opposition, with members warning that it could weaken institutional autonomy and result in excessive centralisation of higher education in India.
The Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan Bill, 2025, earlier known as the Higher Education Council of India (HECI) Bill, has been introduced in line with the National Education Policy (NEP) 2020.
The proposed legislation seeks to merge three existing regulatory bodies, the University Grants Commission (UGC), the All India Council for Technical Education (AICTE), and the National Council for Teacher Education (NCTE), into a single unified body called the Viksit Bharat Shiksha Adhishthan.
At present, the UGC regulates non-technical higher education institutions, the AICTE oversees technical education, and the NCTE governs teacher education in India.
Under the proposed framework, the new commission will function through three separate councils responsible for regulation, accreditation, and the maintenance of academic standards across universities and higher education institutions in the country.
According to the Bill, the present challenges faced by higher educational institutions due to the multiplicity of regulators having non-harmonised regulatory approval protocols will be done away with.
The higher education commission, which will be headed by a chairperson appointed by the President of India, will cover all central universities and colleges under it, institutes of national importance functioning under the administrative purview of the Ministry of Education, including IITs, NITs, IISc, IISERs, IIMs, and IIITs.
At present, IITs and IIMs are not regulated by the University Grants Commission (UGC).
Government to refer bill to JPC; Oppn slams it
The government has expressed its willingness to refer it to a joint committee after several members of the Lok Sabha expressed strong opposition to the Bill, stating that they were not given time to study its provisions.
Responding to the opposition, Parliamentary Affairs Minister Kiren Rijiju said the government intends to refer the Bill to a Joint Parliamentary Committee (JPC) for detailed examination.
Congress Lok Sabha MP Manish Tewari warned that the Bill could result in “excessive centralisation” of higher education. He argued that the proposed law violates the constitutional division of legislative powers between the Union and the states.
According to him, the Bill goes beyond setting academic standards and intrudes into areas such as administration, affiliation, and the establishment and closure of university campuses. These matters, he said, fall under Entry 25 of the Concurrent List and Entry 32 of the State List, which cover the incorporation and regulation of state universities.
Tewari further stated that the Bill suffers from “excessive delegation of legislative power” to the proposed commission. He pointed out that crucial aspects such as accreditation frameworks, degree-granting powers, penalties, institutional autonomy, and even the supersession of institutions are left to be decided through rules, regulations, and executive directions. He argued that this amounts to a violation of established constitutional principles governing delegated legislation.
Under the Bill, the regulatory council will have the power to impose heavy penalties on higher education institutions for violating provisions of the Act or related rules. Penalties range from ₹10 lakh to ₹75 lakh for repeated violations, while establishing an institution without approval from the commission or the state government could attract a fine of up to ₹2 crore.
Concerns were also raised by members from southern states over the Hindi nomenclature of the Bill. N.K. Premachandran, an MP from the Revolutionary Socialist Party representing Kollam in Kerala, said even the name of the Bill was difficult to pronounce.
He pointed out that under Article 348 of the Constitution, the text of any Bill introduced in Parliament must be in English unless Parliament decides otherwise.
DMK MP T.M. Selvaganapathy also criticised the government for naming laws and schemes only in Hindi. He said the Constitution clearly mandates that the nomenclature of a Bill should be in English so that citizens across the country can understand its intent.
Congress MP S. Jothimani from Tamil Nadu’s Karur constituency described the Bill as another attempt to impose Hindi and termed it “an attack on federalism.”
_vb_22.jpeg)
