I refuse to click on any link to National Organization of Marriage or any other such link that "protects marriage".
 

I will not support their advertisers or them.

I have no interest in helping them make their information available to clergy, scholars, political leaders, and activists.

I have no interest in helping them with educational, lobbying and organizational efforts or raising funds as they do in specific races.

No thank you.

Have a link not supporting such things?

Hm... well... here is the same story from Yahoo! Canada Sports: http://ca.sports.yahoo.com/blogs/olympics-fourth-place-medal/married-olympic-couple-angry-over-roommate-discrimination-215314832--oly.html

Here it is on SportsGrid: http://www.sportsgrid.com/media/married-olympic-couple-olympc-discrimination/

And here it is in the GayStarNews: http://www.gaystarnews.com/article/olympic-shooters-say-theyre-being-discriminated-against-over-gays160712

Rich blessings.

Jae, do you think it's discrimination if you can't use the same locker room as your opposite sex partner?

I do think separation based on gender is useful at times, and accomodations for the altheles at the Olympics fits one of those situations to me.  I don't see this as discrimination.

l'm not sure how accomodations are set at the Olympics.  If it really bothers people, maybe it should be set so that no couples (or families unless one is a guardian) can share a room.  I suspect that people aren't bothered by this though, and it's just using a claim of 'reverse discrimination' (which doesn't exist) to make a point.

One can have a lot of fun with this, if they let themselves

(and don't give in to their own culture's analities)

Is it in reaction to Russel's stance on sleeping pills and his wife's shotgun camel-toe photo shoot (which he does express)?

None of the other couples on the Aussie team has asked to room together

If the 1 husband & wife got their way, 5 other female members of the shooting team would have to share the same bathroom...there is no extra room space

How many openly homosexual are there in these games?  Only 11?

Couples are split during the games...

Opinions are a dime a dozen...media tries to create a narrative...

Aussies have a great sense of humour...

Anal-retardo Christians have to learn to take responsibility for their own anality -- maybe have some good soul-and-bowel-clearing sex...otherwise, they'll blow an o-ring...and stink up the people around them...and that's just bad...

and so it goes...

Really Jae?

Really?

I think this quote from your SportsGrid link pretty much sums it up....

"http://www.sportsgrid.com/media/married-olympic-couple-olympc-discrimination/ : I think this is the first time I’ve ever heard anyone go this route. I mean, would anyone have disagreed with them if they had just said, “We’re married, we should be in the same room”? I really don’t think so. But they had to play the heterosexual discrimination card, which is a card that only crazy people or people with no cards play."

lol!

Thanks MCjae for the laugh of the day.  Sucks to be them....maybe she's just to "hot" for the rest of the folks....sounds like a zoo......

The husband and wife Olympians are calling the mandate stupid and believe it was set off by Russell's pro-sleeping pill stance and Lauryn's provocative photo shoot in the latest issue of The Zoo, an Australian magazine geared towards the fellows.

thanks again for the laugh.....

Jae,

Just so you know - the Aussie sports-couple concerned are not nearly as upset as you seem to be.........

Here is a link to a more reputable media coverage. (ABC is the national broadcaster - like your CBC).

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-13/olympic-shooters-stay-together/4129860?section=olympics

Play the video -and you'll get to hear some Aussie accents as a bonus, lol.

What I read seemed to be more, they don't like us (as individuals not as part of a group). They seemed to say it was because he uses sleeping pills and she has posed for some risque pictures.

A tempest in a teapot.....I only clicked on the link Pilgrim provided. It seems to be just logistics more than anything.....

This made me think of the accomodation situation when I took the Ministry of Supervision course this past winter. Men were on the main floor, and women upstairs. One of our lesbian classmates commented on the irony of that!

the Olympics are about sports if the genders are separated all the better it would cost too much for the host country ot have to figure all the possible scenarios needed. Leave it alone.

Good question chemgal. I suppose in a sense that it is. However there is a greater issue at play, which is privacy. My wife might not want to be undressing and such inside a room filled with male strangers who are doing same. That issue is not at play in the matter of the man and his wife.

How is it useful, chemgal, to have a husband and wife staying in separate quarters when they each desire to stay together? Who benefits by their being split apart? 

Imho chemgal, everyone should be treated equally. Either all couples should be allowed to stay together, or else no couple should be able to.

Rich blessings.

Really Witch I think they are publicity hounds out to capitalize on their time in the Olympic spotlight.

Really Jae????

And here's me thinking she was just sooo proud to be wearing the green and gold........

Pilgrims Progress, I'm not feeling upset, but then again -- shouldn't I be? All discrimination is wrong.

Is your ABC as liberal as is our CBC?

I will watch the video on August 1st. Thank you for the link.

Rich blessings.

Update from the ABC: It seems the couple will probably get to share a room together after all.

I don't know about the olympic village - but if its anything like the dorm I stayed in at a seminar a month ago, there was a wing assigned to women and another to men.  Single or double rooms.  My friend and I decided to share a room to save money.  Noone asked if we were a lesbian couple (we weren't).  The beds were single bunks, built in so we couldn't have arranged furniture to be together (we didn't want to). 

But the catch was - there was only one common bathroom per wing.  Ours had four to five toilet cubicals, the same number of sinks, and three or four showers, separated by plastic curtains.   Would the others who shared this bathroom have been happy if a married couple had a room in that wing and a man shared our bathroom?   Or maybe they should put the married couple in the men's wing.  Would the wife mind bushing her teeth when a man rushed in to use the urinal in the same open space?

Discrimination?   No.    Practical arrangements for a short period of time?   Yes. 

Why would they be unhappy? Surely you've heard of unisex washrooms. What's the difference?

Unisex washrooms are designed to be used by one person at a time.  A dormitory setting like this would rewquire washrooms that handle many people at a time.  Also, unisex washrooms in malls tend not to have shower stalls.  In a dorm setting, like the Olympic Village, they would.  Great idea for a shopping mall; a non starter for the Olympic village setting.