5 ms·

British canoeist 'forced to choose between Olympics and OnlyFans'

39 points by TMWNN 1y ago

Grimblewald 1y ago
As if the olympics wasnt struggling enough to connect with the world and stay relevant, they're deciding it is time to alienate even more people on moral grounds that signal clearly that if you aren't rich and connected the olympics aren't for you. How does that align woth it being a sports event for everyday people (in name at least, even if not in spirit for a long time now)? I think we'll see the end of the olympics before the turn on the century.
- mensetmanusman 1y ago
  I will bet 1 BTC that the Olympics will still exist in 100 years.
  - DaSHacka 1y ago
    And I'm willing to bet you 2 BTC that OnlyFans will not.
  - waste_monk 1y ago
    I'd say BTC has worse chances of surviving 100 years.
  - xhkkffbf 1y ago
    What if the Olympics are suspended in 100 years, as they were in 1940 and 1944?
- xingped 1y ago
  You know what would be great? If there was an Olympics where anyone could sign up but you were only allowed to compete if you've never won an event or participated in any official competition in that sport. I'd love to see an actual Olympics for the masses. I think it'd be fun!
  - Grimblewald 1y ago
    I'd love it to be a civic duty thing that all able bodied adults each country are eligible for. Each Olympics, a group of 100 random adults from each country are picked and sent to the Olympics. It would be cool to see how each country compares athletically using random samples, but also would encourage everyone to stay fit. Who wants to be picked only to fail to complete a 50 meter swim on the international stage while representing your country?
    - supriyo-biswas 1y ago
      It’s more likely that people will be selected by the countries based on some fitness criteria that is obscured from the Olympics governance machinery so as to simply make an impression that they’re selecting random people, whereas in fact they’re not.
    - wiether 1y ago
      Once you exclude enough people from the balot using exemptions like "bad feet", you'll randomly pick within the fitest in your able bodied adults and it won't mean what you actually wished for.
  - theamk 1y ago
    If this happens, I imagine some events would get "anonymous mode", where you don't get to go on-stage, but never have to tell anyone your name either. And major sport teams wanting to qualify a new player would have secret ratings, not shared with any public or Olympic committee.
- miladyincontrol 1y ago
  Thats the thing though, just about every athlete you hear of these days is very much in the rich and/or connected realm of things. Make no surprise its why it can be painful to see politicians fighting tooth and nail for some of them, while ignoring basic plights of the very same demographics they'll pretend to be caring for in their athletic politics.
  - Yeul 1y ago
    In the Netherlands athletes are not rich but they do get support from the state who is rich. The Olympics is dominated by countries with money and always has been.
    - dagw 1y ago
      In the Netherlands athletes are not rich but they do get support from the state who is rich Same in the UK, but according to the article, the support is nowhere near enough to cover all the actual costs of his training, hence the OnlyFans.
djohnston 1y ago
> He says he has earned more than £100,000 since creating his OnlyFans account in January. God damn
csense 1y ago
By the letter of the contract, it's an open-and-shut case in the team's favor: "Indecent, offensive or immoral behaviour" is a bannable offense. The article doesn't mention how spicy his OnlyFans account is, but I'm assuming his OF content is such that it would be hard to argue it doesn't qualify as "indecent" or "immoral." [1] [2] If the player has a case, I'd think it would stem from legal limits on the extent to which an organization's people are allowed to contractually sign away their rights to engage in "immoral" behavior when "off the clock." Under what circumstances is an organization allowed to impose its notions of "morality" on its people when they're "off the clock"? To me, part of the question is whether you're using the organization's resources or branding. If the OnlyFans channel mentions the Olympics or his team by name, or uses its logos, or he makes videos during the times he's officially "on the clock" for training, my instinct is that they have every right to object. But if he's using his own name, or a pseudonym, staying "off the clock" and not displaying any Olympics or team branding, it's less clear. (Thought experiment: If LeBron James started an OF side hustle, would / should the NBA be allowed to come down on him? If your answer's different from this case, what makes the situations different?) He's a sympathetic character -- they tell people "You need a ton of money to compete here" [3] so he says "Well that sucks, my family isn't rich, I don't really have the skills or free time to get a job at FAANG, but I guess I can hustle the money on OF" and then they suspend him for doing it -- but he's only doing it trying to get through the obstacles they created. (OTOH, if a bunch of skilled but poor athletes started taking the same path, would it damage the Olympics brand if people started to think "The Olympics? You mean those sports teams where the players all sell their bodies online to pay their team dues?") [1] This seems super vague. If you and I sign a contract that has a clause saying you won't engage in offensive behavior, if I want out of the contract I can always trap you by, say, walking through a doorway at the same time as you do. If you don't hold the door for me, that's offensive behavior -- you let it slam into my face, you impolite uncultured swine! If you do hold the door for me, that's offensive behavior -- it's clearly a form of gendered violence and sexual harrassment, you sick perverted swine! No matter what you do I can always claim your actions were "offensive" or "immoral," so I can get out of the contract, and hit you for breach-of-contract penalties to boot. [2] If a contract forbids you from "indecent" behavior, does that mean you can't engage in any form of sexual activity whatsoever for the duration of the contract? [3] To me, this seems counter to the spirit of the Games. I always thought the Olympics were supposed to be a contest for amateur competitors -- but most of the teams seem to be professionalized outfits with very expensive training. (I know very little about sports.)
hddnncloset49 1y ago
Some "firsthand" experience. So I happen to follow a canoeing guy on OnlyFans and on Instagram. He doesn't actually post anything dirty or so, mostly covered nudity on OF, completely nice and fair, chill guy, on IG. And with this submission I realised it's the same guy! I've heard about the affair, but didn't connect the dots. I fully support his move, if this is what it takes to get funding, then it's fine (and it's a sign the system is broken). PS That's just a throwaway account, unfortunately
southernplaces7 1y ago
"PaddleUK say Rozentals' ban is not disciplinary action, but an "interim action" and a "neutral act designed to protect all parties" and to "safeguard other athletes, staff, and volunteers due to the nature of the allegation". "The investigation has been referred to independent investigation service Sport Integrity," the governing body said. It added: "Paddle UK is committed to ensuring a safe and open environment for all, and interim action under the Athlete Disciplinary Policy is only taken where necessary and proportionate." How brainlessly tedious, mealy mouthed and empty this kind of twaddle sounds, especially when it's constantly used by utterly hypocritical, mendacious or simply cowardly organizations and corporations in justifying, without genuine communication, some latest bit of corporate moral diarrhea they've shat all over the place.

39 points by TMWNN 1y ago

As if the olympics wasnt struggling enough to connect with the world and stay relevant, they're deciding it is time to alienate even more people on moral grounds that signal clearly that if you aren't rich and connected the olympics aren't for you. How does that align woth it being a sports event for everyday people (in name at least, even if not in spirit for a long time now)? I think we'll see the end of the olympics before the turn on the century.

mensetmanusman 1y ago
I will bet 1 BTC that the Olympics will still exist in 100 years.
- DaSHacka 1y ago
  And I'm willing to bet you 2 BTC that OnlyFans will not.
- waste_monk 1y ago
  I'd say BTC has worse chances of surviving 100 years.
- xhkkffbf 1y ago
  What if the Olympics are suspended in 100 years, as they were in 1940 and 1944?
xingped 1y ago
You know what would be great? If there was an Olympics where anyone could sign up but you were only allowed to compete if you've never won an event or participated in any official competition in that sport. I'd love to see an actual Olympics for the masses. I think it'd be fun!
- Grimblewald 1y ago
  I'd love it to be a civic duty thing that all able bodied adults each country are eligible for. Each Olympics, a group of 100 random adults from each country are picked and sent to the Olympics. It would be cool to see how each country compares athletically using random samples, but also would encourage everyone to stay fit. Who wants to be picked only to fail to complete a 50 meter swim on the international stage while representing your country?
  - supriyo-biswas 1y ago
    It’s more likely that people will be selected by the countries based on some fitness criteria that is obscured from the Olympics governance machinery so as to simply make an impression that they’re selecting random people, whereas in fact they’re not.
  - wiether 1y ago
    Once you exclude enough people from the balot using exemptions like "bad feet", you'll randomly pick within the fitest in your able bodied adults and it won't mean what you actually wished for.
- theamk 1y ago
  If this happens, I imagine some events would get "anonymous mode", where you don't get to go on-stage, but never have to tell anyone your name either. And major sport teams wanting to qualify a new player would have secret ratings, not shared with any public or Olympic committee.
miladyincontrol 1y ago
Thats the thing though, just about every athlete you hear of these days is very much in the rich and/or connected realm of things. Make no surprise its why it can be painful to see politicians fighting tooth and nail for some of them, while ignoring basic plights of the very same demographics they'll pretend to be caring for in their athletic politics.
- Yeul 1y ago
  In the Netherlands athletes are not rich but they do get support from the state who is rich. The Olympics is dominated by countries with money and always has been.
  - dagw 1y ago
    In the Netherlands athletes are not rich but they do get support from the state who is rich Same in the UK, but according to the article, the support is nowhere near enough to cover all the actual costs of his training, hence the OnlyFans.

djohnston 1y ago

> He says he has earned more than £100,000 since creating his OnlyFans account in January. God damn

csense 1y ago

By the letter of the contract, it's an open-and-shut case in the team's favor: "Indecent, offensive or immoral behaviour" is a bannable offense. The article doesn't mention how spicy his OnlyFans account is, but I'm assuming his OF content is such that it would be hard to argue it doesn't qualify as "indecent" or "immoral." [1] [2] If the player has a case, I'd think it would stem from legal limits on the extent to which an organization's people are allowed to contractually sign away their rights to engage in "immoral" behavior when "off the clock." Under what circumstances is an organization allowed to impose its notions of "morality" on its people when they're "off the clock"? To me, part of the question is whether you're using the organization's resources or branding. If the OnlyFans channel mentions the Olympics or his team by name, or uses its logos, or he makes videos during the times he's officially "on the clock" for training, my instinct is that they have every right to object. But if he's using his own name, or a pseudonym, staying "off the clock" and not displaying any Olympics or team branding, it's less clear. (Thought experiment: If LeBron James started an OF side hustle, would / should the NBA be allowed to come down on him? If your answer's different from this case, what makes the situations different?) He's a sympathetic character -- they tell people "You need a ton of money to compete here" [3] so he says "Well that sucks, my family isn't rich, I don't really have the skills or free time to get a job at FAANG, but I guess I can hustle the money on OF" and then they suspend him for doing it -- but he's only doing it trying to get through the obstacles they created. (OTOH, if a bunch of skilled but poor athletes started taking the same path, would it damage the Olympics brand if people started to think "The Olympics? You mean those sports teams where the players all sell their bodies online to pay their team dues?") [1] This seems super vague. If you and I sign a contract that has a clause saying you won't engage in offensive behavior, if I want out of the contract I can always trap you by, say, walking through a doorway at the same time as you do. If you don't hold the door for me, that's offensive behavior -- you let it slam into my face, you impolite uncultured swine! If you do hold the door for me, that's offensive behavior -- it's clearly a form of gendered violence and sexual harrassment, you sick perverted swine! No matter what you do I can always claim your actions were "offensive" or "immoral," so I can get out of the contract, and hit you for breach-of-contract penalties to boot. [2] If a contract forbids you from "indecent" behavior, does that mean you can't engage in any form of sexual activity whatsoever for the duration of the contract? [3] To me, this seems counter to the spirit of the Games. I always thought the Olympics were supposed to be a contest for amateur competitors -- but most of the teams seem to be professionalized outfits with very expensive training. (I know very little about sports.)

hddnncloset49 1y ago

Some "firsthand" experience. So I happen to follow a canoeing guy on OnlyFans and on Instagram. He doesn't actually post anything dirty or so, mostly covered nudity on OF, completely nice and fair, chill guy, on IG. And with this submission I realised it's the same guy! I've heard about the affair, but didn't connect the dots. I fully support his move, if this is what it takes to get funding, then it's fine (and it's a sign the system is broken). PS That's just a throwaway account, unfortunately

southernplaces7 1y ago

"PaddleUK say Rozentals' ban is not disciplinary action, but an "interim action" and a "neutral act designed to protect all parties" and to "safeguard other athletes, staff, and volunteers due to the nature of the allegation". "The investigation has been referred to independent investigation service Sport Integrity," the governing body said. It added: "Paddle UK is committed to ensuring a safe and open environment for all, and interim action under the Athlete Disciplinary Policy is only taken where necessary and proportionate." How brainlessly tedious, mealy mouthed and empty this kind of twaddle sounds, especially when it's constantly used by utterly hypocritical, mendacious or simply cowardly organizations and corporations in justifying, without genuine communication, some latest bit of corporate moral diarrhea they've shat all over the place.