The Morality and Politics Surrounding Visiting Specific Theme Parks

[Bowser]

Dont be shocked if we see Universal Studios Saudi Arabia within the next decade.

Already under consideration.

Universal Saudi Arabia

Here we go again… The Comcast CMCSA unit is doing initial concept work for the park, which might be financed by a Saudi government-backed entity as part of a licensing deal with Universal, according to people with knowledge of the matter...

towersstreet.com

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

Thanks for the info.

50m a show seems a lot, no? Although I have no idea what they earn on a typical PPV these days to be fair.

Very much seems like investment by stealth then if they are overpaying. Had no idea Wrestlemania was heading out there either. Is that a first for outside North America? I presume it must be?

Dont be shocked if we see Universal Studios Saudi Arabia within the next decade.

It is not quite investment by stealth, but it is sportswashing by megaphone.

There is a distinct difference between buying equity in a company (investing) and paying a vendor an astronomical fee for a service (marketing). The Saudi General Entertainment Authority is essentially paying a hosting fee, akin to a city hosting the Olympics, but annually.

They aren't buying the company they are buying the product. They are buying the legitimacy that comes with a global brand broadcasting "Welcome to the beautiful city of Riyadh" to millions of homes worldwide, whilst conveniently glossing over the less photogenic aspects of the regime. The $50 million per show isn't an overpayment in their eyes, it's a marketing budget. It is cheaper than a war and cleaner than an embassy incident.

Just to clarify on this, they do not own WWE. They do pay them a LOT of money to hold two events a year in the country.

For full transparency in the 7 years since they’ve been doing this they’ve moved from not allowing women to attend or perform on the shows to allowing both and with equal representation. The women do however have to modify their appearances as traditionally many wear bikini style outfits or similar. The men have free reign to perform in their underwear.

Also in this time, all previous objectors to performing have now acquiesced, including Sonya Deville an openly homosexual wrestler and CM Punk, a vocal LGBT rights supporter who previously (and notoriously) publicly stated participants could “suck a blood money covered ****”.

Acquiesced is a very polite way of saying found their price.

We have seen this play out recently with Jordan Henderson. A man who built his entire reputation on being a vocal ally to the LGBTQIA+ community, wearing rainbow laces and armbands, right up until the moment a Saudi cheque cleared. Suddenly, his values became flexible. He didn't change the regime, but the regime bought his silence.

The participation of specific LGBTQIA+ performers does not signal that the Kingdom is suddenly OK with the gays. It signals that the regime is willing to create a temporary, hermetically sealed bubble of Western tolerance for the duration of a broadcast, provided the cameras are rolling.

This selective tolerance serves to highlight the calculated cruelty of the regime. Allowing a Western woman to perform, or a gay wrestler to enter the ring without consequence, demonstrates that their oppression is a choice, not an immutable religious necessity. They can suspend these rules when it suits their international image or economic goals. That they choose to enforce them so brutally against their own citizens, the women who are still guardianshipped, the LGBTQIA+ individuals facing capital punishment, proves that the cruelty is the point.

We must also remember that the existence of a person from a marginalised group engaging with, or supporting, an oppressor does not validate the oppressor. There were gay men who opposed same sex marriage. There are women who vote against reproductive rights. Caitlyn Jenner exists.

One person's willingness to take the cash does not represent progress for the collective. It represents a payout for the individual.

 

[Plastic Person]

One person's willingness to take the cash does not represent progress for the collective. It represents a payout for the individual.

The delusional grift that often accompanies the decision to take said cheque winds me up more than anything. At least one of the influencers very prominently reporting from SFQ has responded to some fairly good-natured criticism of his participation with the notion that a win for them is a win for us all against those pesky, nebulous ‘haters’; “Who could believe that me, just an x from y, could have come this far?!?”

In the case of the recent Comedy Festival in Saudi, a common defence was that the country “is trying to change”, but I suppose I’m old-fashioned enough to believe you begin with basic human rights and work backwards to a twenty-minute spot from Jimmy Carr.