Toronto jocks at the 2006 Outgames.
The second Outgames starts a month from today in Copenhagen, with Opening Ceremonies on July 25. The multisport event will be a cozy affair, with about half the athletes of the 2006 edition in Montreal and far fewer than Copenhagen organizers had hoped for.
The number of registered athletes is a “bit more than 4,000,” with another 1,200 people signed up for cultural events and a gay and lesbian conference, Ole Udshol of the Outgames told Roger Brigham. There will be between 600 and 700 people from the U.S. Brigham, long active with the Federation of the Gay Games and also a journalist, posted these latest numbers on our Discussion Board. It follows a report he had last week in the Bay Area Reporter.
When we last wrote about the Outgames registration two months ago, organizers were still hoping for 6,500 registrants. This is below the 8,000 target they had set, which was also about the number that attended the first Outgames in Montreal in 2006.
Four sports have been cut — rugby, kayak, pool and shooting — while others like wrestling might be more exhibitions than competitions, Brigham says. On the other hand, swimming will be well represented since the International Gay and Lesbian Aquatics is holding its world meet at the Outgames.
Outgames officials say their financial goals are attainable and add that “everything is working very smoothly.”
Copenhagen is an awesome city and I find it hard to imagine anyone having a bad time at the Outgames. However, this event will be a pale imitation of the Gay Games, which routinely gets 10,000 athletes, and of the original boasts of Outgames organizers from Montreal, who promised 18,000 registrants before going bankrupt, leaving $5 million in debts, including $2.2 million to dozens of vendors (disclosure: Outsports is among those vendors).
Antwerp, Belgium, is set to host the 2013 Outgames, but already the city says it can’t pay a $209,000 deposit to the Gay & Lesbian International Sport Association (which licenses the event) because of the global recession.
I have advice for Antwerp – save your money. The Outgames have already run their course, and only came about because a group of hustlers from Montreal broke away from the Gay Games to start their own event. The 2006 Outgames was a financial disaster, and the 2009 version (while being run by a new group that has been above board) has seen its registration goals fall victim to the recession and to a sense that one international multisport gay and lesbian sporting event is enough.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 3:19 AM
Perhaps you should do a bit more research and you’ll find that the 1st Asia Pacific Outgames held in Melbourne 2008 was a financial success too and so much so it created a legacy fund giving cash grants to the community and this all within 6mths of the games end. No fund raising post event took place like other sporting events were said to have had to do to enable a positive position. And where is mention of current economic climate..come on..give Copenhagen support for what it’s worth and stop reporting one sided. And in case you did not experience the Montreal event it was incredible and should be remembered as being just that. 4000 athletes in Copenhagen from around the world is also something to absolutely celebrate in such hard times. I guess you’ll just sit there winging and typing on your computer while others get on with enjoying GLBT sport as it progresses.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Gstar,
I think virtually everyone who has said they believe the World Outgames have run their course is in agreement that the continental Outgames HAVE been worthwhile and that we are hopeful GLISA will be able to help develop them. In the case of the World Outgames it would appear that they are cramming out of the calendar the EuroGames which otherwise would have been held this year and and in 2013. Variations on this viewpoint have been the subject of threads on the discussion boards here.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 12:52 PM
I was one of the biggest supporters of the Outgames in Montreal – and like others had a SPECTACULAR time at that event. BUT – that was at the unfair expense of a lot of unpaid creditors. And a lot of people like me – who in good faith worked with the Montreal organizers – felt betrayed once the truth came out about all the lies they told. Be it registration numbers or their financial posiition.
Now 3 years later the world has changed. I think the reforms the FGG undertook to battle the GLISA ‘threat’ have been good ones – that make that organization a better one to serve the GLBT sports community world wide moving forward.
That being said one of the good things to come from GLISA in my opinion are the regional events that are modeled on the successful Eurogames model. So I hope those are successful moving forward to give many athletes a chance to participate in a multi-sport event close to home occassionally – something that may not happen if the only time their sport is offered at a ‘gay’ event is once every four years at a Gay Games. It may be 12 years or more without a Gay Games on their continent – so there is a vital role that these ‘regional’ events can play on the gay sports calendar – especially for some of the less popular sports out there that do not have an infrastructure of gay tournaments on their own.
But in view of the experience from 2006, and the situation Copenhagen finds themselves in this year – it looks like two major quadrennial events may be one too many. So I would encourage GLISA to sit down with the FGG and EGLSF – and work together to rebrand Antwerp 2013 as a Eurogames, work together to support Vancouver 2011 as a North American Outgames, and Wellington for the Asia Pacific region and work together to make 2014 Gay Games as successful as possible.
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 12:58 PM
You are so full of it, your article lacks total objectivity. the main reason for the low turnout is mainly the recession and has nothing to do with the Outgame organisation itself. It will be the same thing next year in Cologne but I,m sure you will not be bashing those games cause they are run by Americans and Americans only. And that in itsel is the problem. As long as the Gay games keeps being run by a handfull of close minded americans there will be room for the Outgames. When they decide to open up and let other people have a say in the organisation then we will truly have an international movement .Meanwhile people will be split and both organisation will suffer. As for the Montreal game It was an awsome success considering the boycott and the armtwisitng american gay federations put on their memebers and the deficit by the way was under 2 million which considering the publicity the city got out of it , was a bargain. Montreal as become one of the premier gay destination in the world . So the Outgames did reach their purpose and help Montreal establish itself as a gay Mecca
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 1:17 PM
Jacques: No event is an “awesome success” that goes bankrupt and stiffs its creditors. The deficit reported was $3 million owed to the govt. and $2 million to vendors. Please stop all this nonsense defending Montreal, which should be castigated rather than applauded.
And I don’t think the Gay Games in Germany are being “run by Americans and Americans only.”
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 1:28 PM
I have to say that I found the comment ‘ The Outgames have already run their course, and only came about because a group of hustlers from Montreal broke away from the Gay Games to start their own event.’ a bit less than truthful .
The Gay Games themselves caused the creation of Outgames , you will recall that the 2006 Gay Games were originally awarded to Montréal , later this was reneged on and the Gay Games were switched to Chicago under rather dubious circumstances .
I had friends who went to the Outgames in Montréal and others who went to the Gay Games in Chicago , I can honestly say that the feedback I had was overwhelmingly in favour of Montréal .
I do agree that there is not room for two competing games , but frankly the Gay Games have no one but themselves to blame for the split .
on Jun 25th, 2009 at 4:34 PM
There is room for both the Outgames and Gay Games, but they will be different events. That’s why the Outgames were created in the first place: Because the FGG was being run poorly and the event was suffering. The FGG has since made smart changes, thanks in large part to the pressure from the Outgames.
I went to both Chicago and Montreal. Montreal was a better event by far. But, Chicago was more responsibly run from a financial perspective. Both are important and both events set important new standards.
I think most everyone wishes the Outgames had hit their registration goals, but they didn’t. Cologne is claiming they’ll have 12,000 athletes, which is highly doubtful. It’s tough times. Either the groups will find a way to work together or co-exist, or one or both of them will go away. I don’t think either needs to shut down and get out of the way. Let’s see how the Outgames turn out and see what the next year brings Cologne.
BTW, Jim and I discuss this issue at length in our next podcast, which will be up shortly.
http://www.outsports.com/os/index.php/component/content/article/49-podcast/231-outsports-podcast
on Jun 26th, 2009 at 9:33 AM
I agree that the article seems one sided, and the FGG’s “leaders” actions did help create GLISA and the OutGames. Many of the organizations (including my city) mine were tired of the backroom politics and intimidation by some individuals that occurred. I believe some of that still occurs today, even though some may not be officers of the FGG.
Anyone that reads or listens to the news understands the severe impact the economy has had on tourism worldwide, and sponsorships for our teams. How much have many of us lost in our personal portfolios and our teams investments?
So don’t tell me it is the lack of enthusiasm for the OutGames. The OutGames delivers experiences that I have never felt before. With sports, human rights, and cultural events they bring together a greater diversity of people and views.
The facts are that except for the Chicago Gay Games, all the past Gay Games lost money and a trail of unpaid creditors. It took the work of dedicated Chicago people (not the FGG “leaders”) who came forth with creative ideas and the games eventually could say they paid off all the Chicago Games debt, and saving their local reputations.
The Continental OutGames that GLISA has held, have been successful financially and in building a legacy for those areas in new energy for sports, culture and human rights.
on Jun 26th, 2009 at 11:43 AM
I’m old enough to recall the days when quality journalists offered clearly factual and balanced reporting. Sadly, but not unpredictably, this is not the case here, nor usually the case for Mr. Bingham where it comes to his reporting about GLISA and/or the Outgames.
In retrospect, the birth of GLISA and the Outgames was a natural outcome of differing points of view on the overall GLBTQ lifestyle, experience, and world-wide human rights, and those who wanted to control that outlook in a significant way. I live in a richly pluralist country where diversity is a way of life (albeit imperfectly) and people’s individual rights against discrimination are now entrenched in law. Such a message and model cannot be shared around the world if there is not the significant opportunity to discuss such rights as a part of the whole person – body (sports), mind (human rights), and spirit (culture). This is the GLISA model. One need only look to Iran these days to understand the impact of the absence of such an opportunity, or to recall the reality of Stonewall.
Personally, I find it fundamentally disrespectful to slag events where people are doing their best to provide such an opportunity for me, my friends, and people I don’t even know from around the world. Any event which brings GLBTQ people together in joy, celebration, achievement, and safety should be supported and those organizers wished well. It’s astonishing to me, and a contradiction of the “journalist’s” observations, that over 1 000 people from North America will attend the Copenhagen Outgames despite this extremely difficult world recession. Their actions speak louder than the “journalists” words.
And I must candidly say that, were I someone involved in the “journalists” preferred organization, I would actively wonder what his comments, behaviours, and lack of objectivity say about the organization. Hmmmmm. Maybe there’s some substance to several of the previous comments. Hmmmm. Ya think!!!
Have a nice day.
on Jun 26th, 2009 at 1:40 PM
“This is the GLISA model. One need only look to Iran these days to understand the impact of the absence of such an opportunity, or to recall the reality of Stonewall.”
Oh, give me a break — equating GLISA to people fighting for their rights in Iran is an insult to those in Iran.
on Jun 26th, 2009 at 1:54 PM
Perhaps, Mr. Buzinski, you should ponder a little more deeply the impact of Stonewall and the birth of several organizations whose primary goal is to secure the Human Rights of GLBTQ people. I could give you the names of such people and organizatoins if you are unaware who they might be, including GLISA.
Have a nice day.
on Jun 26th, 2009 at 4:56 PM
Yes, I have always equated the first Outgames with Stonewall.
on Jun 29th, 2009 at 2:49 PM
it is exactly because of your attitude that there was a need to create the Outgames you really don,t get it do you?
on Jun 29th, 2009 at 2:52 PM
by the way success is not always a question of dollars and cents is what you get out of it. And anybody who attendes the Montreal game came out of there with experiences and memories that will last them for ever. You can count money if you want we will settle for the memories
on Jul 6th, 2009 at 4:45 PM
First, it seems several people here either have forgotten or never read numerous LGBT journalists’ articles critical of the Gay Games, dating at least from Vancouver’s financial loss in 1990. It comes with the territory.
As to Jim’s article, he has been following Outgames since its beginning and has drawn conclusions based on what he’s heard and seen and then written about them. In other words, it’s simply an editorial, so of course it’s one-sided. No surprise to me that some people choose to believe differently – that’s just the way the world works. Even Jim’s colleague Cyd continues to draw different conclusions.
Regardless, I think Cyd’s statement is a bit off-point. There are far too many nuances regarding events both before and after the 2003 schism that this cannot be reduced to Old FGG = bad, New FGG = good. For one thing, organizational changes in the Federation since 2003 have very little to do with site selection and subsequent contract negotiations, which were at the heart of the schism. The schism issues have not really changed – the one thing that may be different is that bidding organizations have more history on record to realize the event does not lie exclusively in a host’s hands, which was Montreal 2006’s gamble.
Let’s be clear: the schism was not about “visions for LGBT sports” – everyone wants LGBT sports to thrive. The schism was also not about nationalism issues, and anyone who keeps claiming that simply reveals personal prejudice unrelated to what happened in 2003. As for why GLISA was founded, say what you will but how many in this thread are aware of roots there that go back to interpersonal relationships between Montrealers and Berliners forged more than a decade ago during a proposed FGG board meeting swap? There was a sort of “you take your turn then we’ll take ours” that itself was ultimately geared towards drawing the FGG to their cities to promote bids. (And which is why, after too many years of such nonsense, I’d prefer the FGG meet in cities NOT interested in bidding.)
Why am I even wading into this now? Well, without negating Jim’s eyeroll above one whit, it’s because in the past couple of weeks I’ve read a number of local articles in New York commemorating the 40th anniversary of the Stonewall uprising by some people who were actually there. The articles corrected misimpressions of people not present yet who claim to know what happened.
Fine. Subsequent generations take from an event what is important to them symbolically and some people either will pay heed to the Lucian Truscotts who were there and realize they still have more to learn or will ignore the Truscotts as self-promoters. Whatever. I’ll say this as someone who has been to every Gay Games and was smack in the middle of the 2002-03 negotiations – the FGG stands for a Gay Games event that is sports-focused, community based, and financially sound. Because GLISA was founded in an atmosphere of “less control, more trust” for its Outgames-branded event, as a governing body it appears to rationalize that its events can be gay rights-focused, guided by tourism departments, and, apparently, financially unsuccessful as long as people had a good time.
GLISA’s dilemma is that it cannot step in to move any of those aspects more towards those supported by the FGG without exposing its entire creation as a smokescreen. People may choose today to join GLISA or put on an Outgames for good-hearted reasons, but addressing the “less control, more trust” issue is ultimately what they face as part of GLISA’s legacy. And some journalists may choose to write about it at the time.
– Charlie Carson, FGG Board 1994-2007
on Jul 6th, 2009 at 7:56 PM
charlie carson has nailed it,imho
on Jul 8th, 2009 at 8:53 PM
I would like to point out to all on this blog that the FGG whilst US based (under California law) and funadmentally American because Tom Wadell was the founder who was guess what, American, that the Board of the FGG is now more globally represented than at anytime in its history. The Board now has
3 Australians, one European (with 2 Amercians who live in Paris and have done for many year so have European sensitivity), and 1 South African.
It is clear i believe that there is now a groundswell happening in Europe, New Zealand and Australia for the current 2 international events to change as it is not working and the global financial crisis whilst having an affect, is not the only reason.
I take my hat off to the organisers of the Outgames for their efforts and commitment to holding a successful event. However all their best efforts have not been enough to get the people there. Change is in the wind and it will be for the best of this i am convinced
Kate Rowe Sydney, Australia
on Jul 9th, 2009 at 4:50 PM
I had already planned a trip to Copenhagen when i learned that Outgames would be going on while I was there. I immediately signed up to participate (Half Marathon). I am thrilled to be among 4,000 LGBT athletes in what looks to be a beautiful city. Quite honestly, I could care less about internal and inter-organizational politics. Shouldn’t we be focusing on the fact that even in the middle of a worldwide recession, 4,000 LGBT people will be presenting their atheticism, sportsmanship, and Pride?
on Jul 9th, 2009 at 6:51 PM
Hi Eliiot
I wish you all the best and for your first event it will electric. NOw, think 3 times as many as try and get a feeling of how electric that would be. As a runner myself, i have been in many many half and full marathon including eurogames the size of the Outgames) the largest being New York and i have to say, sheer numbers make a huge difference and add to that the fact that most of us in from our gay and lesbian community and you might be a picture.
Why not come to Cologne as well. I will be there dong the Cologne Half Marathon on Oct 4 and the Gay Games will have a visual presence
Good Luck
Kate
on Jul 10th, 2009 at 1:32 AM
Jim’s interview on the pod cast was great and so right on.
GayGames is a ‘victim of its own success’ because the GLBT sports groups have so matured they do not need someone to put on their events.
It is not 1982 anymore. The fact that rugby is not in either event is telling. Softball is bigger than everything. The entire international quadrennial needs to be rethought. The buzz of 1982-2002 is gone. We should be celebrating our success in the growth of GLBT athletics.
World OutGames (WOGs) is not even on the radar of credibility…. there is no ‘there there’. Our community simply cannot support two internationally billed quadrennials.. OGs should stick to the regional/local events.
Contrary to the mindless inaccuracies posted above by the Montreal partisans, I am like Charlie, I was there… from 1982 right through the negotiations that caused the ‘split’. Montreal had no intention of having their ‘event’ monitored by the FGG. They refused & walked out. What was predicted exactly happened. Even if Montreal had 12k registrations, they would still have lost $2mil. Where were all these unbiased Canadian journalists asking the difficult questions instead of perpetuating the registration lies. They had a responsibility to our athletes, and instead they foisted a hoax on us all.
So what is the problem with Copenhagen? It is in the less than forthright constantly shrinking registration numbers. It is GLBT athletes who registered and will not get the competition they bargained for. Sure some sports will have enough ‘critical mass’, but a lot will not. Can you ask for a refund, if after spending ~$2k to compete in wrestling of martial arts, you have to play with yourself? Copenhagen, the latest WOG, has 9 wrestlers and 22 Martial Artisits. Better it were a EuroGames costing $185 instead of $285 to register… Is that what a WOG branding costs? What does it buy you? A lot of ‘good feelings’? I think some posters confuse competition cycles with politics & vacations.
Jim’s point about unreliable/shrinking regsitration numbers is the key to the entire debate. It is not whether you had a good time on your Copenhagen vacation playing tennis. Most GLBT athletes cannot afford a Copenhagen vacation with an option to spend another $285 to play tennis there as well. This is a self centered elitist attitude that ignores the importance of getting a GLBT critical mass of athletes.
It is also not about your perception of what having a good time is. That is all ‘subjective’, and as an athlete/coach looking out for my team, I find it to be useless information. We don’t do ‘pick up’ wrestling like was suggested to me in 1990 Vancouver, when they did not have mats ready. Planning to take a team to a GGs requires a LOT of work over 2 years with good honest data.. It is not a spontaneous decision on your vacation 3 weeks out as has been posted here.
This debate is not about Americans vs. anybody, or who is more ‘gay’, or any of those silly comparisons to Iran or StoneWall. These people above were not even around in NYC for StoneWall, I was. I resent these professional homosexuals rewriting/recasting my history. Stop the silly political anti Americanism.
We need some intellectual honesty from those who continue to propagate lies to resuscitate Montreal 2006 and defend an event that set back gay event credibility in Montreal. That Board should have been sued and gone to jail for their lies.
We all need to demand total honesty from the FGG and GLISA about event registrations so our athletes can make good decisions and choices where the want to compete. Having this honest data EARLY is most important for team organizers.
on Jul 11th, 2009 at 2:56 AM
I would like to respond to some things said in the podcast and posted here,
Greg, the name is ‘Brigham,’ not ‘Bingham.’ You do a disservice to me and to Mark Bingham, rugby hero of 9/11, to confuse our names.
As to objectivity, I have always clearly told people that I am a strong Gay Games supporter, a former officer and board member and current delegate, and an active volunteer on numerous committees over the years: technical advisory, host relations, negotiating team, communications, strategic planning and sports.
I do not have as lengthy history as Gene and Charlie in the Games — I started volunteering for the Games three years before my first Gay Games in 2006 — but I do have a lengthy career in sports (20 years as a sports writer, columnist and editor for daily newspapers, sports sysop for two early news web portals, active at one time or another in seven sports, and now in my 40th year of wrestling) and I have a long understanding of some of the issues involved in being out in sports: I came out while I was sports editor at the Anchorage Daily News (Sarah Palin won her state basketball title during my tenure) and coaching at six Anchorage high schools. At the time I was the only out sports editor at a major daily (shortly preceding my friend Jim B.)
I have never ‘bashed’ the Outgames. I have questioned (in my columns) the need for the WORLD Outgames and praised the efforts to make a successful go of the Continental Outgames, which have already done much to help the Australasia community and have the potential to help Africa, South America and eastern Europe.
I have reported the figures I have received from Outgames. If those numbers are taken to be negative, they are nevertheless objective. I have offered on numerous occasions to speak with World Outgames organizers about such things as their implementation of drug testing, but I have not had success getting anyone to speak in great detail about these issues.
As to the podcast….
– The ‘split’ occurred in 2003 (which is when I joined the FGG after reading two years of correspondence between M2006 and the FGG), not in 2004. In reality it had been going on since 2001. As I say, I read the correspondence and in it numerous times M2006 would say it agreed that the projected numbers needed to be cut back … and then in the next round they would start back at what they had just said they knew needed to be changed. The picture I saw as I read it (before ever speaking to anyone on either side) was of an attempt for one side to resist every request of the other side by drawing things out and wearing it down until it was too late for anything to happen. What I saw was a dysfunctional relationship. I think M2006 was right to withdraw (Tewskbury told us at the final meeting that they would not make any concessions, and M2006 was never going to get the chance to burn the taxpayers for the millions they did), and the FGG was right not to lose any sleep over it.
– You refer to the FGG as a ‘dictatorship.’ Please explain that harsh statement and give particulars and what time frame you are saying the FGG was a dictatorship: from inception, currently, when? I was on the negotiating team for the FGG when Chicago was earning the rights to the Games, I was on the host relations committee for the early stages of the 2006 planning, and I do not think anyone from Chicago would say I was ‘dictatorial’ in anything I did — not even when we were in strident disagreement. And often my disagreements were with my fellow FGG board members — Charlie can attest there have been many times when we have had trouble remaining cordial with each other, so strong were our differences — but in every instance all parties stayed and worked things out.
– The portrayals of ‘Good FGG’ and ‘Bad FGG’ are lazy oversimplifications. Did the FGG have severe organizational problems before 2003? Absolutely. I often told my fellow board members our mission was so good we succeeded DESPITE ourselves. But these were the growing issues of an entirely volunteer grassroots. Did the FGG need to change? Damned right it did. Many people contributed to the overhaul of the board structure to a membership base with a working board (special kudos to my successor as co-chair of Strategic Planning Committee, Rich Williams of Florida), but I was the person who initiated the push and forced the issue.
The overhaul was, I told folks, a decade overdue: it should have been done (and was actually attempted) shortly after the 1994 New York Gay Games, which signaled the arrival of the Games as a MAJOR global sporting event and a prime target for a takeover. The change was not able to be effected then, and then after the Amsterdam Games it seemed the pressing matters of dealing with Sydney’s emerging financial struggles and the protracted unproductive negotiations with M2006 consumed all of the FGG’s attentions. The Montreal co-opting of the Gay Games Mission was just waiting to happen ever since 1994; M2006 was merely the first to try it.
With absolutely no disrespect to the ‘old’ FGG board (and again, that’s an oversimplification; there were different groups at different times with widely differing politics), I do think the new structure, which was installed over a three-year span, is an improvement and will only get better as things stabilize and the pool of qualified candidates to draw on for the board of directors deepens. The conditions that led up to 2003 are what created the change; Montreal merely served as a warning that if it didn’t occur then, it would never have a third chance.
Which, in my opinion, would have been misfortunate. The FGG is the ONLY major international organization run entirely by ATHLETES. It took decades for the Olympics even to give athletes a small voice in its affairs. The Gay Games have been run by athletes from the get go, and the rules we adopted in 2006 ensured that it would remain so.
You want to bash the Gay Games? Ask yourself if the world is better or worse for the fact that they exist. ‘Nuff said.
– Jim, you say you don’t see the ‘need’ for the global multisport events any more, Gay Games included. Let me hold the lantern so that you can see a little further. I am now speaking as an sports activist in a minor sport for an international organization (WWB) and a local club (Golden Gate Wrestling).
The Games are ‘needed’ by smaller sports such as wrestling. There are so few opportunities for wrestlers to compete, and the few that do exist outside the Gay Games bring together the same wrestlers from nearby locations over and over again. The Gay Games are the ONLY event in which we can meet with all of our wrestlers from all over the globe and have a full fledged tournament. There simply isn’t enough money behind the sport on its own, which serves primarily a low income demographic, to move the WWB Cup around the world, which means we only get to see our colleagues from Australia and Europe in the Gay Games.
And places outside North America need them. Croatia. Japan. South Africa. They need the Gay Games, and they have been the athletes hurt the most by the dilution of available resources over two global events.
And our community needs the visibility the Gay Games brings. We have changed attitudes, especially among mainstream organizations, wherever we have gone. The IGLA and IGLFA championships on their own can’t bring that kind of media attention.
– Lastly, we need them to continue to bring down the barriers that hold us back. On that I’d like to address you comment, Cyd, about your football event not being able to be in the Gay Games because you have rules on how many straight players a team may have. Think about that: your event is in violation of the LGBT rights laws that have been enacted in so many places over the past few decades because of activism such as the Gay Games. (I have taken the Gay Softball World Series to task for this very issue. You guys are next!) You are defending the right to deny straights Inclusion — a cornerstone of the Gay Games — with gays, easily the most critical way to change perceptions. I think that is a shame. But hey — it works for you. But it also points out the need for an alternative: for a place where there really are no barriers. (Side note: at the first two WWB Cup Championships, gay wrestlers creamed straight wrestlers overhwlmingly. That couldn’t have happend in your football event.)
I think many people are disturbed by discussions of the differences in philosophy (eg. Outgames offers ‘purse throwing’ in its Queenie Games, something the Gay Games would never offer) and the internal politics of the FGG because they just want to eat the sausage: they don’t want to tour the factory or stuff the casings. I think others are focusing on a subjective snapshot-in-time of the way things were and assuming that nothing has changed since.
Well, I was at the FGG annual meetings in 2003-05 and I hated being there. I have never described my work in the FGG as a joy: it’s work, and hard work, wearying to the soul. My joy comes from seeing what a difference I have made in the lives of athletes: those thank-you emails and letters and phone calls from athletes I never had met before and never would have met if it were not for the Gay Games.
And having watched from the sidelines the past two years and attended the 2007 meeting as a journalist, I know this is an organization that has grown up and is getting better.
At that 2007 AM, I saw a much more relaxed atmosphere and some wonderful committee arguments as new organizations joined and took part in setting policy. One delegate not from North America came up and told me how impressed he was. “This is the opportunity for representation that GLISA promised us,” he said, “but was never able to give us.”
So, if you want to credit the change to the Montreal fiasco — fine. Doesn’t bother me a bit.
I’m too busy stuffing sausages. Enjoy!
