For those of you wondering if the Gay Games and Outgames will be merging, it won’t be anytime soon. The Gay and Lesbian International Sport Association has announced a deal that will place the 3rd World Outgames in Antwerp, Belgium, in 2013. Antwerp has been the prefered spot for those games for a while and now the deal is locked up. In the meantime, continental Outgames will take place in Vancouver, Canada and Wellington, New Zealand in 2011.
Ross Forman has a full report in the Windy City Times. Also check out our Outgames 2009 report from Copenhagen.
on Dec 19th, 2009 at 9:02 PM
It is ludicrous to have competing global events Travel money is limited, and deficits burn out communities city after city, Does nobody involved with GLISA ever think long term or in terms of the larger picture?
on Dec 23rd, 2009 at 6:00 PM
Here are some other questions to toss into the mix, lacharlie13:
1) Will there be a Eurogames in 2014 since there is no Outgames or Gay Games in Europe that year?
2) Will EGLSF, governing body for the Eurogames, seek financial reimbursement from Antwerp in 2013 the same way that EGLSF ostensibly did from Copenhagen and Cologne?
3) Why did the Vancouver Outgames committee not follow Copenhagen’s example and submit a formal bid to host IGLA 2011 in conjunction with the presumed North American Outgames there?
4) Is Tatiana Eggeling part of a rogue group of Berliners who disagree with the Team Berlin plea to both the FGG and GLISA for an eventual return to one international event every four years? Or does she just prefer the company of people in GLISA to the people she’s met in the FGG? Or is she simply keeping a foot in GLISA’s door so that Berlin is best positioned to host either Outgames or Gay Games, depending on future developments?
5) What do the Dutch and German groups who showed up at the joint GLISA/FGG “workshop” in Copenhagen with t-shirts and long petitions of signatures demanding a return to one quadrennial international event think about the Antwerp announcement?
6) Will GLISA ever acknowledge that they weren’t happy that Antwerp promoters were the only group to meet GLISA’s bid deadline?
7) Could GLISA have cancelled its “award” of World Outgames to Antwerp had GLISA even been inclined to do so?
You know, honestly, even if we were to get straight answers to any and all of the above — which would be a refreshing notion in itself — the answer to your question is a big N-O. That’s because all our organizations include people who do not care about long-term ramifications for the international LGBT sports movement. These individuals are interested in the short-term tourism interests for their own regions and how to maximize using the LGBT athletes to show off their city, not how to maximize using their city to show off the LGBT athletes.
(GLISA hasn’t had to live through the catcalls and revealing accusations of members of certain self-interested bid groups that were not selected only because GLISA has not yet had any competitive bidding.)
Schism groups are nothing new in the world. EGLSF was, in a sense, a schism group itself in that its founders wanted ongoing local continental events instead of backing the existing international sports groups’ already ongoing championships in the years between Gay Games. And, quel surprise, now GLISA and EGLSF seem to have enough interconnections that what happens in Europe is still affecting the ability of the world to come together (Danes moved into EGLSF officer positions once Copenhagen “won” the Outgames).
Back in the 1980s the LGBT community’s quadrennial sports event was envisioned as being the occasion when the world’s best LGBT athletes would meet for outstanding, notable competitions – with all the ancillary political, cultural and social benefits being an outcome of that primary goal. Now so many cities are hosting regional “human rights events combined with sports” or “Pride fests with sports” or “cultural/sports weekends” that local and national teams’ attentions are diffused, with no collective goal-setting much less financial savings plans to attend any one event as a priority over another. I see the ramifications on my own team.
Let’s remember that one of GLISA’s initial goals was to supplant the FGG and wipe out the Gay Games (the quotes exist). Maybe that’s taking GLISA longer to accomplish than they had originally hoped, and maybe it is and maybe it isn’t still a goal. No one believes the PR that GLISA offers anything new in terms of vision, and regional Outgames is as much about branding as anything. But enough of its leaders are intent on sticking with their clique instead of engaging in real, constructive dialogue with the FGG or international LGBT sports group leaders that I see no progress being made any time soon on the basic issue of what optimizes worldwide LGBT sports competition. So much for the open “dialogue” a few months back in Copenhagen.
Europeans are keeping the split alive. Wellington is actually defensible as an event due to the lack of access and events in the Asia/Pacific region and, if it happens, Vancouver will be a nice little event that will not matter one whit to North America or the major LGBT clubs based in the region (and this is coming from someone who loves Vancouver). So we can ask all the questions we want but until the Europeans get serious about one quadrennial event expect no change. Even if the rebranded Antwerp Eurogames II doesn’t draw as many Europeans as they’d like (say, worst case, European clubs decide to boycott in order to more forcefully demand one global quadrennial event), expect Antwerp/GLISA to declare it a success because these events are no longer about sports accomplishments but about “human rights.”
Antwerp politicians stated public reluctance in the face of reports out of Copenhagen that numbers there weren’t as high as expected, but once city fathers decided on balance it was a good idea to go ahead GLISA certainly wasn’t going to stand in the way if there was any chance of legal exposure. Even should the next couple of years show GLISA willing to take on Regional Outgames as their reason for being and fold up World Outgames in favor of the Gay Games, I’m not holding my breath that we’ll see an announcement from GLISA that, like Ted Turner publicly announced in advance about New York’s Goodwill Games, Antwerp’s World Outgames will be the last.
No, I think GLISA reps smiled their way through the Copenhagen meeting, fingers crossed that Antwerp would still come through. And now I believe GLISA is keeping those same fingers crossed that the global economy keeps numbers down in Cologne and that at least one other major LGBT community group will be craven enough to want to host a “global” Outgames 2017 event so that GLISA can continue to justify its existence.
In short, it’s not about sports — it’s about site selection.
I really should get paid for some of these op-eds. :^)
- Charlie Carson, IGLA co-founder 1987, FGG board of directors 1994-2007
on Jan 4th, 2010 at 8:38 PM
Well I guess this means good-bye (and good riddance) to the Kumbaya efforts of Team Berlin, The FGG, and numerous other organizations to lobby for a consolidated Single Quadrennial Event (1QE).
After a substantial number of meetings before Copenhagen, in Copenhagen, and in Koeln this year (all of which I attended), throw in Jim’s OutSport’s articles, and I thought it was a done deal! So much for good faith and logic. This Antwerp announcement is insulting to all of us, and IMHO is a direct challenge to the FGG and LGBT teams. Clearly EGLSF is now impotent.
After the less than spectacular Copenhagen -Athletic- registration results, it pretty clear now that the World OutGames (WOGs) is getting light in the heels. After two WOGs, GLISA can no longer guarantee registrants in the smaller sports like Martial Arts, Skating, Wrestling a significant ‘critical mass’ of competitors. So you have this very expensive host city, a hefty registration fee, a total outsourcing of the sports to mainstream governing bodies (bypassing the established LGBT governing bodies almost entirely), and no guarantee of a worthy ‘critical mass’ competition.
How can this be classified a ‘World’ anything, other than a ‘World Hoax’ to fill hotel rooms. But at least you can spend another few hundred dollars to sit in a Human Rights Conference and be lectured as to why you are there in the first place.
Henceforth IMHO the WOGs will be known as the WHGs, the ‘World Hoax Games’.
We recently learned that:
BC government reneges on promise to fund 2011 Outgames:
http://www.xtra.ca/public/Vancouver/BC_government_reneges_on_promise_to_fund_2011_Outgames-8063.aspx .
Is it not now obvious that after two WHGs; Montreal’s $5mil deficit and now Copenhagen’s low registration, that no Canadian or American city will fund a WHGs? Forget America, that market is solid GayGames. But Montreal, Toronto, and now Vancouver have been emasculated as possible LGBT event hosts. Even their local city and spoprts teams are in a very low cycle of enthusiasm if they exist at all. Canadians in Copenhagen? Lets face facts, Montreal 2006 destroyed LGBT credibility in Canada, and LGBT enthusiasm for -any- LGBT event. A very sad state of affairs.
To add insult to injury, the bottom line is still (whether we like it or not) that without the 7k American registrations, neither a GayGames or a WHGs can be successful. So I would be careful about saying it is not a real event if it is ‘too American’. BTW, Koeln 2010 GayGames has already passed Copenhagen’s 4.5k registration and is approaching >5k -ATHLETES- . Once the American buzz starts, ~10k will be a cinch. Smoke that in your pipe and put that in!
So just who are the GLISA people, how do they operate, and why do they have so little respect for the LGBT athletic community that they would continue this WHGs fraud? Who do they talk to other than other international hotel managers? I think an investigation by some ‘unbiased’ journalist is in order. GLISA it seems has lost its American media outlets since Montreal stuck OutSports with an unpaid bill in 2006. Why does GLISA only speak through 1-2 journalists who IMHO do not ask the tough enough questions when it comes to the WHGs? I think all journalists need to ask Charlie Carson’s questions (above) before another WHGs enabling fluff piece is ever written anywhere! I specifically intend to be right there to challenge these WHG enabling journalists.
So if this is a direct challenge by GLISA, so be it, I am already a wrestler training for Koeln…. adding GLISA an WHGs just makes it sweeter.
I just hope the first time I see trap email addresses stolen by Montreal from the FGG’s prior Gaygames come to me from a WHGs or GLISA marketing source, that a Cease & Desist letter with teeth is written, and our honorable LGBT media writes about this ongoing thievery of GayGames resources. It would be such a waste of resources to sue another LGBT organization, but our community would react to the truth if someone would just bother to investigate and write about it.
I am especially saddened because my EuroGames experience wrestling in Antwerp 2007 was wonderful and the Antwerp Active is probably one of the best sports clubs in Europe. But a WHGs is ~50% more expensive than a EuroGames, and for what?
GREED!
on Jan 8th, 2010 at 12:26 AM
GLISA as Fraud: The Copenhagen Secretariat Report:
Several applications for funds from the EU have been rejected, as the EU did not want to accept the legal company form or the wording in the articles of World Outgames 2009 ApS as being a non-profit organization.
the collaboration between GLISA as an organization
and World Outgames as an event has been marked by very varying levels of quality.
The responsibility for these at times strained relations falls of course in both camps. In the secretariat, the many staff changes in communications have been one of the
factors contributing to unclear communication and expectations that have not been met. But correspondingly, GLISA as an organization has at no time lived up to the expectations we in Copenhagen have had of the brand owner. Expectations and requirements which were otherwise expressly stated in the contract between
Wonderful Copenhagen and GLISA.
It is therefore highly recommended that when the third World Outgames is held, a more detailed declaration of expectations be made between the local event organizer
and GLISA.
Because due to the large financial loss, the Montreal office was forced to close earlier than expected with the consequence that a manual and summary of their
experiences were not written and passed on to GLISA and then Copenhagen.
So the sports team’s best tool was paradoxically enough the report from the Gay Games in Sydney in 2002. But even with help from this report, the sports team had to use unnecessarily many resources to clarify the rules and procedures for the individual sports As mentioned earlier, World Outgames is a young brand. A young brand
owned by a very young – and therefore inexperienced organization not rich in resources: GLISA
The contract the City of Copenhagen had signed with GLISA included GLISA making their international sponsorship and media contacts available to the World
Outgames secretariat in Copenhagen.
The secretariat has never received this specialist
and organizational support. Primarily because it became apparent that GLISA did not have these contacts. Neither globally nor regionally As previously mentioned, World Outgames has only been held once before, in Montreal in 2006. World Outgames as an event is therefore new, and prior experience of an international and mixed project (sport, culture, conference) is therefore not great. That goes for planning and holding the event, as well as budgeting and financial management.
It was not enough that the overall objective for World Outgames was so vague at the start – neither were there any written success criteria or values for the event.
What is the overall concept for the event? If the secretariat had copied the concept which formed the basis of the first World Outgames in Montreal, we would
be seeing an event where sport was the overwhelmingly dominant aspect. But in Copenhagen, as mentioned above, we chose to raise the priority and give the human
rights dimension and the cultural meeting between the event and the city the same weighting as the sports activities.
Anything else would have been wrong, if we were to meet the overall objectives for the event and the project’s fundamental values.
But this decision has not been without consequences. Because by prioritizing the cultural program and the human rights conference as much as we have, the secretariat has firstly challenged GLISA, the owner of the World Outgames brand, and secondly the global LGBT sports community – because what we have done is not the way a large international LGBT sports event is “normally” run.
No Danish ministry was willing to accredit the
World Outgames organization as a non-profit organization
The first issue is the absence of actual external objective evaluation and documentation of World Outgames.