I'm here in the great state of California - you know, the one that managed to uphold Proposition 8, which bans the rights of same-sex couple to marry.  (And NO it wasn't African-Americans' fault that the legislation didn't pass - unfortunatley, the Prop 8 organizers took for granted some communities and failed to strategize their campaign effectively to combat the pro-Proposition 8 crowd).

In any event, I recently found out that Washington D.C. is in the running to host the 2014 Gay Games.  According to The Hoya, the purpose of Gay Games is to promote and empower gay athletes - and other talents, like musicians/artists.  Kelly Stevens, the Officer of Communications for the Federation of Gay Games said this:

"I would describe the Gay Games as a celebration of human rights through sport and culture."

I found this video on YouTube that serves as a preview for the 2010 Gay Games in Cologne.

Of course I couldn't avoid reading the comments posted below the video.  It was interesting to read what people thought about the video and about the idea of having a Gay Games.  While most agreed that the presentation of the video was cool, some chimmed in stating that it isn't necessary for a Gay Games to even exist.  Take for instance these exchanges:

"This is so amazingly [expletive] stupid. What would sexual orientation have to do with athletic ability? Why don't they just compete in the regular olympics?"

One commenter responded: "The best do. And win medals, too."  Good one!  Also note how this commenter used the word "regular" to describe the Olympics, as if the Gay Games would be irregular?  In what way, I wonder.  And what constitutes something that's regular, or what I interpret this commenter to mean, as 'normal'?  Interesting use of the English language, I'd say.

And this comment:

"I am gay but i can still play sports and not get a [expletive]. you think because your Gay you cant play sports with other."

[Note: Many thanks to YouTube users for all the great expletives - and making my job as a blogger that much more tedious!]

Now of course we have to take these comments with a grain of salt - especially considering we have no idea who these people are behind their computer screens (for all we know these comments could be manipulated just to make a point).

But what about the argument that questions the idea of having a separate games for Gay athletes  - as if to send a message that gay athletes can only feel a certain kind of empowerment when participating in a gay friendly environment.

I covered the Beijing Summer Olympics quite extensively on PlayCity and in doing so I learned about openly gay Olympians.  I also covered stories about gay athletes who struggle in various realms of organized sports.  Bottom line: it ain't easy.

I'm not sure what the answer is (or if there necessarily has to be a definitive answer).  One could also bring into the debate the idea of historically black colleges (HBCs) - but again, we'd probably run the risk of replicating the same argument currently going on in the news concerning the Civil Rights movement for African-Americans and gay rights.

The saga continues . . .

What do you think?? 

Last night I hosted a potluck at my house to discuss ideas for a budding movement-and-circus-arts weekly skill share and/or training sessions. As we sat together in a circle in my living room, we thought of a silly concept combining circus clowns with military recruitment officers. We thought it would be funny to put together a skit that mocks the U.S. military’s homophobic “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” policy. Our semi-formulated idea involves a bunch of clowns (you know, the pie-throwing, flower-squirting, nose-squeaking types) interacting with recruitment officers who must legally abide by the anti-clowning policy, “Don’t Ask, Don’t Clown.”

It’s a ridiculous take on a ridiculous policy. When Clinton approved the policy 15 years ago, it was considered a progressive move towards relaxing the outright ban on LGBT military members. But that was 15 years ago. Now we’re sorely in need of a new policy to ban all institutional discrimination in any government-sponsored entity.

Being gay has nothing to do with athletic performance, intelligence, or the ability to make it through the rigors of basic training. While military operations don’t exactly qualify as sports, they do share many of the same characteristics. Like those involved in team sports, military participants engage in tough physical training, develop teams, identify their competition, and develop strategies to win. But here’s why it could never qualify as a sport: it’s not a game. There’s no play involved in training for war.

And there’s nothing playful about legally sponsored discrimination and military discharges based upon sexual orientation. Unless, of course, you bring in the clowns to hold up a social mirror and expose the complete absurdity of an outdated policy.

[Below: A documentary-style clip about "Don't Ask, Don't Tell."]