rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (02/10/86)
I've read that despite an original assurance that South African players would not be invited (because of the all-white makeup of South African teams and the longstanding international boycott in athletics), the organizers of Gay Games II have accepted an all-white South African contingent to the Games. Because of this, Scotland has just announced it would boycott the Games. Another nation (Canada? Netherlands?) has already pulled out. Does anybody out in the Bay area know what kinds of pressure/protest are being brought to bear on the organizers, and if they're likely to revoke South Africa's invitation? I ask because I'm thinking about attending the games, and maybe even participating in squash racquets (I don't remember whether the Bay area, in exception to the rest of the West, has squash courts). I don't think everyone should cancel their participation without waiting a decent interval to see if the decision can be revoked (the Games are scheduled for this summer). Mainstream athletics has many other international sporting events besides the Olympics. Gay Games is the only international gay sporting event I know of, and the only national one besides the Gay Rodeo (though gay outdoors clubs now have an international organization, IGLOO). On the other hand, athletic apartheid practiced by gay South Africans is inexcusable, however difficult the situation of even white gays may be in South Africa. If the Gay Games II organizers don't revoke their decision, I think everyone should boycott the Games. I will. Regards, Ron Rizzo
keith@whuxl.UUCP (TITUS) (02/13/86)
Ron Rizzo writes: > I've read that despite an original assurance that South African players > would not be invited (because of the all-white makeup of South African > teams and the longstanding international boycott in athletics), the > organizers of Gay Games II have accepted an all-white South African > contingent to the Games. > > Does anybody out in the Bay area know what kinds of pressure/protest > are being brought to bear on the organizers, and if they're likely to > revoke South Africa's invitation? > > I ask because I'm thinking about attending the games, and maybe even > participating in squash racquets (I don't remember whether the Bay > area, in exception to the rest of the West, has squash courts). > > I don't think everyone should cancel their participation without waiting > a decent interval to see if the decision can be revoked (the Games are > scheduled for this summer). Mainstream athletics has many other > international sporting events besides the Olympics. Gay Games is the > only international gay sporting event I know of, and the only national > one besides the Gay Rodeo (though gay outdoors clubs now have an > international organization, IGLOO). On the other hand, athletic > apartheid practiced by gay South Africans is inexcusable, however > difficult the situation of even white gays may be in South Africa. > If the Gay Games II organizers don't revoke their decision, I think > everyone should boycott the Games. I will. > > While I have been a avid reader and sometimes poster to this net, I must disagree with Ron on this article. The curse of politics has cast a shadow on the 1980 and 1984 Olympic games and I would hope the gay community is not that small minded as to exclude anyone based upon a policy that is set by their government and that they have little control over. If we think we have it bad in this country, just imagine how suppressed the gay life is in South Africa. I had done some reading on the subject and it appeared that their's was not an easy lot. Most, if not all the gay clubs and culture is in the major cities, ie. Johannesburg, CapeTown, Durban, Pretoria, where blacks and coloureds are not even allowed to be at night whether they were gay or not. In that light, how would there be a large interaction of the two races to socialize in the first place. It is a government sponsored policy of separation of the races. Even in this country, it was not official until 1965 that a law proclaimed it illegal to discriminate on the basis of race or colour. And socially, whether we want to believe it or not, the invisible practice of dicrimination goes on, even though it is not government sanctioned. I do not condone apartheid, and I do not condone communism. However, I would not exclude athletes from East Germany, the Soviet Union, Hungary, etc... from participating in a sporting event. Just because the government sponsors something I do not agree with is no reason for me to write off the people of its country. We as gays, have a hard enough time dealing with our own situations, lets not make it worse. Keith Titus Bell Laboratories, Whippany, NJ
rrizzo@bbncca.ARPA (Ron Rizzo) (02/14/86)
Since I raised the issue, here's more info obtained from a friend last night to shed light on the situation. The international boycott against South Africa isn't against all- white teams (many of South Africa's teams are in fact interracial, I'm told) but against apartheid; the boycott was called by other African nations, eg, Kenya, and my informant seemed to think that conformity to the boycott was mainly out of political expedience: ie, it was more important not to offend Kenya than South Africa. He also thought homosexuality was heavily surpressed, taboo in South Africa (the situation must be bad, but I vaguely remember reading about a few gay bars, and a gay organization, maybe assoc- iated with universities--Witwatersrand?) as a result of conversa- tions with a gay South African exile here, so that inviting a South African contingent to the Games is extending recognition to an oppressed minority in a very repressive society. He pointed out that many North American contingents to the Games are probably all-white. Given the interracial composition of South African teams, the all-white makeup of the gay contingent may be simply incidental, or a reflection of the difficulty of being both non-white, gay, and in touch with gay white athletes in South Africa. Regards, Ron Rizzo