Talk:International Gay Rodeo Association

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Equine This article is within the scope of WikiProject Equine, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of articles relating to horses, asses, zebras, hybrids, equine health, equine sports, etc. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at the barn.
Stub This page has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality assessment scale
Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance assessment scale
LGBT Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-class on the quality scale.

[edit] Why Gay Rodeo?

John Wayne is rollin over in his grave if gays dont want to be made fun of why have they own rodeo? --Posted by AC

Regarding John Wayne: unlikely, but beside the point. The point of "gay rodeo" versus "straight rodeo" is multi-fold: to provide a sporting/event environment which is free of prejudice and stereotypical "norms", where the competitors and spectators are free to be themselves, enjoy themselves, and compete as equals without feeling the need to conform to others' expectations about what "real [men/women/cowboys/cowgirls/etc.]" should act/look like.

In addition, there are aspects of gay rodeo which are unique and uniquely entertaining, as well as representing a genuine spirit of community and emphasis on fund-raising and charity which draw in a "crowd" very different from a traditional amateur rodeo, thus increasing the support base for rodeo in general. There is plenty of room in the sport for all its different forms. C.f. Indian Rodeo. --Cowb0y 03:08, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Page Deletion Issue

"This page has been deleted, and should not be re-created without a good reason."

Why? This is a legitimate organization.

(above comment by Austinfidel)

According to Bluemoose, it was the quality of the article (original content?) at issue.[1] Note that I've recreated the article from scratch (not having seen the deleted one). Feel free to edit. --Cowb0y 00:43, 24 June 2006 (UTC)