sports day: Girls not allowed to run 400m

I would also ask them at exactly which point between 200 and 300m does it become an h&s issue for the girls and what the comparable figure is for the boys to experience that same issue? Say 264m for girls vs 305m for boys (obviously I have just pulled example figures out of the air!)

Because if they can't give the exact point and reasons as to why it becomes dangerous for girls not boys and know what the danger point is for boys, then how do they know that 300m actually is dangerous? There mist be a point at which they decide the danger threshold has been reached - if they can't explain it or provide the evidence then frankly it doesn't sound like they can guarantee the safety of any of their sprint races and should call all of them off. or run all of them, girls and boys.

I would also then use the figures to say well if xxx is dangerous let's run a race for a metre less so at least the girls get their turn and it can highlight the ridiculousness of the situation. They can't argue that a metre less than the distance would also be dangerous as you already know what that threshold is allegedly and are proposing something below that.

If they refuse it will show they aren't bothered about the race for girls and see it as a way of cutting down on sports day, so I'd tell them they need to cut an event from the boys too in order to make it fair.

good luck!

I would ask what the h&s concerns are that apply to girls but not boys and ask on what authority are they making these decisions. I'd also be asking for actual evidence of the risk and why it applies to girls but not boys.

I'd be tempted to get in touch with the head and say that it appears someone has hacked into their system And sent out a very dodgy email that she needs to deal with ASAP - say you wonder if it's some non-sporty girls looking to get out of running.

If youare worried about your job are there some senior girls and boys you get on well with or know the parents of and could prime them with these questions and the number of the local paper and get them to start complaining and saying they'll run anyway?

Do you think they are just looking for a way of shortening sports day?

I'm with the skiing gardener!!

Have you found them this lacking in other areas?

How long have you been at this school?

Is your Head always this much of a twunt?

At least you have thought about what to do... I'd have fired back an email quicker than you could have said 'Oh do fuck off' and probably been looking at the sits vac over my morning coffee

I am concerned that we may be at risk of legal action for sex discrimination.

I think the only possible response is "What the actual fuck do you think you are doing in education if this is the message you give to children"

Preferably stapled to their chest.

I would play it differently, and say that if it's dangerous for the girls to run 400m then it must surely also be dangerous for the boys, and that if anything went wrong and a boy became ill as a result, the school would surely be in big trouble for failing to protect them from the risk in the way they have done with the girls. That might worry them enough to pull the boys' race also back to 300m. Sounds like this is a long game and I would aim at cancelling out the planned inequality in this race to start with, then working on rooting out this attitude about girls being fainting delicate flowers.

YANBU, but then DDs BF would win the 400m and do an extra lap before the slowest boy had finished.

But as the school doesn't appear to be following those rules anyway I don't think they are relevant in this case.

Well according to the ESAA website there is discrimination between boys and girls:

The Association Junior Championships for boys 13 years and under 15 years will be decided on the total points gained in the following 15 (fifteen) events: 100 metres; 200 metres; 300 metres...

The Association Intermediate Championships for boys 15 years and under 17 years will be decided on the total points gained in the following 18 (eighteen) events: 100 metres; 200 metres; 400 metres...

The Association Senior Championships for boys 17 years and under 19 years will be decided on the total points gained in the following 18 (eighteen) events: 100 metres; 200 metres; 400 metres...

The Association Junior Championships for girls 13 years and under 15 years will be decided on the total points gained in the following 11 (eleven) events: 100 metres; 200 metres

The Association Intermediate Championships for girls 15 and under 17 years will be decided on the total points gained in the following 17 (seventeen) events: 100 metres; 200 metres; 300 metres...

The Association Senior Championships for girls 17 years and under 19 years will be decided on the total points gained in the following 18 (eighteen) events: 100 metres; 200 metres; 400 metres...

Pretty shit really.

I was outraged recently about a thing at school. House names that were exclusively white European were proposed, I wrote to the head, outlining concerns 'someone responsible for genocide and slave trading will perhaps prove to be controversial?' She thanked me for raising it and has decided to go with place names instead. Your head may thank you for raising concerns before parents do.

Well indeed Kim.

I am shocked if there are different rules for boys and girls within the sports governing body.

However the wording doesn't suggest that was even a consideration by the school. They were intending to 'allow' the girls to run 400m and only the weather is stopping them.

That's ridiculous!
allmycats - if it's the case that they can't compete because of ESAA rules then surely the school should have said that? This sounds as if it's a blanket rule across all year groups so not appropriate for all.

allmycats
Are there different rules for boy and girl races?

Ours did Sports Day today. Races up to 1500m for all. How ridiculous - YADNBU.

(not that I spent my afternoon running the Sin Bin in a sweaty Portakabin or anything...)

What age are the girls, UK athletics and English Schools athletics have always had a minimum age at which girls run 400metre which is correctly defined as a sprint race. In fact both UKA (now known as British Athletics) and English Schools athletics now have U15 boys Sprinting over 300 metres and not moving up to the 400 until they are
Under 17 age group.
So, the school may well be correct depending on the age of the girls.
Running further than 400 is NOT classified as sprinting which is why younger age groups can compete.
You need to know the rules of UKA and English Schools before claiming that this is wrong
This does not have to apply to 'open athletics meetings'
I am a UKA qualified coach and a UKA official so do know what I am talking about here

Yes they do. Women finally have parity with men over all track events apart from 110m hurdles where the women run 100m. Go figure There is still a discrepancy with heptathlon/decathlon though

Girls at my DCs school are allowed to run 600m from Y3. We must breed them tough here in Yorkshire!

Seriously i'd challenge the school on this one. Am i right in thinking that at the Olympics, men & women run over the same distances?

I'd also ask what message this sends the boys as well as the girls. Really good point. It certainly sends out the message that boys are more worthy of a complete event. That only they are strong and fit enough to compete over the full distance. That is only going to give them a sense of entitlement.

Do your school have an Equality Policy? I have a feeling it's a compulsory one, and should be on the website. I should think this would quite probably contravene it.

It's one of the few grammar things I remember.

The beer affected my grammar, (verb)
The effect of the beer was poor grammar (noun or something).

'I am concerned that preventing girls from participating in the 300m race gives the impression that we consider them in some way less able than their male counterparts. The wonderful example of the London Olympics has inspired our girls to train hard this past year, and it would be demoralising for them to be excluded from this event.

Added to that, the school leaves itself vulnerable to a charge of sexism, and sex discrimination, which could lead to rather negative publicity'.

Are you sure you haven't time travelled from 1950s?

Grammar aside, I'd also ask what message this sends the boys as well as the girls. Should they really have teachers telling them they're better than girls? That it's ok to discriminate and treat women as less capable?