New sports club at DC’s high school only open to LGBTQ+ pupils and their allies

It’s an awkward predicament.
Your son wants to participate in the sport, but this comes at the cost of publicly supporting aspects of LGBTQIA (namely, gender ideology) with which he doesn’t believe.
If he asks to create a club for people to participate in the sport without this alignment, he is publicly saying that he doesn’t want to support LGBTQIA*, which includes parts he probably is supportive of (namely, gay rights).

It’s a real conundrum.

The school shouldn’t be forcing children to make such huge political statements in order to play a sport they’re interested in.

Singling one group of children out for special, better treatment never ends well, in my experience

Surely the answer there is to provide the same treatment in clubs for other children?

I don't know, that's why I posed it as a question.

its the word “allies” that’s the problem. Sports club to encourage LGBTQ+ children to play a particular sport fine (usual caveats of dangers of mixed sex ie strength, speed apply of course) but “and allies”?

“hey do you want to go to x sports club for lgbtq+”

“no it’s okay”

”why not???”

”im not lgbtq & I don’t like that sport”

”so aren’t you an ally? Do you hate trans ppl?? Are you homophobic?? Urgh”

”No I just don’t want to go”

”I don’t believe you! Transphobe! Bigot!”

Except in that instance, 'Sarah' is trying to set up a group for women only, when there are already groups available for men, trans people and people who are happy in a mixed group. She's not trying to exclude anyone from having access to agroup, everyone else is already catered for.The OP is talking about the only group for this activity being for LGBTQ+ and their allies, thereby leaving anyone else, let's say those with the protected characteristic of religion or belief, with no group.

What protected characteristic do they share?

Could a GC lesbian attend?

From the Equality Act 2010 schedule 16:

"An association does not contravene section 101(1) by restricting membership to persons who share a protected characteristic."

Do LGBTQIA+Allied students share a single protected characteristic? If not, it is potentially unlawful to exclude other students on the grounds of belief, which is also a protected characteristic.

Transphobia and homophobia should not be tolerated in any of the school clubs, and labelling one specific club as being safe for LGBTQ+ students suggests that the others are not. Why not just label it mixed sex?

Spot on but it's Scotland so no doubt the actual intention of the law is being deliberately disrespected. Orwellian.

Miyagi99

do you know what their definition of ‘ally’ is then?

@SirChenjins I missed the fact that you have a son rather than a daughter, which does change the balance of how this affects him personally, in my opinion.

Is it a sport where boys have a physical advantage over girls, or is it something like bouldering where it really doesn't make any difference and mixed sex participation is common?

If there is no real need for it to be single sex, then if you could be arsed to write to the school I'd say something like, "I was quite surprised to see this new sports group labelled in such a way. Whilst I applaud efforts to help the LGBTQ+ community feel safe and welcome at school, I wonder whether labelling a specific mixed sex sports group as being for LGBTQ+ children and their allies might give the impression that other clubs are not inclusive of this group, which would be a shame. It might also create a barrier to joining for any student who is privately questioning their gender identity but does not want any other students to know yet, which I believe would be the opposite effect to what was intended. Would it not be better to simply label this a mixed sex sports group, which is what it is, and aim to foster an environment where all students, regardless of their sexuality, sex, gender, race, beliefs, disabilities or lack thereof feel safe, included and welcome everywhere in school, and that all the other students are their allies in relation to whatever struggles they may be facing? For other sports where students typically play in single sex teams for reasons of safety and fairness, it would be really positive to have an additional mixed sex team for those students who want one, again without any specific reference to LGBTQ+ students or their allies. That way a child who does not feel comfortable participating in sport with members of their own birth sex can choose to participate in a mixed sex group without needing to label or out themselves, but equally, children who are transgender or non binary but wish to compete with members of their birth sex should be free to do so in the knowledge that these spaces are also inclusive and welcoming, regardless of their gender identity."

This

it is interesting that there is a current thread talking about a poster trying to set up a female only rape and sexual assault meeting but activists are doing exactly what dancingbear has posted

An ally is anyone not trans or homophobic really so they’re not excluding anyone.

You could try sending school this:

https://www.transgendertrend.com/school-lgbt-club/

Do you know who they actually mean by ‘Allies’?
Do they mean the participants can bring a friend along to help them feel comfortable or do they actually mean people who believe in a particular ideology?

Seems very strange to me that the group is aimed at a particular group on the grounds of sexual orientation. Yes this is high school (and yes many teens are sexually active) but are these children beyond the age of consent in your region? Seems like children are being unnecessarily sexualised in the name of inclusivity, at and age where they may still be trying to figure out who they are and what they are attracted to. I think this is a big faux pas on behalf of the school.

How are they checking who is and isn't an ally?

Could your child just go along anyway? The staff might be glad of the extra person because I can't imagine how many actual LGBTQ+ and allies there are, who happen to want to do the sport at that particular time.

From the OP, it sounds like it's being done at a state school (?) presumably using public money. And there isn't anything like it for other pupils.

I wouldn't call that a "third space".

What do you think about trans-activists harassing someone for trying to set up a female only support group?

It's not a third space, it's the only space for this sport.

The class will be run by a member of staff doing it voluntarily in their own time because they’ve identified a need to get particular students who are underrepresented in sports to participate, and offer them the opportunity to bring a friend for support if that’s what it takes to encourage them to participate. Am GC but can’t get twisted about a group of underrepresented young people being encouraged.

If DS really wants to participate then he can think of himself as an ally in being supportive of getting this group of his peers who don’t currently engage in sport, interested in sport. Unless he’s determined to be a troublemaker and raise his views on gender at every opportunity then, if asked, “I’ve joined because I really want to try out waterpolo and I think it’s great that people who identify as LGBTQ+ who don’t always feel comfortable about showing their bodies have the opportunity to play waterpolo in this supportive group” is a perfectly fine response - and presumably true. We’d all ideally like everyone who feels uncomfortable to have a space where they can feel comfortable, regardless of our politics.

Or, you could volunteer to help run another group for the sport, as whoever runs this group is doing.

GC types: trans people should set up their own third spaces!

trans people set up their own third spaces

GC types: you can’t do that! It’s exclusionary and discriminatory!

special slow handclap for ‘special alphabet people’.

JFC.