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

This will be one of the most under represented groups in sport. They will have very limited opportunities to play sport in an environment that they feel safe in. It (imo) is a good thing.

"This is a club for Christians, Muslims Hindus, and any other religions, and atheists that are supportive of any religions.

Except Jews, they can't come."

Of course if you really wanted to troll them you could call up the school and say, "Sasha really wants to play this sport but she doesn't feel safe playing mixed sex sports. Is there any chance you could have a club for AFAB LGBTQ+ children and their allies and a club for AMAB LGBTQ+ children and their allies?"

This is wrong.

I think it's absolutely fine to have a sports club for, let's say, gender diverse children who don't want to be in biological sex categories.

If it's a sport that is usually played in single sex teams but these children don't feel comfortable with that then by all means have a third option. But you don't even have to call it LGBTQ+, just call it mixed and tell the children that they can either join the team for their birth sex or the mixed team. That would be so much better as well for any gender questioning children who didn't feel comfortable playing in a single sex team for their birth sex but aren't ready to come out, because they and their friends could just say they prefer a mixed sex environment.

It's doubly wrong if there isn't an equivalent team or club for children who don't fall into this bizarre category. And it's clearly deliberate because if any child asks for another club the response they'll get is, "Why? Aren't you an ally?"

I see what you mean. Any possibly of asking for this activity to be included in the other clubs; could it be pointed out that if it's only in the one club that excludes certain groups (or puts pupils in a position of needing to lie to access this activity) then it is unfair, and if also provided elsewhere then that maintains the integrity of the excluding group as pupils will not need to lie to attend, so they can be assured that all who do attend truly meet the inclusion criteria

OP has explained that's the only club.

OK, so this club isn't for him. That's ok, I'm sure there are other places he can try elsewhere. Not every club is for everyone.

Actually, as a GC advocate, I think an ‘open category’ for sports , alongside girls / women and boys/ men’s categories, is the way forwards.

IMO it would be better if this club was presented as such with ‘this club welcomes…’.

Socialising around sport and social groupings isn’t wrong per se in my book. I know if a gay men’s water polo team, a lesbian women’s water polo club, gay choirs, a Trans In-line skating club. Sometimes, just like women, people of different groupings like to socialise as such.

The space is not safe is if it discriminates
I'd say it was more likely to be a safe space if they didnt want people there who called them "special alphabet people."
or requires pupils to lie to gain access.
There's the risk of that in any club sadly, not just LGBT ones.

LGB pupils can still attend the club's corresponding with their natal sex.

T pupils (so far as children are trans, which is highly debatable) can as well. But if it stops female children from being ousted by trans-identifying male pupils, then fine.

Q+ doesn't even exist in law so no need for it to be tacked on. Especially when it involves minors.

The main risk with a T/TQ+ club in any school is that of ROGD. As well as forcing other minors to go along with individuals' mind's eye of themselves in order to affirm what's in other children's heads.

@SirChenjins - you still haven't explained your "special alphabet children" comment. What do you mean by this?

If it is the only sports club the school is running, that is, not an additional club on top of other clubs, then surely it's discriminatory as it is excluding anyone who doesn't 'fit'?

@SunflowersAndSmellyTrainers I imagine it's about creating a safe space for the children, away from prejudice, phobia and bullying. It just happens to be wrapped up in the form of a club to make it fun and hey, why not?
Oh,@SirChenjins"special alphabet children" - what do you mean by this precisely, I wonder

Exactly - I'd see it as somewhere for anyone LGBT to go, hang out, have a 'safe' hang out for want of a better word.
Think the sneery "special alphabet children " says it all really about the intention of "but can "GC" people go, and if not, why not? 🙄

There is no class for GC pupils or for those who are not allied to any ideology.

That's discriminatory, and the school should know better.

Oh, @SirChenjins"special alphabet children" - what do you mean by this precisely, I wonder?

Interested in this as well.

This would be fine with me if there was a "standard" club for everyone and this one was just separate.

Singling one group of children out for special, better treatment never ends well, in my experience. It could make the kids who don't qualify very resentful, which can lead to huge problems and actually be counter-productive in terms of the group who are supposed to be helped.

Also, the allies part is just plain wrong. Who gets to decide who is a good enough ally? What happens if they fall victim to a purity spiral and who makes sure that nobody is bullied because they aren't ally-ing sufficiently? If otherwise sporty kids don't want to sign up, will they be vilified for not being allies?

The general culture around these issues in Scotland is worrying enough at the moment for me to be profoundly wary of anything like this.

Including allies allows DCs who are not quite ready to come out to go. It also allows others to bring along a friend for support.

I wonder what they would say if you started a club for children with GC beliefs.

This is essentially a third space, so if there is male football, female football and the LGBTQ+ football - then surely this is a good thing. It would surely make it more likely the female team remains so?

Who's running/funding it? And who will supervise it?

Including allies makes it descriminatory. They are clearly excluding on the grounds of belief. Would they welcome a gender critical lesbian?