Not again! - Government is proposing to allow trans-identifying boys into under 18s girls’ school sport - unless it is deemed unsafe

People aren't really that stupid to think it is the same as mixed sex sports.

It is a deliberate attempt to confuse the issue with another and slip one past the goalie.

This isn't what is being proposed here. This is potentially allowing a boy to join the girls PE class to take part in the girls basketball game.

This wouldn't be in an optional, additional activity, where its clear that boys are included and rules are made under these conditions. This is compulsory for the girls, where the rules are made assuming everyone is a girl.

The girls cannot opt out of the class, and even if they do, they will lose out on part of their education.

Basketball has mixed sex leagues under 14. Or used to anyway. I used to play in one. That league was called pasarelle as there are specific rules about subs and stuff. Everyone has to come on for a certain amount of time.

Nothing wrong with young kids competing against each other. Martial arts is the same.

https://www.instagram.com/reel/DKuNM32sf0o/?igsh=azkwZGs4OWZmc2R3

My reaction to this whole proposed guidance is: why?
Why would a department of education go to all this trouble and tie themselves into knots and have public consultations just to facilitate a small number of boys participating in girls' sports?

Is it to support Public Sector Equality Duty? They need to demonstrate that children with the PC of GR are considered and included.

So they redefine the need for girls sport around safety to allow these boys to be included.

@MarieDeGournay Exactly my point.

Either a sport is single sex or mixed sex.

But a boy who is 'socially transitioning' is just 'any boy', in the context of girls' sport!
Just because he is 'socially transitioning' doesn't make him any less of a boy and more of a girl - he's still 100% male and has no place in girls' sports.

My reaction to this whole proposed guidance is: why?
Why would a department of education go to all this trouble and tie themselves into knots and have public consultations just to facilitate a small number of boys participating in girls' sports?

It seems like a disroportionate waste of time and energy.

Too late for the edit button.

That should have said:

Safeguarding against the Isla Brysons of this world, including the teenage ones at school, and supporting vulnerable children (e.g. autistic children who might believe their emotional confusion and/or sensory issues with body changes during puberty could be a sign that they are in the wrong body) depends on this clarity.

Do you mean the current proposed wording of the KCSIE guidance is at risk of blurring these issues?

If so, I agree.

It's at risk of blurring a lot more than just issues with sports too. I'll second the nudge from SingleSex to take a look at the main discussion thread about this proposed guidance wording. Isla Bryson isn't necessarily relevant in the sports context (not directly anyway) but becomes very relevant indeed regarding the rest of the document. Prior to committing rape, there will have been a lot of coercion going on that it's important to accept Isla, not to mock the penis-hugging leggings, not to say you feel uncomfortable in a thong in Isla's presence while getting a spray tan etc.

It's important that children learn the difference between facts (biological sex, laws) and belief (gender identity) as without this, there is no safeguarding. The Isla Brysons of this world, including the teenage ones at school, and vulnerable children (e.g. autistic children who might believe their emotional confusion and/or sensory issues with body changes during puberty could be a sign that they are in the wrong body) depend on this clarity.

Also the ‘special exception’ of being allowed in the single sex sport reinforces the identity of the child as having socially transitioned/being trans in front of the other children. This is extra affirming for the child in question. The whole school will notice.
Other boys can’t join, only the special, important one. This is hard for the ‘special’ one to turn back from. So it is not safe-guarding that child but harmful to them, and it’s also discriminatory to others.

The general discussion around excluding men and boys from female spaces has focused so much around safety - the risk of sexual assault and physical injury, that dignity and opportunity for women and girls has been sidelined.

Girls sport in school is to promote girls opportunities and encourage life long participation. Having to balance that with the wants of a boy will inevitable disadvantage girls at some point, there will be scenarios where a boys inclusion will take priority. The reason for the class will change from opportunities for girls to including boys.

That will mean that girls are discouraged from participating and sends a message to every girl that they arent the priority in lesson designed for girls. The boy will learn that he takes priority too.

Where single sex sports is a fair and proportionate response for reasons of safety, fairness and to prevent discrimination against girls, schools should follow the law and ensure they are single sex - not follow sports bodies’ policies.

Where there are no safety concerns and a child makes a request relating to
how they participate, schools and colleges will need to consider the request in light of the advice on “considering requests for support with social transition”. This means that the school or college would need to take into account all the relevant factors, including whether supporting social transition is overall in the best interests of the child, as well as considering the impact on other children and the aim of creating safe and fair environments for children to participate in PE.

The fundamental problem is that making any activity single sex is an act of exclusion that must be justified, per the EQ 20210. If there is sufficient justification to make an activity single sex then, by definition, it is necessary to exclude trans identified individuals of the opposite sex. The converse is also true, if you accept trans identified individuals of the opposite sex into an activity then you must accept all member of the opposite sex. The SC judgement in FWS is extremely clear on this matter - it's central in fact to the entire case. This can not be made 'case by case' basis; it must be uniform and being transgender cannot be made a conditioning factor. The above regulation is in obvious contradiction of the EA 2010 as (re)established by the SC in FWS.

There has been a lot of talk about 'you don't have to exclude transwomen', which is is true in most situations, but that means you must not exclude men.

I do wonder if what's being contemplated is a sort of legal device in which, if a trans individual requests admittance to an activity, the school then acts to make that activity uinisex for the period of time the trans individual is a member of the activity and then the activity reverts to be single sex. There are hints that that might be the intent, but as stated it doesn't even provide that work around (which in any event would likely be found to be be unlawful for a variety of reasons).

Are the waters being muddied here? It seems that there are 2 quite different scenarios:

1. mixed sex sports in schools - decided on a sport by sport basis according to safety and fairness
2. trans people being allowed into a single sex sports group that does not align with their biological sex

Even scenario 1 may be disadvantageous to some girls who will self-exclude and, anyway, who gets to decide on the question of safety and fairness; they should follow the rules of the regulatory body eg FA.

Scenario 2 is a complete no-no because it goes against the SC judgement and peer pressure would prevent anyone raising objections.

I bet you've never been to a compulsory yoga lesson, though.

@AStonedRose would probably have been doing the telling that it was transphobic. Much as they are now outraged to have Bryson raised in this thread. He is inconvenient, to say the least.

The local leisure centre runs women only swim sessions for women who don’t want to swim alongside men.

It’s a real thing that some women/females don’t want to be in the pool or in swim gear alongside men.

Some of the young women on the beauty course did complain that they were uncomfortable with Bryson. They were told that was transphobic

You can make the comparison, but most sensible people would dismiss it as hyperbole.

The utility of mentioning Bryson and his leggings is to remind people of the absurdities that authority ties itself in when it fails to distinguish between men and women in an honest way.

The reason that it's incumbent for you to try to disuade anyone from mentioning that debacle is because 'most sensible people" understand that's where we're likely to end up when policies try to fudge basic safeguarding.

Quite.

Most sensible people would know that considering such things - that boys demanding access to female spaces might be potential sex offenders - is basic safeguarding.

And if a teenage girls complained Bryson would no doubt have said:

“Comparing me to a rapist - which the complaining teenage girl is obviously doing - is hateful and repellent. Are you mocking my outfit?”

Sensible people know that male should not be in female spaces. And where I am really coming from is pointing out that any male entering a female space is behaving in a predatory fashion. Why shouldn't people compare boys who enter female spaces to rapists, we have no idea what they plan to do?

You can make the comparison, but most sensible people would dismiss it as hyperbole.

And I've not reported the post comparing a trans kid in a yoga class to Isla Bryson. Sensible, moderate people read these boards too, so (together with the rest of the board doubling down on it) it's a useful marker for them to see what some of you are really about.

You clearly have no concept of safeguarding.

Can we remember that whilst he was waiting for the process to complete, Double Rapist Isla Bryson was enrolled onto a beauty course where older teenage girls were spraying each other with tanning spray, wearing just a thong. They knew this and still put those girls at risk.

Of course we could just insist that it is not the business of schools to support "social transition

This ^
Don’t mind more sports as long as it’s judged fairly with separate changing facilities.

But why the social transition bit . Have they not read Cass?