I'm in a position of influence in a school and recently needed to debate with parents whether there should be continue to be a boy-only football team.
I guess the sport is irrelevant except that football is a male-dominated sport, especially in schools.
We have several girls teams which compete against other girls teams. The rules in the local league don't actually appear to exclude girls from the boys team but are clear that boys cannot play for the girls teams. I feel that this is about following the spirit of the law as opposed to the letter. Not a single team we compete with has a girl playing with the boys. I'm sure a large part of this is due to the equally good girls league with plenty of fixtures and camaraderie.
Many parents wanted the girls to be classed a closed group whereas the boys as a free-for-all Perhaps unsurprisingly, they were the same parents who will defend the need for girls to have spaces reserved for them.
Was I being unreasonable defending the need for boys to have space free from girls and any politics involved should girls be picked over boys? I'm rarely unsure about my opinions (for better or worse) but on this occasion I am doubting myself.
AIBU?
Girls and unisex or girls and boys football team
r0tringLover · 28/02/2017 16:59
do you not feel that you are being unfair to these girls by not allowing them to play for the 'boys' team? You're effectively holding them back because they cannot play at the level their talent dictates.
No. One of them is held back more by not playing with people in upper secondary. When I say 'held back', that's of course in the context that they are children kicking a ball around.
I imagine by law boys and girls who identify as the opposite sex will be allowed to play for the team they feel they match.
Yes, MN hates trannies. I get it 
But girls don't participate anywhere near the levels of boys hence the need for a single sex team.
Why? They could all be mixed and 'set' by ability. As long as there's a team for everyone... Are you saying that girls need single-sex space away from boys who want to ruin it for them? I can't see the logic.
Boys can be boys with boys in lots of other forums and arena, they do not need that specifically in the football team...
Which? Scouts? Cubs? Any argument for mixed football teams applies equally to other sports ie. the need for girls only and mixed.
It's saying we recognise girls don't participate as much as they'd like in this sport and we'd really like to address that.
I can't find any figures to support that. I don't mean the numbers of boys and girls participating but any showing girls who want to play but don't because of mixed teams.
I'm guessing you have boys?
Actually, I have more girls than boys. Around 500 girls and 450 boys! Are you suggesting I'm lacking the EQ to empathise?
Of course ideally you would have 3 teams, mixed, girls and boys but then it's about whether there is enough interest to justify it.
There is. As I mentioned earlier, we'd be the only school fielding a mixed team. That seems to me to be rewarding more able boys and girls with their own team and lumping the less able together at the bottom.
Should women be allowed in mixed gyms if there are women-only gyms nearby?
Yes. If a gym had been for men though, they shouldn't demand entry when there's a women-only gym nearby and especially not when they're so adamant that their gym needs to remain women only.
What about the girl who doesn't want to play with the girls team.
What about the boy who doesn't want to play with the boys. Should he have to play with them because he's in possession of a willy even though his ability is more on a par with the girls team.
Why is it terrible for a boy to lose a place to a girl when he might equally well have lost his place to another boy?
Because the girl could have stuck with the girls team and been picked. She had other options but he didn't.
It's a shame the OP, who is in a position to make a difference with girls' participation at her school, is choosing not to do so, and rather worrying she doesn't really understand the problem
Not sure what the passive-aggressive strikethrough was for. I understand the problem. I just think it's not a black and white area hence asking for opinions here. And one thing I would like to say is that we have just shy of 20% more girls playing football (signed up to clubs and teams) in the primary school than boys. It would be unfair for me to take the credit but I don't need to do anything at my school.
The school has decided not to let girls join.
Yes, as has every other school we play against. We even had to get clarification as to the rules.
All that I, titchy and others want is for girls to be given the opportunity to join the 'boys' team, if they're good enough to do so.
But not for a boy to join the girls if they aren't good enough for the mixed because girls-only teams are positive positive-discrimination.
This isn't about that buggering boxes and fence equality vs blah blah nonsense. You've giving the box to the tallest at the expense of the shortest because the tallest is a girl and therefore has the opportunity to stand on whatever box best suits her and the short boy has to give her his box and apologise for the patriarchy and acknowledge his internalised misogyny and micro-aggressions
I don't know why there's so many posters arguing amongst themselves about the fairness of a girl taking a boys space based on ability. I don't think that's what the OP has an issue with.
Think of it like this:
So little Johnny and Mary both love football but they aren't especially great at it and neither of them made the mixed team which was picked based on ability. Both kids would really like to join another team more suited to their ability so they can continue to get better but the opportunity is only available to Mary because she has a vagina. Little Johnny just has to suck it up.
I completely agree that ^that isn't fair and I don't see how that apparently fits in with the box/fence analogy either
I also agree that a young boy might see that set up and think boys are less important than girls. It's all well and good saying that that's not really what you're saying, that you're just 'recognising that girls don't participate as much' but would a child see it the same? Particularly when there already seems to be more girls than boys playing? I doubt it.
Don’t want to miss threads like this?
Weekly
Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!
Log in to update your newsletter preferences.
You've subscribed!
To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.