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

[Another2Cats]

Very much as the title. An account I follow on Twitter/X @ SEENinSport posted this tweet.

https://x.com/SportSEENuk/status/2041037786082329070?s=20

Apparently there is an open consultation from the Dept for Education

'Keeping children safe in education: 2026 proposed revisions'

One of these revisions is that schools may choose to allow boys to take part in girls sports. There are also other issues about 'social transitioning'

It says that there are "some" sports that "may" need to be played in single-sex groups from a certain age. Frankly though, I can't think of any school sports that shouldn't be single-sex activities.

Apart from these sort of 'maybe' sports, the new guidance says that schools will need to consider any boys requesting to play in girls sports in light of the advice on "considering requests for support with social transition"

This is from paras 96 and 97 of the draft proposed changes:

96 Some sports may need to be played in single-sex groups from a certain age to ensure children’s safety, and where this is the case there should be no exceptions. In other cases, schools or colleges may have adopted a policy of single-sex sports for reasons related to fairness.

97 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.

Frankly, the whole thing about even considering "supporting social transition" is entirely wrong, I feel.

Link to the proposed revisions:

https://consult.education.gov.uk/independent-education-and-school-safeguarding-division/keeping-children-safe-in-education-2026-revisions/supporting_documents/keeping_children_safe_in_education_2026_draft_for_consultationpdf-1

.

SEENinSport has suggested the following:

The survey has 41 questions but Q35 is the key one for sport

If you only have a couple of minutes, you can press return for each question till you reach Q35

They also have a link to suggested answers here:

https://static1.squarespace.com/static/67fa41451fd5090aa3fb410b/t/69ceb2a41c966b1fc3a00b94/1775153828864/KCSIE+SEEN+in+Sport+response+Feb+2026+%286%29.pdf

and their website page on the issue is here:

https://www.seeninsport.org/consultation-on-kcsie-2026

The consultation is open until 22nd April and if you wish to contribute your thoughts on any of the questions then the government consultation form is here:

https://consult.education.gov.uk/independent-education-and-school-safeguarding-division/keeping-children-safe-in-education-2026-revisions/consultation/intro/

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.

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).

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

@MarieDeGournay Exactly my point.

Either a sport is single sex or mixed sex.

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.

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

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.

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.

Ive always trained in basketball against boys. It's quite normal for that sport in London at least. We didnt always have the resources to have totally separate training sessions so many sessions were mixed. I think it is less common now than it was in my day but not totlaly unheard of. Many of the boys I played with are now pro. One went to the NBA!

Playing together as equals helped us as young people. We learned to communicate without the added social pressure of romance and sex and the boys learned to respect what women bring to the table. We might not be as athletic as them, but we play with an intelligence that boys typically learn later on. They teach us to be more flexible and improve our strength.

I'm actually about to start playing football in a mixed recreational league.

I think there should be more mixed team sports.

According to evolutionary biologist Carole Hooven, sex difference in testosterone starts in the womb. Boys are exposed to much higher levels.

During puberty, male brains are again exposed to high levels of T. Testosterone builds muscle, boys have more of it, and it gives strong and increasing advantage over girls in sport.

Research shows that nearly every boy by age 15 throws better than the best girl, for example.

Yes, mixed sports can be a good thing. Equally, it can result in girls self-excluding (e.g. from fear of being hurt by faster, stronger boys) or being ignored (by boys who view them as substandard). It all depends on the sport and how it's managed.

But to manage mixed sports successfully, schools need to know what sex each child is.

Firstly, they will need to decide which sports should be mixed-sex and which should be single-sex. Then only the mixed-sex ones should allow both sexes.

Some may over-pivot, like my daughters' school and decide that every PE lesson should be mixed-sex. For contact and semi-contact sports, this puts girls at risk of injury. Even more so if schools are also pretending that they are following good mixed-sex sports practice but are instead allowing children to self-ID as the opposite sex.

I think PE is a place where boys ignore girls. It's different when you are all at a training session for a sport you all want to be at. In my experience, anyway.

How many of the girls you played with are now pro?

Quite a few. Not the current GB team but the one before. Quite a few of my female friends play pro basketball in European leagues. Some play for BBL teams here. I am late 30s though so we are getting on a bit!

More girls went pro than boys as more boys play basketball so competition is tougher.

it's great for you that you had those experiences playing basketball with boys. Lots of people enjoy mixed sports. Mixed sports are not the issues. It's about eligibility rules in specific sports.

Some sports are mixed, like equestrian sports.
Some sports are divided into two branches, e.g. there's women's soccer and men's soccer, women's boxing and men's boxing, and the distinction is as significant as the difference between flyweight and heavyweight boxing bouts.

There are eligibility rules in boxing, so you won't be allowed take part in the flyweight division of boxing if you weigh 93kg - nobody thinks that's unfair.

Nobody claims that just because they'd like to be 50kg, somebody who weighs 95kg should be allowed box in the flyweight division.
That's not the way the rules of the sport operate.

There are similar eligibility rule in girls' and women's sports. It's easily established whether you're female and eligible, or male and not.
That's clear, open, inclusive of all girls and women, and fair.

You haven't addressed any of my points.

A girls PE class is not an optional activity designed for both boys and girls.

What is being proposed is for school to have a girls PE class, where it is assumed that everyone taking part is a girl, then introducing a boy, but pretending that its still a class exclusively for girls.

If playing together helps both boys and girls equally, thats great, but thats not what is being planned here. They are suggesting that if a boy wants to take part in a girls class, and the risk assessment concludes that there is no physical danger, then he can take part. There is no consideration for what the girls can get out of it, just that they are not likely to be harmed.

In terms of competition, Helen Joyce sometimes mentions her cricket-playing sisters playing against men, because there just aren't enough women around for a high-level game.

Boys identifying into competitive girls' sports, even if we leave aside the issue of pretending that they're girls, is the exact opposite. In terms of fairness, it's like that Fast Show sketch about the dad who was always challenging his small children in some kind of activity.

It's the kind of thing that could be dealt with by a robust national framework and some common sense at school level, because clearly teenagers playing competitive sport is not the same thing as 7 year olds doing PE, which is also not the same as a teacher having to make a judgment call on whether Jack (15) sincerely wants to do yoga or is mainly interested in perving on the girls.

What this looks like to me is that there's going to be the usual sort of DfE guidance that's both extremely detailed and vague enough to be given a very broad interpretation, and since social transition has been bolted on, this will be the backdoor for activist teachers to keep social transition, special boys being able to self-ID into the girls' showers, and all the other stuff that they don't want to admit is happening.

Where can I get my: "Brigit Phillipson: destroyer of womens' and girls' rights" t-shirt from?

Agreed, so many girls drop sports at puberty, Sport England commissioned a report and I thought this section was really interesting and emphasised why girls often do better in girl only environments:

An underlying narrative prevails; that girls are not as competitive; that sport is not important for girls; that they will never be as good at it compared to boys; that sport can be at odds with femininity. Add to that the harassment and unwanted attention teenage girls are subject to when exercising and quite simply, taking part becomes a burden, instead of bringing freedom and joy.

It’s from 2022
womeninsport.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/2022-Reframing-Sport-for-Teenage-Girls-Tackling-Teenage-Disengagement.pdf

One of the issues I have with it is the mind fuck for the kids (and adults).

A child (or adult) can be treated as the opposite sex for some reasons/activities but not others. And with case by case trangsgirl ‘A’ might be awarded permission whilst transgirl ‘B’ may be denied. We know that case by case on an individual basis mostly means permission is granted as no one wants to have to justify why ‘A’ is allowed but ‘B’ is not. If permission is based on a blanket basis on the nature of the activity then that leads to a transgirl being treated like a girl for some activities but not for others. One is either male or female, so it’s damaging for the whole cohort for someone to be accepted in their preferred sex for some things but not for others. And this is how the mission creep starts and we start talking about sending women to men’s prisons. And that fucks with the brains.

Little Johnny who now wants to be Little Joanie isn’t allowed to use the girls toilets because ‘she’ is actually male but ‘she’ is allowed to join the girls for music and movement because there are no fairness or safety concerns.

When the children are taken for swimming lessons it’s a mixed sex group in the pool but LJ is not allowed to join the girls in the female changing room so LJ changes into a bathing costume whilst the rest of the boys are changing into their trunks. Apparently social transition is a neutral act and is supported by the school but LJ doesn’t understand why ‘she’ cannot get changed with the girls.

LJ has an identical twin brother who wants to be a dancer when he grows up and would like to join the girls also instead of doing what the other boys are doing. He isn’t allowed as he does not have a trans identity. Is that fair?

This stuff messes with the brain (by design rather than a bug). Much better to be straightforward and honest and make sure children and adults know that they cannot ever change sex no matter how much they may want to. And that even if they use a name stereotypically associated with the opposite sex and wear clothes stereotypically associated with the opposite sex that they can never be the opposite sex. They can view themselves however they want to but they cannot impose their preferred identity onto others. That basic understanding must be a prerequisite for any kind of medical transition.