That Australian sporting codes are embracing pride rounds reflects a welcome change of attitude and behaviour towards LGBTIQA+ people — and exemplifies the ethical leadership and change of tone required for organisational policies, practices and culture to change.
This is why — despite the kerfuffle surrounding the National Basketball League’s (NBL) inaugural pride round — we need to see the initiative as a success, as well as an important step in the long slog towards full inclusion and equality.
What happened? Having dodged Manly’s mistake of announcing a pride jersey without consulting players, the NBL still wound up with multiple players refusing to don the rainbow logo and/or attend awareness training on grounds of religion or culture. After media scrutiny, their teammates stuck with their usual jerseys to protect their fellow players from being, as described in a Twitter statement, “targeted”, “shamed”, “vilified” and made to feel they no longer “have a safe place in our sport”.
The irony of this complaint — the same from LGBTQIA+ people that gave rise to pride rounds in the first place — is hard to miss. Yet at the same time the response by the league and organisations like Pride in Sport to individual player and team dissent was measured and perfectly pitched.
“Our position is not to force or mandate anyone to wear the jersey and we are not here to impose our views on to anyone else,” an NBL spokesman said. “Our job is to love and support people without judgment.”
Pride in Sport’s Beau Newell said: “We need to take a step back and acknowledge that this is the first time a pride round is happening in the NBL and to just have a very small handful of players say they are not comfortable wearing the jersey, doesn’t mean it’s not a success.”
I agree. Even 10 years ago the concept of a major sporting code endorsing diverse sexualities and genders was unthinkable. Now multiple Australian sporting codes have high-profile inclusion initiatives that most players participate in, and studies suggest they’re also supported by many of those employed in sport.
It’s also impossible to demand ethical accountability for individuals without respecting their moral agency, even when we disagree or are mystified with what their conscience instructs. To have the freedom to live according to one’s own values (within the confines of the law, of course) is among the most treasured liberty of citizens in a free society.
In a diverse society like ours, where 30% of citizens were born overseas and half were parented by people who weren’t born here, we must expect people to use these freedoms in different ways. Lately it appears this foundational principle has become foreign to some, yet the truth is that we’ve been abiding by it in the arena of free speech for centuries. As the old saying goes, we can vehemently oppose what someone says, but in a free society must always defend — to the death if required — their right to say it.
This leaves persuasion — in the form of education, leadership, argument and example — as the main tool by which to achieve lasting social change. The NBL is setting itself up for success by emphasising the continued membership in good standing of dissenting players.
By doing its job of “loving and supporting people without judgment” — whether those people are LGBTQIA+ players or those with reservations — the organisation puts itself in the best position to advance the acceptance and inclusion agenda. Research shows the best way to change minds on prejudice is education, and increasing contact between the biased and those they are biased against.
This means that as professional sport becomes a more comfortable and welcoming environment for LGBTQIA+ people, more will be out during their sporting careers. And it will be consistent contact with those whose religion or culture has taught them to hate and to fear that will slowly dispel those prejudices, and show them the door.
I struggle with the whole ‘gay pride’ thing, actually. I am heterosexual and I was born that way. Genetics, I guess? Others are born gay, lesbian or bisexual. I am not ‘proud’ to be straight. I just am, no thanks to anything I’ve done. Why are people ‘proud’ to be gay, or bi? That’s presumably the way they were born. Should one be proud of being blonde, brunette or redheaded? Blue eyed, green eyed or brown eyed? Sorry, bu the whole ‘pride’ thing is something I find vaguely offensive, and extremely pointless and stupid. I’m old enough to remember when being anything other than straight was illegal. Happily, those days are gone, but like all pendulums, this one has swung too far, and now we are having the ‘gay’ thing rammed down our throats (no pun intended). Can’t we all just move along, accept our differences and be proud and happy to be Australian?
In defence of pendulums, the swing is usually fine.
There are people proud of being red-haired – ranga pride. Should that be forbidden?
The ‘we are one’ nonsense is just that, nonsense, and if I hear it sung on the ABC one more time I’ll vomit.
I’m a straight, mature aged woman so I can’t provide any personal insights, but have always assumed it to be about having the courage to be who you are despite the prejudice and persecution. I reckon that’s a courage to be proud of.
Given your comment though, I wonder if we should be proud to be Australian? For a great many of us, it’s just a matter of chance.
There’s a US university where students wear “Nerd pride” on their shirts. I think the”pride” claim is to say”what I am is nothing to be ashamed of, despite what some think.”
Except that people think nerds are cool because they’re supposed to be smart.
Because of all the people telling them they should be ashamed of it.
A mere five years ago we had to have a plebiscite just so homosexuals could have equal legal rights and even then, two out of every five people said they shouldn’t.
Now the same playbook is being repurposed to attack transgenderism.
Indeed, something straight people cannot understand is that Pride is actually about other LGBTQIA people, not straight people.
Literally every major religion and most political parties and society writ large supports people being straight. No one had a plebiscite to see if you could get married and no one proposes protecting the right of parents to send you to straight conversion therapy. If we lived in a genuinely inclusive and equal society , LGBTQIA pride would not needed. Clearly, we do not live in such a world.
Even before Ian Roberts ‘came out’, it’s hard to recall any problems with the first 3 letters of the tag.
The rest of that now, apparently endless and given a + sign to save breath for the PKs et al on radio – is an entirely different cup of hemlock.
What a load of crap, even in the 2000s people opposed same-sex couples having equal superannuation rights
Your memory must be terrible. The SSM plebiscite was 5 years ago.
And prior to that and continuing since, extreme people of faith have been advocating for a massive roll back of protections for women, LGBTQIA people with disabilty, racial minorities, the elderly etc. The various iterations of their religious privileges bill would have allowed people to work around the workplace and randomly tell gay people they were going to hell., that DV was caused by women not subordinating to their husbands. They even wanted to give doctors the right to refuse to treat gay people, they backed down and changed it to refusing a procedure. Do not underestimate how much these people hate the very existence of gay people, let alone they’re the right to equal rights.
My memory is fine – your comprehension is sadly deficient.
If you cannot recall rampant homophobia in sport prior to Ian Roberts coming out you either never had anything to do with sport or were participating in the homophobic abuse.
You don’t consider the unequal treatment of people by the law because of irrelevant personal details to be a problem ?
Here’s another one for you. Up until 2020, “gay panic” was still a defense to murder in South Australia.
They really don’t. They’re fine with murderers being downgraded to manslaughter when the victim is a gay man.
Leaving aside marriage, the ACL literally defended straight men’s right to murder gay men following a non violent sexual advice and have the murder they committed downgraded to manslaughter. These people literally support straight men murdering gay men. Do not trust them under any circumstances.
There are no out gay men playing in the AFL in 2023.
This might indicate a few problems.
I don’t have a problem with any of this but do have a problem when other people’s right impinge on others. I am specifically concerned about gender self ID and the negative impact this has on women’s sports. In my opinion, people born men, however they now identify should not be playing against women for reasons of safety as well as fairness. It really upsets me when I see people on the podium who are clearly originally male standing where women should stand. Women are pushing back but they still risk backlash when doing so. Let’s keep our eyes open to unintended consequences and save women’s sports.
The main people affected by banning self ID are not trans. They are girls and women who don’t fit gender stereotypes. Girls and women should be able to play sports without being harassed about not being feminine enough.
I think the reality of men ‘identifying as’ increasingly taking the podium from women is the reality, and suggesting non conforming women are the main cohort affected is disengenous. Are you suggesting athletes like Caster Semenya? Caster has a DSD, which is an entirely different conversation altogether.
Trans identifying men who are also gender non conforming should absolutely be able to play sports in the mens or open category without being harassed about not being masculine enough. It’s not for women to make room for them, it’s for men.
that isn’t the reality at all. Girls and women who don’t fit gender stereotypes are already harassed by self-appointed gender police who think they “know” . they’re spectacularly bad at identifying what they call “biological women”
you’re creating a situation where my two sisters, who are gender conforming, could play sports without people investigating their genitalia but me, who has never fit gender stereotypes, would have to prove my sex to any creepy self appointed person just to play weekend soccer. it’s not disingenuous at all. there’s always been people who do not what gender nonconforming women in change rooms and make it as uncomfortable as possible.
Why do you think girls with short hair and broad shoulders should be forced to use the men’s room?
I have short hair, broad shoulders and a flat chest and I’ve never been challenged in a women’s change room, however there are an increasing number of examples of men with a full set of tackle standing on the women’s podium. Do you play weekend soccer and has that happened to you, or is it a hypothetical?
Then you must live in an alternative world because it frequently happens to me and my cisgender friends, many of whom need a chaperone to use the toilets safely.
The unintended consequences of what you propose is empowering men to demand gender nonconforming girls prove they are girls.
Actually it is women and girls asking questions about whether transwomen should competing in categories intended for women and girls. Even a very short look around the photos of transwomen on podiums show the unfairness. This not about gender non conforming girls at all. No one is suggesting girls with short hair and broad shoulders should use the men’s room.
Nope. There has always been a cohort of people that hate girls and women that are not feminine enough and encourage men to harass us everytime they use the women’s toilets. Sorry but you can’t inspect my genitals just because i don’t meet your standards of femininity
I avoid women’s spaces because there’s an expectation that I must strip to be accepted. Coogee Ladies baths are like that. If you’re not feminine enough you’re gawked at until you strip.
Gender nonconforming girls are the ones who are harassed by toilet police, the vast majority of people they go after are not men or trans women.
Great, more blokes competing against the girls…
more creepy blokes trying to investigate kids genitals, no thanks
Yeah but nah.
https://bjsm.bmj.com/content/early/2023/02/09/bjsports-2022-105916?rss=1
And I’m not going to be respecting the moral agency of homophobes.
Yea, I saw that study – disappointing result – but my cite was a meta-analysis = stronger evidence. The political POV, while emotionally understandable, is regrettable because it’s incompatible with choosing democracy over violence to achieve social change. And violence is what results when u view those who disagree with you as unworthy of respect/deserving of contempt (= dehumanize them) Peaceful evolution is hard, that’s why as humans we often fail at it, but remaining in contact with other people’s basic humanity (and they with yours) is essential. Thanks for reading and taking the time to comment.
Indeed, so many people being out of the closet has really improved things. It is much harder to openly dehumanise someone when you have to look them in the eye and tell them you support things like gay panic defence to murder, discrimination in employment housing etc.
What do you mean by “respecting”? I don’t respect their views and I think being fine with being a human billboard for alcohol and gambling but not for LGBTQIA rights is absurd , hypocritical and actually contrary to fundamentals of Jesus’ teachings. My experience with aggressive Christians in the workplace is that they’re highly selective as to which teachings they believe should trump other people’s right to safe work places and they’re all very conveniently either homophobic or transphobic. Almost as if it’s more to do with prejudices than faith.