r/parkrun • u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 • 1d ago
Something to think about
Given some of the reactions to what I wrote here I think it’s worth reflecting on this.
17
6
u/marcbeightsix 250 1d ago
Was there a need to make a second post about it? You feel strongly about it, that’s good. But no need to make a new post to reiterate the same point.
-4
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
Well yes, they’re different points. My post earlier today was a call to action to help LGBTQ+ feel more welcome and safe at patkrun. This post is more general in nature, but as with the comments to both this post and my other it seems the point has been lost, or that a lot of people here on this reddit simply prefer the wolves
6
u/SameOldSong4Ever 1d ago
Wolves are just as welcome at Parkruns as sheep, just as long as they don't eat any sheep at a Parkrun.
The only thing you should get excluded from a Parkrun for is using it as a platform to promote your campaign.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
OK, but there are a lot of people who seem offended at the idea of making the LGBTQ+ community feel welcome. We need the bigots to keep their bigotry to themselves if we want parkrun to stay inclusive. We do this by showing that we stand with their targets and not with them
6
u/littlebigcat 1d ago
It’s a Parkrun no one is checking what your sexual orientation is.
1
u/Glittering_Hope1114 17h ago
I mean i agree that its a mad thing for people to be checking on and focusing on. But well they are. Whether you like it or not the people with the most money do care strongly. It used to be that nobody cares who you are for other hobbies either. Rowling threatened to sue and they kicked all trans people out.
Meaning ultimately people actually do care either park run has to do whatever satisfies the anti trans groups and allow them to design and implement policy or you tell them no and defend it as is which will result in lawsuits and some very powerful people getting involved. There really is no neutral position here I am afraid.
1
u/Glittering_Hope1114 17h ago
I mean my MP was literally ranting about it and going on about how park run is not fair on short men as well. Like sure its deranged but these are people with power and connections. Choosing to ignore the situation will not satisfy them I am afraid. It never does.
3
u/TakenIsUsernameThis 1d ago
Don't confuse parkrunners being vocal about not wanting to see it politicised with parkrunners being offended by your specific campaigning.
1
u/marcbeightsix 250 1d ago
By your own original post you said that they’re creating a new “club” and asking people to join it. The moment they will campaign out loud about it and making people feel unwelcome then run directors and event directors have things that they are meant to do and follow.
There are bigots and dickheads in every part of life, you will be surrounded by them every day. You can turn up in whatever clothing or flags you want, and they can too. Doesn’t mean you should be forcing others to do so or looking down on others if they don’t.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
OK, but do you think knowing there is a transphobic running club and that they might have members at your local parkrun is going to help LGBTQ+ people turn up?
If LGBTQ+ people see people like me standing up for them vocally, do you think that is going to help LGBTQ+ people turn up?
If there are runners in the tranaphobe club, who have club clothing on, will that make LGBTQ+ people feel more or less welcome and likely to come back?
If there are also people wearing LGBTQ+ positive clothing will that make LGBTQ+ people feel more or less welcome and likely to come back?
5
u/marcbeightsix 250 1d ago
I could phrase all your questions in completely the opposite way.
“Do you think knowing there is a queer running club and that they might have members at your local parkrun is going to make them want to turn up?”
I’m being facetious on purpose here, but the point is that parkrun advertises itself as being welcome to everyone. And sadly if that is the case then it has to include bigots and morons.
I’m absolutely fine with people wearing positive LGBTQ+ clothing, doesn’t mean I should be told to do so. I don’t agree with the bigots, but I do accept that they have as much right to be there, exist, and wear clothing that says the name of their running club - which in itself isn’t offensive. The moment they start campaigning outwardly at a parkrun is the moment it should be stopped.
Parkrun is welcome to all, this is how it is promoted, and this is the thing I think most people wanting to come to parkrun will see - not the names of running clubs.
-2
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
You’ve missed the point. I’m not stopping bigots turning up, but the very fact that they’re organising a running club based on transphobia is going to be off putting to the LGBTQ+ community. Read the image above and actually see what it says. You can’t be fully inclusive - I would prefer the bigots to be uncomfortable than their victims
6
u/marcbeightsix 250 1d ago
I’m unsure how I’ve missed the point. Happy for you to explain it to me in more detail. Your original post was actively trying to get people to support the LGBTQ+ community by wearing some sort of pride clothing because another group of people wanted to also wear clothing which supported what they believed in. You essentially are making the same point.
Let’s get this straight, I disagree with these bigots and I would prefer they didn’t come to parkrun, but I accept that there will be such people at parkrun. If they spoke to me or campaigned at me then I would shun them and tell them I disagree. But that doesn’t mean that I’m going to turn up to parkrun with a pride flag.
I have also read the image in this post. I agree with the original response to it in this thread - that sheep and wolves can coexist until the wolves start eating the sheep. You said it yourself, you’d prefer for one group of people to feel uncomfortable over another. That in itself isn’t welcoming to everyone…so whatever point you’re trying to make…is fairly mute now.
-1
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
I don’t think you understand how the presence of some people will put other people off attending. By not speaking out or publicly showing support for the LGBTQ+ community we are making for a more hostile environment for them even if the bigots don’t openly express their bigotry at parkrun. Imagine if it was known the KKK turned up at a parkrun out of uniform but kept their racism to themselves and no one said or did anything about it, do you think that would encourage non-white people to turn up or stay away?
5
u/marcbeightsix 250 1d ago
Of course I understand it. I would prefer they wouldn’t show up. But I can’t stop them attending parkrun. What you’re suggesting to happen could make the bigots potentially more likely to turn up than not.
As for your KKK example, I’m sure there are plenty of racist people at parkrun. Doesn’t mean I agree with it and if they started being racist at parkrun then I would call it out and it doesn’t mean that parkrun is a haven for racists. Just like it isn’t a haven for the bigots to air their views.
2
u/GenericUserName437 1d ago
What’s transphobic about campaigning for Women’s rights? What’s transphobic about saying that there should be single sex spaces (toilets/hospital wards/rape crisis centres/prisons) in which the criteria for entry is the Supreme Court’s definition of Woman (biological female). What’s transphobic about that?
-1
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
Transphobes aren’t campaigning for womens right though, just look at JKR’s friends who want to remove health care from women, cis or trans. Also, you need only look at the attacks on cis women who don’t conform to hetero-normative beauty standards to see that none of this is to do with women’s rights. “Biological sex” is also meaningless, there isn’t a definition of biological sex that neatly divides all cis people into male and female. The law does not match reality
3
u/GenericUserName437 1d ago
JK Rowling personally funded a single sex rape crisis support centre in Scotland to offer biological women something that was not available anywhere else in Scotland. That’s not removing health care from women, it’s funding it for them. Meanwhile services continue to be available for transwomen. None of those have closed. So how are JK Rowlings actions transphobic?
Biological sex is not meaningless, it’s literally a definition in law that came directly from the Supreme Court.
If you want to change the law then change it, through a political campaign and an Act of Parliament.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
OK, what does biological sex mean? Because there isn’t a definition that enconpasses all cis men and women into two neat groups.
Also, two things can be true. JKR can fund a rape crisis centre and also be friends with bigots who want to remove access to health care for women - watch the video I linked to earlier. And then you can watch this about how JKR is transphobic
2
u/GenericUserName437 1d ago
If you are struggling to know what biological sex means, you need to read the Supreme Court’s ruling. They seem to have a pretty decent understanding of it.
Still haven’t explained how campaigning for single sex provision of sporting categories/hospital wards/prisons is transphobic?
What it transphobic when Isla Bryson (convicted rapist) who identifies as a woman was moved out of a woman’s prison?
1
u/Miserable_Election33 1d ago
Well biological sex is actually a bit more complicated than that. We now know that XX and XY is more a matter of correlation than causation and a pretty rough correlation sometimes.
Take me. I'm intersex. I was assigned male at birth based on my genitals, and that's what's on my birth cert. I also have an ovary and a uterus, and mostly I'm taken for a woman, but legally I'm a man and I have no legal right to change my birth certificate.
Personally, I identify as non binary. I don't feel male or female, but the UK government doesn't recognise that, I have to be one of the other. In the slightly longer term I believe that the Supreme Court ruling will change. It often takes the law a little while to catch up with science.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
Well you’re struggling just as much as you haven’t been able to define it, and that is because there isn’t a definition that neatly fits all cis men and women into male and female. Here, this.jpeg) might help you see the complexity of it all.
The campaigning isn’t about single sex space though, is it? It’s about excluding trans people, and also leads to attacks on people that aren’t suitably masculine or feminine. On top of that, forcing someone that looks like this to use the women’s toilets is ridiculous
→ More replies (0)
2
u/SyllabubRadiant8876 1d ago
It's well known that people from minority or disadvantaged groups can be reluctant to participate in activities if they are not sure how inclusive the environment will be. Any proactive show of support to demonstrate inclusivity should go some way towards helping with this, particularly when there are other vocal groups whose views can make them feel unwelcome. Having said that, I think there is definitely an argument that tackling highly emotive to pics head-on can risk escalating conflict and be counter-productive, particularly in an age of "culture wars". It's a tough dilemma these days - how to make people feel welcome in theoretically inclusive spaces, where others' actions are making them feel unwelcome, without making the situation even worse.
2
u/FyrnEito 22h ago
Something you seem to be missing across your various posts is that to them, you're the wolf. Or the other negative examples. To them, you are alienating women and also making them feel unwelcome. And allowing you to get your way is hurting them and their ability to feel included and welcome at ParkRun.
For absolute clarity here - I'm not saying that's true, or even valid. For what it's worth, I personally don't agree with it. I'm saying it's their position. Yes, I'm aware some people will have stopped reading after the first paragraph and are currently downvoting me. Alas.
The concept is important because it brings up the question - who decides who is the wolf and who is the sheep? If you're making the rules, and you can't be fair to everyone, who do you choose to be fair to and how? ParkRun is in a spot where it has to delicately balance a very complicated social issue. Especially as a charity who relies on public funding.
Both sides think they're the good guys, that the other side are evil monsters who hate the vulnerable, weaponise their social status, and must be stopped at all costs; and that everyone in the middle must take their stance or they're also enabling evil. 98% of the people in the middle just want to turn up and do their run and go home. It's not that they don't care about the issues, it's just that in most cases they don't think there's a necessity for it at ParkRun.
That's why the picture misses the mark, and why your last post was poorly received. It's not that you're necessarily wrong, it's that you're so certain you are absolutely right and pure, and people who disagree with you (or even just won't take your side) are wrong and bad, that it's hard for you to understand the actual issue at hand or what is required to maintain an actual inclusive event like ParkRun in the first place.
AFAIK ParkRun does have equality training for RDs and there are processes in place. So if you actually see any bigotry actually happening, it's important to let them know. But beliefs are much harder to police. And in many cases shouldn't be policed in a fair and democratic society.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 20h ago
I do appreciate that take, but I would prefer parkrun to feel more alienating to bigots (not just transphobes, but homophobes, racists and so on) and less alienating to their targets. Transphobes have publicly stated and are campaigning for people to join their transphobic running club. This will alienate the LGBTQ+ community unless we publicly show that this is not acceptable. It is a privilege to be able to ignore this all and just turn up for your run and go home. The bigotry won’t stop at trans people, the well funded transphobic organisations are also out to take away womens access to reproductive health. “First they came for…” and so on
3
3
u/Strange-Dentist8162 1d ago
Keep all politics away from parkrun please.
-8
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
Oh, my sweet summer child
7
u/Strange-Dentist8162 1d ago
You must be an insufferable person. I am eternally grateful that I will never meet you
2
u/TakenIsUsernameThis 1d ago
That's a really toxic response.
1
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 1d ago
In what way is it toxic? It’s incredibly naive to think that politics and parkrun are seperate
3
u/__R3v3nant__ 19h ago
I don't see how not wanting the discussion of extremely charged topics at a weekly 5k fun run is bad.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 18h ago
Because transphobes are, right now, targeting parkrun. Ignoring the discussion doesn’t stop it, ignoring it is actively helpful to the bigots.
2
u/__R3v3nant__ 18h ago
I'm not the most avid parkrunner but based on what everyone else is saying, I think it's an issue that (at least for now) is a bit blown out of proprtion
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 18h ago
Gender, age ans course records got removed because of transphobes. They are well funded and very litigious, we ignore them at our peril
2
u/TakenIsUsernameThis 18h ago
Ignoring the very tiny number of transphobes in parkrun is the best strategy. Amplifying the issue in the way you are doing will just attract the attention of more transphobes and make it a big political issue.
You are not helping, you are harming.
0
u/TheLifeCapoeira v25 18h ago
That’s not what members of the LGBTQ+ community have been telling me. I have had a lot of messages of thanks and appreciation for my posts
1
1
u/liquindian 1d ago
I don't think people who say "keep politics out of parkrun" realise that the politics are already here, and it has the potential to be an existential threat to parkrun.
Transphobes have deep pockets and are very litigious. We can see their "victories" with organisations like girl guides and the women's institute, who were forced to change policies as a result of pressure. But those have membership processes beyond signing up online and downloading a barcode.
Two years ago there were calls to strip parkrun of any public funding because of this issue. According to the charity's annual report, this is a substantial chunk of their income. A bigger chunk comes from corporate sponsors, and they may not want to be a part of any controversy. Parkrun is a charity made possible by an army of volunteers but it's not free. It spent over £5m on "event-related activities" last year. If the charity's income is affected it might have no option but to take note.
So what are the options for parkrun to avoid being slapped with a lawsuit or protests that could affect its income? Any kind of way to prove your identity is out of the question, too cumbersome, too expensive. Maybe they just get rid of the gender categories? Not so fast, because that puts everyone into one category, and it's the position of these groups is that the law is that "If a sport is sex-affected then it follows that it is not fair...for men and women to compete against each other". They're also clear that the amateur nature of a sport does not matter. So a big list of everyone who competed and their times, with no categories, would not meet their demands.
Would the removal of all times from the website, and a private notification of your time work? Maybe, I'm not a lawyer. Maybe it would have to be tested in court. But would parkrun, the charity, be willing to stand up to legal threats? The closest example we have is France, where there are no parkruns because of the risk of legal liabilities. So I doubt it.
1
20
u/mankytoes 1d ago
Parkrun relies on it being a free event open to everyone. I don't think we really have a choice but to make it open to everyone. If someone tries to exclude me I'd be tempted to just say "fine, I'll just coincidentally choose to run in this park at 9am".
Ignoring the morality of the trans issue, there is no practical way of excluding trans people from a free event like parkrun, or forcing them to use their sex instead of their gender.
Really the choice is be inclusive, or shut the whole thing down.