Bathroom Breaks
April 29, 2016
Restrooms and locker rooms have become the front line of the latest civil rights battle in America, with collateral damage to school sports possible.
The laws of the land (local, state and federal) are presently conflicting and unclear; but ultimately, they are likely to be liberally construed. In the meantime, it will be discouraging to observe litigation that pits one person’s rights to access against another person’s right of privacy.
What we advocate is a safe and supportive environment for all students, with as many decisions as possible made at the most local level possible where resources can be best assessed and allocated.
We take no political or religious position; we are on the side of students, facilitating opportunities for gender questioning or confirming students while promoting a fair and level playing field in competitive athletics for all students.
To preserve opportunities for females and consistent with state and federal statutes and a long history of case law, Michigan High School Athletic Association rules do not allow boys on girls teams in MHSAA postseason tournaments. Therefore, the only time the MHSAA is directly involved is when a male student is transitioning to female and desires to play on an interscholastic team designated only for females in MHSAA tournaments. We decide about eligibility only; local schools make the necessary accommodations.
If a student’s gender preference of male is disputed by facts, that student may not be allowed on tournament teams designated for females only. Each decision is made on a case-by-case basis, balancing the objectives of promoting both opportunity and fair play.
Correctable Error?
May 30, 2017
A decade has passed since the court-ordered change in several sports seasons for Michigan high schools. Ten years has brought resignation more than satisfaction; and yet there remains hope in some places that the new status quo is not permanent, at least for those sports seasons changes that were and are seen by many people as collateral damage in a fight over seasons for girls basketball and volleyball.
Actually, the lawsuit sought to place all girls seasons in the same seasons as boys, like college schedules. The federal court did not require simultaneous scheduling; but the court did bring the intercollegiate mindset to the case. It determined, regardless of other facts, that the intercollegiate season was the “advantageous” season for high school sports. And the principle upon which it approved the compliance plan for high school sports in Michigan was that if all the seasons were not simultaneous for boys and girls, then there should be rough equality in the number of boys and girls assigned to “disadvantageous” seasons.
So, for example, from the federal court’s perspective, fall is the advantageous season for soccer, winter for swimming & diving, and spring for tennis. As for golf, the court opined that, even though it’s not the season of the NCAA championships, maybe fall was the better season. The court began with tortured logic and ended with hypocrisy.
As a result, in the Lower Peninsula, regardless of the preferences of the people involved, girls and boys had to switch seasons in two sports to even up the number of boys seasons and girls seasons in what the court had determined were disadvantageous. Schools thought the switch of golf and tennis for the genders was less injurious than switching soccer and swimming.
In the Upper Peninsula, because swimming and golf are combined for the genders in the winter and spring, respectively, the court’s option was to switch boys and girls seasons for either soccer or tennis. The schools chose soccer as the least disruptive change.
As people count the damaging effects and think about challenging the court-ordered placements a decade later, they must understand the court was looking for balance, for having the genders share the burden of participating in disadvantageous seasons. Moving Lower Peninsula boys golf to join girls in the fall and/or switching Lower Peninsula boys and girls tennis back to what was preferred and in place before judicial interference would recreate the imbalance the federal court conjured up and sought to remedy.
Those of us involved see many advantages to conducting fall golf for both genders in the Lower Peninsula and switching Lower Peninsula tennis seasons for boys and girls, no matter when colleges schedule those sports or how impractical the court’s logic and how inconsistently it was applied. Nevertheless, correcting the court’s errors could be both contentious and costly.