Commentary on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender issues in sport from a long-time educator and advocate for social justice in sports. I am also author of Strong Women, Deep Closets: Lesbians and Homophobia in Sport. The opinions expressed in this blog are solely mine and do not necessarily reflect those of any organization with which I am affiliated.
Thursday, May 31, 2012
Nike Hosts LGBT Sports Summit
I am very proud to be a part of a first ever event - A Summit on LGBT sports hosted by Nike. Read the blog that Helen Carroll of NCLR, Cyd Zeigler of Outsports and I wrote about this event here.
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
Update on Lesbian Golf Coach’s Lawsuit Against the University of Minnesota
In December, 2010 I blogged about a lawsuit filed by Katie
Brenny, a lesbian golf coach at the University of Minnesota who alleged that
she was discriminated against on the basis of her sexual orientation. Included in the lawsuit were charges against
the Director of Golf at the time, John Harris.
The Minnesota Court of Appeals has dismissed the charges against Harris,
who is no longer at the U. Brenny's
lawsuit also includes charges of discrimination against the Board of Regents,
alleging violations of the Minnesota Human Rights Act, and one count against both
the university and Harris, alleging that they misrepresented the job to her in
violation of Minnesota law. These part of the lawsuit are still active. Brenny’s lawyer minimized the importance of
this dismissal since Harris’s actions will be examined by the court as part of
the lawsuit that is still active. More
on this as it unfolds.
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Coaching and Preaching: When the Football Field Becomes A Church
Ron
Brown, an assistant football coach at the University of Nebraska, has been on
the public hot seat since he spoke against a proposed Omaha city ordinance
banning discrimination based on sexual orientation and gender identity. In his testimony, Brown listed his address as
Memorial Stadium and lectured the city council about their lack of adherence to
Biblical principles and the dangers of protecting people that he believes God
says are an abomination. Brown has
received lots of media criticism for his public rant and has prompted several
LGBT sports advocates and mainstream sports commentators to call for his
firing. In response to criticism, Brown self-righteously proclaimed that it
would be an honor to be fired for his religious principles.
First,
is there any question in anyone’s mind whether anyone would give a rat’s patoot
what Ron Brown thinks if he were not a University of Nebraska football coach? Is there anyone who seriously believes that
Ron Brown is not using his position as a football coach as a platform to
publicly express his personal beliefs?
The
question is not whether Ron Brown has a right hold and to express his personal religious
and political views. Of course he does. Ron Brown and others who try to turn
this into an issue of religious discrimination are completely missing the point
here. The issues at the heart of this
controversy are twofold: One, where do we
draw the line when a public employee, such as a football coach at a state
university, holds personal views that are in conflict with the policies of the
public institution where he is employed. Two, what are the expectations with
regard to a public employee’s expression of personal religious beliefs in her
or his professional role.
The
University of Nebraska has a non-discrimination policy that includes sexual
orientation. Public school employees,
which Ron Brown is as a coach at a public university, are subject to the
Establishment Clause of the First Amendment of the US Constitution meaning that
as a public employee he is required to be neutral with regard to religion in
the carrying out of his professional duties.
The university President has publicly distanced himself and the
university from Brown’s statements while acknowledging Brown’s right as a
private citizen to express his views as he chooses. Fair enough, but that is
not what is going on here.
It
seems there is some confusion at Nebraska about what “religious neutrality”
means: Ron Brown’s outgoing voice message on his university office phone
includes a liberal dose of his religious beliefs. He listed the university
football stadium as his home address when he spoke before the Omaha city
council. His bio on the Huskers football
web site includes the following:
“Off
the field, Brown and former Husker Stan Parker are co-founders and co-directors
of a statewide Christian ministry called Mission Nebraska. This ministry
stewards MY BRIDGE RADIO, which consists of numerous Christian radio stations
and translators across Nebraska. Mission Nebraska also facilitates a statewide
Christian endeavor called FreedMen, which challenges and inspires men and boys
to take a strong courageous Christian stand in the public square. The
54-year-old Brown spent the four years prior to his return to coaching serving
as the Nebraska State Director of the Fellowship of Christian Athletes. While
he relinquished that duty to return to the Cornhuskers, he continues as a
regular columnist for FCA's National Magazine "Sharing the Victory."
Through Mission Nebraska, Brown also hosts a weekly statewide cable TV show
called "Truth Vision", along with daily radio spots…He has authored
several books on Christian character and growth. He is an outspoken advocate on
many issues, including adoption, abstinence and drug and alcohol education,
race relations and anti-pornography, to name a few.”
Brown
freely acknowledges that he routinely sprinkles in Biblical references in his
coaching and conversations with his players. He claims that his religious talk
does not bother his athletes. Really? How would he know? What does he expect them to
say to their coach, someone who has power over their access to playing time? What about the Jews or Muslims or atheists on
his team, how do they feel about his open promotion of Christianity on the
football field? How free do they feel to
challenge the coach?
Brown
is also now vowing that he would not discriminate against a gay player on the
football team despite his opposition to homosexuality and laws that protect
them from discrimination. Am I missing
something? He publicly condemns anti-discrimination laws, yet he expects us to
believe he would have no problem coaching a gay player?
This
is not the first time Ron Brown has been accused of violating his position as a
prominent public employee. He has also come
under fire in the past from the American Civil Liberties Union for promoting
Christianity in speeches at public schools. Ron Brown is not the first and
certainly won’t be the last coach to be so public about his private religious
views. Coaches mixing religion and
sports in public educational institutions is a common practice despite the
constitutional principle of separation of church and state. Athletes have long
tolerated coach-led team prayers; team prayer breakfasts; coaches urging athletes
to attend Bible studies; coaches using Biblical quotes mixed in with the
motivational speeches; unlimited access of sports ministries, like the
Fellowship of Christian Athletes, to athletes on school teams; as well as
outright discrimination against or condemnation of lesbian and gay coaches and
athletes – all in the guise of “saving” souls.
Ron
Brown is a fervent Christian who believes he and others who believe exactly
what he does have a direct line to God.
He has somehow confused the football field with a church and his
position as a coach with that of a pastor. The problem is that we are wasting too much
outrage on Ron Brown for this. We should
be spending a lot more attention focused on the head football coach and the
university president at the University of Nebraska. The head coach’s silence and the university
president’s bland assurances that Ron Brown has a right to his personal views
even if the university does not agree with them ignore the blatant disregard
for federally mandated expectations that Ron Brown’s actions exemplify.
Brown
was mixing Cornhusker football and Christianity in clear violation of his
obligations as a public employee before he decided to testify against city
ordinances protecting LGBT people from discrimination. The evidence is there on his office phone
voice message, in this coaching bio, in his own acknowledgment of his use of
Biblical quotes in coaching. What more
do Nebraska officials need? What does it
take for them to demand that their employees, including assistant football
coaches, adhere to the requirements and expectations of religious neutrality? Clearly, if the rights of students of all
religious and all sexual orientations are to be protected in public schools,
administrators need to make clear what is expected and take action if any
employee violates the principle that every student, athlete or not, has the
right to attend a public school free of religious influence from their
professors and their coaches.
Other
Christian coaches may believe homosexuality is a sin, but also believe that
everyone on their team should be treated with respect. They live their faith, but they do not shove
it in the faces of their athletes. They do not advocate against legal
protection for those they see as sinners or use their position as coaches as a
pulpit from which to preach their religious beliefs. They live their faith,
especially the part about treating others with love and respect, without
proselytizing.
Ron
Brown does not understand this distinction and his employers have failed to
insist that, in order to abide by the law, he must.
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
Measuring LGBT Equality in Sports
Yesterday Campus Pride launched their Out To Play Project, an initiative focused on fostering LGBT equality in collegiate sports, with their first ever list of “The Best of the Best” college athletic programs that are “LGBT friendly.” The schools included on this inaugural list are Bates College, Bowdoin College, Bucknell University, Columbia University, Indiana University, Ithaca College, Kennesaw State University, New York University, Stanford University and Whitman College.
The cool part is that I’ve already seen press releases from several of these schools announcing their inclusion on the list and using it as a point of pride, complete with supportive quotes from athletic directors and student-athletes. Though the criteria for inclusion on this list is not completely clear, Campus Pride does ask for information about “policies, programs and practices” as well as for instances of individual coaches, athletes and teams exemplifying the goal of being LGBT-friendly. Campus Pride is already making plans for their next list and invites submissions of candidates for future lists of the best of the best.
In a similar call for evaluating LGBT friendly sports programs, Hudson Taylor recently wrote a column for the Huffington Post calling for an Athletic Equality Index for professional sports teams based on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index.
The time is right for school and professional sports programs to assess the climate for LGBT people. Where once the results of such efforts would have yielded uniformly bad news highlighting hostility and discrimination in athletics, we can now celebrate schools like the ones included on the Campus Pride Out To Play Project list. Some good things are happening, not just in these schools, but in others across the US as well. It is a great idea to reward these athletic programs and to help set a standard for other school athletic programs that are not so LGBT-friendly.
The challenge will be to identify some measurable criteria that are based in athletic department policy, practice and programming rather than on individual team, coach or athlete actions. My experience is that, in any given school, the range of LGBT-friendliness is quite broad. While some teams are viewed by the athletes in that school as open and welcoming to LGBT students and coaches, others at the same school are viewed as decidedly hostile to LGBT people. We cannot leave the responsibility for creating and maintaining an inclusive, safe and respectful athletic climate up to individual teams, coaches and athletes.
Coaches come and go as do athletes and LGBT friendliness can come and go with them. Real change, substantive change that is sustained even with the transience of coaches and athletes, must take place at the departmental level. Coaches and athletes who come into an athletic program need to know departmental expectations for diversity and inclusion for which they are responsible. That is how real change can be sustained.
Athletic administrators need to take a stronger leadership role in making sure that everyone in the athletic department is aware of and responsible for maintaining an LGBT-friendly climate as well as for making explicit what that means in every day practice.
Campus Pride’s Out To Play Project and the “Best of the Best list is a great start toward reaching this goal.
The cool part is that I’ve already seen press releases from several of these schools announcing their inclusion on the list and using it as a point of pride, complete with supportive quotes from athletic directors and student-athletes. Though the criteria for inclusion on this list is not completely clear, Campus Pride does ask for information about “policies, programs and practices” as well as for instances of individual coaches, athletes and teams exemplifying the goal of being LGBT-friendly. Campus Pride is already making plans for their next list and invites submissions of candidates for future lists of the best of the best.
In a similar call for evaluating LGBT friendly sports programs, Hudson Taylor recently wrote a column for the Huffington Post calling for an Athletic Equality Index for professional sports teams based on the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index.
The time is right for school and professional sports programs to assess the climate for LGBT people. Where once the results of such efforts would have yielded uniformly bad news highlighting hostility and discrimination in athletics, we can now celebrate schools like the ones included on the Campus Pride Out To Play Project list. Some good things are happening, not just in these schools, but in others across the US as well. It is a great idea to reward these athletic programs and to help set a standard for other school athletic programs that are not so LGBT-friendly.
The challenge will be to identify some measurable criteria that are based in athletic department policy, practice and programming rather than on individual team, coach or athlete actions. My experience is that, in any given school, the range of LGBT-friendliness is quite broad. While some teams are viewed by the athletes in that school as open and welcoming to LGBT students and coaches, others at the same school are viewed as decidedly hostile to LGBT people. We cannot leave the responsibility for creating and maintaining an inclusive, safe and respectful athletic climate up to individual teams, coaches and athletes.
Coaches come and go as do athletes and LGBT friendliness can come and go with them. Real change, substantive change that is sustained even with the transience of coaches and athletes, must take place at the departmental level. Coaches and athletes who come into an athletic program need to know departmental expectations for diversity and inclusion for which they are responsible. That is how real change can be sustained.
Athletic administrators need to take a stronger leadership role in making sure that everyone in the athletic department is aware of and responsible for maintaining an LGBT-friendly climate as well as for making explicit what that means in every day practice.
Campus Pride’s Out To Play Project and the “Best of the Best list is a great start toward reaching this goal.