Funding warning for sports governing bodies under new gender diversity code. And why aren’t 50% of lorry drivers female?

More government bullying to privilege women unworthy of senior positions on the grounds of merit. An extract:

Sporting governing bodies must bring in more women or lose public funding, UK Sport and Sport England have warned.

Under the new ‘Code for Sports Governance’, organisations must adhere to “gold standards” of transparency, accountability and financial integrity.

The code sets out a target of at least 30% gender diversity on boards.

“If sport wants to be publicly funded, it must reflect the public it serves,” said the chief executive of Women in Sport, Ruth Holdaway.

She said the code sent that message “loud and clear”…

“It is vital that our domestic sports bodies and organisations uphold the very highest standards of governance and lead the world in this area,” sports minister Tracey Crouch said.

What horrendous passive-aggressive women these are. They always have noble-sounding justifications for the shameless privileging of women, at men’s expense. Later in the piece:

The Football Association is among the many recipients and will receive £30m from Sport England during the period 2013-2017.

However, the sports minister warned the FA earlier this year that it would be stripped of further funding unless it made changes to its governance.

The FA has just one woman on its board, independent non-executive director Dame Heather Rabbatts, who has been left “frustrated” and “disappointed” at its failure to implement reform.

The first piece on our YouTube video channel is here. It dates from January 2013, the month before we launched J4MB. I was on there representing Campaign for Merit in Business on the issue of gender diversity on corporate boards. The interviewer was Jo Coburn, and her guest for the whole programme was the aforementioned Heather Rabbatts, then as now a non-executive director of the FA. At 10:00, in response to Rabbatts’s blithering on about the importance of diversity on boards, I said this:

We always have cherry-picking. We always have, “50% of the population are women, so why aren’t 50% of FTSE100 board directors women?” I don’t see anyone campaigning for 50% of lorry drivers to be women!

Ms Coburn invited Ms Rabbatts to respond. Ms Rabbatts dealt with the question as best she could – not very well, it turned out, as she casually admitted the key issue of ‘more women on boards’ was women taking power from men. As we were leaving the studio she hissed at me, “That lorry driver question was a low blow, Mike!” I cheerily replied, “Thanks – I’ve got hundreds of ’em!” She glared at me, then scurried off with an anxious-looking minion.

If everyone who read this gave us just £1 – or even better, £1 monthly – we could change the world. Click here to make a difference. Thanks.

About Mike Buchanan

I'm a men's human rights advocate, writer, and publisher. My primary focus is leading the political party I launched in 2013, Justice for Men & Boys (and the women who love them). I still work actively on two campaigns I launched in early 2012, Campaign for Merit in Business and the Anti-Feminism League. In 2014 I launched The Alternative Sexism Project, aiming to raise public understanding that the sexism faced by men and boys has far more grievous consequences than the sexism faced by women and girls.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Funding warning for sports governing bodies under new gender diversity code. And why aren’t 50% of lorry drivers female?

  1. MacOisdealbh says:

    It’s all about giving women more and more and more, it’s not about them earning it. Our politicians are still not listening. My bet is that BREXIT was about much more than immigration and tyranny from Europe and the Trump phenomenon is a lot more than anti-HRC.. Fundamentally it’s about the choices those politicians have and are making, and this gender politics garbage is large part of the problem. If they don’t start listening soon the message will start being sent in more ways than just the ballot box.

  2. sanity2014 says:

    The mere fact they cherry-pick specific fields only for gender equality is a living proof that all they are looking for is advantaging women for cozy positions only, even without merit.
    Why isn’t there a drive to have 50% of women in other professions then? Like fire dept., trucking, mining, forestry, etc…
    I have never seen a single attempt to make those types of professions gender equal.
    And I think that says it all.

    • There was the recent piece on mining, but we can be sure women will again cherry-pick, and not do the backbreaking dangerous work ‘at the coal face’. No, they’ll go into admin, managing teams in air-conditioned offices…

  3. cheannaich says:

    Well, such a move is only to be expected. On the Sport England website,https://www.sportengland.org/our-work/women/, we have a list of the ways to encourage women to take up sports. This focus comes with a price tag of several millions of pounds. The percentage difference, according to the same website, between men and women playing sports is 40.7% men and 31.7% women of a total of 15.7 million participants.
    So, a single figure difference results in government action in sport whereas in education, suicide, lifespan etc the government shows a complete lack of empathy to the disadvantaged gender.
    is it me? or is Sport England stuffed full of pension polishing aparatchiks?

  4. epistemol says:

    On taking ‘public money’ i.e.
    stolen from the public.

    ‘He who sups with the devil must need a long spoon’.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s