Bill Pribis of Concord is a former lawyer and a current English teacher.

I have been following the events surrounding the recent soccer game at Bow High School which included a transgender player from Plymouth.

For the record, I have no problem with transgender students playing sports consistent with their identity. But I don’t have a dog in that hunt and I really don’t have strong feelings about the issue. I am happy to let the democratic process play out as to how schools are required to handle the matter. And if that process creates a result that violates anyone’s constitutional or other rights then I assume a court will play its role as a check on the legislature and any unjust law that comes from that body.

That is how our system is supposed to work. And that is how it seems to be working in the case of the transgender student from Plymouth.

But what we all should have strong feelings about is protecting students. We should have strong feelings about putting their interests and well-being ahead of our need to express our political beliefs at a particular place and time. We should have strong feelings about using the concept of “freedom of speech” as a tool to intimidate children.

According to the Monitor’s Oct. 1 article, the “protesters” at the Bow High School soccer game claim they wore pink armbands “to silently support our daughters and their right to fair competition.” Those armbands displayed symbols for the female chromosome. Self-serving, after-the-fact characterizations aside, a reasonable person could conclude that the message these adult protesters intended to send, and were in fact sending, to all who were present at the game (including the players) is this: If you are a trangender child, we do not want you playing in this game. You are different from the other players. You don’t belong on our field with your peers. You should be excluded from this competition.

In most situations, I would agree with the protesters’ right to express their disagreement with transgender girls participating in girls’ sports. However, they were not expressing their disagreement on social media, in a letter to the editor, or in an email to an elected official. They were not staging a protest at the State House or at the Bow superintendent’s office. They chose to display their message of exclusion at a soccer game where a single transgender child was playing. A transgender child who had fought for, and won, the legal right to play in that game.

Imagine a school administrator. Someone comes to their school and expresses a political viewpoint that advocates for the exclusion of a group of students. However, in the case of the administrator’s particular school, that political viewpoint would only apply to one single, particular student. The message tells the student that they don’t belong in that school, even though they have every legal right to be there. The message is displayed in a manner that is plainly visible to the student. What does the administrator do? Do they allow the message to continue under the guise of “free speech?” Or do they take the steps necessary to protect that student?

Article continues after...

Yesterday's Most Read Articles

Should every NH family be eligible for thousands of dollars in school vouchers? Dozens showed up to share their thoughts.

‘They can do it elsewhere’: Advocates rally against special education cuts to local schools

‘You would have loved him:’ Merrimack Valley high school community honors 17-year-old senior Wyatt Carleton killed in crash

New cost estimates: Rebuilding at Rundlett would cost $8 million more than at Broken Ground

Fire tears through barn in Franklin

Loudon residents voice opposition to new fire truck purchase

Your Daily Puzzles

Cross|Word

Flipart

Typeshift

SpellTower

Really Bad Chess

I would want the administrator to protect the student. I would want the administrator to put the rights of that student to participate in the educational process ahead of the rights of someone’s perceived need to express their political opinion at the school rather than somewhere else. Bow administrators no doubt understood the can of worms they were opening when they made their decisions in this matter. The citizens of Bow should be proud that they have administrators who have the courage to put the rights of a student to participate in all aspects of the educational experience ahead of any concern for their own personal convenience, careers, and well-being.

This is not a case of a student protester wearing an armband to protest an overseas war. This is not a case of a disgruntled citizen wearing an article of clothing that protests burdensome taxes. This is not a case of someone wearing a MAGA cap or a rainbow tee shirt or some other item supporting a broad political cause. This is a case of a group of adults choosing to express a message of exclusion at a soccer game where there was one single minor student whose exclusion would be mandated by that message. And that message was being displayed in full view of that student.

Was that student intimidated? Scared? Saddened? I don’t know. But it’s hard to imagine a 15-year-old girl facing a group of adults whose message is “We don’t want you here” not suffering pretty badly.

This shouldn’t even be a legal issue. It’s a moral issue. These days, people who want their voices heard have so many ways to have that happen. So why not choose one that doesn’t have a direct impact on a minor student exercising her legal right to participate in a sport she loves? We can, and should be better.

Oh, and by the way, the protesters sued the referee? That, in and of itself, speaks volumes.