BCA 2020 Demographics Report

Sorry to post on my personal account but will do so until the auto post works.

The report is available here: https://british-caving.org.uk/demographics-report/

I'd be very interested in hearing people's takes on it.
Rostam
BCA P&I
 

JoshW

Member
Some good insight with limited data available there Rostam. Hopefully with annual production of reports (started by Badlad - thank you!) we can start drawing some conclusions about how the caving population is changing.

I would like to see a few things included so that similar comparisons can be made:
- sexuality
- disability
- race

I will be suggesting that these are requested at renewal going forwards (with drop down boxes including ?prefer not to say?, which will hopefully increase the response rate).

I?d also like to see age become a required field for both CIM and DIM, and again will be suggesting this is amended.

If anyone has any issues with these metrics being requested, feel free to message me so that I can ensure your viewpoint is reflected in any debate at council. I do however think it?s very important that the BCA takes a look at all these things to see where we can ?do better? to ensure that our sport is open to as many as possible.
 

PeteHall

Moderator
Thanks for the update Rostam.

Josh. Disability could obviously be an impairment to caving (depending of course on the disability), so understanding this might be useful to the BCA, but why does the BCA need to know about sexuality or race? I can't understand how these have any bearing whatsoever on caving.

What would the BCA do with this data?

I really don't think the BCA should be asking for private information that it does not need. This would be an unnecessary intrusion of privacy and I would strongly oppose the BCA asking for such data.

Also, what would the implications be for GDPR? I was under the impression that you can only collect necessary information and only hold it for as long as it is required.
 
I would like to see a few things included so that similar comparisons can be made:
- sexuality
- disability
- race

Wondering why those words had been used I started looking them up ... & found

- sexuality:  a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are typically attracted; sexual orientation.
&
There are 46 Terms  :eek: That Describe Sexual Attraction, Behavior, and Orientation.

So looking for definitions I found these for starters:  :confused:

Monosexual. A broad sexual orientation category that includes people who experience romantic or sexual attraction to people of one sex or gender. ...
Non-libidoist asexual. ...
Omnisexual. ...
Pansexual. ...
Panromantic. ...
Polysexual. ...
Pomosexual. ...
Passing.

I think this is going to take a while  ....    :coffee:  :LOL:  :coffee:  :LOL:  :coffee:


 

Badlad

Administrator
Staff member
Hi Rostam.  Excellent report.  Keep up the good work on this.  It must be helpful across the spectrum of BCA to have a good understanding of your membership demographic.

I notice you didn't mention the 2018 or 2019 age demographic reports I compiled as follow ups to the 2017 report.  They will have been attached to BCA minutes somewhere.  I also hold copy if you would like to attach them as an appendix.  The data was supplied slightly different to 2017 which allowed analysis of the difference between DIM and CIM.  Let me know if you want a copy.

I also compiled a report on a CHECC questionnaire which was designed by Hellie and Jane.  The average age of respondent was 23 and gives a useful insight for BCA P&!.  One of the answers I found quite interesting was to the question 'where do you get your information from for caving'.  Not a single respondent mentioned Descent magazine yet BCA were spending ?3000 per year on advertising in Descent.  All this sort of info is useful to target different messages to different groups.

Thankfully things are changing.  Perhaps BCA need to find a better place to reference these sort of reports or they just disappear into the ether.

 

JoshW

Member
If it was shown that the BCA lacked diversity in either of those areas (I wouldn?t be surprised), then I think it?s important that the BCA looks into why, and thinks about how they can ensure that there are no impairments to getting into the sport for any particular groups.

Personally I can see how it could be viewed that there is a historical ?lad? culture which may prevent those of a different sexuality feeling comfortable in certain segments of the caving community, and therefore this may prevent retention.

The specific wording I suggested would ensure that if someone didn?t want to complete this information they could use the ?prefer not to say? option.

Many large companies request this information as part of their commitment to being an inclusive organisation, and I don?t think the BCA should be any different.

Making the fields optional (including the prefer not to say) means that any information given is voluntary and therefore the individual can make the call as to whether to give it or not and therefore the ?necessary? part of GDPR is irrelevant. In terms of holding it as long as required, this is the same with any other details collected with membership. Worth bearing in mind that any information used in these reports is anonymised.

Points taken on board though :)

Sorry for derailing your thread Rostam!
 

JoshW

Member
Judi Durber said:
I would like to see a few things included so that similar comparisons can be made:
- sexuality
- disability
- race

Wondering why those words had been used I started looking them up ... & found

- sexuality:  a person's identity in relation to the gender or genders to which they are typically attracted; sexual orientation.
&
There are 46 Terms  :eek: That Describe Sexual Attraction, Behavior, and Orientation.

So looking for definitions I found these for starters:  :confused:

Monosexual. A broad sexual orientation category that includes people who experience romantic or sexual attraction to people of one sex or gender. ...
Non-libidoist asexual. ...
Omnisexual. ...
Pansexual. ...
Panromantic. ...
Polysexual. ...
Pomosexual. ...
Passing.

I think this is going to take a while  ....    :coffee:  :LOL:  :coffee:  :LOL:  :coffee:

And unsurprisingly it took about 3 comments to find a comment that possibly demonstrates why those of the LGBTQ+ community might find it difficult to feel they ?fit in?...
 

PeteHall

Moderator
JoshW said:
If it was shown that the BCA lacked diversity in either of those areas (I wouldn?t be surprised), then I think it?s important that the BCA looks into why, and thinks about how they can ensure that there are no impairments to getting into the sport for any particular groups.

If you really want to go down that road, should you not consider all protected characteristics under the equality act:
- age
- disability
- gender reassignment
- marriage and civil partnership
- pregnancy and maternity
- race
- religion or belief
- sex
- sexual orientation

I would not be surprised if getting your kit off in front of your mates was more of a problem for people with certain religious beliefs than for people of any particular sexual orientation.
 

JoshW

Member
PeteHall said:
JoshW said:
If it was shown that the BCA lacked diversity in either of those areas (I wouldn?t be surprised), then I think it?s important that the BCA looks into why, and thinks about how they can ensure that there are no impairments to getting into the sport for any particular groups.

If you really want to go down that road, should you not consider all protected characteristics under the equality act:
- age
- disability
- gender reassignment
- marriage and civil partnership
- pregnancy and maternity
- race
- religion or belief
- sex
- sexual orientation

I would not be surprised if getting your kit off in front of your mates was more of a problem for people with certain religious beliefs than for people of any particular sexual orientation.

Perfect idea, appreciate your support :)
 
And unsurprisingly it took about 3 comments to find a comment that possibly demonstrates why those of the LGBTQ+ community might find it difficult to feel they ?fit in?...

Sorry, not my intention.  :kiss2:

I finding it increasingly amazing at how impossible it seems to keep up with current terminology.  Sometimes, until something is pointed out to you, one does not know it is offensive. I was laughing more at my ignorance.

Do we really have to fit into a category ... ?  :confused:  :-\


 

Badlad

Administrator
Staff member
For interest the CHECC questionnaire referred to above showed 56% male, 31% female and the rest did not identify/answer.
 

ChrisJC

Active member
I think I would rewind a little bit, and ask if the BCA actually need to collect this information. Specifically, what problem would it solve?

In my view, the BCA (and in fact, all cavers) should be striving for equality of opportunity. Gathering this sort of data seems more geared towards equality of outcome, which I think is pointless, certainly to the resolution of being concerned about the sexuality of participants. Personally I couldn't give a monkeys who does what with whom in their personal lives. It has no bearing on their caving. And striving to ensure that all sexual preferences are well represented, to the point of targeting certain groups to increase their participation levels seems like a waste of effort.

So rather than gathering too much data, I would be more concerned with ensuring that caving is both perceived to be welcoming, and turns out to be in practice. To achieve that no doubt needs research, but not via too many detailed questions.

Chris.
 

Fishes

New member
Perhaps the most suitable box to add if BCA want more information about its members  is " none of your ******* business"

* select expletive of your choice
 

PeteHall

Moderator
JoshW said:
PeteHall said:
JoshW said:
If it was shown that the BCA lacked diversity in either of those areas (I wouldn?t be surprised), then I think it?s important that the BCA looks into why, and thinks about how they can ensure that there are no impairments to getting into the sport for any particular groups.

If you really want to go down that road, should you not consider all protected characteristics under the equality act:
- age
- disability
- gender reassignment
- marriage and civil partnership
- pregnancy and maternity
- race
- religion or belief
- sex
- sexual orientation

I would not be surprised if getting your kit off in front of your mates was more of a problem for people with certain religious beliefs than for people of any particular sexual orientation.

Perfect idea, appreciate your support :)

To be clear, I do not support collecting all this data. I don't think the BCA needs this data, I don't know how they plan to use it and what they hope to achieve by doing so, therefore I don't think the BCA should be trying to collect it.

I was simply pointing out that if you did want to do this, surely it should be representative of all protected characteristics, not just a trendy few.
 

JoshW

Member
Equality of opportunity will hopefully lead to equality of outcome.

If the outcome isn?t equal (or representative to use a better word)  then either the opportunity isn?t equal or there is something else at play.

Gathering further information allows the BCA to judge whether over time there is improvements being made in diversity of membership.

I?ve mentioned this on previous threads about demographics, but there?s few useful conclusions that can be drawn from a single years membership data (even with the additional information I think we should request), the idea is that you can use it to see if the work you?re doing is making a tangible difference to the outcome. It is why these demographics report should be done each year and the more frequently they?re done (and the better information you obtain) the more useful conclusions can be drawn as they?re based on trends not on a snapshot.

I wouldn?t necessarily think that if a sexual preference was under represented that it would direct the BCA to immediately looking to ?target? increasing that groups opportunity, but it may highlight that the culture isn?t welcoming leading to retention of these groups is low. Ensuring higher retention of any and all people, and ensuring that they don?t feel unwelcome couldnt and shouldn?t ever be considered a waste of time
 

JoshW

Member
Fishes said:
Perhaps the most suitable box to add if BCA want more information about its members  is " none of your ******* business"

* select expletive of your choice

Hence the inclusion of ?prefer not to say?, if you?d bothered to read what had been written you?d have seen that, but then you wouldn?t have had a chance to look edgy, well done  o_O
 

aricooperdavis

Moderator
Judi Durber said:
Do we really have to fit into a category ... ?  :confused:  :-\

This is a fair point - as well as a "I'd rather not say" option we could have a "none of the above" option too.

I don't know whether this should be collected at sign up as it seems like a lot of additional administration for individuals and club secretaries - perhaps it should be a well published member census instead?
 

JoshW

Member
PeteHall said:
To be clear, I do not support collecting all this data. I don't think the BCA needs this data, I don't know how they plan to use it and what they hope to achieve by doing so, therefore I don't think the BCA should be trying to collect it.

I was simply pointing out that if you did want to do this, surely it should be representative of all protected characteristics, not just a trendy few.

I guessed as much, I was being facetious, but you actually raised a valid point. I think as you can see from this thread that some people are very concerned that they?d have to complete a box that says prefer not to say and therefore requesting a larger range of info will be a harder sell.

To clarify as if it wasn?t clear already, this is not something the BCA has decided to do whatsoever, this is something I, as youth and development officer, would like to see and plan on taking to council, and so those who I can already tell are losing their minds at the BCA requesting this, bear in mind it hasn?t happened yet and there?s no guarantee it will. I opened it to the floor so that people could share their views on it, in the interest of transparency and interaction.

There?s some good points coming out of it, and if the information was to be requested (again it would be optional) there would be clear guidelines provided as to why it?s being requested and what would be done with the information if provided.
 

Ed

Member
All this info is likely to be required if BCA applies for  any government grants.

One of the first things that will stand out to anyone looking is the demographic. They will then ask what proactive steps are BCA doing to address this.

Was an interesting segment of ski Sunday yesterday about the demographic of snow sports - in a similar situation to caving regarding diversity etc...
 

Fishes

New member
Its not about being "edgy" whatever that means.

BCA has no good reason to ask these questions so why ask them. Its not like they are something you would drop into a casual conversation with a stranger.
 
Top