ALFW Pride round jumper debate provides litmus test for true inclusion and diversity

GWS player Haneen Zreika’s decision not to wear the club’s Pride round jumper and therefore not play in round four of the AFLW has brought rise to much debate around the concept of “inclusion”. For a long time sport and AFLW specifically has elevated conversations about inclusion and diversity, but what does that really mean? Embracing “diversity” necessitates the coexistence of different experiences, beliefs, practices and cultures. The concept of “inclusion” is often described as the ways in which we make our diversity work together. To me, inclusion is respect. Not always agreement, but a functional respect for one another.

By all accounts that is what GWS has achieved, and this moment has provided the perfect litmus test. Had the team not cultivated an environment of inclusivity, understanding and respect, Zreika would not have been able to have this very complex conversation with her teammates. Her teammates would not have accepted her difference. They would not have come to a resolution that, perhaps difficult on all sides, was largely workable for the collective. The long term effects will tell us how deep their culture of respect and inclusion goes, but so far, the signs are good. No doubt there are LGBTQ+ identifying staff and players who would have found Zreika’s refusal to wear the Pride jumper hurtful, but they accepted her choice not to.

The public’s reaction however has been varied. Some have likened Zreika to Israel Folau and Margaret Court. Zreika’s own words tell us they are vastly different. In a statement released late on Friday afternoon, Zreika called for kindness, saying inclusion was about respecting people’s choices “as long as they don’t advocate for hate and division”. By contrast, Folau and