It’s not as simple as ‘stick to footy’ or ‘promote positive change’. I tend towards Hypen and Walter’s view that clubs must be forces for positive social change, but I do think there is merit in them being something of a safe harbour where people of all stripes can come together for a few hours over a shared love for a footy team. There’s a great deal of polarisation in society these days; I don’t think we should undervalue shared touch-points.
Whether the club is sticking its neck out for a just cause or ‘wading into politics/political correctness' seems to depend on whether you agree with the position. Personally, I wish the club would take more of a leadership position on certain matters, but I wouldn't claim to know where the line sits between positive influence and descending into politics. There are a few obvious areas, but it gets murky pretty quickly.
Below is my hastily considered guess on where that line might sit. Obviously these are just examples and I’m not attempting to cover the field (apologies if you have a strong view on whaling or the rise of China).
Must take a position
Racism / Hate Speech / Legal Equality
Domestic violence
Mental health
Climate change
I consider the club should take a position, but I understand the arguments against the club doing so
Vaccination
Gambling
Healthy lifestyle stuff (eg, junk food)
More nuanced issues of race (eg, changing the date of Australia Day, constitutional recognition)
More nuanced issues of equality/equity (eg, diversity in the workplace)
Probably not their scope
Actual party politics
More nuanced issues of climate change (ie, Govt. policy)
Refugee advocacy
Abortion or euthanasia
Australian republic / Australian flag / Australian anthem (although I have very strong views about these and think at least the last two could be bumped up to the category above)
Animal rights
I know this is an artificial exercise but I’d love to know where other people think the line is? Am I way off?
