NO TROLLS Transgender Discrimination AFL Lawsuit

[owen87]

His teammates were uncomfortable with him sharing changerooms with them. Less to do with height/weight and more to do with him having a dick and being attracted to women.

Missing the point really.

 

[owen87]

That's not what this is about.

This is more akin to someone being an atheist and they are forced to say there is a God before them even though they don't see or believe what is claimed.

Should they be forced to say what is before them exists even though they don't see it or believe in the assertion?

Should AFLW players have to be put in that situation when it's not necessary?

You're doing a lot of mental gymnastics here.

No one is asking you to believe Mouncey is a biological women, or asking you to date them, or believe they're a different species.

 

[Laphroaig]

Yeah, I'm not sure that insisting that gender and biology are "deeply intertwined" (and that to suggest otherwise is a pretense) is the same as claiming that trans people don't exist.

No, it doesn't. Try thinking harder.

Or look upwards a few posts.

 

[CheapCharlie]

I think this is a very difficult issue. Of course we want everyone to feel included and happy. However the AFL also has a duty of care to all players in providing a safe workplace.

The question for the AFL is would a transgender player be a risk for other participants due to their physical size, speed or strength?

A tough one if the person wanting to play is much taller, stronger and faster than current participants.
Where does the AFL draw the line though? A participant must be with a certain height/ weight/ speed/ strength parameter?

As you point out, the argument about size and strength has a massive hole.

If a woman is 90 kilos and 190 centimeters, should she be banned from playing because of her size?

 

[owen87]

As you point out, the argument about size and strength has a massive hole.

If a woman is 90 kilos and 190 centimeters, should she be banned from playing because of her size?

Does she have a male skeleton and muscle mass? If so, she's probably not a biological woman.

Liz Cambage is the common example, but look how she moves compared to a (taller) Giannis Antetokounmpo. Her speed, coordination, strength aren't on the same planet as a male of the same height has the potential to be.

Being an outlier for a female, isn't the same as being a biological male.

 

[Ando727]

Given how vexed an issue this is, even if Hannah Mouncey obtains permission to play in the AFLW, it looks like she would have an even bigger challenge getting recruited by a club. A football club needs a lot of cohesion to function well, and I can't imagine many clubs choosing to wade into this complex situation if even a small number of players were against it. Maybe Mouncey is doing this without the expectation of actually playing in the AFLW - maybe it's a more of a legal test case.

 

[CheapCharlie]

Does she have a male skeleton and muscle mass? If so, she's probably not a biological woman.

Liz Cambage is the common example, but look how she moves compared to a (taller) Giannis Antetokounmpo. Her speed, coordination, strength aren't on the same planet as a male of the same height has the potential to be.

Being an outlier for a female, isn't the same as being a biological male.

I'm talking about physical size and weight of any given competitor competing against another. Strength, speed, coordination is going to vary greatly amongst people of the same size and weight.

 

[The Tilt]

No, it doesn't. Try thinking harder.

Or look upwards a few posts.

You missed the point of my post.

*whispers* I was agreeing with you.

 

[Roby]

Given how vexed an issue this is, even if Hannah Mouncey obtains permission to play in the AFLW, it looks like she would have an even bigger challenge getting recruited by a club. A football club needs a lot of cohesion to function well, and I can't imagine many clubs choosing to wade into this complex situation if even a small number of players were against it. Maybe Mouncey is doing this without the expectation of actually playing in the AFLW - maybe it's a more of a legal test case.

Wait a minute... One minute we're saying she is way too oversized with an unfair advantage and now we're saying that a club wouldn't want that ability at their club? Rightio.

And even if this was the case as you would say then the AFL should put no restrictions and let clubs decide, right?

 

[owen87]

They are asking me to pretend I believe that a biological male is a woman.

No they're not. You're being asked to believe that a biological male identifies as a female by gender. Meaning, they don't feel that their body fits with their mental outlook on how they want to be seen by others, live their life, or express themselves.

Like, if I called you a campaigner, you asked me not to call you a campaigner, and I kept calling you a campaigner, because I didn't want to pretend to believe you weren't a campaigner, even if you believe you're not a campaigner. It would be a pretty dick move on my behalf to keep calling you a campaigner, right?

I'm talking about physical size and weight of any given competitor competing against another. Strength, speed, coordination is going to vary greatly amongst people of the same size and weight.

Except there's a distinct difference between a 0.01% of the population biological female at ~ 203cm, and the way a biological male would be built, move and perform as a 203cm athlete. One isn't interchangeable with another.

 

[Bostonian]

Wait a minute... One minute we're saying she is way too oversized with an unfair advantage and now we're saying that a club wouldn't want that ability at their club? Rightio.

And even if this was the case as you would say then the AFL should put no restrictions and let clubs decide, right?

No they are saying a Trans player could cause divisions among players which in a team sport does not create an environment for successful team play.

 

[kirsti]

Might be worth a lawsuit in getting the AFL to really resolve this and sort out how to treat this in future, as you can't expect to ban trans people from team sports (and other individual sports) altogether without expecting a little blowback, as sport has too much of a part in our cultural and daily life to not expect good faith cases. You do need some form of inclusive policy, pathways for trans players to play the game whether through medical requirements or level competitions.

But from an individual standpoint it shows poor common sense. A lot of transgender people just give up competitive sport competitions when they transition, even local amateur ones. Might be different for someone aspiring to be a professional athlete, hard to give away what you love and want to earn from, but it is one realm of transgender life that will always be a grey area, especially for later transitioners in contact sports where safety and advantage might be a consideration. Always good to have multiple pursuits, options in case something about you conflicts with one of them. Maybe a dual professional/amateur policy needs to be considered, but from an all-sports perspective you could really only offer guidelines for sports to apply on a specific case-by-case basis.

The AFLW policy is a case by case assessment way above and beyond any other trans sports policy in the assessment requirements to be met by the trans player.

 

[Roobs321]

The AFLW policy is a case by case assessment way above and beyond any other trans sports policy in the assessment requirements to be met by the trans player.

I'm not very fluent on the different policies taken by different sports, but reading through the quoted AFLW requirements it actually seems reasonable to me in terms of application. Medical transitioners would have those endocrinology records, 24 months sounds reasonable, and the performance data would be easy to obtain for anyone with a goal towards AFLW (and as an athlete would be expected to happen anyway). How it is evaluated is another thing, but it feels an appropriate balance for inclusion in a competition on the level of the AFLW.

If you had to do all that for every weekend local sport you'd be pissed, but if you had a dream to play in the AFLW then those requirements aren't too onerous.

 

[Laphroaig]

You missed the point of my post.

*whispers* I was agreeing with you.

How embarrassing is that?

 

[Bostonian]

No they're not. You're being asked to believe that a biological male identifies as a female by gender. Meaning, they don't feel that their body fits with their mental outlook on how they want to be seen by others, live their life, or express themselves.

Like, if I called you a campaigner, you asked me not to call you a campaigner, and I kept calling you a campaigner, because I didn't want to pretend to believe you weren't a campaigner, even if you believe you're not a campaigner. It would be a pretty dick move on my behalf to keep calling you a campaigner, right?

This highlights perfectly how you work on feelings, others work on visually what is before them.

So even if you visually see a male before you you'll completely ignore that if the person simply tells you they are female.

You're comparison is an example of that.

You're talking about something that you base on a feeling. Not based on something physical.

As said previously, it's suspending disbelief based on a feeling.

That's not how many people operate.

 

[burge13]

If someone has anorexia, they receive help. No one indulges their thoughts that they're fat, they aren't.
Yet if someone says they're something they're not with gender, society bends over backwards to indulge it. I have never understood it

If she wants to be Hannah, I have no problem with it, it doesn't affect me. But it is bizarre to me from the outside looking in that clear mental illness is coddled and everyone needs to join in on it stoking the fire in one instance yet actually helped in another.

 

[Leeda]

heart shuddering at the personality of people in this thread... we all have things we deal with... Monty said that we should
allow ourselves to accept things and then we should tell everyone else that it is none of our business..

 

[Bostonian]

I'll put a scenario out there for you. At birth you were named John by your parents--- but for most of your life you've called yourself Jack. You tell everyone that you meet that your name is Jack, it's what your friends call you and is on your social media profiles, etc.

But every time I talk to you I call you John, despite your repeated claims to call you Jack because that's the name you identify with. Do you think i'd be happy if I kept calling you by the wrong name?

You're taking about a name.

I'm taking about what is standing before me physically.

If a pale red head stands before you and tells you they are a dark skinned, dark haired person are you going to believe them or think they are not what they claim?

 

[Laphroaig]

It's an indictment on contemporary discourse that 20 pages in, the blindingly obvious tipper has yet to be mentioned.

The separation of sports into male gender and female gender competition happened around 100 years ago. As soon as it became socially acceptable for women to get sweaty in public at all.

This separation by gender was done for exceedingly obvious and rational reasons. It was done at a time when gender was not optional or multiple choice, so their was no ambiguity.

The intended outcome of the separation remains very clear, and the obvious and rational reasons remain clear.

To ignore obvious and rational reasons for no better purpose than to carry a contradictory piece of social engineering to the extreme limits of outcome demonstrates that a proportion of the population has lost sight of the ball. So to speak.

 

[owen87]

This highlights perfectly how you work on feelings, others work on visually what is before them.

So even if you visually see a male before you you'll completely ignore that if the person simply tells you they are female.

You're comparison is an example of that.

You're talking about something that you base on a feeling. Not based on something physical.

As said previously, it's suspending disbelief based on a feeling.

That's not how many people operate.

You're not getting it.

Gender is subjective feelings.

Sex is objective biology.

Mouncey is a biological male, nothing can change that.

Mouncey also feels that they are a female, and wishes to live their life as a female, and express themselves as a female.

For me personally, calling Mouncey a he, or a she, or Hannah, or Callum is all much of a muchness. For the trans-person themselves, being referred to as the name they choose, or the gender pronoun they choose, is a very big deal.

I'm not going to go out of my way to be deliberately offensive to another person by calling them something they've specifically asked me not to call them, much like I wouldn't call you a campaigner all the time if you asked me not to call you a campaigner.

That doesn't mean I then inherently agree that someone like Mouncey should be treated as a biological female.

 

[Bombermania]

This highlights perfectly how you work on feelings, others work on visually what is before them.

So even if you visually see a male before you you'll completely ignore that if the person simply tells you they are female.

You're comparison is an example of that.

You're talking about something that you base on a feeling. Not based on something physical.

As said previously, it's suspending disbelief based on a feeling.

That's not how many people operate.

Biological sex and gender identity are not the same thing.

Even if we stick to biological sex for a moment.

One man identifies with being on a worksite working with their tools then having a few beers with other tradie mates while mocking the PC crowd for not having real jobs (tradie jobs). That is their gender identity.

Another man prefers to work in an office then drinks wine while talking about art and social issues or reading books. That is their gender identity.

Both are biologically men but their gender identity are different.

 

[boncer34]

I'm interested in people's thoughts on Rachel Dolezal

 

[Bostonian]

Biological sex and gender identity are not the same thing.

Yes they are.

Just because you believe they are doesn't mean everyone holds that position.

Male and Female, Man and Woman, both were created as words to describe the two different sexes.

There's only two genders.

Even if we stick to biological sex for a moment.

One man identifies with being on a worksite working with their tools then having a few beers with other tradie mates while mocking the PC crowd for not having real jobs (tradie jobs). That is their gender identity.

Another man prefers to work in an office then drinks wine while talking about art and social issues or reading books. That is their gender identity.

Both are biologically men but their gender identity are different.

That has literally nothing to do with gender.

Absolutely stupid argument.

Both are men with different interests and hobbies is how regular people would phrase it.

Who you vote for is not part of gender identity.

 

[Ando727]

Wait a minute... One minute we're saying she is way too oversized with an unfair advantage and now we're saying that a club wouldn't want that ability at their club? Rightio.

I didn't say that, I only said it is a divisive issue and most teams would probably not want to wade into it if its players were not onboard. I preface that by saying I don't know that for certain. Maybe the players won't care. Maybe some clubs are happy to take on the controversy - or perhaps even leverage the controversy for publicity purposes. But one thing's for sure, it won't happen quietly.

And even if this was the case as you would say then the AFL should put no restrictions and let clubs decide, right?

I made no statements about this either. I only spoke about the challenge Mouncey might have in finding a club if she got permission to play in the AFLW. I'm not seeking some sort of argument here, just raising a specific issue.

You'll have to find your fight elsewhere, I'm not interested.

 

[Bigger]

That's ( Rachel Dolezal ) cultural appropriation taken to sad and sick and self-defeating levels.

Folks who identify as a different gender is a different kettle of fish.

We very rarely hear from the women who could potentially be competing against folk who have transitioned from biological male to their conception of gendered female. I would really like to hear what their thoughts are because, frankly, mine are irrelevant.

Difficult, I know, for a welter of reasons (who wants to sound exclusionary or intolerant; who wants to assume they speak for the many) but is there a sense of what the feeling is among that community?