NO TROLLS Transgender Discrimination AFL Lawsuit

[The Tilt]

What about allowing Hannah (and other trans-women) to compete (only) in men's competitions?

What are the arguments against this?

I'm certain that Mouncey and other trans women are already permitted to compete in men's competition. I guess Mouncey's argument against this approach is that she is a woman, and so shouldn't be forced to play in a men's competition/excluded from a women's competition.

I think the best response is just to emphasise that the women's category is based on biological sex, not on gender identity i.e. we have separate competition for women because of the on average physical differences between males and females. Even if Mouncey is a woman, she is not a female; hence, she is ineligible.

 

[Bostonian]

An archaic and incorrect point of view. You don't really understand "science".

Maybe start actually learning about the scientific method before acting as an authority on biology and psychology, and to another extent you're lack of awareness in anthropology.

This has zero to do with scientific method.

The discussion was the use of eyes to identify.

Seems you need to go work on your comprehension skills a bit.

 

[Bombermania]

Those examples literally have nothing to do with looks or body.

These identifiers seems to be the most pointless inane things out there.

Looks and bodies are only linked to genetics, nothing to do with identifying.

Genetics plays a part and that is where biological sex comes into it but people can change their looks and body shape.

 

[zill]

I'm certain that Mouncey and other trans women are already permitted to compete in men's competition. I guess Mouncey's argument against this approach is that she is a woman, and so shouldn't be forced to play in a men's competition/excluded from a women's competition.

I think the best response is just to emphasise that the women's category is based on biological sex, not on gender identity i.e. we have separate competition for women because of the on average physical differences between males and females. Even if Mouncey is a woman, she is not a female; hence, she is ineligible.

This is the most logical approach, but logic doesn't have anything to do with this debate. Mouncey was already allowed to play top-level women's handball, but he refused to use a separate changeroom. If it was just about competing, a small concession would have allowed them to continue in the sport.

 

[kirsti]

Trans woman Kirsti Miller opens up to Dee Dee on @3AW693 Afternoon show.

Transgender woman Kirsti Miller opens up to Dee Dee - 3AW Afternoons with Dee Dee

omny.fm

On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Roby]

This has zero to do with scientific method.

The discussion was the use of eyes to identify.

Seems you need to go work on your comprehension skills a bit.

You keep reiterating that you're the authority on what is gender. Your eyes tell you the truth. Nobody can convince you otherwise. Are these statements incorrect?

Ether way, "your" eyes don't determine what is a gender; nor do they determine what is sex, scientifically speaking.

 

[Bostonian]

You keep reiterating that you're the authority on what is gender. Your eyes tell you the truth. Nobody can convince you otherwise. Are these statements incorrect?

Ether way, "your" eyes don't determine what is a gender; nor do they determine what is sex, scientifically speaking.

I said I know what a woman looks like.

Mouncey looks nothing like a woman. This is a very commonly held view.

It's based on the ability of humans to differentiate for the whole on what is and isn't a man or woman.

An ability that humans have used effectively to the point that the planet now has over 7.5 billion men and women on it.

 

[Bombermania]

I said I know what a woman looks like.

Mouncey looks nothing like a woman. This is a very commonly held view.

It's based on the ability of humans to differentiate for the whole on what is and isn't a man or woman.

An ability that humans have used effectively to the point that the planet now has over 7.5 billion men and women on it.

What you are talking about is biological sex.

 

[Bostonian]

What you are talking about is biological sex.

It's called men and women.

Males and females.

Easily identifiable from each other.

 

[Bombermania]

It's called men and women.

Males and females.

Easily identifiable from each other.

That's right there are only two sexes.

 

[Bostonian]

That's right there are only two sexes.

And that's all that matters.

 

[Laphroaig]

Nope - just the bog-standard Oxford dictionary definition will do.

noun: inclusion
- the practice or policy of providing equal access to opportunities and resources for people who might otherwise be excluded or marginalized, such as those who have physical or mental disabilities and members of other minority groups.

I can't see the bit about including males in female sport competitions.

Which propositions are logically incongruous? Your (perhaps wilful) inability to understand the argument does not make it 'self-contradictory'.

The bits where you hide behind incongruous meanings to ignore the contradiction that the end result is males competing against females (biological ones if you insist on groupthink speak). Rabbit on about gender versus sex a bit and just say we need to recalibrate. Makes it it all go away.

We have an amazingly expressive language, capable of astounding nuance of meaning, and you have an unusual grasp of it (even if you can't spell willful) in these benighted days when it is not fashionable at all to be able to express more than the most banal and compliant pap.

That takes application.

It literally saddens me that such an unusual person is yet to learn, or even suspect, the pitfalls of an imposed mandatory vocabulary. Once the tool of dictators and cynical power brokers, winning the vocabulary battle has now become the routine opening move in any public debate.

The instant you accept an external demand that "only this / these words are acceptable" you not only surrender your hard earned skill of expression, you also surrender free thought itself.

Hiding behind the mandatory vocabulary to avoid critical examination of your own thoughts (or the uncomfortable contra thoughts of others) is a cop out.

You can do better.

 

[Laphroaig]

That's right there are only two sexes.

So why insist that one sex must be forced to compete at an unequal disadvantage against the other?

And, there are splinter groups who would (one hopes figuratively) burn you at the stake for that statement.

 

[Bombermania]

So why insist that one sex must be forced to compete at an unequal disadvantage against the other?

And, there are splinter groups who would (one hopes figuratively) burn you at the stake for that statement.

I'm not and looking at the AFLW rules i cannot see what Hannah's legal complaint is.

There is some reference to the IOC but the AFL is not an IOC sport and the AFL rules are similar to other women's sports then there is talk about being banned without reason but every year players get knocked back and not always with a reason.

 

[Laphroaig]

I agree the AFLW assessment criteria is fair I suggest it should be used at the grassroots also because if it is about safety the grassroots is where safety is needed most.

It would be really great if people who feel strongly about the subject in any way took the effort to engage with this poster.

Even go back and read every post by this poster.

I am pretty sure this is the same person who dove into Bay 13, no less, in a previous incarnation of the subject; and demonstrated such obvious knowledge, patience and tolerance of opposing viewpoints to walk away with minor scratches and bruises. And made some people not well known for their depth of thought step back and think.

 

[Laphroaig]

I'm not and looking at the AFLW rules i cannot see what Hannah's legal complaint is.

There is some reference to the IOC but the AFL is not an IOC sport and the AFL rules are similar to other women's sports then there is talk about being banned without reason but every year players get knocked back and not always with a reason.

My bad, then.

I will make a point of being more careful in assuming.

 

[kirsti]

It would be really great if people who feel strongly about the subject in any way took the effort to engage with this poster.

Even go back and read every post by this poster.

I pretty sure this is the same person who dove into Bay 13, no less, in a previous incarnation of the subject; and demonstrated such obvious knowledge, patience and tolerance of opposing viewpoints to walk away with minor scratches and bruises. And made some people not well known for their depth of thought step back and think.

Thanks for that I thought I would pop back in X


On iPhone using BigFooty.com mobile app

 

[Bicko]

Hi Fryman,

Thank you for your very important question about roles of gender and sex!

It sounds like you have some questions about gender, and gender identity?

As we like to say here at the kidshelpline, there is a lot more to to gender identity than being male or female. Learn more about gender identity and the different ways people can identify themselves, here on our website at the kidshelpline:

What is gender identity?

Gender doesn't automatically equal the sex you were assigned to at birth - it's a lot more complex than you think…

kidshelpline.com.au

• Sex can mean lots of different things. It can be about biological features our bodies have, like our genitals and chromosomes. It can be the assigned sex a doctor gives us at birth, depending on what our genitals and chromosomes look like. It can also be a legal status that we’re given at birth or that we change over our lives. We usually assume a person’s assigned sex decides their gender, but it’s more complex than that!
• Most societies think there are only two genders that people identify with, either male or female. This belief is called the gender binary.
• There are lots of possible gender identities out there! People can identify as one of the binary genders, as moving between genders, as no gender or as another gender altogether.

Corrupting children’s minds, how wicked. 1+1=3 kids. There are two genders. Are you people that corrupt and devoid of understanding that you would lie to your children? Is there a greater evil right now? You reap what you sow, get ready for a truly messed up world to come.

 

[Suspense]

I can't see the bit about including males in female sport competitions.

members of other minority groups.

Thought that was obvious - but I guess not.

The bits where you hide behind incongruous meanings to ignore the contradiction that the end result is males competing against females (biological ones if you insist on groupthink speak). Rabbit on about gender versus sex a bit and just say we need to recalibrate. Makes it it all go away.

I don't think you know what a contradiction is - it has nothing to do with "hiding behind incongruous meanings" or a specific "end result".

A contradiction is a logical incompatibility between two or more statements or propositions. For example, the statement-pair: "All fire engines are red," and "It is not true that all fire engines are red" is contradictory.

So, which statements or propositions were contradictory?

We have an amazingly expressive language, capable of astounding nuance of meaning, and you have an unusual grasp of it (even if you can't spell willful) in these benighted days when it is not fashionable at all to be able to express more than the most banal and compliant pap.

'Wilful' is the British spelling traditionally adopted in Australia. This should be obvious to someone who claims to adore language.

It literally saddens me that such an unusual person is yet to learn, or even suspect, the pitfalls of an imposed mandatory vocabulary. Once the tool of dictators and cynical power brokers, winning the vocabulary battle has now become the routine opening move in any public debate.

The instant you accept an external demand that "only this / these words are acceptable" you not only surrender your hard earned skill of expression, you also surrender free thought itself.

Hiding behind the mandatory vocabulary to avoid critical examination of your own thoughts (or the uncomfortable contra thoughts of others) is a cop out.

You can do better.

I choose my words carefully and they are not mandated. As much as you may bemoan the fact, language, has, and always will be, a continuously evolving construct that morphs with social change and scientific progress. My words are based on empathy for the lived experiences of transpeople and our evolving scientific knowledge with regard to the natural variations in genetics, neurobiology and brain development.

I choose not to use certain words in certain contexts - not because they are not deemed unacceptable by "external demands" - but because they can unnecessarily cause psychosocial harm to people who have long struggled for social acceptance (and continue to do so).

I think you see yourself as a 'deep and critical thinker' serving as an ardent vanguard against some imagined dominant groupthink agenda. However, your posts lack any actual substance - so it all just comes off as a weird assortment of ill-informed musings from a man with advancing neurodegeneration.

 

[Laphroaig]

I think you see yourself as a 'deep and critical thinker' serving as an ardent vanguard against some imagined dominant groupthink agenda. However, your posts lack any actual substance - so it all just comes off as a weird assortment of ill-informed musings from a man with advancing neurodegeneration.

I withdraw my hope that one day you will grow up.

There is a clearly evident will to avoid doing so.

 

[All Aust]

The AFL have a process for transgender players to be drafted to the AFLW. The height / weight of the transgender is not part of the process, nor is a players or parents opinion. If Hannah busted any player in any sport it would be front page with screaming headlines. There's absolute crickets chirping here too. Hannah could just undertake the process but has instead chosen to legally contest.

What process does Hannah wants for transgenders to qualify for the draft? Then there is no guarantee that what Hannah would like as a process would be acceptable for the AFL or any other sporting organisation. The contest could extend many years by which time age may defeat Hannah's playing aspirations.

Back to crickets chirping. No media has reported that an AFLW club has any interest in recruiting Hannah. Is she currently training to the level? To me this silence speaks volumes.

 

[Ron The Bear]

The AFL have a process for transgender players to be drafted to the AFLW.

Actually at this stage she is only aiming to play in the ACT women's comp. She has played there previously but the AFL recently changed its policy to align with the Victorian Equal Opportunity Act, which permits trans athletes to be barred on the grounds of strength, stamina or physique.

There is obviously more here than meets the eye for the AFL to have altered its policy, ostensibly in a bid to thwart Mouncey (which they would no doubt deny).

 

[Eagle Wrath]

Zero chance of a man being allowed into AFLW. Especially after the player getting a fractured neck the other day. They are already worried the women cant handle being hit by other women.

 

[Laphroaig]

Zero chance of a man being allowed into AFLW. Especially after the player getting a fractured neck the other day. They are already worried the women cant handle being hit by other women.

The AFL is highly motivated by "optics".

If the day arrives when they feel that it's a good look to have a trans athlete running around, then that's what will happen.

 

[owen87]

There is obviously more here than meets the eye for the AFL to have altered its policy, ostensibly in a bid to thwart Mouncey (which they would no doubt deny).

I think this explains their approach, they want to appear to look accommodating, whilst not allowing Mouncey to play.

The optics of barring trans-athletes doesn't look good, the optics of having a trans-athlete playing AFLW at that size also doesn't look good.