Play Nice AFL Womens - General Discussion

[jatz14]

That Rookie has had to work a lot harder to get into the AFL because of all that has come before.

As I pointed out, an absolute spud of a footballer like Tilly Lucas-Rodd has gotten over 1k for playing a game of football. That's not deserved, that's gifted. Not worth $50 a game with that talent level.




Well that's my point. the Susan Alberti's of the world should have formed this league.

The irony is that I'm arguing women have the means and capabilities to have created their own thing and yet it's being argued against that they shouldn't or couldn't have done it.

They are the people shitting on women and what they could achieve. Not me. I guess I have higher expectations for them than some of these white knights.

They aren't a different species.
They didn't build a seperate electricity grid for women, or road network. They don't need to build a seperate football league either.

The AFL isn't backing them because it gives them a warm glowing feeling.

They do it because it is to the strategic benefit of the AFL to do it. If women had built a separate league, the AFL would swallow it anyway. The AFL doesn't get the full benefit of a national women's league unless it's an AFL league.

And this notion you have that women should have built there own league, I am having trouble believing even you buy that.

When I was in juniors, about U9s or 10s, my team made the WA news. That's because we had a girl try to join our team. There was nearly a ******* riot, people were threatening to remove their kids from the club, quit the sport. She never got in, it was really ugly.

This was in the 70s. Even in the 90s, women's teams were routinely refused permission to use grounds and facilities by male tenant clubs, even when they were not used.

This WW2 era games you speak of were seen and treated as novelty events, like circus acts.

The idea they would have been allowed access to council grounds or facilities to play regular footy is delusional.

Entrenched interests were openly hostile to women's football until well into the 2000s.

And yes, Alberti did in fact work to create a national women's league, it's now called the AFLW.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[Bostonian]

And this notion you have that women should have built there own league, I am having trouble believing even you buy that.

The richest person in Australia is a woman. Parliament is full of women. I absolutely believe in their capability to do it.
The fact you can't envision it says more about your opinion of women than mine.

Self determination is better than being at the behest of idiots like those that run the AFL at present.

What's wrong about thinking that?

This WW2 era games you speak of were seen and treated as novelty events, like circus acts.

Pre-WW2 was different to after WW2. As I've pointed out, we had female cyclists that were household names and their achievements were certainly not seen as "novelty acts". These were seriously talented and heralded athletes.

The idea they would have been allowed access to council grounds or facilities to play regular footy is delusional.

Don't believe that as a known truth, just an opinion. They we able to compete at cycling tracks as part of clubs so there's actual evidence they weren't being shut out as is often the only view portrayed.

Entrenched interests were openly hostile to women's football until well into the 2000s.

And yes, Alberti did in fact work to create a national women's league, it's now called the AFLW.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

Controlled by another organisation whose main focus is the men's competition.

I'll never change my mind on thinking a league with a woman as it's head would have been better for the long term outlook of the game over a dill like Gil being involved.

 

[Bostonian]

Because he is a sad lonely old man with nothing else to do but troll on this forum.

Poor old Bostonian says he supports Carlton (which is sad enough), supports a pathetic southern English soccer team (which is really sad) and claims to have helped with Women’s footy (bullshit) but says women should help themselves. He can’t even lie straight. I wonder what his imaginary wife has to say about this?

Come down to Gaelic Park on Sunday. I'll be running the water for the women's side.

Make sure your fake arse comes up and says Hi.

 

[Vintage]

Because he is a sad lonely old man with nothing else to do but troll on this forum.

Poor old Bostonian says he supports Carlton (which is sad enough), supports a pathetic southern English soccer team (which is really sad) and claims to have helped with Women’s footy (bullshit) but says women should help themselves. He can’t even lie straight. I wonder what his imaginary wife has to say about this?

So is Bostonian an afl bandwagoner or a soccer bandwagoner? Surely he can’t have supported both through birthright?

 

[Colonial]

So today's super privileged women can't claim any kinship with suffragettes then. That how it works?

If you could actually read and comprehend however I was using the other posters words when using "we" in reference to men.

Equality is super privileged now?

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[jatz14]

The richest person in Australia is a woman. Parliament is full of women. I absolutely believe in their capability to do it.
The fact you can't envision it says more about your opinion of women than mine.

Self determination is better than being at the behest of idiots like those that run the AFL at present.

What's wrong about thinking that?




Pre-WW2 was different to after WW2. As I've pointed out, we had female cyclists that were household names and their achievements were certainly not seen as "novelty acts". These were seriously talented and heralded athletes.



Don't believe that as a known truth, just an opinion. They we able to compete at cycling tracks as part of clubs so there's actual evidence they weren't being shut out as is often the only view portrayed.



Controlled by another organisation whose main focus is the men's competition.

I'll never change my mind on thinking a league with a woman as it's head would have been better for the long term outlook of the game over a dill like Gil being involved.

Cyclists? wtf has that got to do with anything, last time I checked, cycling was not an invasion sport, let alone a contact sport. Female tennis was big to, doesn't mean the people enjoying watching the womens final at the local tennis club were going to stand for them playing footy.

And yes, that female leagues and teams were starved of resources by men who thought the whole idea of womens football was stupid, is not a perception, interviews about the history of womens footy from the period almost always refer to the fight to get basic facilities (such as an oval), despite them sitting there unused.

AFL is a beast that sucks in footy funding and attention. Most of the bigger sponsors the AFLW have got, they don`t get as an independent league. Sponsors are not in it for altruism any more than the AFL is. The profile AFL gives the womens league makes them viable in a way that they wouldn't be otherwise.

You ask whats wrong with self determination, its called failure. You use the tools available to build what is required. The only tool that counts in this regard is the AFL. If the AFL do not do it, then it never gets above community level football. They will not attract the money, the attention, the resources else wise. That might not be desirable, it is possibly not what a lot of the more feminist minded want, but it is just how it is. For someone like Alberti to set out to build a national womens comp from scratch, without the AFL, is incompetent.

I find it ironic that the most radical feminist commentators on AFLW, those that frame the debate in terms of gender politics exclusively, want freedom from the shackles of the AFL, not unlike you. Those women involved that come at it from a football perspective are fully into this being the AFL. The difference is, feminists (and you), prefer gesture politics, and the footballers want a successful league.

This debate is centred a bit about men v women culturally, but I have never bought the feminist subtext that seems to regard the dominant culture as a male construct imposed on women. Culture is a construct of female perceptions as well as mens.

You want to know why women did not build a national league years ago, but are jumping on the bandwagon now. There was a long standing cultural assumption that footy was a boys sport, and this was as entrenched in the attitudes of women as it was in men. My mother, in her 70s, and very into sport, still rolls her eyes at the idea of women playing footy. All her friends of the same age are similar. It just does not compute, they cannot get their heads around, why they want to, how they can, why anyone would watch irrespective of quality.

Chloe Molloy in a recent interview spoke of her love of footy, and her time playing as the lone girl in a boys league up until the age of 12, when she got told she was to old to play with the boys anymore. She said she never even questioned that she could no longer play, her footy just ended, and she took up basketball, because that was the culture. She walked away from a basketball scholarship to the States to return to footy.

I am listening now to a podcast featuring Erin Hoare, who spoke of growing up in a footy family, near Kardinia park, and her love of footy, and how she played Netball, and didn't question it, because that is where the girls were.

Daisy Pearce grew up playing footy in a boys league, and when it finished, she played volleyball. She didn't know there was a womens league you could play in, it was so culturally out of the norm, she didn't even think to look.

I remember vaguely what little talk of womens footy I heard in the 90s as being almost exclusively about fat hairy butch lesbians who had no idea how to play (and to be honest, that was a fairly accurate assessment).

Womens football to become possible in a big way required significant cultural change, amongst women as much or more so than amongst men. That did not happen until the last 10 - 15 years. To believe it was possible prior to this is to seriously lack cultural understanding of your own country. The army forming a female combat brigade was as likely as a serious female football league.

We have a sequence.

Generations of women have liked football, and enjoyed playing sport, but never so much as thought of playing it themselves, as this was just to far outside cultural norms. Footy was a boys sport, the end.

A changing culture made playing football possible, but only at the extremes. A few girls might think they would like to play, but actually making that leap was difficult. Footy was a boys sport, and a fat hairy lesbians sport, the end.

The spread of more assertive female sports, boxing etc, the push into professions such as the police force, makes footy seem less a taboo. More girls look to play, but its still not the norm. Most girls still live in an environment where footy is, without question, a boys sport. It takes a court case to get a girls junior program of the ground in Vic. The AFL, and state bodies are still not really interested but, its still a novelty in the scheme of things.

Womens footy spreads, but of a low base, and older male admins attitudes are still stuck 3 steps back in the, footy is a boys sport, the end, phase. A burgeoning SA womens league basically dies because of something between disinterest and open hostility from the established SA footy authorities. Every where, its a novelty, and even most women know nothing much about it. Note, creating a new league, in a space where grounds and facilities are already tied up by men, is near impossible if the male leagues and or councils do not get on board.

Then we enter the profile phase. We have state teams playing each other, it starts to get a bit of notice, more and more of the footy loving sporty girls are starting to think `hold on, I can actually play if I want??` However, thinking it, and actually doing it are differnt, options are strictly limited. Female footy enters a phase of expansion. The push in AFL house for resources for the womens game begins in earnest. It does not initially bear much fruit, but there is no other realistic source of the resources required. State leagues start to take notice, some bigger community clubs buy in. There is enough interest for some female only clubs to form.

Then the AFL gets involved and everything turbo chargers. TV exposure, girls are suddenly faced with the prospect that playing for the club their whole family supports is possible, and growth becomes exponential. Now, ALL of the girls that are into footy, and like playing sport are thinking, I can play footy, and unlike previously, where thinking it was one thing, but finding somewhere you could actually do it, was another, they can. We start to see the cross coders, the girls that would have played if it had been seen as an option, start switching back. There is no organisation that can resource this phase, but the AFL. If the AFL is not involved, it does not happen.



This sequence cannot begin prior to Australia being culturally ready, and no organisation but the AFL can resource it. Its why the pioneers of the expansion phase all went to the AFL, what they required was not available anywhere else.

 

[SunGirl89]

Representation for weaker conferences, Oceanic/Asia would probably struggle to get any sides in if they had to play and beat a number European/South American sides.

Oceania gets 0.5 spots at the FIFA World Cup. Asia gets 4.5. Conference B is pretty much Oceania but is being treated equal to South America.

Next year with 6 teams in each pool it helps guarantee a western Derby/q clash and an assortment of Richmond/Carlton/Collingwood matches.

AFLW has 14 teams in 2020, not 12.

I don't understand why they didn't go with crossover finals.

The AFL/AFLW have not been crystal clear on this but has already been mentioned, the finals ARE crossover.

They have done their utmost best to stuff up this season but only complete idiots could stuff up the finals too.

 

[SunGirl89]

How will the finals work?
The top two teams from each conference will play off in preliminary finals on the opening weekend of the AFL season. The team that finishes first in conference A will take on the second-placed team in conference B, and vice-versa. The winners will meet in the Grand Final.

http://www.afl.com.au/news/2018-09-07/aflw-2019-all-you-need-to-know-about-system

It's almost like Nicole knows nothing about football, she definitely knows nothing about mathematical equity. LOL at saying the VFL had a conference system. Yeah, they did but only in the finals, and it too was poorly implemented and was subsequently scrapped after 3 seasons.

 

[Caputo]

I take exception to the recent bullshit arguments. Disagree unicorns are real! Younger Buddy Franklin, younger Gazza Jr and Erin Phillips.

 

[owen87]

no organisation but the AFL can resource it.

Pretty much it in a nutshell; there's been leagues of varying level and standard for women around for quite a while. To be an 'elite' league however, they needed the backing of the highest and best recognised competition for men - the AFL.

That the AFL chose to use alignment with existing AFL teams and not the already established women's teams e.g. Darebin, Melbourne University etc.. indicates where the AFL believed the biggest and quickest growth in interest (and therefore sponsorship dollars) was going to come from. Established followers of the game, and clubs, crossing over to take an interest in 'their' women's side. This is the same reason the competition is given clear air before the AFL season proper commences.

 

[Bostonian]

Cyclists? wtf has that got to do with anything, last time I checked, cycling was not an invasion sport, let alone a contact sport. Female tennis was big to, doesn't mean the people enjoying watching the womens final at the local tennis club were going to stand for them playing footy.

I see much contradiction in this. What exactly is an invasion sport? It's refuting your point because it shows that is women liked something there was opportunity to play it.

And yes, that female leagues and teams were starved of resources by men who thought the whole idea of womens football was stupid, is not a perception, interviews about the history of womens footy from the period almost always refer to the fight to get basic facilities (such as an oval), despite them sitting there unused.

I wanted to look into this claim a bit deeper. I posted a photo somewhere on BF of a family members Grandmother in a B&W photo when she was part of a football team way back in the day (she's almost hit 90). I thought why not go straight to someone who would have the actual answers and not the perceptions. So I contacted her.

What you have stated isn't the definitive reason as to why women's leagues didn't take off. In her words "It just wasn't popular among young women".

So there's that.

AFL is a beast that sucks in footy funding and attention. Most of the bigger sponsors the AFLW have got, they don`t get as an independent league. Sponsors are not in it for altruism any more than the AFL is. The profile AFL gives the womens league makes them viable in a way that they wouldn't be otherwise.

I disagree. Plenty of huge sponsors out there for a women's competition that wouldn't have any ties to the men's game.

You're thinking is too constrained. A profile for something can be created with the right person heading the campaign.

Imagine the old AFL campaign "I'd like to see that" but done with a heap of famous female celebrities and business women promoting the idea.

You ask whats wrong with self determination, its called failure. You use the tools available to build what is required. The only tool that counts in this regard is the AFL. If the AFL do not do it, then it never gets above community level football. They will not attract the money, the attention, the resources else wise. That might not be desirable, it is possibly not what a lot of the more feminist minded want, but it is just how it is. For someone like Alberti to set out to build a national womens comp from scratch, without the AFL, is incompetent.

What?

You're so small minded. With your kind of outlook nothing would ever have been created with that mindset.

Alberti didn't have to be the person to build it, she could have just been the person to start gathering people of different skill sets and wealth creation potential and get they working on a common goal.

I find it ironic that the most radical feminist commentators on AFLW, those that frame the debate in terms of gender politics exclusively, want freedom from the shackles of the AFL, not unlike you. Those women involved that come at it from a football perspective are fully into this being the AFL. The difference is, feminists (and you), prefer gesture politics, and the footballers want a successful league.

Wrong. My view always was it should have been built up slowly and not just throw millions of dollars at it. Which is the AFL way.

This debate is centred a bit about men v women culturally, but I have never bought the feminist subtext that seems to regard the dominant culture as a male construct imposed on women. Culture is a construct of female perceptions as well as mens.

I'm only looking at it from the potential of a unique opportunity to start something up that's not been done before at that level. Blame the marketer in me in seeing that potential.

You want to know why women did not build a national league years ago, but are jumping on the bandwagon now. There was a long standing cultural assumption that footy was a boys sport, and this was as entrenched in the attitudes of women as it was in men. My mother, in her 70s, and very into sport, still rolls her eyes at the idea of women playing footy. All her friends of the same age are similar. It just does not compute, they cannot get their heads around, why they want to, how they can, why anyone would watch irrespective of quality.

Sounds like a cop out. As I've stated previously in my attempt to get a women's team up and running in the 90's it wasn't culture that was the issue. It was simply lack of interest. We must have asked hundreds of girls if they were interested and the over whelming common theme was "got better things to do with their time, not interested".

Which somewhat matches up with the earlier message from the near 90 year old that stated it was a lack of interest was the real issue.

Chloe Molloy in a recent interview spoke of her love of footy, and her time playing as the lone girl in a boys league up until the age of 12, when she got told she was to old to play with the boys anymore. She said she never even questioned that she could no longer play, her footy just ended, and she took up basketball, because that was the culture. She walked away from a basketball scholarship to the States to return to footy.

If there was only one girl playing the interest wasn't that high there. Agreed?

I am listening now to a podcast featuring Erin Hoare, who spoke of growing up in a footy family, near Kardinia park, and her love of footy, and how she played Netball, and didn't question it, because that is where the girls were.

I live in Geelong. That's where the girls were because that's what they wanted to play. Which is why we had little success in the 90's recruiting them. This is the new fad. She could have played with North Geelong if she wanted too.

Daisy Pearce grew up playing footy in a boys league, and when it finished, she played volleyball. She didn't know there was a womens league you could play in, it was so culturally out of the norm, she didn't even think to look.

I find that a weak excuse to not find out.

I remember vaguely what little talk of womens footy I heard in the 90s as being almost exclusively about fat hairy butch lesbians who had no idea how to play (and to be honest, that was a fairly accurate assessment).

So the key to football being popular was to get rid of the fat hairy lesbians?

Womens football to become possible in a big way required significant cultural change, amongst women as much or more so than amongst men. That did not happen until the last 10 - 15 years. To believe it was possible prior to this is to seriously lack cultural understanding of your own country. The army forming a female combat brigade was as likely as a serious female football league.

It required people getting off their arses and not waiting for things to be done for them.

You talk about understanding culture of this country. What about the culture of rolling up your sleeves and getting s**t done?

We have a sequence.

Generations of women have liked football, and enjoyed playing sport, but never so much as thought of playing it themselves, as this was just to far outside cultural norms. Footy was a boys sport, the end.

It's one excuse after another.

A changing culture made playing football possible, but only at the extremes. A few girls might think they would like to play, but actually making that leap was difficult. Footy was a boys sport, and a fat hairy lesbians sport, the end.

More excuses.

The spread of more assertive female sports, boxing etc, the push into professions such as the police force, makes footy seem less a taboo. More girls look to play, but its still not the norm. Most girls still live in an environment where footy is, without question, a boys sport. It takes a court case to get a girls junior program of the ground in Vic. The AFL, and state bodies are still not really interested but, its still a novelty in the scheme of things.

Why would it require a court case to start up an independent junior program?

Womens footy spreads, but of a low base, and older male admins attitudes are still stuck 3 steps back in the, footy is a boys sport, the end, phase. A burgeoning SA womens league basically dies because of something between disinterest and open hostility from the established SA footy authorities. Every where, its a novelty, and even most women know nothing much about it. Note, creating a new league, in a space where grounds and facilities are already tied up by men, is near impossible if the male leagues and or councils do not get on board.

Thus supporting my vision to start their own thing. Take those older men out of the equation. It's just as much a fad now as it was a novelty back then. Only time will tell how much the fad can be built upon.

Then we enter the profile phase. We have state teams playing each other, it starts to get a bit of notice, more and more of the footy loving sporty girls are starting to think `hold on, I can actually play if I want??` However, thinking it, and actually doing it are differnt, options are strictly limited. Female footy enters a phase of expansion. The push in AFL house for resources for the womens game begins in earnest. It does not initially bear much fruit, but there is no other realistic source of the resources required. State leagues start to take notice, some bigger community clubs buy in. There is enough interest for some female only clubs to form.

I'm starting to get the vibe that footy loving sporty girls are a bit thick and aren't capable of doing a bit of research. I'm not sure if it's because of my efforts to start up a women's team but even I was aware female football existed back then.

Then the AFL gets involved and everything turbo chargers. TV exposure, girls are suddenly faced with the prospect that playing for the club their whole family supports is possible, and growth becomes exponential. Now, ALL of the girls that are into footy, and like playing sport are thinking, I can play footy, and unlike previously, where thinking it was one thing, but finding somewhere you could actually do it, was another, they can. We start to see the cross coders, the girls that would have played if it had been seen as an option, start switching back. There is no organisation that can resource this phase, but the AFL. If the AFL is not involved, it does not happen.

This is where the fad had kicked in. It's why athletes are jumping codes.

I'm seeing that fad aspect at local level. Lot's of girls/women giving it a try. Just as many already dropping off because it's not for them.

Sure the AFL was the most ready organisation to fund it, doesn't mean it was the best option though to build a great product long term.

As the old saying goes, first impressions last. And with the rushed way the AFL implemented things many a bad impression was made with much of the bog ordinary football. Whether the few stars in the league and their outstanding play were enough to counter that impression as always, time will tell.

 

[Stax on the mill]

Because he is a sad lonely old man with nothing else to do but troll on this forum.

Poor old Bostonian says he supports Carlton (which is sad enough), supports a pathetic southern English soccer team (which is really sad) and claims to have helped with Women’s footy (bullshit) but says women should help themselves. He can’t even lie straight. I wonder what his imaginary wife has to say about this?

Don’t know about being a sad lonely old man. However reading through the various posts, Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse. You should try it sometime.

Your intolerant and abusive reaction to being bested in an argument might win you some likes from people with similar characteristics. I prefer to believe that it merely displays a childish desparation when one has to resort to such a style of posting.

 

[TWLS]

Have extracted this line from above article --
"Sure the AFL was the most ready organisation to fund it, doesn't mean it was the best option though to build a great product long term."

So your telling us that the AFL does not control the game in Australia completely - Nothing happens in the sport without them having a say. It starts at AFL House and spreads down the chain.
The Victorians will never relinquish their control of the game so your remarks about a independant group forming up a National/State Womens comp is not reality based.
I can tell you the AFLW is not a fad - It is here to stay, so we will see who is right in 5 years.
It has come along at the right time for our sport by adding vital numbers for heaps of reasons and a maybe decline in male numbers is occurring. The WA Mens Amateurs are reporting this year that numbers progressing from the junior clubs in their districts are down.

 

[Clems Knee]

Don’t know about being a sad lonely old man. However reading through the various posts, Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse. You should try it sometime.

Your intolerant and abusive reaction to being bested in an argument might win you some likes from people with similar characteristics. I prefer to believe that it merely displays a childish desparation when one has to resort to such a style of posting.

Bostonian is a troll. He has no reason to be posting in the manner he is. If you think he has made a single point, it reflects very poorly on your intellect. And he has name called a lot. The personal abuse of a Carlton player in particular has been galling.

 

[The_Wookie]

Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse. You should try it sometime.

Thats an interesting take.

 

[Slack Nang]

Bostonian is not a troll. They have been pretty consistent in their argument since the inception of the AFLW and their first post on the subject

Better posters than me have spent far too much time and energy highlighting just how wrong they are but to Bostonians credit they have stuck steadfast to their convictions

I mean, ya gotta admire that. To be outlandishly, stubbornly, pig headedly, stupefyingly wrong and still think you're right and post about it is bravado usually reserved for a boxing movie or Vietnam War epic when a movie studio wants to win an award

And let's face it, by name goes the nature

You keep being you... Bostonian

 

[jatz14]

Don’t know about being a sad lonely old man. However reading through the various posts, Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse. You should try it sometime.

Your intolerant and abusive reaction to being bested in an argument might win you some likes from people with similar characteristics. I prefer to believe that it merely displays a childish desparation when one has to resort to such a style of posting.

Can you give me one fact he has taken someone to the cleaners with? I must have missed it, all I have read is opinion, backed up by more opinion.

And I never thought he was a troll, just wrong.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk

 

[SM]

Who says it was going to be simple? Sometimes it takes hard work and time to create something.

Are you a Millennial? You sound just like one.

Are you a crusty Baby Boomer? Entitled to everything but when someone else gets something you cry about it for days on end.

 

[SM]

Don’t know about being a sad lonely old man. However reading through the various posts, Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse. You should try it sometime.

Your intolerant and abusive reaction to being bested in an argument might win you some likes from people with similar characteristics. I prefer to believe that it merely displays a childish desparation when one has to resort to such a style of posting.

Weirdly enough, he has actually resorted to name calling a number of times.

 

[Colonial]

Don’t know about being a sad lonely old man. However reading through the various posts, Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse. You should try it sometime.

Your intolerant and abusive reaction to being bested in an argument might win you some likes from people with similar characteristics. I prefer to believe that it merely displays a childish desparation when one has to resort to such a style of posting.

Lol.

What a load of garbage.

The guy is whinging because it is too successful.

"The grassroots and ratings are growing to quickly damn it"

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk

 

[wayToGo_]

However reading through the various posts, Bostonian has singlehandedly taken you and some of your cohorts to the cleaners with logic and actual facts. All whilst not resorting to name calling and personal abuse.

Can you enlighten us on any of these facts?

So far he has claimed that history is ONLY about class discrimination - factually massively wrong. He has claimed that women had the exact same opportunities as men in the past - factually wrong. He has claimed he has earned the right to play football professionally (and women haven't) for no other reason than some people of the same gender as him created the AFL originally - completely illogical. When asked about earning the right himself - he brings up his helping footy clubs and volunteering - because no women have ever helped clubs or volunteered before? - again completely illogical argument. He has claimed the women's competition would have been better if done independently of the AFL yet all factual research and analysis shows that the take up at grassroots by young girls (the main goal) would have been nothing like what has happened if it were done so independently. Apparently a few women cyclists back pre WWII is evidence that the culture of women in football was no different to that of men - so so so illogical. So many illogical and factually incorrect arguments that I (and I assume others) didn't even bother responding to the vast majority of them. Like I said, it's like trying to have serious intellectual debate with someone who throws in "but unicorns are real" argument" when they are unable to form a logical argument.

He refuses to address the main point of contention that inheriting rights is not the same as earning rights. He fails to accept that men and women are the same species. And that plenty of women have helped the AFL men's competition progress - plenty are fans that are members, ticket purchasers, merchandise buyers - plenty are mothers of sons that went on to become AFL footballers, driving them to practice etc. Just because the players of the past have only been men it does not mean the league only involved men in its establishment and development. Nothing that is created by society should be owned by one gender/class/race/religion/etc - by virtue of it being created and developed by society it should be "inherited" by all. Therefore the argument that the AFL has been earned ONLY by men is ludicrous! He is upset because some of the money he spends on AFL is being put into AFLW, but he like all consumers has a choice not to put any of his money into an organisation if he doesn't agree with how it is being spent. I'm fairly confident the AFL Commission aren't too worried about a very small but loud minority who may consider not renewing their memberships (over this issue) because the numbers are completely insignificant when compared to the hundreds of thousands of female fans they are creating from the grassroots upward with the investment in AFLW. You don't have to be a very saavy business mind to realise that investing relatively little to double the size of your market in the long run is a smart business decision.

And the name calling thing? Seriously? His response to one of my posts was he and his imaginary wife laughing about my post and implying I wasn't a real man. Your analysis of the situation is as logical and factual as his is about women's football.

 

[Clems Knee]

And I never thought he was a troll, just wrong.

See, I reckon if someone posts stuff that gets refuted comprehensively, but continues to post the same stuff without changing any of their views, that’s a form of trolling. The references to his (supposed) wife, misogynous comments about opportunity and history, and snide comments about individuals all point to trolling. He also uses the same methodology of splitting up a post to point score portions without any coherent argument in the same way that established trolls such as Sweet Jesus do.

I admire the patience of many posters such as yourself who take the posts at face value, but I think they may be giving oxygen to this oxygen thief.

 

[owen87]

methodology of splitting up a post to point score portions

One of my pet hates in online forums; breaking down to minutea in order to point score instead of just addressing the premise and concept itself.

 

[Bostonian]

Are you a crusty Baby Boomer? Entitled to everything but when someone else gets something you cry about it for days on end.

Sadly you picked wrong.

I'm Gen X. We get s**t done.

 

[Colonial]

Sadly you picked wrong.

I'm Gen X. We get s**t done.

Lol yeah no.

I'm Gen X and even I know we are a bit to laid back for our own good.
To much "meh" and "she'll be right".

Sent from my SM-G960F using Tapatalk