Play Nice First transgender player in the AFLW

[owen87]

If you don't question it then the insanity is considered a norm. You're forcing their assertion onto other people with zero ability to reject it.

If my daughter doesn't want to play football against a man playing in a women's league then the way it is going she would be the one forced to quit playing. Not the male.

Thats a total garbage outcome.

Did you actually read my first sentence?

 

[Bostonian]

Did you actually read my first sentence?

I did. And I replied in kind because the narrative that is trying to be framed is that if you don't recognise a trans person as what they claim they are its being disrespectful.

Do tell me how one can respond to their claim in a respectful way and reject the whole proposition that men can all of a sudden now be women?

Is it possible?

 

[owen87]

I did. And I replied in kind because the narrative that is trying to be framed is that if you don't recognise a trans person as what they claim they are its being disrespectful.

Do tell me how one can respond to their claim in a respectful way and reject the whole proposition that men can all of a sudden now be women?

Is it possible?

Because Mouncey's wishes or preference to be referred to a she/her does not - in my opinion - mean participation in the equivalent sporting competition is also automatically allowed.

I don't think she should be permitted to play in the VFLW or AFLW, but it also does me no harm to refer to her as 'Hannah' or 'she' in the interests of basic respect for the individual.

Participation in elite sport is not a right, nor is legal recognition of change of gender - certainly not without meeting certain criteria, which we can debate further I'm sure - but I do believe that where a reasonable and respectful request is made, that has no impact upon my own circumstances, then we can be mature enough to do that.

The problem is that we end up with a black and white scenario; either you must recognise Hannah as a woman and therefore she is entitled to everything a biological women is - e.g. participation in women's sporting competitions - or you must reject that she's a women and call Hannah a he (and whatever name came before Hannah) and that therefore participation in women's sports isn't allowed.

There's a whole raft of space between the two extremes; one where we can treat the individual with respect and care, whilst also protecting the bounds of women's sport - and where relevant; men's sport.

If someone introduces themselves to you as Jim and you find out their legal name is James, but they only answer to Jim; do you just call them Jim or do you insist on going against that and calling them James? Do you then argue with them that because their birth certificate says their name is James, they must only be called James?

 

[Bostonian]

Because Mouncey's wishes or preference to be referred to a she/her does not - in my opinion - mean participation in the equivalent sporting competition is also automatically allowed.

I don't think she should be permitted to play in the VFLW or AFLW, but it also does me no harm to refer to her as 'Hannah' or 'she' in the interests of basic respect for the individual.

Participation in elite sport is not a right, nor is legal recognition of change of gender - certainly not without meeting certain criteria, which we can debate further I'm sure - but I do believe that where a reasonable and respectful request is made, that has no impact upon my own circumstances, then we can be mature enough to do that.

The problem is that we end up with a black and white scenario; either you must recognise Hannah as a woman and therefore she is entitled to everything a biological women is - e.g. participation in women's sporting competitions - or you must reject that she's a women and call Hannah a he (and whatever name came before Hannah) and that therefore participation in women's sports isn't allowed.

There's a whole raft of space between the two extremes; one where we can treat the individual with respect and care, whilst also protecting the bounds of women's sport - and where relevant; men's sport.

If someone introduces themselves to you as Jim and you find out their legal name is James, but they only answer to Jim; do you just call them Jim or do you insist on going against that and calling them James? Do you then argue with them that because their birth certificate says their name is James, they must only be called James?

See that's my issue. Mouncey is clearly a man.

I'm not going to pretend they are as they claim just to appease their wish.

If someone claims they are an alien and want to be called high commander of Mars are you going to call them that or think they are weird and have a screw loose?

This is Australia, we give people nicknames all the time even if they don't want them. You think all the blokes that have been called horse or bluey loved their nicknames?

 

[owen87]

See that's my issue. Mouncey is clearly a man.

I'm not going to pretend they are as they claim just to appease their wish.

If someone claims they are an alien and want to be called high commander of Mars are you going to call them that or think they are weird and have a screw loose?

This is Australia, we give people nicknames all the time even if they don't want them. You think all the blokes that have been called horse or bluey loved their nicknames?

You're still completely missing the point about actually showing a level of respect to another individual.

You can disagree with Mouncey's life choices, but insofar as calling Mouncey "she" goes, what effect does it actually have on you? What effect does being called "he" have on someone who is clearly uncomfortable with the term?

I'm all for free speech, but I'm also in favour of not being unnecessarily offensive to random strangers as well. Mental health being a thing goes both ways; you can't on one hand claim that you take mental illness seriously enough to think that Mouncey is unwell, whilst simultaneously neglecting the effect that words can have on mental health - if Mouncey was a direct relative or friend of yours, then yes, feel free to make comment on the individual specifics to that person directly.

If you want to discuss Mouncey's participation in the Women's AFL league(s) then that is of far more relevance than your personal dislike of Mouncey's life choices off the field.

 

[Bostonian]

You're still completely missing the point about actually showing a level of respect to another individual.

You can disagree with Mouncey's life choices, but insofar as calling Mouncey "she" goes, what effect does it actually have on you? What effect does being called "he" have on someone who is clearly uncomfortable with the term?

So you'll agree the earth is flat because a flat earther says it is just to respect their view? Or God is real even though you're an atheist just to respect a Muslim or Christian?

I certainly would not because it's validating their opinion of which I do not agree.

I can respectfully disagree with Mouncey's position or views.

I'm all for free speech, but I'm also in favour of not being unnecessarily offensive to random strangers as well. Mental health being a thing goes both ways; you can't on one hand claim that you take mental illness seriously enough to think that Mouncey is unwell, whilst simultaneously neglecting the effect that words can have on mental health - if Mouncey was a direct relative or friend of yours, then yes, feel free to make comment on the individual specifics to that person directly.

If you want to discuss Mouncey's participation in the Women's AFL league(s) then that is of far more relevance than your personal dislike of Mouncey's life choices off the field.

I never said I dislike Mouncey's choices, I said I don't recognise them in any kind of way as proof of something.

It's something we do all the time, refute people's claims. Even if I think Mouncey is unwell, there's a whole lot of other people telling them that they are perfectly normal and that anyone who doesn't agree 100% with their claim is a certain kind of person.

 

[owen87]

So you'll agree the earth is flat because a flat earther says it is just to respect their view? Or God is real even though you're an atheist just to respect a Muslim or Christian?

I certainly would not because it's validating their opinion of which I do not agree.

I can respectfully disagree with Mouncey's position or views.



I never said I dislike Mouncey's choices, I said I don't recognise them in any kind of way as proof of something.

It's something we do all the time, refute people's claims. Even if I think Mouncey is unwell, there's a whole lot of other people telling them that they are perfectly normal and that anyone who doesn't agree 100% with their claim is a certain kind of person.

Ok let’s follow your religious distraction through;

Mouncey asking you to refer to her as well, her, is akin to a Muslim (or Christian etc) asking you not to swear in church.

Maybe you don’t believe in God, but not swearing does you no harm, makes your friend happy, and shows a basic element of human decency.

Calling Mouncey him, is akin to you running in to the church and yelling out “Jesus is a campaigner and Mohammed is gay”.

Sure maybe they’re wrong and there is no God, but you’re also an arsehole for doing it.

You can debate Mouncey’s right to play in the women’s league until the cows come home, but play the ball, not the man (or woman).

 

[Over The Post]

Exactly. If Bostonian cannot bring himself to refer to Hannah Mouncey as "her" then he is more than welcome to not post in this thread.

There is a difference between arguing a point and being an arse about it, Iworkthecircus and now Bostonian have crossed it.

As the title of this thread says - play nicely.

 

[sprockets]

Ok let’s follow your religious distraction through;

Mouncey asking you to refer to her as well, her, is akin to a Muslim (or Christian etc) asking you not to swear in church.

Maybe you don’t believe in God, but not swearing does you no harm, makes your friend happy, and shows a basic element of human decency.

Calling Mouncey him, is akin to you running in to the church and yelling out “Jesus is a campaigner and Mohammed is gay”.

Sure maybe they’re wrong and there is no God, but you’re also an arsehole for doing it.

You can debate Mouncey’s right to play in the women’s league until the cows come home, but play the ball, not the man (or woman).

You seem to be telling Bostonian how he should think and act. Doesn't that go against what you're telling him? He has a view/belief that he's entitled to and you should accept it and move on.

 

[owen87]

You seem to be telling Bostonian how he should think and act. Doesn't that go against what you're telling him? He has a view/belief that he's entitled to and you should accept it and move on.

As I said; I think he's welcome to debate the topic at hand - transgender players in the AFLW - but doing so doesn't mean you have the be disrespectful to the individual person.

Surely we can agree that Mouncey is as much a person deserving of respect as the rest of us, and making the effort to either use the individuals preferred pronoun - her - or just work around it by not using a gender pronoun if it's something that you have particular strong feelings about. It's not as though this was a mistake, it's as deliberate as me calling a gay person a ****** and saying it's fine because they have a mental illness.

As I said above - in my opinion - you play the ball, not the man. We can discuss whether a transgender player should compete in the AFLW without having to be offensive to make our point, and if his view is that Mouncey shouldn't be participating in the AFLW or VFLW competitions, I would agree.

 

[Theprofessional]

Ok let’s follow your religious distraction through;

Mouncey asking you to refer to her as well, her, is akin to a Muslim (or Christian etc) asking you not to swear in church.

Maybe you don’t believe in God, but not swearing does you no harm, makes your friend happy, and shows a basic element of human decency.

Calling Mouncey him, is akin to you running in to the church and yelling out “Jesus is a campaigner and Mohammed is gay”.

Sure maybe they’re wrong and there is no God, but you’re also an arsehole for doing it.

You can debate Mouncey’s right to play in the women’s league until the cows come home, but play the ball, not the man (or woman).

If you are attending a church or Mosque you are in a place (safe space if you will) where they are practicing their beliefs- you of course should follow the rules of said place. If I went into a LGBT safe space I'd obviously refer to Mouncey as a her.

If a Christian/Muslim asked you not to swear everywhere in public- you don't have to. How far does your human decency need to stretch? If I ask you to please delete your account- will you do so?

It's a completely nonsense comparison.

 

[kirsti]

If you are attending a church or Mosque you are in a place (safe space if you will) where they are practicing their beliefs- you of course should follow the rules of said place. If I went into a LGBT safe space I'd obviously refer to Mouncey as a her.

If a Christian/Muslim asked you not to swear everywhere in public- you don't have to. How far does your human decency need to stretch? If I ask you to please delete your account- will you do so?

It's a completely nonsense comparison.

This thread was created by a trans woman and it was posted to discuss the merits of trans people playing in the AFLW it wasn’t created to disrespect any individual including Hannah Mouncey. Hannah’s legal name is Hannah she identifies as a female. By all means attack the policy as I have even attack the merits of Hannah playing women’s sport but attacking her gender identity is not the purpose of this thread. There are plenty of other threads where you don’t have to play nicely.

 

[kirsti]

If you are attending a church or Mosque you are in a place (safe space if you will) where they are practicing their beliefs- you of course should follow the rules of said place. If I went into a LGBT safe space I'd obviously refer to Mouncey as a her.

If a Christian/Muslim asked you not to swear everywhere in public- you don't have to. How far does your human decency need to stretch? If I ask you to please delete your account- will you do so?

It's a completely nonsense comparison.

If you went to watch Hannah play in the VFLW and vilified her on her gender status under the AFLs Members Protection Policy if identified you would face sanctions.

 

[Theprofessional]

This thread was created by a trans woman and it was posted to discuss the merits of trans people playing in the AFLW it wasn’t created to disrespect any individual including Hannah Mouncey. Hannah’s legal name is Hannah she identifies as a female. By all means attack the policy as I have even attack the merits of Hannah playing women’s sport but attacking her gender identity is not the purpose of this thread. There are plenty of other threads where you don’t have to play nicely.

I'm replying to an individual who is the one making things off topic? Don't pick and choose what's on topic because it fits you.

Can keep going in circles and the comparisons of Sandilands and Caleb Daniels can be made but it's missing the point. They are two different males born male.

Male-to-female trans athletes will always have a biological advantage in terms of size, muscle mass, bone density and lung capacity. Ignoring testosterone completely Hannah has advantages over their female counterparts- that plus the many years of building muscle and living life as a man.

These are HUGE advantages which are as a result of the fact that they were born a male- with male genitals, body parts, testosterone and the lot. The fact that they are now reducing their testosterone and changing certain aspects of their genetic markup to become more aligned with female doesn't change all the advantages they have from years of living as a man.

You can't have an unfair physical developmental advantage and get your body to a physical point and then slightly reduce only certain aspects of your body to reach guidelines when you still have other advantages from the process.

It's open to abuse- and it's dangerous.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...ht-of-Irans-womens-football-team-are-men.html

 

[kirsti]

I'm replying to an individual who is the one making things off topic? Don't pick and choose what's on topic because it fits you.

Can keep going in circles and the comparisons of Sandilands and Caleb Daniels can be made but it's missing the point. They are two different males born male.

Male-to-female trans athletes will always have a biological advantage in terms of size, muscle mass, bone density and lung capacity. Ignoring testosterone completely Hannah has advantages over their female counterparts- that plus the many years of building muscle and living life as a man.

These are HUGE advantages which are as a result of the fact that they were born a male- with male genitals, body parts, testosterone and the lot. The fact that they are now reducing their testosterone and changing certain aspects of their genetic markup to become more aligned with female doesn't change all the advantages they have from years of living as a man.

You can't have an unfair physical developmental advantage and get your body to a physical point and then slightly reduce only certain aspects of your body to reach guidelines when you still have other advantages from the process.

It's open to abuse- and it's dangerous.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wo...ht-of-Irans-womens-football-team-are-men.html

I am a transitioned woman who’s body is in a state of complete androgen deprivation my main androgen receptor was surgically removed 13 years ago I am the lightest woman in my AFL team, I am the only player in my team that can’t prouduce adrogens.

XY women (fully transitioned) are the only athletes competing unhealthy in a complete androgen deprivation state and well beyond a (post menopause state). Incredibly unhealthy and spore eventually becomes impossible as the body deteriorates as it cannot respond to day-to-day functions without androgens as the bodies primary communications and regulator hormone.

Moreover and important, the XY transitioned female is the only body that can show the health and key markers where the body turns on then off, as the body loses its ability to regulate androgens.

Which then causes complete androgen deprivation of the human body, heavily contraindicates it as testosterone plays over 200 functions in the body every single day separate of the sex of the physiology.

Physically I am at a huge disadvantage to my biological female teammates.

Vo2 oxygen levels are reduced well within the normal female range within 12 months of reduced testosterone treatment reductions in bone density and muscle mass varies between each transitioning person the age at the time of transition and also the previous participation in sport can add years to this feminisation process. My pre transition body was around 110kg a former dual male international athletes body today I am 57kg size six.

 

[Theprofessional]

I am a transitioned woman who’s body is in a state of complete androgen deprivation my main androgen receptor was surgically removed 13 years ago I am the lightest woman in my AFL team, I am the only player in my team that can’t prouduce adrogens.

XY women (fully transitioned) are the only athletes competing unhealthy in a complete androgen deprivation state and well beyond a (post menopause state). Incredibly unhealthy and spore eventually becomes impossible as the body deteriorates as it cannot respond to day-to-day functions without androgens as the bodies primary communications and regulator hormone.

Moreover and important, the XY transitioned female is the only body that can show the health and key markers where the body turns on then off, as the body loses its ability to regulate androgens.

Which then causes complete androgen deprivation of the human body, heavily contraindicates it as testosterone plays over 200 functions in the body every single day separate of the sex of the physiology.

Physically I am at a huge disadvantage to my biological female teammates.

Great. Now on topic with Hannah.

Is Hannah the same?
Has she fully transitioned?
Is she post menopause state?
Is her body in a androgen deprived state?

Or is there very clear differences between yourself and Hannah when it comes to the transition and thus should be discussed accordingly- especially when Hannah is attempting to enter sport at a professional level as a woman.

 

[kirsti]

Great. Now on topic with Hannah.

Is Hannah the same?
Has she fully transitioned?
Is she post menopause state?
Is her body in a androgen deprived state?

Or is there very clear differences between yourself and Hannah when it comes to the transition and thus should be discussed accordingly- especially when Hannah is attempting to enter sport at a professional level as a woman.

Has been discussed many times from the inception of this thread which I created. I can say without a doubt my pre transition muscle
mass was far greater then Hannah’s.

 

[Theprofessional]

Surely the idea of a trans person being able to compete against women shouldn't even be entertained until all the advantages of puberty (as a male), living with male testosterone levels, having a male edocrine system, male bone density and other MALE advantages are completely gone.

Surely once advantages, which you have previously acknowledged Hannah would have for longer than yourself (given professional athlete history) have completely objectively been removed (if at all possible) only then should the idea of Hannah being able to compete at a professional level be discussed.

Until that point, isn't it simply a discussion of Hannah has huge advantages due to living and developing as man- has not and will not undergo the full transformation process and therefore will always have these advantages over women- yet we should still let them compete?

 

[Theprofessional]

Has been discussed many times from the inception of this thread which I created. I can say without a doubt my pre transition muscle
mass was far greater then Hannah’s.

Excellent. And now yours is far lower than it was before, and lower than Hannahs.- Hannahs however is still clearly very high. Which means you both are at completely different stages in your transitions and Hannah clearly has a lot of advantages from living and developing as a man- advantages which could and should rationally be deemed unfair.

 

[kirsti]

Surely the idea of a trans person being able to compete against women shouldn't even be entertained until all the advantages of puberty (as a male), living with male testosterone levels, having a male edocrine system, male bone density and other MALE advantages are completely gone.

Surely once advantages, which you have previously acknowledged Hannah would have for longer than yourself (given professional athlete history) have completely objectively been removed (if at all possible) only then should the idea of Hannah being able to compete at a professional level be discussed.

Until that point, isn't it simply a discussion of Hannah has huge advantages due to living and developing as man- has not and will not undergo the full transformation process and therefore will always have these advantages over women- yet we should still let them compete?

I never said it would take Hannah longer to minimise her advantage then I did, I was a duel international athlete as a male Hannah was in one sport I also had greater muscle mass then Hannah pre transition. If Hannah fully transitions I have no doubt she would eventually minimise her advantage in women’s competition.

 

[kirsti]

Excellent. And now yours is far lower than it was before, and lower than Hannahs.- Hannahs however is still clearly very high. Which means you both are at completely different stages in your transitions and Hannah clearly has a lot of advantages from living and developing as a man- advantages which could and should rationally be deemed unfair.

If you read back through the thread you would clearly see I have been the loudest in stating Hannah has not minimised her advantage as yet.

 

[kirsti]

Excellent. And now yours is far lower than it was before, and lower than Hannahs.- Hannahs however is still clearly very high. Which means you both are at completely different stages in your transitions and Hannah clearly has a lot of advantages from living and developing as a man- advantages which could and should rationally be deemed unfair.

Reposting for your information

My name is Kirsti Miller formerly Warren Miller I have grave concerns with the current transgender sports participation guidelines in particular with the guidelines in high impact sports such as AFL Football.

I am a former duel international male athlete having represented Australia at many world championships and Pan American Games in the sports of Modern Pentathlon and Aquathon. I am also a former first grade rugby league player with Wagga Brothers, I was an inaugural inductee in the Wagga Wagga Sporting Hall Of Fame I was the only inductee inducted for multiple sports being swimming, Modern Pentathlon and Aquathon. I was inducted alongside other Australian Sports Legends such as Mortimer, Sterling, Arthur Summons, Wayne Carey, Paul Kelly, Mark Taylor and Michael Slater.

In 2013 I became the first fully transitioned woman to play women’s AFL Football at any level in Australia out here in Broken Hill. I commenced my transition back in the year 2000 at the time I was the local Governor of the Broken Hill Correctional Centre. I underwent gender surgery in 2006 also having my birth certificate amended to female in 2006.

There has been a lot of controversy with transgender participation in sports in recent times in particular with the stories of Laurel Hubbard the Nz transitioned weightlifter and also Hannah Mouncey the former male international handball player and women’s Aussie Rules Football Player.

There has also been much misinformed information reported in recent times from both the media and also by Hannah Mouncey herself, these people are deers in the headlights in this conversation.

I am a long time transgender sports advocate and educator in diversity and inclusion in sports. I am heavily involved in global discussions and also discussions within Australia re developing an updated trans sports participation guidelines.

Not many people are aware that the new IOC Guidelines that were released prior to the Rio Olympics were developed in 1/2 a day by 90 sports officials without science. These policies were developed as a hip response to lesson liability in the divisional court in Toronto Canada in the human rights case of Canadian Transitioned Female Cyclist Kristen Worley’s historic human rights victory.

The current IOC policy removed the the requirement of trans females having to have had gender surgery as a prerequisite to compete and they also introduced a policy of trans women having to have a level of endogenous testosterone Of below 10nmols per litre of blood at least 12 months prior to there first competition in the female category.
The advantage with this new policy has without doubt tipped the advantage in the favour of transgender athletes and in high impact sports it has cause a definite health and safety risk to biologically born females.

What concerns me is that our competitors are being harshly criticised for objecting to this new policy or even for having their concerns voiced political correctness is rife in this conversation unfortunately.

There are many factors other then increased testosterone levels that significantly affect the competitive edge in sport such as nutrition,age,height, weight,access to coaching and training facilities, & other genetic and biological variations like oxygen-carrying capacity.

For a person transitioning from XY male to XY female we need to be able to show how we have minimised our strength & endurance by 10 to 12% the estimated performance difference between males and females across most sports that rely on endurance & strength. Up until puberty age there is very little performance difference between the sexes experiencing a male puberty is where the difference in males & females in endurance and strength becomes evident, @Scienceofsport explains this better then anyone I have heard before. To enable XY females to gain some credibility in sports we need to identify measurable quantities that can show all stakeholders how we have minimised this advantage of experiencing a male puberty and living years with a male endocrine system.Some of the measurable quantities I suggest could be screening pre transition V02 Oxygen levels, muscle mass , testosterone levels, bone density and BMI’s. We need the criteria to compete to be clear for both the transitioning athlete & our competitors. This hopefully would minimise transitioning athletes having to defend the right to compete each time they play sport & it would show our competition in measurable terms what the criteria is to compete, and when and how the criteria has been met. Our competition also face criticism unfairly when they question the rights of transitioning athletes competing this would be minimised with clearer and measurable quantities within trans participation policies.

For XX female to XX male athletes minimising performance is not seen necessary although I do have concerns this may be the case in the future with XX males being able to super dope unrestricted. XX females transitioning to XX males do not have to undergo a hysterectomy (removal of the womb and ovaries), but a gonadectomy (removal of testicles) is carried out on XY males transitioning to XY females.

What this means, in effect, is that XX males do not have the main testosterone-producing organ in their body removed, but XY females do. Sport has put forward the idea that transitioning from one sex to the other is the same process. The XY female’s body is broken down into a post-menopausal state and the complications that come with that. The XX male gets juiced, and goes into a hyper state due to their known biological sensitivity to androgens. You see them in football, in bodybuilding, in all the big muscle sports doing exceptionally well, because they are taking these high levels of testosterone that are completely unregulated. They never bring XX males back into a state of lower values after they have gone through transition. They just stick to those higher levels. Chris Mossier could not be competing the way that he competes as a biathlete without those really high levels of testosterone. Mack Beggs is a hyper-doping athlete competing in sport who is outperforming other female athletes. People should be complaining because it’s clearly doping. Chris Mossier , Beggs and others have been getting away with it and this is the problem with what the IOC has done. It has solely focused on the male/female social model, but has never done the necessary homework. The science actually opposes the IOC’s international policy.

With XY females fully transitioned I believe creating a fair inclusionpolicy could be achieved now, XY women (fully transitioned) are the only athletes competing unhealthy in a complete androgen deprivation state and well beyond a (post menopause state). Incredibly unhealthy and spore eventually becomes impossible as the body deteriorates as it cannot respond to day-to-day functions without androgens as the bodies primary communications and regulator hormone. Moreover and important, the XY transitioned female is the only body that can show the health and key markers where the body turns on then off, as the body loses its ability to regulate androgens. Which then causes complete androgen deprivation of the human body, heavily contraindicates it as testosterone plays over 200 functions in the body every single day separate of the sex of the physiology.

A transitioning XY Female (pre op)are not feeling full effects of complete androgen deprivation and plus 2 dozen contraindications because they still have gonads. If they were a HP athlete prior and during continued transition minimising the advantage in women's competition takes even longer years longer. A pre op XY female still has a male endocrine system all it takes is for the transitioning athlete is to not take their androgens blockers for a day and testosterone production will recommence.

A transitioning (pre op) XY Female effectively has the equivalent of a fully loaded syringe of testosterone at her disposal. As Hannah Mouncey states in a recent article she only had to provide her initial testosterone levels with no follow up tests very easy to manipulate testosterone levels. At the elite level of sport & also in high impact sports this is a grave concern. A transitioning XY female athlete could take just enough testosterone blockers to maintain a testosterone level at just under 10nmols very easily with manipulating her medication, almost impossible to police.

 

[owen87]

If you are attending a church or Mosque you are in a place (safe space if you will) where they are practicing their beliefs- you of course should follow the rules of said place. If I went into a LGBT safe space I'd obviously refer to Mouncey as a her.

If a Christian/Muslim asked you not to swear everywhere in public- you don't have to. How far does your human decency need to stretch? If I ask you to please delete your account- will you do so?

It's a completely nonsense comparison.

None of the above has any real relevance, and I didn't raise the example to debate increasingly absurd situations.

If you want to refer to Mouncey as a he; despite the knowledge that it's a term Mouncey is uncomfortable with, that it's of no real inconvenience or consequence to you aside from tapping a slightly different key on your keyboard (or not using a gender description at all), and that someone such as Kirsti can explain the very real personal feelings that come from someone ignoring a reasonable request to be treated with respect as a person, then that's on you.

If you want to discuss whether Mouncey (or any other transgender athlete) should be competing in the AFLW / VFLW competition, then surely you can do so without stooping to personal attacks? My interest is in the broader limits of participation in sporting competition, not in judging personal life choices that no-one aside from Mouncey's friends or family should have any concern with.

 

[Over The Post]

Consider the above post to be the official and rigid policy of this thread, on this board.

Thank you owen87 .

 

[Bostonian]

Exactly. If Bostonian cannot bring himself to refer to Hannah Mouncey as "her" then he is more than welcome to not post in this thread.

And here is exactly why people are railing against this mindset. You are literally using your power to force people into either agreeing with a view or you shut it down. This is how laws get enacted and authoritarianism rules.

Is that what you want? Be honest. Do you want it forced upon people to use pronouns even if people don't agree with them?

This is a man with male genitalia and you're using your power to force people to refer to them as "she" or they can't partake in a conversation.

Boggles the mind. Especially when nobody I'm wishing no harm upon them or saying they can't call themselves what they want.