Play Nice First transgender player in the AFLW

[Malifice]

The US college of paediatricians begs to differ:

No; one member (the President) differs in opinion. A position from that individual that has been rejected by the Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine, with the claims being debunked here:

https://www.adolescenthealth.org/SAHM-News/SAHM-Responds-to-Dr-Michelle-Cretella.aspx

The Society for Adolescent Health and Medicine strongly rejects the views of those in the medical community pushing political and ideological agendas not based on science and facts.

Recently, Dr. Michelle Cretella, the president of the American College of Pediatricians, penned a scathing attack on the transgender community thinly veiled as an argument against the dangers of transgender surgery and support; an argument based on medical omissions, circumstantial facts, hateful interpretation and peripheral context.

Earlier this month, the Adolescent Health News Roundup, compiled by Multiview and distributed by SAHM, included the article “I’m a Pediatrician. How Transgender Ideology Has Infiltrated My Field and Produced Large-Scale Child Abuse”. While SAHM welcomes opposing views and tries to include other perspectives in its weekly digest of news culled from around the internet, SAHM does not condone misinformation and hurtful, ideological opinion, not rooted in science or evidence-based medicine. The above-referenced article does not meet these standards and was included as “news” in error. It not only promotes a biased agenda, but does so with outright disregard for the facts. We sincerely apologize for including this alongside legitimate news stories and are currently revising our procedures to ensure this does not happen again.

Dr. Cretella begins with “What doctors once treated as a mental illness, the medical community now largely affirms and even promotes as normal.” She fails to reference historical medical errors with regard to mental illness such as hysteria, a catch-all diagnosis for outspoken women; nostalgia, an affliction to those who had left their home; or the color purple, once argued to drive people insane. She then lists eight “basic facts” which are anything but, and ends with a conclusion of “Transition-affirming protocol is child abuse.”

Like all science there is a level of broad consensus, but it is still a controversial topic.

 

[Tigersfan35]

You can’t have a 190 CM 100 KG frame with male sexual organs and play women’s league. It’s as simple as that. It would be unfair to all the other women who train their asses off.

 

[manboob]

The US college of paediatricians begs to differ:
here http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/1...sm-is-real-completely-destroys-it-with-truth/ (ignore the inflamitory article heading, watch the video.) if a child is chemically castrated pre-puberty then that is child abuse and nothing less.

Just keep it in your back pocket that the Heritage Foundation is a pretty conservative think tank in the US.

 

[ABSOLUTE MADMAN]

Ethncity (unlike gender) is a completely arbitrary social construct. It has no objective basis in biology.

Accordingly there needs to be a social agreement that you are what you say you are, by others of that group.

You can try and be postmodern and ignore that social construct. But then you might as well call yourself an ethnic 'Flangnozian' or whatever else you want to make up.

The timeline of acceptance of one is at a different point to the timeline of acceptance of the other. The logic and reason for both are at a similar level.

 

[FrustratedTiger]

Having a 100kg former bloke running around in the AFLW would turn the comp into parody. The AFL is trying to get families to bring their girls into the game - this would put a real spanner in the works. They've already other demographic problems to deal with, why make things worse?

But it's OK having her running around the local Canberra comp. That's much better

 

[RobbieK]

Possibly because of the outroar if she was banned from all leagues.

i totally get that this is a decision the AFL has made to compromise between the perception they want for the AFLW competition and the rights of a transgender athlete. Thy don't want to come out and just say that, though, because they worry about how making such an image-conscious decision to exclude a minority will lead to them being perceived, particularly at a time when they are putting themselves out there as a support of LGBTI rights. So yeah, it is like perception inception, perceptions in perceptions in perceptions.

The problem is, in being so worried about this, they have just ended up coming up with a decision and justification that don't make any sense.

Difference between elite and non elite competition i believe.

Surely elite athletes are going to be in a much better position to compete with Hannah's size than non-elite athletes, yeah? Elite athletes are going to be bigger, stronger, fitter. So, if there is a concern about Hannah having an unfair advantage at elite level, surely there should be an even greater concern about her advantage at lower levels?

 

[Rance2Mewtwo]

So society accepts a person who has a mind that contradicts their physical body and the external world.

The inner reality of a person's mind is deemed the top priority.

Extending this further, if someone has schizophrenia, we give them medication to remove the thoughts in their head that are inconsistent with reality.

Not that I'm drawing a parallel, but more broadly on the concept of subjective reality vs objective reality, how do transgender issues compare to such an analogy? In the future, should we be more accepting of the inconsistent subjective/objective thoughts that occur inside the mind of people with schizophrenia instead of trying to make them "normal"?

 

[Malifice]

The timeline of acceptance of one is at a different point to the timeline of acceptance of the other. The logic and reason for both are at a similar level.

I agree they are similar on many levels. But they are also different.

 

[MightyTiger]

Hillariously, I'm a lawyer.

A Carlton supporter as well. Harsh times.

 

[PrideOf]

Hillariously, I'm a lawyer.

The first time "hilarious" has been used in conjunction with "lawyer".

Kudos.

 

[Xtreme]

AFL had the chance for more positive pr and they stuffed up. I'm shocked to be sitting here as they normally would sell their soul to look good (eg: the YES sign).

 

[Malifice]

Not that I'm drawing a parallel, but more broadly on the concept of subjective reality vs objective reality, how do transgender issues compare to such an analogy?

Its a strawman.

People with schitzophrenia cant function in society becuase they percieve a totally different reality. They harm themselves, often becoming homeless, struggling to find and engage in work and society, or live normal productive lives. Entertaining and encourage it and you simply make those problems worse.

A transgender person percieves a different self-identity within that reality. It harms no-one. Entertaining it ameliorates the only problem with it which is depression and unhappiness. Allow and encourage them to express that self identity, and they become happier and live fuller lives.

One is a disorder because it is debilitating and harmful to the person unless supressed. The other only becomes debilitating and harmful to the person if supressed.

 

[BigHippy]

You are talking about Romero a olympian in the year 2000 who started competing in MMA in 2007 so not remotely compareable to that- or people who have been competing for 10+ years and are champions of their sport.

She walzed in at her late 30's lost one fight in controversial stances against someone who failed a drug test in their next fight and hasn't been as convincing. Furthermore, they've gone on to fight in the UFC.

The girls themselves have said that they can tell the physical difference- by the same understanding of we can't dictate opinions on people- why can't we take the girls word for it? Including Ashley Smith who said that their was an advantage DESPITE her winning. It's a large advantage maybe not always insurmountable but certainly an unfair advantage.

The age example is more to show that being 35+ isn't a death sentence in MMA as much as it seems to be in the AFL.

Maybe there is a sizeable advantage, I wouldn't know. I'm not an expert on MtF athletes like (I assume) the people who write these guidelines are. But again, you're saying she "waltzed in and kicked ass" when the reality of the situation is she had 5 fights at a mid-tier regional level and lost to the only half-decent opponent she came up against. That opponent then proved herself to be relatively mediocre (2-3 record) at the highest level (in the UFC). For all that people like to bring up "the Fallon Fox situation" she didn't really do anything extraordinary. She didn't waltz into the UFC and starting beating the crap out of professional female fighters. She lost to the only "legitimate" opponent she faced and proved herself to be several levels below world class.

So yes, there might be an advantage. To what extent that advantage exists and is relevant, I don't know. But anyone who thinks the average bloke could have a few treatments then go crush elite-level female athletes will find that "the Fallon Fox situation" is a point AGAINST their argument, not FOR it.

 

[Furn2]

There's people who identify as amputees, even though they aren't.

Should they be allowed in the Paralympics ?

 

[RobbieK]

So society accepts a person who has a mind that contradicts their physical body and the external world.

The inner reality of a person's mind is deemed the top priority.

Extending this further, if someone has schizophrenia, we give them medication to remove the thoughts in their head that are inconsistent with reality.

Not that I'm drawing a parallel, but more broadly on the concept of subjective reality vs objective reality, how do transgender issues compare to such an analogy? In the future, should we be more accepting of the inconsistent subjective/objective thoughts that occur inside the mind of people with schizophrenia instead of trying to make them "normal"?

The short answer to your last question is yes.

Our understanding of mental health issues, their causes and their best treatment (or indeed whether something is actually a mental health issue or is only made to be an issue because of our society's response to it), are constantly evolving. We are coming to see what society has deemed as "normal" is more contested, legitimately so, than it was ever considered before. We don't see people with mental health problems as evil or possessed by devils. We don't kill them. We don't lock them away in the ways we once did. We don't see homosexuality as being a mental illness to be "cured". Rather than forcing people into "normality" in often cruel and harmful ways we are more accepting and supportive, to the benefit of those who don't fit the mold.

It is clear that helping trans people make their transition is beneficial for their mental state. When it comes to schizophrenia, the course and style of treatment (or non-treatment) would also be made in accordance with our continuously improving understanding of what is going to provide those people the best life possible. If that is found to include the prioritisation or legitimisation of things you might consider to be subjective rather than objective, then so be it.

 

[AstroboyUK]

Just keep it in your back pocket that the Heritage Foundation is a pretty conservative think tank in the US.

Conservative = bad?
But more the point, but the US College of Paediatricians is not, and the statement is from the PRESIDENT of the US College of Paediatricians, not from the Heritage Foundation

 

[Pessimistic]

But it's OK having her running around the local Canberra comp. That's much better

Where she plays now? Getting the in and getting the out are completely different things

 

[NoobPie]

But it's OK having her running around the local Canberra comp. That's much better

No, that's just a pragmatic approach to a very sensitive issue....tougher gig than anonymously on social media accusing people with actual real responsibilities around dealing with sensitive issues hypocrites

 

[manboob]

Conservative = bad?
But more the point, but the US College of Paediatricians is not, and the statement is from the PRESIDENT of the US College of Paediatricians, not from the Heritage Foundation

You'd be blind to not admit that what is nowadays termed "conservative" values are generally not socially progressive, inclusive, equality championing or sex positive values. Sure, it does matter who is speaking, but look at where they are doing it. I'm not taking any position on the AFL's ruling or the speech itself. I am also not making value judgements. Just adding a grain of salt.

 

[BloodRet]

If he was allowed to play I would've stopped following the code. Logic prevails.

 

[Malifice]

There's people who identify as amputees, even though they aren't.

Should they be allowed in the Paralympics ?

My brother is a T2/ T3 paraplegic.

You have exactly 5 minutes to find me a substantial case of a person who identifies as an amputee (but isnt) or I'll infract you for trolling.

Time starts now.

 

[JAlexG]

Good.
Common sense making decision.
Now we move on. For now.

Unfortunately this is going to carry out for a loooooong time.

 

[Cleric]

There's people who identify as amputees, even though they aren't.

Should they be allowed in the Paralympics ?

Whats their testosterone levels?

 

[Jugada]

My brother is a T2/ T3 paraplegic.

You have exactly 5 minutes to find me a substantial case of a person who identifies as an amputee (but isnt) or I'll infract you for trolling.

Time starts now.

 

[Cleric]

My brother is a T2/ T3 paraplegic.

You have exactly 5 minutes to find me a substantial case of a person who identifies as an amputee (but isnt) or I'll infract you for trolling.

Time starts now.

https://www.google.com.au/amp/natio...e-impostors-in-their-fully-working-bodies/amp