Play Nice Hannah Mouncey, transgender AFLW hopeful

(Log in to remove this ad.)

owen87

Club Legend
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
2,373
Likes
2,820
AFL Club
Essendon
I can't remember who he was talking to but in a Joe Rogan podcast he was talking about how a regular dude would get his ass kicked by a female UFC fighter, if the bloke was a fair bit bigger than her and somewhat fit she would have a much harder time winning.
Also the element of surprise; if you put someone in a ring clearly expecting a fight and know that you're in there with a trained fight, your behaviour would be very different than trying to intimidate someone with a gun in your waistband, not knowing they're fully capable of defending themselves and likely assuming the shock of showing a gun would be sufficient.

Good on her for having the ability to drop him though, might make some other would-be criminals think twice.
 

basashi

Premiership Player
Joined
Jun 18, 2010
Posts
3,374
Likes
4,137
AFL Club
Fremantle
Other Teams
FFC Quay Club
It can quite easily be both.

Math can say something, that something can then be used in a discriminatory fashion.

But math, in and of itself, is not discrimination.
The point is that it is discrimination whether or not the maths stack up. Then there is the layer of what should and shouldn't be unlawful discrimination - and that is the level at which there is an enormous amount of hypocrisy and at which governments struggle to be consistent. It is clear that with what we know now, the exemption that allows gender pricing on motor cover is a failure.
 

owen87

Club Legend
Joined
Apr 23, 2016
Posts
2,373
Likes
2,820
AFL Club
Essendon
The point is that it is discrimination whether or not the maths stack up. Then there is the layer of what should and shouldn't be unlawful discrimination - and that is the level at which there is an enormous amount of hypocrisy and at which governments struggle to be consistent. It is clear that with what we know now, the exemption that allows gender pricing on motor cover is a failure.
A failure by what measure?

Insurance companies making a profit wouldn't consider it a failure at all. In fact, they'd prefer to have access to more data points to use to estimate the risk of an applicant.

Certain factors; age, gender, race, place of residence, type of vehicle etc.. would all have some level of correlation to risk level.

Calling it 'discrimination' in the sense that you're implying is a bit of a long bow. If your argument is that insurance companies shouldn't be allowed to set premiums based off correlated risk factors, then your argument is sound, but we'd then have to consider what other factors should be excluded.

  • Should a young person pay more just because they're younger?
  • Should someone living in a 'poor' area pay more because their area is high risk? In fact, if they live in that area they're also less likely to be able to afford a higher premium.
Insurance relies upon a collective spreading of the risk, so low risk people will tend to pay more to offset the high risk ones that might be considered otherwise un-insurable at a reasonable price. All this also has to then provide a profit to a for-profit entity.
 

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
No one under estimates her sporting ability just like no one under estimates the sporting ability of the top 200 men.
The difference is as a woman she has made tens of millions and the guy at 200 is struggling - isn't that discrimination to reward her so much but of course its allowed as she is female

That is simple hypocrisy
Bollocks.

Williams is the top competitor in a comp that makes quite a lot of money. Hence, she gets the lion's share of the prize money in that comp.

200th ranked man is 200th in his comp, and gets prize money accordingly.

For him to get more than Williams means he is getting some of the women's tour prize money. That's the only way it could happen.

Think about your proposition rationally for a minute (please, try).

The objection from men to players in the AFLW being paid is that the comp doesn't generate profit. Male players play in a comp that generates a lot of money, that's why they get the big bucks. It is PC gone mad to expect female players to be paid by organisations that make their money of male comps.

The women's tennis tour generates a lot of income, meaning, if you dominate that tour, your going to make a lot of money.

This suddenly is wrong, it's now not reward for generating the money, it had to be split so every man that can beat Serena gets more than she does, irrespective of the fact they have jack shit to do with helping generate that money, in either the men's or women's comp.

Go have a snowflake sooky somewhere else.


Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
She would lose to a trained fighter easily?
Well if she would I'd say she wouldn't of been signed by the biggest MMA company on the planet
Her abilities against trained male fighters is irrelevant to MMA, she will not be fighting them.

It's like saying that they wouldn't sign a man in the lowest weight division if they weren't capable of winning in the top weight division. They do.

Incedentaly, Cyborg at a media event in Japan 5 or 6 years ago did a demo fight with a Japanese reporter, and he got her down and submitted. He had a background in fighting, but wasn't a current fighter. Cyborg lost her first ever fight to another woman a couple of weeks ago.

None of which is relevant as Cyborg is paid to fight women, not men.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 

PoppedCorn

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 29, 2009
Posts
7,527
Likes
9,503
AFL Club
St Kilda
Other Teams
West Ham 76ers
I have no idea what you're on about
U said she would lose to a trained mma fighter easily
I'm saying she is employed by the UFC, she is a fighter, and from memory most fighters win and lose

She has every chance of beating a trained mma fighter seeing as she is one


I'm well aware of Cristianes history
 

Masher

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 8, 2018
Posts
378
Likes
340
AFL Club
St Kilda
Bollocks.

Williams is the top competitor in a comp that makes quite a lot of money. Hence, she gets the lion's share of the prize money in that comp.

200th ranked man is 200th in his comp, and gets prize money accordingly.

For him to get more than Williams means he is getting some of the women's tour prize money. That's the only way it could happen.

Think about your proposition rationally for a minute (please, try).

The objection from men to players in the AFLW being paid is that the comp doesn't generate profit. Male players play in a comp that generates a lot of money, that's why they get the big bucks. It is PC gone mad to expect female players to be paid by organisations that make their money of male comps.

The women's tennis tour generates a lot of income, meaning, if you dominate that tour, your going to make a lot of money.

This suddenly is wrong, it's now not reward for generating the money, it had to be split so every man that can beat Serena gets more than she does, irrespective of the fact they have jack shit to do with helping generate that money, in either the men's or women's comp.

Go have a snowflake sooky somewhere else.


Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
You are biased and support women who don't deserve to be paid for their ability compared to a man

Let the men and woman play at different months and you will see the truth. The crowds will eventually go down in Woman's tennis
 
Last edited:

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
You are biased and support women who don't deserve to be paid for their ability compared to a man

Let the men and woman play at different months and you will see the truth. The crowds will eventually go down in Woman's tennis
lol. Dig up fool.

The WTA and the ATP are separate tours, a lot of their events are stand alone already. Even the events where men and women play the same tournament, they are generally run as separate events, some times they are consecutive, ie one is first, and then when it is over, the other plays, or at different times, or different courts. The points value for the respective tours are different, so an important mens event worth a lot of points, might be a minor womens event.

Exceptions are the majors, only they are not exceptions, as they are not ATP or WTA events, they are totally controlled by the respective majors bodies. So, the female prize money at the Australian open isn't dictated by the WTA, its determined by the Australian open.

Events draw crowds based on the names that play in them. Minor tournaments with unknown players draw no crowds, but this is true of men as well as women. Serena is a draw, a womens event she and the other top players play in will draw more attention and sponsorship than a male tournament composed of male players ranked in the 200s.

Women do not deserve to be paid as much as men because mens sport draws the crowds, the sponsors, the dollars, and women should only be paid when their sports makes money.
Only, according to Masher, they shouldn't be paid even then. A women shouldn't be paid regardless how much money she brings into the sport unless she can beat an arbitrarily ranked man in that sport. Is that a correct summation?

You obviously know who the big names are in female tennis, could you name the 200th ranked man without googling it?

I bet you cannot. And I know why you cannot. No one gives a **** about him. Whatever he is paid, its to much.
Serena generates the cash, Serena makes the cash.
Mister 200 generates **** all, Mr 200 makes **** all. Simple.
 

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
I could give my 2c about how overpaid women tennis players are
like all sports, the top players are paid based on what the sport generates and can afford. I would consider Baseball players and male golfers grossly overpaid, but, they are paid a portion of what the sport generates, so I have no reason to complain really. Just as you dont. It has nothing to do with what people think their ability is worth, and everything about how much the sport generates.

Have you noticed this is a complete reversal of the arguments.

I am usually arguing female football players should be paid, against people saying, sports people should get paid on the basis of what the sport makes.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)

red+black

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 12, 2001
Posts
37,372
Likes
5,148
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Liverpool, Storm
like all sports, the top players are paid based on what the sport generates and can afford. I would consider Baseball players and male golfers grossly overpaid, but, they are paid a portion of what the sport generates, so I have no reason to complain really. Just as you dont. It has nothing to do with what people think their ability is worth, and everything about how much the sport generates.
The WTA does not pay women the same as men because the women's tour does not generate as much interest, advertising or revenue as the men's tour. The only times women are paid the same as the men is when they compete at the same event, such as the 4 slams, Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid. Male tennis players DO have something to complain about because they are subsidising the women.
 

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
The WTA does not pay women the same as men because the women's tour does not generate as much interest, advertising or revenue as the men's tour. The only times women are paid the same as the men is when they compete at the same event, such as the 4 slams, Indian Wells, Miami, Madrid. Male tennis players DO have something to complain about because they are subsidising the women.
Most of those events are not run by the tours. The prize money is allocated by the event out of the revenue the event generates. A lot of the income something like the Australian open generates is for the event, not the men's games, or the women's games specifically.

None of which is relevant as this entire argument is on the proposition put forward, that if Serena Williams cannot beat the 200th ranked man, then she should not earn more than that player, and the fact she does shows bias against men. This is irrespective of how much money the women's tour makes, or is bought in by Serena.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 

red+black

Hall of Famer
Joined
Jul 12, 2001
Posts
37,372
Likes
5,148
Location
Melbourne
AFL Club
Essendon
Other Teams
Liverpool, Storm
Serena is better in her sport, women’s tennis, than most men in their sport, men’s tennis, and naturally deserves to earn more than them.

To those that suggest that there is a gender spectrum, I’m not sure what solutions exist for competitive sport.
 

Bostonian

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Posts
8,991
Likes
8,216
AFL Club
Carlton
like all sports, the top players are paid based on what the sport generates and can afford. I would consider Baseball players and male golfers grossly overpaid, but, they are paid a portion of what the sport generates, so I have no reason to complain really. Just as you dont. It has nothing to do with what people think their ability is worth, and everything about how much the sport generates.
Actually it was a bunch of feminist whiners and activists that eventually saw women be paid as much as the men for far less work in the majors in tennis.

These same styled people are now trying it on with the WNBA.

Whenever feminists get involved in sports it turns the sport into a political football pardon the pun and turns certain people away or against it.

I remember they tried that shit when Rousey was champion. She shut that shit down quickly.

AFLW needs to be very careful it doesn't let those kind of people become involved in any shape, way or form or the competition will suffer heavily from their involvement and the garbage they would push.
 
Last edited:

Masher

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 8, 2018
Posts
378
Likes
340
AFL Club
St Kilda
Serena is better in her sport, women’s tennis, than most men in their sport, men’s tennis, and naturally deserves to earn more than them.

To those that suggest that there is a gender spectrum, I’m not sure what solutions exist for competitive sport.
Why does she naturally deserve more than them - because she is the best female...isn't that sexist

Why don't we try that when you need major surgery and you are allocated the best female surgeon but she is no.50 compared to 49 better male suregoens.
You don't get a say whether you can have the 49 males and you also get to pay more for the surgery since she is the best female surgeon

Lets keep paying people whether male or female the same or better wages when they work less and not as good at their task
 

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
Why does she naturally deserve more than them - because she is the best female...isn't that sexist

Why don't we try that when you need major surgery and you are allocated the best female surgeon but she is no.50 compared to 49 better male suregoens.
You don't get a say whether you can have the 49 males and you also get to pay more for the surgery since she is the best female surgeon

Lets keep paying people whether male or female the same or better wages when they work less and not as good at their task
Lol. No. Your comparison is stupid and the complete opposite of most arguments against women receiving equal pay for sport.

As Bostonian points out in the previous post, it is only a relative handful of joint events where prize money is equal, which was achieved through politics as much as anything. Most events the prize money is separate. Most events, the EVENTS are separate. Serena wins the money she does because that's what the WTA events generate.

The argument against WNBA players getting more is their pay should be dictated by what the WNBA earns, not what the NBA earns.

For women's tennis, which does generate a fair amount, you are arguing women's pay should not be dictated by what the WTA earns, but by what a lowly ranked man earns.

Surgeons do not operate in a gendered industry, men and women operate in the same space. The comparison shows you have nothing to back up your position other than annoyance at the idea of women getting the same pay as men.

Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 

jatz14

Norm Smith Medallist
Joined
Dec 13, 2011
Posts
5,138
Likes
4,946
Location
WA
AFL Club
West Coast
Other Teams
Perth Glory W-League
Actually it was a bunch of feminist whiners and activists that eventually saw women be paid as much as the men for far less work in the majors in tennis.

These same styled people are now trying it on with the WNBA.

Whenever feminists get involved in sports it turns the sport into a political football pardon the pun and turns certain people away or against it.

I remember they tried that shit when Rousey was champion. She shut that shit down quickly.

AFLW needs to be very careful it doesn't let those kind of people become involved in any shape, way or form or the competition will suffer heavily from their involvement and the garbage they would push.
I agree with you. AFLW has already attracted commentary from people who clearly only view the sport through the prism of gendered politics. However, we cannot dismiss their complaints out of hand (as much as a lot of what they say is both grating and irrational).

For the majors, criticism from feminists forced the majors to defend their position, which they struggled to do, because their position was as gendered and biased as the feminists.

A lot of the income these events generate is not broken down to 'mens money and women's money'. Sponsoring companies want to be associated with the prestige of the event. The official water supplier for instance is not saying, 65% of our money is for the men.

So if the money is not coming in based on gender, on what basis is it going out based on gender? The majors never had a good answer for this other than, we value men's tennis more.

However, if companies are paying for the prestige of the event, then politics absolutely plays a part in the value. If the politics are bad, it diminishes the value of the event

Make no mistake, it's politics that put the pressure on the events, but the decision was commercial.

It's an argument I don't really like, but in a cut throat commercial world, is the reality.

College football generates a huge amount of money, but players get nothing. Americans justify it on the basis that they get free college, but this is a fraction the value a pro in a comp like that would receive. They get not much because they cannot apply the pressure to get more.

This is where payments are determined, what pressure can be applied to force higher payments verse the pressures to pay less. This has always been the basis of what sports people receive, it is never based on 'merit', or 'deserve'.

If the AFL is to stingy in negotiations with players, it risks a strike, which would be catestrophic. If players are to demanding, it damages the league, which is their bread and butter. It's achieving a balance between these 2 that determines pay.

Women's Sports people historically have lacked the levers to apply pressure to force higher pay, even when the sport can afford it. That women's sports earn less is a big part of it, but it's also that in many cases, it's seen as the second, less important comp. The AFLW players cannot demand more because the AFL is much less concerned about them striking, not because the league doesn't make money. The AFL could afford to pay them more, they just don't have the means to apply sufficient pressure to make them pay it

So in this sense, it doesn't matter how the pressure was applied to make the majors pay women more. The equilibrium still holds true. If to much was demanded, they wouldn't pay. If to little was paid, the players go elsewhere.

A good comparison is the Aussie open. At one point it was struggling. A lot of the best players skipped it. It was the wrong time of the year, it was to hot, it was poorly paid. There was even talk of stripping it of its status as a major. This applied huge pressure, and one of the outcomes was it became the highest paying major.

Approaching sponsors and saying, do you really want to be associated with a sexist event, and having the sponsors approaching the open saying, this isn't good for our brand, do something about it, is applying pressure, and the response was to lift women's prize money. They didn't have to, this was a commercial decision between the cost of paying women more, and the cost of not.

The proof is also in the pudding as they say. What is the detrimental cost to the open of doing this? I cannot really see one. Men's pay is high, it didn't come down, it didn't even slow down in going up. So people may argue that the men are subsidising the women, there is no evidence it has cost one male player a cent.

The feel good factor in trumpeting 'equal pay' keeps sponsors happy, may induce them to pay more, may attract new sponsors. It certainly hasn't hurt.

So why does it upset so many people that the Open pays women the same?

If the Open paid women less, would we have a better Open? Would the men benefit?

On the principal that I cannot in a negotiation force you to pay more than you are willing, where walking away is an option, but I can fail to make you pay as much as you are willing if I cannot find the right incentive, then a sport paying more due to feminists probably could have always paid more. They had just been able to get away with paying less up to then.



Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk
 

Masher

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 8, 2018
Posts
378
Likes
340
AFL Club
St Kilda
Surgeons do not operate in a gendered industry, men and women operate in the same space. The comparison shows you have nothing to back up your position other than annoyance at the idea of women getting the same pay as men.
Woman should only get equal pay if they can produce the same results under the same conditions as men ..isn't that what women like you have been whining about

You are the one who has been exposed as a hypocrite
For decades women have declared they want the same treatment, same pay, same work , same standards etc etc but in reality there is a constant changing of the goalposts to suit the woman's agenda

All woman's sport should stand on their own merits WITHOUT piggy backing on men's itinenary.
Let the women's tennis have their own calendar and agenda separate to men and let them stand on their own - You are too afraid to do that as you know eventually the attendance will decrease as well as interest

As for the AFLW which is a z rate competition that should run its own program without forcing itself onto the public
 
Last edited:

Masher

Team Captain
Joined
Sep 8, 2018
Posts
378
Likes
340
AFL Club
St Kilda
^good luck with your argument and applying it to sport. Write an article somewhere and see how much support you get.
That's because the feminists and male snowflakes want everything decked in their favour who scream and yell 'sexism' to get their way and everyone is too cowardly to expose the hypocrisy.

At the beginning all the feminists wanted equality but when they realised in many areas they couldn't compete they changed the rules and goalposts
 
Top Bottom