Transgender footy star sues AFL

[ChakaDakotaRegina]

HM is to sue the Australian Football League. Australian Rules Football is a similar game to rugby in that the ball is held and thrown and there are high impact tackles.

It is reported below that HM was unable to play in the senior league because they did not meet the lower testosterone level requirements for the women’s teams and also that they refused the offer of their own changing room.

It looks like HM wants to play in a lower women’s league (as opposed to an LGBT or mixed league)

While I’m sorry they don’t feel they are being taken seriously, I’m not sure the safety implications are coming across and I’m concerned this is just to set the precedent to later move up the women’s leagues, regardless of the impact on other participants.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9155345/Transgender-footy-star-Hannah-Mouncey-sues-AFL.html#article-9155345

Let’s take a fictional boxing match as an example...

Barry McGuigan v Henry Cooper (ok, ok, I’m old!)
Both natal males.
Both professional boxers.
Both deemed fit to box.

Would the WBA sanction the fight?
Why not?

What’s the difference with HM and AFL?

How have we come to this - where safety & fairness in sport is compromised by the ‘feelz’.

Does Hannah still have a penis then?

I’m wondering why HM has such a problem with proving that they can indeed fit in a woman’s sport as any other woman.
You know because they have very similar biological features to a woman, including testosterone levels, but I would also include muscle mass ratio etc....
I mean HM IS a woman no? So it really shouldn’t be an issue at all for them to show this is the case?

It's really good in drawing attention to the issue.
I've read a good few comment sections on FB and Insta on this, and the vast majority agree that HM should never have been let to play with women in the first place.
Also, people are starting to clock on that "transwoman" doesn't mean "had their cock and balls removed" (this was one of the things I noticed when World Rugby came out with the new guidelines, a lot of male rugby fans had this opinion "oh well if someone goes to such great lengths and even had their penis chopped off, let them play").
I think it's brilliant that HM opens people's eyes to what the real meaning of "transwoman" is.

@SansaClegane

It's really good in drawing attention to the issue. I've read a good few comment sections on FB and Insta on this, and the vast majority agree that HM should never have been let to play with women in the first place. Also, people are starting to clock on that "transwoman" doesn't mean "had their cock and balls removed" (this was one of the things I noticed when World Rugby came out with the new guidelines, a lot of male rugby fans had this opinion "oh well if someone goes to such great lengths and even had their penis chopped off, let them play"). I think it's brilliant that HM opens people's eyes to what the real meaning of "transwoman" is.

Yes, not having to lose your penis or testicles really lowers the barrier to entry for males in women's sport... at the same time as it increases the costs for women not just entering the game. So that's women's participation, success and safety hammered, in one blow. How curious, that there should be such exactly opposite results, depending on who's male and who's female...

My understanding is that after an orchiectomy (ie surgery to remove testicles) testosterone should naturally be in or below the female range.
transcare.ucsf.edu/orchiectomy

So it's interesting that someone with high testosterone levels would be requesting to share changing facilities.

HM appears in this mini-documentary, along with some of the other usual suspects, uploaded a year ago. Handy compilation:

”Transgender athletes are DESTROYING women’s sports”

Thanks Mole. Lots of “gender” at the start of the video but good clips!

Given that pretty much every UK sports body has been stone walled I suspect suspension plus immediate “re education” for the team..

I think that would be an outrageous treatment to mete out to people who would be just trying to protect themselves from injury.

Let's hope that the referees disappearing makes the difference...

Senator Claire Chandler has written to the AFL about this case. Senator Chandler has been an absolute star on this subject.

senatorchandler.com.au/afl-gender-policies-unfair-and-unsafe-for-female-players/?fbclid=IwAR0BhJreyJveNuncf0Ru1VpjIPdpo0mG47UC7Eweslg22e-0hlCjmNIWtEQ

Is this the 6ft2 220lb HM?

@Sexnotgender

Is this the 6ft2 220lb HM?

Steady on there! “Beauty standards” and all that. Tut! Tut!

Big can be beautiful, Mole - where's your commitment to body positivity gone?

Senator Claire Chandler is a true feminist and champion of women and girls. It is not feminism to look the other way while fairness in women's sport and the safety of women & girls in sporting competition is undermined:

"The suggestion that women and girls playing community football aren’t entitled to fair competition because the AFL wants to appear ‘inclusive’ is insulting, elitist and dangerous. The right to play sport against people of your own sex is not supposed to be a privilege granted only to elite athletes.
Providing fair and safe competition for females is the purpose of women’s sport. The AFL and many other major sports in Australia are undermining that opportunity by allowing biological males into women’s sport."

Did it not just boil down to Mouncey being pissed about not being allowed to change and shower with the females on the team?

Is there a picture anywhere of HM stood with other players in a lineup? Not in a running/crouch pose.

Tired your comment My understanding is that after an orchiectomy (ie surgery to remove testicles) testosterone should naturally be in or below the female range.

I have an acquaintance who has had full surgery and I still wouldn't compete against her and she thinks she would still be at an advantage

@lunar1

Is there a picture anywhere of HM stood with other players in a lineup? Not in a running/crouch pose.

Like this one?

I have an acquaintance who has had full surgery and I still wouldn't compete against her and she thinks she would still be at an advantage

Yes. The advantages of male physiology and male puberty do not disappear with a reduction in testosterone levels. There will still be longer limbs, bigger lungs etc. Testosterone is not the only difference between male and female anatomy.

I was just saying that there are certain conclusions that can be drawn from HM's high testosterone levels, and that puts an interesting slant on their demands to share changing facilities with female players.

Ie - to spell it out as I've just checked the guidance and I think it is allowed - HM must not have had surgery (as otherwise they would have female levels of testosterone) but is nevertheless demanding access to female changing.

@lunar1

Is there a picture anywhere of HM stood with other players in a lineup? Not in a running/crouch pose.

Or this one?

These are quite informative, too.

(Mouncey is in the yellow shirt.)

@TiredAndGrumpy85

I have an acquaintance who has had full surgery and I still wouldn't compete against her and she thinks she would still be at an advantage

Yes. The advantages of male physiology and male puberty do not disappear with a reduction in testosterone levels. There will still be longer limbs, bigger lungs etc. Testosterone is not the only difference between male and female anatomy.

I was just saying that there are certain conclusions that can be drawn from HM's high testosterone levels, and that puts an interesting slant on their demands to share changing facilities with female players.

Even if you reduce testosterone to below the 10nmol/litre level the IOC requires, the advantages of male puberty are retained in most measures.

Ross Tucker (who led the team who reviewed the existing literature for World Rugby) is very good on this. This thread is a good starter:
twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1333017543745953792

The bottom line is:
(a) you have to decide on either inclusion until evidence of harm is demonstrated, or exclusion until evidence of no harm is demonstrated. This choice is a philosophical/political one, but it's interesting to ponder why almost all sporting bodies have gone for the first of these options;

and (b) the existing literature (barring Joanna Harper's study of 8 amateurs self-reporting their times, with no controls) shows that on just about every measure you look at, reducing androgen levels reduces performance by a bit relative to other males, but does not reduce it to anything even close to the female range.

Women might as well not bother with elite sports if this carries on. It's not safe.

@lunar1

Women might as well not bother with elite sports if this carries on. It's not safe.

Absolutely.

World Rugby has stopped transwomen playing at international level, after an exhaustive scientific examination of all the available evidence.

All (as far as I can see) the national bodies have then said "screw you, we want to beee kind so we're going to let biological males play rugby with women at all levels below international level." Despite the scientific evidence. Despite knowing that women are more at risk of brain damage from concussion than men.

Bastards.