if we are going by testosterone levels then there will be most men over 40 that would qualify to play in the AFLW
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Draft Hannah Mounsey to AFL women
- Thread starter Team Agg
- Start date
it really is a difficult one ,
from my own observations , men are just simply stronger and faster etc , its there to observe everywhere in sport , and my own personal observations training in powerlifting and bodybuilding gyms for over 20 years ....... with the odd exception of course , but its rare
You can drop your test levels , while that certainly helps, im not convinced it takes away the full advantage ,
Can of worms for me
from my own observations , men are just simply stronger and faster etc , its there to observe everywhere in sport , and my own personal observations training in powerlifting and bodybuilding gyms for over 20 years ....... with the odd exception of course , but its rare
You can drop your test levels , while that certainly helps, im not convinced it takes away the full advantage ,
Can of worms for me
Brodders17 said:
The end of women in the AFL. The end of the women's competition (no need). The end of this discussion.
There is a precedent for the Mouncey situation. We have had a transgender player in the Sydney Womens comp for a few years and there are very distinct issues to consider. I coached against her and the were times when the hormone levels were fluctuating that it became quite dangerous for my girls playing against her. The extra strength and aggression were factors that fed into that at these times. There were numerous incidents so it was an issue but the League chose not to confront it and over time when she eventually transitioned it became less of a problem. This may also have been affected by the fact she got older and the hormonal levels kicked into the extent she became heavier and slower. There are a lot of things to consider but my girls definitely were concerned on numerous occasions, it is my considered opinion that the player has to transition fully before they can be allowed to play at the highest level.
1eyedtiger said:
Not sure I understand your point. I reckon it's great to see an emerging opportunity for talented women to play footy/make a $. We do need to work through this issue, but it is and will be an isolated problem.
The transgender issue has had minimal effect on elite sports with plenty of $s, such as golf and tennis.
Yes, common belief is that she was doped to the hilt at the peak of her powers around 1987-88. Indeed, it seems highly likely that most of the upper echelons of Olympic level sprinting - both male and female - were during this period. And the belief is that the speculated steroid use contributed greatly to her early death.yandb said:
Performance enhancing drug use in the US took on quite a different format than it did in Eastern Europe. Whereas in Europe it was very much systemically institutionalised by govt sporting bodies, in the US it tended to be a bit more free enterprise - but with sporting bodies complicit in turning a blind eye.
tigerlove said:
Okay, there seems to be a bit of head scratching regarding my posts but it's really simple.
I was responding to another of your posts tigerlove, where you claimed that women will not be able to match men and used tennis as an example. I simply put forward the idea to end this discussion for once and for all. Abolish gender specific AFL competitions. Change all AFL competitions to 'mixed' competitions and let everyone and anyone who wants to, nominate for the AFL draft and we'll see what happens when it comes down to 'the best PERSON for the job'.
If you're right, tigerlove, then all the gender issues are solved because only men will ever get drafted at the top level.
Women's groups might complain about this but hey, they wanted equality. Having a separate women's competition isn't equality. Having a separate women's competition is acknowledgement of the truth which is that men and women are not equal. To get equality, you need to remove all references to gender. So, to dig myself deeper into my little hole and deal with any concerns about equality, I can confidently say that in my proposed mixed AFL competition, 'people' will be equally represented at all levels.
tigerlove said:
Not saying I agree with the sentiment but it is true equality I guess. I suspect that no women's group would argue for equality in this way but equally you can't only have equality when it suits you and not when it doesn't.
Ironically I have a friend who works in health care and that is an area where recent developments (say last ten years) have demonstrated, not surprisingly men and women are not equal and a medical treatment that works on men may not work in women and vice versa. For a number of new treatments therefore gender based clinical trials may be required to ensure the best outcome.
Ironically I have a friend who works in health care and that is an area where recent developments (say last ten years) have demonstrated, not surprisingly men and women are not equal and a medical treatment that works on men may not work in women and vice versa. For a number of new treatments therefore gender based clinical trials may be required to ensure the best outcome.
I don't really follow your thinking Peaka. It depends on your definition of "true equality" I suppose. I'm no feminist. I think men and women are quite different overall...of course there can be exceptions and that goes without saying.
I don't see how anyone could equate men and women being equal on a physical sporting field to them having equal opportunity in the work place for example.
I don't see how anyone could equate men and women being equal on a physical sporting field to them having equal opportunity in the work place for example.
KnightersRevenge said:Perhaps this will help:
Let me guess... the kid on the left is named 'Richmond' and the one on the right is 'Norf'.
Defining equality has always been difficult and perhaps impossible as there are so many ways of doing it and depends on a persons perspective. Some see equality as meaning you have the same opportunity, others see equality as the same outcome (as shown in Knighters cartoon above). Each definition has flaws, although I tend to lean towards equality of opportunity in most cases but agree it's difficult to define.
In relation to sport I think it's ridiculous not to segregate on gender grounds but unfortunately this means that there are some individuals like Hannah and Caster Semenya that create grey areas when you do. Due to history in some sports we have also muddied the waters which has also created problems. For example in tennis I support equal prize money for female athletes but think that the women should play best of 5 sets rather than best of three in those tournaments where the males also play best of 5.
In relation to sport I think it's ridiculous not to segregate on gender grounds but unfortunately this means that there are some individuals like Hannah and Caster Semenya that create grey areas when you do. Due to history in some sports we have also muddied the waters which has also created problems. For example in tennis I support equal prize money for female athletes but think that the women should play best of 5 sets rather than best of three in those tournaments where the males also play best of 5.
Peaka said:
I have attempted to write a post along these lines to follow up on the picture but you've done a better job than I could have.
I disagree on lumping Caster Semenya in with Hannah, although biology is so messy it is hard to know. While looking up more info on Caster (I thought I read somewhere that she had ambiguous genitalia at birth but couldn't find any evidence for it) I did find the this ---> Where’s the Rulebook for Sex Verification? it includes the following passage:
[quote author=Alice Dreger from the link above]
" Many think you can simply look at a person’s “sex chromosomes.” If the person has XY chromosomes, you declare him a man. If XX, she’s a woman. Right?
Wrong. A little biology: On the Y chromosome, a gene called SRY usually makes a fetus grow as a male. It turns out, though, that SRY can show up on an X, turning an XX fetus essentially male. And if the SRY gene does not work on the Y, the fetus develops essentially female.
Even an XY fetus with a functioning SRY can essentially develop female. In the case of Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, the ability of cells to “hear” the masculinizing hormones known as androgens is lacking. That means the genitals and the rest of the external body look female-typical, except that these women lack body hair (which depends on androgen-sensitivity)." [/quote]
So where does that leave Hannah?
