Moved Thread Should the AFL have a full pride round?

[Dynamics]

Depending on your definition of transitioning, between 3% and 0.15% of people who transition regret transitioning.

Regret after Gender-affirmation Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prevalence

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.There is an unknown percentage of transgender and gender non-confirming individuals who undergo gender-affirmation surgeries (GAS) that experiences regret. Regret could lead to physical and mental ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

I acknowledge that this still leaves a subset of the population that regrets their transition, but 3% of what is already a small percentage of the population (39 from 10,000 individuals) is much lower than the binary you're proposing as equal.

That examples exist does not entail that those examples are representative of a wider population.

Thanks for the link, I'll have a read.

 

[Schneebly11]

Anyone who says politics should stay out of sports immediately invalidates any argument moving forward. Sport has ALWAYS been political.

It also questions where the line is drawn between political/non political.

Those against “politics in sports” like Pride and Indigenous rounds generally defend Anzac Day and the playing of the national anthem before important matches. I’d argue the latter two are far more “political” than the former two.

 

[ElectricG]

Statistics tell us there definitely should be multiple same sex attracted AFL players. Have a think about why they aren’t coming out?

What statistics are these? If you mean that the number of gay men in AFL would be a similar proportion to the population, I would doubt that that’s right. There seems to be a lot of gay women in AFLW. I’d suggest that this would be a proportion greater than the general population.

I don’t have the data on AFLW, so I’m just speaking from my own observations. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if there were no gay men in AFL.

 

[Schneebly11]

I actually wouldn’t be surprised if there were no gay men in AFL.

Statistics (and chatter around the League) would confirm this is not true.

Are you running off a stereotype that all gay men are limp wristed, effeminate and camp?

It’s fairly obvious there are same sex attracted male players in the AFL, but the culture of clubs, the highlighting from the media and the abuse they’d cop is enough for them to stay in the closet.

 

[iameviljez]

What statistics are these? If you mean that the number of gay men in AFL would be a similar proportion to the population, I would doubt that that’s right. There seems to be a lot of gay women in AFLW. I’d suggest that this would be a proportion greater than the general population.

I don’t have the data on AFLW, so I’m just speaking from my own observations. I actually wouldn’t be surprised if there were no gay men in AFL.

Roughly 2% to 3% of the male population are considered to be gay or bisexual.

There are over 800 current AFL footballers, and obviously far more past players over (let's say), the last 10 years. Hence, in the last 10 years, we've probably seen about 1600 footballers going through the door.

If 2.5% of those players were gay or bi, then this means you're talking about 40 players. For it to be roughly a 1 in 2 chance that none of these 1600 players or so are gay or bi, then you would need for the rate of gay/bi men among AFL players to be 80 times smaller than that of the general population. That seems a lot more far-fetched than the hypothesis that the experience of being the first AFL player out of the closet would be really, really unpleasant.

 

[ElectricG]

Statistics (and chatter around the League) would confirm this is not true.

Are you running off a stereotype that all gay men are limp wristed, effeminate and camp?

It’s fairly obvious there are same sex attracted male players in the AFL, but the culture of clubs, the highlighting from the media and the abuse they’d cop is enough for them to stay in the closet.

I’m just putting forward that whatever it is about AFLW that seems to select for gay women might have the opposite effect in AFLM.

What statistics are you talking about?

 

[Schneebly11]

That seems a lot more far-fetched than the hypothesis that the experience of being the first AFL player out of the closet would be really, really unpleasant.

It would have been better for a gay AFL player to come out 15 years ago.

Do it now and half of the political sphere will accuse them of being “woke”, their coming out is a “plot to recruit kids to their lifestyle” and that “kids don’t need to see that type of thing at the footy”. No doubt they’ll be labelled as harmful for children by the reactionary right.

 

[iameviljez]

It would have been better for a gay AFL player to come out 15 years ago.

I think that 15 years ago there would have been a lot less support, too. A huge amount has changed since 2007

 

[spinynorman]

Discussions about sexuality should be left until children have reached an age when they have the mental maturity to grasp these concepts, around 11 at the earliest preferably a bit older around 12 or 13. Similar to how sex education is only discussed and taught in High School and not Primary School aged students. Foisting this topic to any child under 10 to me is tantamount to child abuse. No stranger has any right to be broaching these subjects with kids that aren't their own if they don't have the parents permission and would like to see laws introduced to ban adults that have the hide to do so.

I was 11 when I was first aware that I found males attractive. I’ve known people who came to the same realisation later, I’ve known people who came to the realisation earlier.

The feeling was startling to me. If I wasn’t aware same-sex attraction existed it probably would’ve been even moreso.

I don’t think anyone says kids need to learn what felching is, but they need to know that a feeling they might have isn’t wrong, isn’t to be mocked in others, and that everything is okay. Calling this tantamount to child abuse is bizarre - and this comes from someone with an inherent predisposition to the dramatic.

 

[iameviljez]

I was 11 when I was first aware that I found males attractive. I’ve known people who came to the same realisation later, I’ve known people who came to the realisation earlier.

The feeling was startling to me. If I wasn’t aware same-sex attraction existed it probably would’ve been even moreso.

I don’t think anyone says kids need to learn what felching is, but they need to know that a feeling they might have isn’t wrong, isn’t to be mocked in others, and that everything is okay. Calling this tantamount to child abuse is bizarre - and this comes from someone with an inherent predisposition to the dramatic.

It's also fair to suggest that, just in doing things like featuring literature that happens to involve LGBT couples, you make life a LOT easier for kids with two dads, for example.

 

[spinynorman]

Somewhat off topic, but this year I brought a partner to a game for the first time. He’s French and was visiting Australia, and had of course never been to a game. I don’t think he ever will again lol - but not because of the crowds, in fact he expressed his surprise at the sheer lack of homophobia, that there was no carrying on about our holding hands or his quite camp manner and chic dress sense. We were sitting in front of a group of sloshed bogans, but they never once commented on us. I can only say anecdotally from gay friends who’ve gone to games with partners in recent years that they’ve had the same experiences.

Undoubtedly there would be plenty of examples to the contrary, but I wanted to give a positive contrast to some of the poor comments in this thread - and perhaps the only reason we don’t cop shit is because they know that the majority in the crowd would throw back at them.

 

[iameviljez]

Somewhat off topic, but this year I brought a partner to a game for the first time. He’s French and was visiting Australia, and had of course never been to a game. I don’t think he ever will again lol - but not because of the crowds, in fact he expressed his surprise at the sheer lack of homophobia, that there was no carrying on about our holding hands or his quite camp manner and chic dress sense. We were sitting in front of a group of sloshed bogans, but they never once commented on us. I can only say anecdotally from gay friends who’ve gone to games with partners in recent years that they’ve had the same experiences.

Undoubtedly there would be plenty of examples to the contrary, but I wanted to give a positive contrast to some of the poor comments in this thread - and perhaps the only reason we don’t cop s**t is because they know that the majority in the crowd would throw back at them.

You landed a well-dressed Frenchie? It's probably jealousy more than anything else

 

[spinynorman]

You landed a well-dressed Frenchie? It's probably jealousy more than anything else

Aside living on different continents at the moment and my being relentlessly looked down upon for my pronunciation for phrases such as “hors d’ouvre” or “joie de vivre” it’s pretty great!

 

[the_interloper]

It would have been better for a gay AFL player to come out 15 years ago.

Do it now and half of the political sphere will accuse them of being “woke”, their coming out is a “plot to recruit kids to their lifestyle” and that “kids don’t need to see that type of thing at the footy”. No doubt they’ll be labelled as harmful for children by the reactionary right.

Well I'd hope you were wrong about that, but I'm sure the left and right would be on opposite sides of that issue somehow, like everything that comes up it seems.

 

[Pistol Night]

Why should they?

Women don't have the fragile ego's of men, whose sexuality can be threatened by wearing a rainbow.

For what its worth i thought Manlys jumper that they sooked about looked awesome.

 

[Pistol Night]

I think that 15 years ago there would have been a lot less support, too. A huge amount has changed since 2007

And they'll be a "pioneer" and a "spokesman" which they probably dont want. And asked about it in every interview. Depends who it is i guess. Its sad that we have gay players that cant admit and it be no big deal.

 

[Schneebly11]

I remember now we had this controversy before.

2000 Olympics Closing ceremony.

We’ve come a long way, the language used by the hate groups was more direct, they’ve become subtle now and shifted to “save the Kids” rheotoric:

Sydney Olympics hit by 'drag queen' controversy | Baptist Press

LONDON (BP)--Australian church groups are appalled that several dozen "drag queens" are expected to participate in the official closing ceremony of the Sydney Olympics, according to CNSNews.com. The involvement of men dressed as women, the church groups say, does little to enhance the city or...

www.baptistpress.com

 

[iameviljez]

And they'll be a "pioneer" and a "spokesman" which they probably dont want. And asked about it in every interview. Depends who it is i guess. Its sad that we have gay players that cant admit and it be no big deal.

Yeah, agreed. If it's someone who is a bit-part player, they'll be forever defined by it. Kind of like how players who are related to legendary players are defined by that connection (son of Ablett, Nick Riewoldt's cousin) until they prove themselves worthy in their own right first.

 

[iameviljez]

I remember now we had this controversy before.

2000 Olympics Closing ceremony.

We’ve come a long way, the language used by the hate groups was more direct, they’ve become subtle now and shifted to “save the Kids” rheotoric:

Sydney Olympics hit by 'drag queen' controversy | Baptist Press

LONDON (BP)--Australian church groups are appalled that several dozen "drag queens" are expected to participate in the official closing ceremony of the Sydney Olympics, according to CNSNews.com. The involvement of men dressed as women, the church groups say, does little to enhance the city or...

www.baptistpress.com

Lee Atwater was a Republican strategist who outlined this very very bluntly. The quote was:
"You start out in 1954 by saying, "N*, n*, n*". By 1968, you can't say "n*"—that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff."

 

[iameviljez]

Aside living on different continents at the moment and my being relentlessly looked down upon for my pronunciation for phrases such as “hors d’ouvre” or “joie de vivre” it’s pretty great!

As a kid, I used to refer to them as "horse doovers", having only ever read the word

 

[Gough]

I remember now we had this controversy before.

2000 Olympics Closing ceremony.

We’ve come a long way, the language used by the hate groups was more direct, they’ve become subtle now and shifted to “save the Kids” rheotoric:

Sydney Olympics hit by 'drag queen' controversy | Baptist Press

LONDON (BP)--Australian church groups are appalled that several dozen "drag queens" are expected to participate in the official closing ceremony of the Sydney Olympics, according to CNSNews.com. The involvement of men dressed as women, the church groups say, does little to enhance the city or...

www.baptistpress.com

The really shit thing about the whole Helen Lovejoy routine is that it's exclusionary in itself, when they say think of the kids they mean the straight kids because their hatred and bigotry sure as hell doesn't do much for the LGBTQI+ kids.

 

[Schneebly11]

The really s**t thing about the whole Helen Lovejoy routine is that it's exclusionary in itself, when they say think of the kids they mean the straight kids because their hatred and bigotry sure as hell doesn't do much for the LGBTQI+ kids.

In their world “let kids be kids” means until 17 years and 364 days all they do is watch wholesome cartoons, attend single sex schools, go to Sunday school, and not have a thought about sex until they hit 18. On the day they do then they are equipped with the knowledge to make adult decision on sexuality, that being heterosexual sexuality of course.

 

[Elmer_Hauser]

I would like to see it myself, but unfortunately due to the Manly Sea Eagles fiasco and fallout, I don't think the AFL would ever be brave enough to introduce it here in the AFL (well at least not in the next 10 years anyway)

 

[randyzany]

I was 11 when I was first aware that I found males attractive. I’ve known people who came to the same realisation later, I’ve known people who came to the realisation earlier.

The feeling was startling to me. If I wasn’t aware same-sex attraction existed it probably would’ve been even moreso.

I don’t think anyone says kids need to learn what felching is, but they need to know that a feeling they might have isn’t wrong, isn’t to be mocked in others, and that everything is okay. Calling this tantamount to child abuse is bizarre - and this comes from someone with an inherent predisposition to the dramatic.

In the past I've come across attitudes, especially from left leaning individuals, that today's teachers are overloaded with far too many educational tasks/checklists at schools and whinge and complain constantly that it is ridiculous/insane/irresponsible/unfair/etc.. to expect them to also act as de facto parents to their students.

On this issue though, unsurprisingly, those same left leaning individuals (most teachers lean left, especially public school ones) are probably more than happy to spend hours waxing lyrical to Primary age children that are not their own about a topic that close to their hearts, sexual minorities.

I'm sympathetic to your own experience and others like it, but never-the-less I stand firm in the belief that teachers do not have the automatic right to broach a subject with Primary school aged students that is considered a fairly delicate one by the vast majority of parents unless they have had permission beforehand from them to do so.

It is the height of arrogance to dismiss and potentially circumvent the parents wishes on how this topic should be approached with their own children and think that some unrelated adult knows better. Many children would not be mentally mature enough to fully comprehend and process what they've been told. Parents are the ones best placed to know when their own children are mentally ready to process that information and how it should to be delivered to them. This stance shouldn't be controversial but here we are.

The same applies to religion or any other subject matter that's not a core age appropriate school subject. I say age appropriate because as I've said previously I'm 100% for sex ed/sexuality being taught in High Schools. Students aged 13 and over should definitely be taught about sex ed/sexuality as part of the school curriculum, no issues with that and I'll go as far as to say that it should be a core essential subject.

Primary schools (it seems it's mostly public ones that want to overstep the mark in this matter) though should stick to teaching typical school curriculum material and discussions revolving about sexuality should be left to their own parents unless the parents themselves have requested and confirmed that they're okay with Primary school teachers taking on that responsibility.

 

[Chief]

Students aged 13 and over should definitely be taught about sex ed/sexuality as part of the school curriculum, no issues with that and I'll go as far as to say that it should be a core essential subject.

I think we started in about grade 5.

Why do you want to pretend it doesn't exist?

 

[the_interloper]

I think we started in about grade 5.

Why do you want to pretend it doesn't exist?

How early would you want to start sex ed in schools?