https://twitter.com/darcyvee/status/1476103768059957251
Sure they'll be happy
This is a bit ridiculous but if it makes her feel better...
So is she going to demand we drop the W from AFL W?
This is a bit ridiculous but if it makes her feel better...
So is she going to demand we drop the W from AFL W?
Darcy is not the first AFLW player to identify as trans (close) as their is a gold coast player who identified last week.
https://www.pedestrian.tv/sport/the-aflw-now-has-an-openly-non-binary-player-theyre-keen-to-use-their-platform-to-educate/
Tori Groves-Little has officially become the AFLW’s first openly non-binary player, in a massive move for gender diversity in the sport.
The part of this I struggle to understand is that they / them fight for recognition and the right not to be categorised / labelled, then immediately ask to be identified with a specific label!
To me this contradictory behaviour seems to be the exactly opposed to respecting an individuals privacy and rights, and that then reduces the whole event to a form of attention seeking behaviour, so that is why I think it comes across as somewhat disingenuous.
It's a behaviour that seems to be repeated in public frequently. An overt desire to be self-declared as somehow different, uncategorised, apart from mainstream society, special even, then a demand for identification that seems driven by an overarching desire for some form of inclusion. Not just on gender issues, but politics, religion, tribalism, fashion, etc., etc.., it's just become another trend / meme with language warped and reduced to a narcissistic absurdity!
Is it a having your cake and eating it scenario?
I'm struggling a bit with this too.
How do you take this stance and then choose to play in a competition that is built and based on a specific male/female distinctions.
The part of this I struggle to understand is that they / them fight for recognition and the right not to be categorised / labelled, then immediately ask to be identified with a specific label!
To me this contradictory behaviour seems to be the exactly opposed to respecting an individuals privacy and rights, and that then reduces the whole event to a form of attention seeking behaviour, so that is why I think it comes across as somewhat disingenuous.
It's a behaviour that seems to be repeated in public frequently. An overt desire to be self-declared as somehow different, uncategorised, apart from mainstream society, special even, then a demand for identification that seems driven by an overarching desire for some form of inclusion. Not just on gender issues, but politics, religion, tribalism, fashion, etc., etc.., it's just become another trend / meme with language warped and reduced to a narcissistic absurdity!
Is it a having your cake and eating it scenario?
I think its a matter of not wanting a label.....that is incorrect.
Then providing one that is correct.
I think its a matter of not wanting a label.....that is incorrect.
Then providing one that is correct.
I'd say it's more arbitrary than correct, it's the label you have when you're not having a label!
Scoundrels will refer to "they" as "it", and be labelled a hater while being grammatically correct!
Will there be a future in which a female athlete claims prejudicial treatment within the AFLW for not being part of a minority, it seems an absurd suggestion, is it? Imagine that, being treated unfairly by gender bigots for identifying as female!
That would be an interesting question to pose Darcy or others, "Do they believe there is a still a place for females in AFLW?"
Seriously, who gives a **** about her "look at me" pronouncement?
Seriously, who gives a **** about her "look at me" pronouncement?
Yes I suspect you are correct, but now I feel overwhelming guilt for lambasting Harris for twittering rather than training! I thought Tayla was perhaps the odd one out, when it may be the case she is the majority!
I'd say it's more arbitrary than correct, it's the label you have when you're not having a label!
Scoundrels will refer to "they" as "it", and be labelled a hater while being grammatically correct!
Will there be a future in which a female athlete claims prejudicial treatment within the AFLW for not being part of a minority, it seems an absurd suggestion, is it? Imagine that, being treated unfairly by gender bigots for identifying as female!
That would be an interesting question to pose Darcy or others, "Do they believe there is a still a place for females in AFLW?"
In this case arbitrary IS correct.
The first thing i thought about was Darcy has been very pro-female/anti-male with the comments that went viral early on - "Smash the patriarchy" Does Darcy owe one side an apology now because they are somewhat 'fence sitting' now coming out as trans?
Darcy has always been very opinionated and boundary pushing....sometimes a little too much for my liking, it just seems to come back and bite them now.
I don't have a problem with Darcy telling her story, I'm dead against people who continually message and lecture me publicly about not wanting to be labelled / categorised coming out and demanding I refer to them by a label.
A label is something generally earned and given to a person or object by a 3rd party, not something you demand for yourself unless you are full of yourself.
You can wear a name tag all you like, but that doesn't require others to refer to you by it.
I don't have a problem with Darcy telling her story, I'm dead against people who continually message and lecture me publicly about not wanting to be labelled / categorised coming out and demanding I refer to them by a label.
A label is something generally earned and given to a person or object by a 3rd party, not something you demand for yourself unless you are full of yourself.
You can wear a name tag all you like, but that doesn't require others to refer to you by it.
I think that is a very wide brush you are painting wish.
Darcy hasn't "continually" done anything.
Darcy hasn't lectured anyone.
Darcy hasn't demanded anything.
Darcy made one post letting everyone know something somewhat private about themselves and letting people know the best way to go about addressing them to avoid embarrassment.
I think thats fair.
** As a side note, i have caught myself on no less than 10 occasions having to edit out a 'her/she' from my posts, despite proof reading (which i don't normally do). I guarantee i will miss 1 soon enough. If i was chatting face to face, i'd have no hope of addressing them correctly. :-[
** As a side note, i have caught myself on no less than 10 occasions having to edit out a 'her/she' from my posts, despite proof reading (which i don't normally do). I guarantee i will miss 1 soon enough. If i was chatting face to face, i'd have no hope of addressing them correctly. :-[
Why do you worry about it, you've done and are doing nothing wrong!
This non-binary stuff, it's like a punter too gutless to place a bet on the nose!
I'm old school and binary numbers converting them to decimals etc is what I understand, non binary humans I dont get, Darcy is a pleasant young lady and thats how I view her.
I think you lose something as a unique individual when you become a non gender abstract object and I wonder what has led to this decision to describe herself in such a neutral manner.
How silly is this.
The Wikipedia entry for Darcy has now been edited so that it reads 'they' and 'their' instead of 'she' and 'her'.
I was reading through it without really thinking too much about it but when I got to the second 'they' I thought ..."Does Darcy have a sister who plays as well? ;D .. then it clicked that the edit gremlin had already visited.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darcy_Vescio
Why do you worry about it, you've done and are doing nothing wrong!
This non-binary stuff, it's like a punter too gutless to place a bet on the nose!
Practicing i guess.
I had the same issues with the Ellen/Elliot page thing.
Its only a matter of time until someone i know does something similar, so i'm being a good boy scout and being prepared.
I'm old school and binary numbers converting them to decimals etc is what I understand, non binary humans I dont get, Darcy is a pleasant young lady and thats I how I view her.
I think you lose something as a unique individual when you become a non gender abstract object and I wonder what has led to this decision to describe herself in such a neutral manner.
Continuing down the numbers theme for a minute, and i hope you can follow me, but to me its less about binary, and more about real vs imaginary numbers.
Real numbers are the numbers we all know and love and use everyday.
Imaginary numbers don't exist, but we made them up to help us work things out and describe things in a simpler way.
Perhaps being 'non-binary' falls instead on the imaginary number scale. That is, it serves a specific purpose but is largely irrelevant to everyday use.
I think you lose something as a unique individual when you become a non gender abstract object and I wonder what has led to this decision to describe herself in such a neutral manner.
This is peer pressure, it's not something that comes from the majority, it's driven by an aggressive minority cliqué.
Before the politically correct nerds jump on what I've written, I don't have to wait until I experience this from a family member first-hand, it's already happened in our clan, and I can tell you the pressure from the minority is both extreme and insidious! It's why I openly and without hesitation called out the bullcrap than was the Hanna Mouncey scenario! Here is a non-binary that in a fit of rage could literally physically tear the head of 99.9995% of female opponents!
This situation is so far from being neutral and respectful it's an outright joke, and to think the majority is somehow accused of a wrong doing! It's just painted that way by an insidious minority intelligencia who play for keeps and everyone, everyone even sometimes their own children, are collateral damage in the process. I can't describe the damage this does to a family group when a young child grows up indoctrinated in this rubbish, by the time the adults get old, regretful and wake up to themselves it's all too late to unwind the damage!
The AFL pander to this by the way, because the marketing people will tell you that Dinks are where the discretionary dollars live, the dollars are not with the young mum and growing family!
You can wear a name tag all you like, but that doesn't require others to refer to you by it.
Guess that is true but if I met someone with a name tag they had chosen I would show courtesy/decency to refer to them by that name, not something that suited me as I am too lazy, confused or set in my ways to use the name/label they asked for/prefer.
I'd call it common human decency to call you John, or Dr John or whatever you prefer.
Darcy has, I think, has informed us very politely and without much fuss of their situation and I'll do my best to follow what they have asked. And yes, I'm bound to get it wrong at times.
Continuing down the numbers theme for a minute, and i hope you can follow me, but to me its less about binary, and more about real vs imaginary numbers.
Real numbers are the numbers we all know and love and use everyday.
Imaginary numbers don't exist, but we made them up to help us work things out and describe things in a simpler way.
Perhaps being 'non-binary' falls instead on the imaginary number scale. That is, it serves a specific purpose but is largely irrelevant to everyday use.
I do follow and it's a fair analogy imho.. I don't
want to see Darcy or any other young or old person as irrelevant but you are right calling it imaginary being non gender imo.
https://www.swimmingworldmagazine.com/news/lia-thomas-transgender-swimmer-from-penn-swims-fastest-times-in-nation-controversy-brewing/
Re the Mouncy issue ... that's where the problem starts tolerating this rubbish
Well, maybe we should just drop the womens aspects of sports and revert to let the strongest competitor man or woman win?
We'd save a bomb on prize money.
Maybe it's my age but I am struggling to keep up with current day definitions of sex and gender, so I would appreciate some help.
In looking at a definition of the "I" in LGBTQIA+, it says in part: "When an intersex person is old enough to choose a gender identity, they can choose to identify as male, female, or a combination."
Is non-binary covered by this definition, or is it a sub-set of one of the other letters?
Just call them quantum and we'll be all square!
btw., What are "they, them or it" going to do when this question is posed to a quantum computer, a device specifically design to answer non-binary questions?
It's not like they invented the term, but they may have hijacked it!
Perhaps being 'non-binary' falls instead on the imaginary number scale. That is, it serves a specific purpose but is largely irrelevant to everyday use.
I'd like to challenge this assertion on a technical level, pretty much every bit of modern life taken for granted exists because of imaginary or complex numbers!
In this regard, is a self-declaration of a non-binary identification being a touch grandiose?
Yes, I'm being mischievous, but me being free and allowed to do that forms part of my point, I can issue labels too!
I think the demographic on this site is right in the WTF wheelhouse!! (Including me!!)
Maybe it's my age but I am struggling to keep up with current day definitions of sex and gender, so I would appreciate some help.
In looking at a definition of the "I" in LGBTQIA+, it says in part: "When an intersex person is old enough to choose a gender identity, they can choose to identify as male, female, or a combination."
Is non-binary covered by this definition, or is it a sub-set of one of the other letters?
If the waters weren't muddy enough...
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/21/style/lgbtq-gender-language.html
The funny thing about all this is that it wouldn't even rate a thread or a mention except for the fact that Darcy is a prominent figure in the Carlton women's AFL team.
The funny thing about all this is that it wouldn't even rate a thread or a mention except for the fact that Darcy is a prominent figure in the Carlton women's AFL team.
Not entirely true. I made a thread about Ellen/Elliot Page when that occured. Big enough names, get mentioned.
But yes, this specific one was because its a carlton player.
Same would occur when the first mens player actually comes out of the closet publicly. I suspect we all know someone who is gay and its not entirely big news....unless its the 'first'.
Not entirely true. I made a thread about Ellen/Elliot Page when that occured. Big enough names, get mentioned.
But yes, this specific one was because its a carlton player.
Same would occur when the first mens player actually comes out of the closet publicly. I suspect we all know someone who is gay and its not entirely big news....unless its the 'first'.
Think about it though.
Darcy only has prominence because she is a very good AFLW player.
That's her claim to fame.
Without that it's like you or I came out as binary folks.
It wouldn't rate a mention.
Tertiary adjunct of unamatrix 9 would have been simpler
Tertiary adjunct of unamatrix 9 would have been simpler
And easier to describe.
Well most of us still love Darcy, but if you hate her there is no way you can credibly be labelled as a misogynist!
A lot of this debate would be twisted by the politically correct, I suppose like the Goodes issue there are some who hide their hatred in this sort of debate. For me it's about the politics of it, I despise the use of spin and politics in disclosing or discussing such issues. I'm afraid my first-hand experiences have left me very cynical of the wider movement because it's been hijacked by a few radicals, not unlike animal welfare being hijacked by extinction rebellion, fascism hijacked by anti-Semites, anti-nuclear hijacked by solar-energy, etc., etc..
There is irony in those who will rally cry "Down the Patriarchy", and then label you a misogynist, they seem oblivious to any 3rd person perspective, is it an accident or deliberate!
My understanding of this issue is that it is about identity. And Darcy has chosen an identity which best describes what is truest and most authentic for Darcy. I respect that.
Like most on here I am grappling with understanding this... but then my frame of reference, my identity is one represented by a large number of people. I look and feel male. And I see a lot like me wherever I go. Plus I've had plenty of decades of existence to reinforce my identity.
So how do I relate to Darcy with this new knowledge of how Darcy identifies Darcy? Simple. Respect. And a willingness to be open to the reality that Darcy's identity for Darcy is Darcy's business and my judgements are irrelevant.
I find myself, to be honest, wanting to understand but accepting that I may not be able to for some time. But I want to. Change aint easy, especially when we're asked to respect an identity that we can't relate to or haven't had to relate to... but that doesn't mean it aint very, very real for the person experiencing an identity so very different to so many, including me. I will be doing a lot of reading/research to better understand the perspectives and feelings of binary folks. To attempt to see the world and themselves through their eyes, minds and hearts. I'm determined to gain a better understanding.
But the one thing I do admire with Darcy's announcement is the courage it took to make this public. Like anyone making known their preference for an identity which is very different to so many, Darcy will experience ridicule and mocking. That is sad and an indictment on empathy and understanding... indeed, human intelligence. Fortunately, Darcy will also experience support, love and admiration from those closest to her... those who matter most, I expect and hope. Another victory for bravery, I suspect... and hope.
Ive thought this through and im still grappling a little with this and ill summarise as follows:
I dont feel male. I am a male by anatomy.
What does I dont identify as male mean in that context? What is a male?
The definition of feeling a gender is a bit of bollocks if you ask me. This stuff is identity politics and makes no sense. Im a male. I dont feel like a male, I am a male person who identifies as themselves. The more I try to understand this which is the key to respecting this decision for anyone who's wondering, is to understand and I cannot wrap my head around the idea that a person feels a gender or not because its not real.
Is the rejection of femininity to do with this? Of so that doesn't make you not female it just makes you a not girly girl.
Is the rejection of femininity to do with this? Of so that doesn't make you not female it just makes you a not girly girl.
This has been referenced a few times on this site, but the native americans were all over this before the europeans imposed their views....
https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/two-spirits-one-heart-five-genders
Of all of the foreign life ways Indians held, one of the first the Europeans targeted for elimination was the Two Spirit tradition among Native American cultures. At the point of contact, all Native American societies acknowledged three to five gender roles: Female, male, Two Spirit female, Two Spirit male and transgendered. LGBT Native Americans wanting to be identified within their respective tribes and not grouped with other races officially adopted the term "Two Spirit" from the Ojibwe language in Winnipeg, Manitoba, 1989. Each tribe has their own specific term, but there was a need for a universal term that the general population could understand. The Navajo refer to Two Spirits as Nádleehí (one who is transformed), among the Lakota is Winkté (indicative of a male who has a compulsion to behave as a female), Niizh Manidoowag (two spirit) in Ojibwe, Hemaneh (half man, half woman) in Cheyenne, to name a few. As the purpose of "Two Spirit" is to be used as a universal term in the English language, it is not always translatable with the same meaning in Native languages. For example, in the Iroquois Cherokee language, there is no way to translate the term, but the Cherokee do have gender variance terms for "women who feel like men" and vice versa.
I think it's actually good that we're 'having a think'.
The fact that some of us are struggling a bit (myself, very much included) with aspects of it is understandable, but in doing so I don't think there is a great deal of anti-Darcy feeling involved. Most of us wish thee well Darcy.
As I've said before the main thing I'm a bit confused about is this.
Darcy plays in competition that is based on the fact that it is not open to male competitors.
Men can't play in that competition.
By playing in that competition the participants accept that structure. In fact if you have a look at a lot of our clubs AFLW information and advertising Darcy is front and centre.
Darcy is helping to promote that 'segregated on M/F lines' competition, and as a result of Darcy's and others efforts, a lot of young women are now inspired to continue their football efforts at a high level. Yet Darcy wishes to be free of that 'women' label, even if is just her own personal preference.
Over the last few years we've heard a number of AFLW players voice their appreciation of the fact that they now have an elite competition for women. I'm not sure how that sits and is expressed by someone identifying as Darcy now does.
Finally my other area of confusion is that the story only has relevance because Darcy is a very good player in a competition for 'women'.
In some respects that is what defines Darcy's talents.
Darcy would not play at that elite level in an open competition.
Darcy would not have the recognition to express Darcy's gender position so publicly.
It would be largely irrelevant.
But I guess there are some folks who would argue the fact that Darcy has that ability isn't such a bad thing if it gets people having a chat about it.
( I've just changed all the shes and hers (probably missed one)...Can someone give me another pronoun...'They' reads ridiculously, as does the constant Darcy's
( I've just changed all the shes and hers (probably missed one)...Can someone give me another pronoun...'They' reads ridiculously, as does the constant Darcy's
Yep, it feels like you are learning another language, and you can't quite get your head around it.
This has been referenced a few times on this site, but the native americans were all over this before the europeans imposed their views....
https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/two-spirits-one-heart-five-genders
sorry mate I've read this before and I reject it
This has been referenced a few times on this site, but the native americans were all over this before the europeans imposed their views....
https://indiancountrytoday.com/archive/two-spirits-one-heart-five-genders
Not sure about the navajo and their belief structures but for me you can still paint all of this into traditional genders of anatomy X and Y.
Where the variance is seems to be behavioural and not gendered.
I.e. we associate femininity with females and masculinity with males as we have defined the class male and female, but both genders have the same capacity for both, and how they behave is actually irrelevant.
The class male or female is the issue for someone to state they don't belong to one is in my opinion still bollocks because its their definition they don't belong to. Its just anatomy.
You can't not have anatomy of one or the other. Its a thumbing of social norms based on flawed models of social norms.
I remember once being told "She is the cat's mother". Perhaps we knew better once upon a time but im never really going to understand this thinking regarding rejection of anatomy. You introduce more chromosomes and im more understanding but the waters seem to have been muddied here for no real apparent reason IMHO.
I think it's actually good that we're 'having a think'.
The fact that some of us are struggling a bit (myself, very much included) with aspects of it is understandable, but in doing so I don't think there is a great deal of anti-Darcy feeling involved. Most of us wish thee well Darcy.
As I've said before the main thing I'm a bit confused about is this.
Darcy plays in competition that is based on the fact that it is not open to male competitors.
Men can't play in that competition.
By playing in that competition the participants accept that structure. In fact if you have a look at a lot of our clubs AFLW information and advertising Darcy is front and centre.
( I've just changed all the shes and hers (probably missed one)...Can someone give me another pronoun...'They' reads ridiculously, as does the constant Darcy's
That's something I wrestled with also, Principal LODS. From the meagre research I did (which continues), the issue is not so much Darcy's body, which seems woman, but how Darcy identifies Darcy's gender or otherwise. It's about identity, not body... and that is a challenge for those of us who have a body and identity which seem the same.
I also found the pronoun thing tough... so I just settled on the noun 'Darcy' and gave pronouns the flick. Probably lazy on my part, but it's a start founded on respect.
Is the rejection of femininity to do with this? Of so that doesn't make you not female it just makes you a not girly girl.
This is close to the money for some cases but not all.
Being female is a competitive sport some feel they just can't win at!
I'm struggling a bit with this too.
How do you take this stance and then choose to play in a competition that is built and based on a specific male/female distinctions.
x100
Saw this in the Hearld Sun and read the first few paragraphs and then stopped reading. Does my head in. I'm too old school with my way of thinking.
I'm old school and binary numbers converting them to decimals etc is what I understand, non binary humans I dont get, Darcy is a pleasant young lady and thats how I view her.
I think you lose something as a unique individual when you become a non gender abstract object and I wonder what has led to this decision to describe herself in such a neutral manner.
x2
That's something I wrestled with also, Principal LODS. From the meagre research I did (which continues), the issue is not so much Darcy's body, which seems woman, but how Darcy identifies Darcy's gender or otherwise. It's about identity, not body... and that is a challenge for those of us who have a body and identity which seem the same.
I also found the pronoun thing tough... so I just settled on the noun 'Darcy' and gave pronouns the flick. Probably lazy on my part, but it's a start founded on respect.
Back in the 1990s, one of my colleagues was pursuing a PhD about the continuums that are gender and biological sex. We had many challenging (for me) discussions. I learnt a lot of stuff that made my head hurt but, eventually, accepted that gender is essentially a social construct with the binary model predominant in western society. Many societies around the globe have their own long-established traditions of non-binary gender with third, fourth, fifth, or more genders. Biological sex is not as straightforward as I thought either, with disorders of sex development (DSD), also known as intersex, creating a spectrum rather than the binary assignation of biological sex based on XX - XY, vagina - penis, ovaries - testes.
Darcy's announcement is a bit of a non-event for me. I don't really give a fat rat's clacker about how anyone chooses to define/identify their gender. That's their business. However, I do now know that I shouldn't use female pronouns when referring to Darcy. My main concern is that Darcy continues to play good footy and wins the goal kicking again this season.
I can't see an issue with the fact that Darcy plays in a women's footy competition. Eligibility to play in the AFLW is based on biological sex rather than gender identity. As far as I know, Darcy meets whatever criteria there may be for playing AFLW and self-identification as non-binary when it comes to gender doesn't really matter.
I'm really starting to feel old now. The brave new world is liberating to some, and I respect individual choices, but there are some goal posts that are pretty hard to move. I am well aware there are some individuals who do not fit the traditional male/female profiles because of chromosome or other medical reasons - the difference is, such individuals have not 'chosen' to be non-binary.
As a species, we absolutely rely upon the male-female differentiation for procreation - so what if everyone chooses to be 'non-binary' - is that the end of us as a race? Or can non-binaries with female gentalia meet non-binaries with male genitalia and create non-binary offspring? Hang on, isn't that heterosexuality......?
What if Max Gawn decided they were non-binary - could they play ruck in the AFLW as a lead-up to the AFL season?
Was that Pandora's box I heard creaking....?
https://www.afl.com.au/video/693910/-these-are-not-sad-tears-darcy-vescio-s-emotion-on-revealing-greatest-fear?videoId=693910&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1641344400001
Worth a watch to see how this issue affects Darcy.
https://www.afl.com.au/video/693910/-these-are-not-sad-tears-darcy-vescio-s-emotion-on-revealing-greatest-fear?videoId=693910&modal=true&type=video&publishFrom=1641344400001
Worth a watch to see how this issue affects Darcy.
Agreed, no doubt about that!
But does it change the social politics of the situation, not really.
Darcy's message is important for Darcy, her family, friends and those closest to her, it gives the rest of us some wider understanding, and new found respect for Darcy, but I feel it doesn't really add clarity on the wider issue.
It does however confirm you have to tread very carefully with these issues because you never know the headspace of those affected. Some may have chosen to drive into a tree on the way to training rather than go through the reveal or confronting the pain, and doing that they wouldn't be the first!
Agreed, no doubt about that!
But does it change the social politics of the situation, not really.
Darcy's message is important for Darcy, her family, friends and those closest to her, it gives the rest of us some wider understanding, and new found respect for Darcy, but I feel it doesn't really add clarity on the wider issue.
It does however confirm you have to tread very carefully with these issues because you never know the headspace of those affected. Some may have chosen to drive into a tree on the way to training rather than go through the reveal or confronting the pain, and doing that they wouldn't be the first!
It shows us we should tread carefully because we don't know who is listening and how it affects them. Which in turn DOES change social politics for the same reason. We don't have to understand it, but we need to respect it. We don't have to bend over backwards for it, but for something as simple as using they/them over she/her then its the least we can do. Refusing to do that, shows little respect.
Obviously we spend a lot less time discussing the women's competition than we do the men's.
It's probably not that difficult a task to make those they/her adjustments for Darcy...especially while the season hasn't started
I'm wondering whether we'd afford a prominent member of our AFL men's team identifying as binary the same level of 'respect' during lengthy in season discussions.
Some of us may, but when does it become too much of a chore, and do we have different standards for biological males and females.
What if Darcy was a fringe player without the profile. Would we still make the effort because it's unlikely that Darcy will be the last player to take this position. It makes things like forum discussions very difficult with different terms for different players.
Given that it's doubtful too many players are avid readers of CSC does it matter a great deal if we stick to the He for the Male comp and She for the female comp.
It shows us we should tread carefully because we don't know who is listening and how it affects them. Which in turn DOES change social politics for the same reason. We don't have to understand it, but we need to respect it. We don't have to bend over backwards for it, but for something as simple as using they/them over she/her then its the least we can do. Refusing to do that, shows little respect.
Well said, K.
Your piece from the Native Americans I found really relevant and important. As someone who has for many decades resonated with the spirituality of Native Americans, and studied their culture/spirituality and stayed with some of these folks briefly when visiting the States in '93, I was aware of their attitude to the 'souls' of people and their attitudes to sexuality. I found it (and still find it) inspiring. Do our souls (spirits, whatever you like) have a gender or sexuality? Nuh. Sometimes I wish we could simply fast forward about 50 years to when we humans have advanced beyond ignorance toward gender, race, colour, sexuality... etc., to acceptance, celebration of difference ...and subsequent respect.
Obviously we spend a lot less time discussing the women's competition than we do the men's.
It's probably not that difficult a task to make those they/her adjustments for Darcy...especially while the season hasn't started
I'm wondering whether we'd afford a prominent member of our AFL men's team identifying as binary the same level of 'respect' during lengthy in season discussions.
Some of us may, but when does it become too much of a chore, and do we have different standards for biological males and females.
What if Darcy was a fringe player without the profile. Would we still make the effort because it's unlikely that Darcy will be the last player to take this position. It makes things like forum discussions very difficult with different terms for different players.
Given that it's doubtful too many players are avid readers of CSC does it matter a great deal if we stick to the He for the Male comp and She for the female comp.
I don't know about you Lods, but i was the one who posted the darcy announcement and i would've posted it if it was player #30 on our list too.
Same with the men.
They are all human and all deserve to be treated as such, regardless of how good they are at footy.
Its a forum and people will write what they wanna write and that includes whatever pronouns they wanna use, but i'll be trying my best to get them right. Doesn't matter if players read this, or their families, or whoever, but perhaps one of our posters feels the same way as Darcy, by ignoring Darcys wishes, you are (potentially) disrespected other posters.
We all know a rival club captain used to frequent here and has family who do too, if they were thinking of following suit (just an example) how would that make their family members feel?
I don't know about you Lods, but i was the one who posted the darcy announcement and i would've posted it if it was player #30 on our list too.
Same with the men.
They are all human and all deserve to be treated as such, regardless of how good they are at footy.
Its a forum and people will write what they wanna write and that includes whatever pronouns they wanna use, but i'll be trying my best to get them right. Doesn't matter if players read this, or their families, or whoever, but perhaps one of our posters feels the same way as Darcy, by ignoring Darcys wishes, you are (potentially) disrespected other posters.
We all know a rival club captain used to frequent here and has family who do too, if they were thinking of following suit (just an example) how would that make their family members feel?
I'll try my best too Kruds.
I'm just pointing out that in the greater scheme of things while it is just an individual, folks may try their best...as it becomes more than just one or two players folks will just drop back or look to different labels.
Imagine a situation where you're talking about our forward line (men's or women's team) and half the group identify as binary,.
Try juggling your pronouns then.
Noble thoughts, but practically it will require a big effort. It's one that most folks wouldn't bother trying.
It would stifle discussion.
It's for each individual to determine how they approach this, as I said where Darcy is concerned I'll try my best.
But a poster shouldn't be judged by the pronouns they choose to use.
I don't know about you Lods, but i was the one who posted the darcy announcement and i would've posted it if it was player #30 on our list too.
It's interesting...I asked myself the question "would I have posted it?"
Yes I would have, if I'd seen it first but....
I wouldn't have posted it if it was player #30 on our Woman's team.
I would have posted it if it was player # 30 on our men's team.
I don't think that's a bias based on sex but more about the relative importance of the competitions in my own mind.
I wouldn't have posted it if it was player # 30 on our VFL side.
It shows us we should tread carefully because we don't know who is listening and how it affects them. Which in turn DOES change social politics for the same reason. We don't have to understand it, but we need to respect it. We don't have to bend over backwards for it, but for something as simple as using they/them over she/her then its the least we can do. Refusing to do that, shows little respect.
We do not apply the pressure to Darcy, she cares nothing of your opinion, my opinion, or any of the thousands of fans, etc., etc... Our opinions carry no weight within Darcy's frame of reference and apply next to no pressure either individually or accumulatively.
She cares about family, friends and close associates. The bulk of the pressure comes from close peers, some may come from close friends and family, but typically not much as they will love / care for Darcy unconditionally.
My first-hand experience in this issue is that the bulk of the pressure comes from politically / socially aligned peers, who do want to make a big issue of it one way or the other. They are happy or even ecstatic for Darcy to sacrifice herself on the public alter to further their own cause.
We do not apply the pressure to Darcy, she cares nothing of your opinion, my opinion, or any of the thousands of fans, etc., etc... Our opinions carry no weight within Darcy's frame of reference and apply next to no pressure either individually or accumulatively.
She cares about family, friends and close associates. The bulk of the pressure comes from close peers, some may come from close friends and family, but typically not much as they will love / care for Darcy unconditionally.
My first-hand experience in this issue is that the bulk of the pressure comes from politically / socially aligned peers, who do want to make a big issue of it one way or the other. They are happy or even ecstatic for Darcy to sacrifice herself on the public alter to further their own cause.
Point is, its bigger than Darcy.
Refusing to 'play along' with Darcy's requests is a slap in the face for others who may not be as fortunate as Darcy to have such a close knit and supportive group.
Your first hand issue has been discussed previously, and from what i can gather it is very much in the minority and is clouding your views on the matter.
That can be seen from your reaction earlier in the thread...
I'm dead against people who continually message and lecture me publicly about not wanting to be labelled / categorised coming out and demanding I refer to them by a label.
Now from the video, which was shot in late October, until when this thread was started off the back of THE tweet, there has been literally no mention of it.
So the 'continual, lecturing, demanding' side of things is coming from something other than this issue re Darcy.
So again, think of the bigger picture.
Darcy might be leading the way, but thats only the tip of the iceberg, 90% of which we will never see.
Refusing to 'play along' with Darcy's requests is a slap in the face for others who may not be as fortunate as Darcy to have such a close knit and supportive group.
Interesting you use that term "play", that is part of my point, the game being played by politically motived activists that applies immense pressure to their peers.
From the other perspective, whatever Darcy personally thinks of some pronoun places zero obligation on me or any other commentator, it's completely untenable for 7 billion people all to have a custom label. Some will just have to put up with having a label they do not like, and choosing an obscure label that doesn't match your outward appearance just sets you up for a world of pain. Having a position of privilege doesn't change that, Darcy's solution is untenable for 99.9999% of people, it is a solution for the privileged!
It's equally likely for some individuals to take offense at being labelled "them or they", rather than "her or she", this is were the absurdity of the request is exposed, it implies "we" like all share Darcy's opinion!
Interesting you use that term "play", that is part of my point, the game being played by politically motived activists that applies immense pressure to their peers.
From the other perspective, whatever Darcy personally thinks of some pronoun places zero obligation on me or any other commentator, it's completely untenable for 7 billion people all to have a custom label. Some will just have to put up with having a label they do not like, and choosing an obscure label that doesn't match your outward appearance just sets you up for a world of pain. Having a position of privilege doesn't change that, Darcy's solution is untenable for 99.9999% of people, it is a solution for the privileged!
It's equally likely for some individuals to take offense at being labelled "them or they", rather than "her or she", this is were the absurdity of the request is exposed, it implies "we" like all share Darcy's opinion!
The word 'play' was deliberate, because you seem to think this is simply a game and forget peoples lives are being affected by this.
No, it doesn't mean you have to listen to Darcy's wishes. It also doesn't mean you have to be arrogant enough to ignore them for.....whatever half-ar$ed reason you seem to want to come up with.
The effect her request has on you (and others)......negligible.
The effect your ignorance has on Darcy (and specifically others)....much more damning.
Look, you do what you want, but you seem to be doing it for spite from where i sit and i don't get why.
It will be interesting to see how this young girl gets treated.
AFLW player Haneen Zreika will not be named in the Giants’ team to play against the Western Bulldogs on Friday night after deciding she could not wear the club’s pride jumper for religious reasons.
I'm pegging she will suffer as much if not more vitriol and derision coming her way as goes the other, but in this regard it will be different, because it'll come from a vocal minority that claims tolerance and acceptance! ;)
Will her career fade away ................. cancelled?
Why have I've become so cynical?
If she was Christian her career would already be over.
If she was Christian her career would already be over.
She is a minority, they/them are a minority, how can any minority be treated preferentially at the expense of another?
Why are the majority forced/guilted into picking a side?
Keep politics out of our footy!
Keep politics out of sport!
Am I missing something here? So she can play, shoulder to shoulder, with LGBTQ folks but can't wear a jumper symbolizing respect for these folks same folks (and others)? ***head shake***