There are some topics I am afraid to write about.
I am someone that is passionate about diversity and inclusion in sport. When I write about sport, I want to make sure that I am coming from an educated, considered and respectful position. Hurting the sports that I am passionate about or making someone feel like they were not welcome in the Australian sporting family is the last thing that I want to do.
In a world that is increasingly focused on diversity, when talking about issues of gender, LGBTIQ or race, conversation can be stifled and people can be afraid to speak up, lest they make a mistake with terminology or be called a racist, a homophobe, a sexist or a bigot for expressing a view in the wrong way.
In the past when thinking about whether to share a view on a particular topic, sometimes I have just placed an issue in the ‘too hard’ basket, just in case I put a foot wrong.
But today, even though it’s challenging, I want to write about Hannah Mouncey.
When it comes to conversations about people who identify as transgender, I am certainly not an expert. But I’m going to raise some questions in the hope that this leads to an open dialogue.
For those of you that also find this issue challenging, I encourage you to be brave enough to educate yourselves and to think critically about diversity and inclusion in our sports.
Most importantly, there is a way to have difficult conversations in a respectful manner. Think before you comment on this article – derogatory comments are hurtful and harmful. Anyone who cannot express a view without resorting to name-calling is not someone I want involved in the sports that I am passionate about.
Hannah Mouncey is a transgender woman who, on Tuesday, was deemed ineligible to participate in the 2018 AFLW draft.
Mouncey had previously played for the Australian men’s handball team before transitioning and has also played in the ACT women’s AFL competition throughout the year.
The reasons for her ineligibility in the draft were largely about her size and the disparity between Mouncey and some of the other women competing in the competition. Just to be clear, Mouncey is only ineligible for this year’s AFLW draft. She is allowed to nominate for future AFLW drafts and to register in other AFL competitions.
For me, this decision raises more questions than answers and demonstrates that there is plenty of work to be done in this space – not just in educating sports fans, but also in making sure our sports have appropriate policies in place so the process for determining whether people are eligible or not is clear.
Is it true that transgender women have a size advantage over other women in the competition? The easy answer, of course, is yes.
But women come in all shapes and sizes. Is it possible that other women that are of a similar size to Hannah could already be in the competition?
AFL Guidelines stipulate that in working out if a transgender woman is eligible for the competition, she must ‘demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition’. Mouncey’s last reading was well below these requirements.
If she meets the guidelines, why is she ineligible to play?
[latest_videos_strip]
Why have I heard little but silence from other AFLW players? The competition has been a beacon for diversity. Images of players attending the AFLW Awards with their partners immediately come to mind, including the iconic image of Erin Phillips kissing her partner Tracy Gahan when she won the AFLW best and fairest award.
Have the players been told not to comment on this issue? Or is Mouncey’s size and physical strength genuinely something that they were concerned about? Some people have compared her size to other athletes in the competition (for example, she is only one centimetre shorter than Phillips), but is it just about height?
My other question is, if the AFL’s primary reason for deeming Mouncey ineligible was their concern about the disparity in size and strength, why has she been given the all clear to play in other AFL-affiliated women’s competitions?
Do the same concerns not exist outside the elite level? Why is it okay for Mouncey to play against players below the elite level, but not against the women who do play in AFLW?
What Mouncey’s situation demonstrates so clearly to me is that the AFL needs to think carefully about its own guidelines. In line with AFL Victoria Guidelines, because Mouncey has been through the gender reassignment process, she should be considered to be the gender set out on the Victorian state documentation. This is consistent with the IOCs approach to the issue as well.
If the AFL doesn’t want to adhere to these guidelines, then why have them in place?
Are the IOC Guidelines more appropriate for non-contact sports and, if so, why did the AFL not think critically about its policy?
It’s not like this issue has only just arisen. The AFL first became aware of Mouncey wanting to participate in the draft back in June. The fact that they left a decision on this to the day before the draft (meaning she had no right of appeal) shows that rather than backing themselves on inclusion and diversity when it mattered, the AFL was more inclined to end the conversation.
It’s very easy to change your logo to ‘yes’ and use words like diversity and inclusion and then back away when the issue becomes challenging or too hard. In light of the AFL’s decision, I wonder where transgender women fit into the AFL family if they want to play.
Whether you agree with the AFL’s decision or not, the timing of the announcement was poor and done in a way so to put the issue to bed.
On a topic that will become more relevant, not less, the AFL has lost an important opportunity to engage with its key stakeholders in an open and frank discussion.
To Hannah, I hope you still feel welcome in the AFL family because you are welcome. I wish you all the best in your future endeavours and hope you are still given the opportunity to pursue the sport that you are passionate about.
The big K
Guest
There are many factors other then increased testosterone levels that significantly affect the competitive edge in sport such as nutrition,age,height, weight,access to coaching and training facilities, & other genetic and biological variations like oxygen-carrying capacity. For a person transitioning from XY male to XY female we need to be able to show how we have minimised our strength & endurance by 10 to 12% the estimated performance difference between males and females across most sports that rely on endurance & strength. Up until puberty age there is very little performance difference between the sexes experiencing a male puberty is where the difference in males & females in endurance and strength becomes evident, @Scienceofsport explains this better then anyone I have heard before. To enable XY females to gain some credibility in sports we need to identify measurable quantities that can show all stakeholders how we have minimised this advantage of experiencing a male puberty and living years with a male endocrine system. Some of the measurable quantities I suggest could be screening pre transition V02 Oxygen levels, muscle mass , testosterone levels, bone density and BMI’s. We need the criteria to compete to be clear for both the transitioning athlete & our competitors. This hopefully would minimise transitioning athletes having to defend the right to compete each time they play sport & it would show our competition in measurable terms what the criteria is to compete, and when and how the criteria has been met. Our competition also face criticism unfairly when they question the rights of transitioning athletes competing this would be minimised with clearer and measurable quantities within trans participation policies. For XX female to XX male athletes minimising performance is not seen necessary although I do have concerns this may be the case in the future with XX males being able to super dope unrestricted. XX females transitioning to XX males do not have to undergo a hysterectomy (removal of the womb and ovaries), but a gonadectomy (removal of testicles) is carried out on XY males transitioning to XY females. What this means, in effect, is that XX males do not have the main testosterone-producing organ in their body removed, but XY females do. Sport has put forward the idea that transitioning from one sex to the other is the same process. The XY female’s body is broken down into a post-menopausal state and the complications that come with that. The XX male gets juiced, and goes into a hyper state due to their known biological sensitivity to androgens. You see them in football, in bodybuilding, in all the big muscle sports doing exceptionally well, because they are taking these high levels of testosterone that are completely unregulated. They never bring XX males back into a state of lower values after they have gone through transition. They just stick to those higher levels. Chris Mossier could not be competing the way that he competes as a biathlete without those really high levels of testosterone. Mack Beggs is a hyper-doping athlete competing in sport who is outperforming other female athletes. People should be complaining because it’s clearly doping. Chris Mossier , Beggs and others have been getting away with it and this is the problem with what the IOC has done. It has solely focused on the male/female social model, but has never done the necessary homework. The science actually opposes the IOC’s international policy. With XY females fully transitioned I believe creating a fair inclusionpolicy could be achieved now, XY women (fully transitioned) are the only athletes competing unhealthy in a complete androgen deprivation state and well beyond a (post menopause state). Incredibly unhealthy and spore eventually becomes impossible as the body deteriorates as it cannot respond to day-to-day functions without androgens as the bodies primary communications and regulator hormone. Moreover and important, the XY transitioned female is the only body that can show the health and key markers where the body turns on then off, as the body loses its ability to regulate androgens. Which then causes complete androgen deprivation of the human body, heavily contraindicates it as testosterone plays over 200 functions in the body every single day separate of the sex of the physiology. A transitioning XY Female (pre op)are hypgonatic, not feeling full effects of complete androgen deprivation and plus 2 dozen contraindications because they still have gonads. If they were a HP athlete prior and during continued transition minimising the advantage in women's competition takes even longer years longer. A pre op XY female still has a male endocrine system all it takes is for the transitioning athlete is to not take their androgens blockers for a day and testosterone production will recommence. A transitioning (pre op) XY Female effectively has the equivalent of a fully loaded syringe of testosterone at her disposal. As Hannah Mouncey states in a recent article she only had to provide her initial testosterone levels with no follow up tests very easy to manipulate testosterone levels. At the elite level of sport & also in high impact sports this is a grave concern. A transitioning XY female athlete could take just enough testosterone blockers to maintain a testosterone level at just under 10nmols very easily with manipulating her medication, almost impossible to police.
Caroline Layt
Roar Rookie
Well written Mary K and thank you for the support. Tide is slowly turning for transgender and gender variant sports women. Hopefully one day it won’t be an issue and it won’t need to be discussed as the T in GLBTIQ will just be accepted in society in the same manner as everyone else.
Caroline Layt
Roar Rookie
Well written Mary K and thank you for the support. Tide is slowly turning for transgender and gender variant sports women. Hopefully one day it won’t be an issue and it won’t need to be discussed as the T in GLBTIQ will just be accepted in society in the same manner as everyone else.
Tricky
Guest
My comment was to make a point that these girls just newly drafted don't want to make their opinion on the matter known, they've got enough on their plate without dealing with external noise as a result of their comment. Fair enough
Stephen
Guest
Sometimes it's best to keep it simple. AFLW represents - Australian Football League for Women. Ms Mouncey was born a man.
Ad-0
Guest
There's a lot of talk around the fact that Mouncey has a testosterone level below 10nmol/l. I hope you are aware that is still in the male range of testosterone levels (lower range admittedly) as females average between 0.5-2.5 nmol/l.
Oingo Boingo
Guest
Keep ya f'n common sense to ya self Yawn . NOW ! Go back and work for a living , your unwelcome in this "new world" of equality.
butterbean
Guest
Too simple. Part of the problem.
Rick
Guest
Olivia I don't think anyone is questioning the validity of a transgender male wanting to be or in fact being recognised as a woman but maybe they will have to have a competition of their own. You said the United Nations Commission (didn't that change to the United Nations Human Rights Council in 2006) backed up the IOC. If they were backing the IOC in having no sex or gender testing in the 2018 Olympics, then they truly are an organisation without any relevance. Why don't we just throw everyone in together and the best/strongest whatever wins or lets give power to a minority so we can all sleep at night thinking what we did was fair, well thats unless you're one of those women that has been unfairly treated with. I'd much rather listen to athletes than sport scientists and medical experts, its terminology that gives credence without justification.
Womblat
Guest
Excellent point.
Olivia Watts
Roar Guru
Jacko, firstly, I apologise for being so strident and I should not have answered in those terms. To answer your question though, a panel of the best and most knowledgable medical experts and sports scientists researched this question on behalf of the International Olympic Committee and concluded that men and women of transsexed and intersexed background experience a condition which is a wholly medical one, not some imaginary nor bizarre lifestyle choice, and created a Criteria of Assessment under which such people be permitted to compete in any sport overseen by the IOC. The United Nations Commission on Human Rights held a seperate inquiry into the matter, called on the expertise of a different but similarly qualified panel of professionals in the field and, amongst many recommendations supporting the rights of transsexed and intersexed people, completely upheld the IOC code in every respect, This issue should have ended there. I agree with those decisions, resolutions and Codes. Given the depth to which these bodies investigated the situation, the calibre of the people conducting the reviews and the years of research which was examined as part of the Committee processes involved, I feel justified in saying that those who disagree with the rights of a transsexed woman who has met the criteria in place to allow them to compete, are demonstrably wrong.
Rick
Guest
You can't compare a big man v a little man to a big "used to be a man, now a woman" to a little woman, it's a lame argument. To take a point from your Swiss article “The overriding sporting objective is and remains the guarantee of fair competition" Here's one on UFC'S Fallon Fox - an interview with the New York Post, former UFC women's bantamweight champion Ronda Rousey stated she would be willing to fight Fox, saying "I can knock out anyone in the world", although she believes Fox has male bone density and structure, leading to an unfair advantage.[16] In an interview with Out, Rousey said: "I feel like if you go through puberty as a 'man' it's not something you can reverse. … There's no undo button on that."[17] UFC president Dana White claimed that "bone structure is different, hands are bigger, jaw is bigger, everything is bigger" and said "I don’t think someone who used to be a man and became a woman should be able to fight a woman.”[18] During Fox's fight against Tamikka Brents, Brents suffered a concussion, an orbital bone fracture, and seven staples to the head in the 1st round. After her loss, Brents took to social media to convey her thoughts on the experience of fighting Fox: “I've fought a lot of women and have never felt the strength that I felt in a fight as I did that night. I can’t answer whether it’s because she was born a man or not because I’m not a doctor. I can only say, I’ve never felt so overpowered ever in my life and I am an abnormally strong female in my own right,” she stated. “Her grip was different, I could usually move around in the clinch against other females but couldn’t move at all in Fox’s clinch…” Is that "fair competition" - I guess you won't have to survive in your brand new world that will be up to others
Cat
Roar Guru
In your post above you claim that the law the AFL cited for diallowing Hannah to play was just an excuse. If that is actually true then:
Cannot be true. It is clear sexual discrimination. So which is it?Cat
Roar Guru
Or you are just making excuses for an appalling decision.
Jacko
Guest
Olivia why is it that if we disagree with you we are wrong and you are right???? Have you considered that part of this 21st century you want us WRONG people to wake up in allows for different opinions and also freedom of speech or is it only the 21st century if we all agree with you??? No laws have been broken in not allowing her/Him to play and I would suggest TV numbers would probably go up for the first couple of rounds but the FIRST question you should ask is why is someone who is not even top 10 in a low level comp is registering, for a draft they know they will never make on talent alone....
Jacko
Guest
Cat you dont get it do you....They had a get out clause so they used it....it may well have had been the reason or it may just have been the excuse.....It seems that everyone else realsies it was just an excuse
Yawn
Guest
If someone has a penis they are a male. If someone has a vagina they are a female. Thats simple science isn't it? Everything else is white noise.
Olivia Watts
Roar Guru
This was a terrible decision by the AFL and one which I believe will haunt them. In old speak, Hannah Mounsey is 6'3. Australian Opals centre Liz Cambage is 6'8. Cambage is also physically heavier and, quite possibly, physically stronger than Mounsey and a very fine athlete indeed. Both Mounsey and Cambage meet the IOC guidelines and the AFL Gender Policy guidelines for competing as women in women's sport yet whereas Cambage would be welcomed with open arms and considered a coup for the AFLW if she were poached from basketball, Mounsey has her application denied. Mounsey has no demonstrable advantage over any other woman of similar size and background. Someone as physically strong as Australian Olympian and discus champion would make mincemeat out of Mounsey given her years of intensive strength conditioning yet, again, Samuels would be welcomed with open arms by the AFLW. This is not an issue of relative strength or size. It is simple, blatant and unsupportable discrimination levelled at a woman because of the medical condition she was born with, could not avoid and did nothing to deserve. She dis not choose to be transsexed - it is not a lifestyle choice - but has chosen to try and make the best of her life, including playing the sport she loves. She has every legal right to do so. The AFL has no legal or moral right to prevent her. This decision has been made, I believe, purely in the interests of Television ratings. Unwilling to do anything which might possibly have negative impact on their fledgling women's flagship, unwilling to take a position as a societal leader in the cause of equality, they have folded and decided to hang Mounsey out to dry whilst they wring their hands in a manner befitting Pontus Pilate. How else can they justify their decision when they have stated Mounsey is free to play in any and all other leagues as a woman? Obviously there are no safety concerns or failures to meet guidelines involved or the ban would cover all leagues at all levels. Even if you feel all transsexed women should be banned from sport I defy you to justify the hypocrisy of that decision - and if you do feel that way, wake up and welcome to the 21st century, where medicine is slowly replacing bigotry
Cat
Roar Guru
Does Aaron Sandilands versus Caleb Daniels 'look like a fair physical contest'? Does Zach Guthrie trying to tackle Buddy Franklin 'look like a fair physical contest'?
Cat
Roar Guru
And Hannah wasn't banned because of her gender status ...