The AFL has just published a tweet which supports same sex marriage. It includes a photo with various "AFL identities" including Gillon McLachlan, Dyson Heppell, Alistair Clarkson and Max Gawn. I assume from this that all those in the photo support same sex marriage. But does Max have a formal role with the AFL?

(Hopefully the picture from the tweet is included. If not, I'll try to copy it and include it).

Note: As part of the respectful debate we should be having on the issue of same sex marriage, I'm not proposing that this thread argue for or against the issue. I'm just asking the question about Max's role. If you want your voice to be heard on the same sex marriage issue...fill in the postal survey and return it to the ABS.

 

The AFL is committed to equality & diversity, & we support the rights of all Australians to live, work & play free from discrimination.

 

Edited September 20, 20177 yr by La Dee-vina Comedia
Photo added

The AFL doesn't have any outwardly homosexual competitors to parade before the media so it forwarded a Kiwi and and two unfortunate hairstyles to demonstrate its diversity and commitment to anti-discrimination.

10 minutes ago, Skuit said:

The AFL doesn't have any outwardly homosexual competitors to parade before the media so it forwarded a Kiwi and and two unfortunate hairstyles to demonstrate its diversity and commitment to anti-discrimination.

Male?

And technically, don't all registered, listed players work for the AFL?

10 minutes ago, Skuit said:

The AFL doesn't have any outwardly homosexual competitors to parade before the media so it forwarded a Kiwi and and two unfortunate hairstyles to demonstrate its diversity and commitment to anti-discrimination.

I think the choice of Heppel and Brown, with their hairstyles, is to test the limits of Australia's hate speech laws.

Looks like some of the higher profile, easily recognisable players not playing in finals. 

Strangely enough although I think the AFL is often too quick to adopt a cause (it's like cause of the week sometimes) I am in complete agreement with their public stance on this occasion.

All types of organisations have weighed in on this issue and I would be disappointed if the AFL "sat on the fence."

As a young boy I can vaguely recall walking home with my mother after she had voted in the 1967 referendum. She was/is a conservative voter but she had no problem explaining to me that she was happy to vote yes on that occasion.  I would like to think that this issue is carried by a similar proportion of the vote.

4 minutes ago, Diamond_Jim said:

Strangely enough although I think the AFL is often too quick to adopt a cause (it's like cause of the week sometimes) I am in complete agreement with their public stance on this occasion.

All types of organisations have weighed in on this issue and I would be disappointed if the AFL "sat on the fence."

As a young boy I can vaguely recall walking home with my mother after she had voted in the 1967 referendum. She was/is a conservative voter but she had no problem explaining to me that she was happy to vote yes on that occasion.  I would like to think that this issue is carried by a similar proportion of the vote.

DJ I have one complaint about the AFL and it's social issues.

They need to get there own house in order before they start lecturing others. 

Hypocrites comes to mind.  

3 minutes ago, old dee said:

DJ I have one complaint about the AFL and it's social issues.

They need to get there own house in order before they start lecturing others. 

Hypocrites comes to mind.  

Generally in agreement  with you OD.. their fence sitting on the Goodes booing was deplorable but on this issue because many organisations are stating their views I think it's to be applauded

3 hours ago, Goodvibes said:

Male?

And technically, don't all registered, listed players work for the AFL?

Nope, all players are effectively businesses that contract their services to a club so the players certainly don't work for the AFL.

32 minutes ago, old dee said:

DJ I have one complaint about the AFL and it's social issues.

They need to get there own house in order before they start lecturing others. 

Hypocrites comes to mind.  

Yup, seems to be a new AFL social event every round when most of us turn up to sink a few beers and watch elite athletes compete for our club with no interest in all this social engineering.

Nothing worse than the politicization of sports. 

 

11 minutes ago, Petraccattack said:

Nothing worse than the politicization of sports. 

 

I don't see this as the politicising of sport. 

Edited September 20, 20177 yr by hardtack

1 hour ago, Petraccattack said:

Nothing worse than the politicization of sports. 

 

 

There are sooooooo many things worse than the politicisation of sports.

 

1 hour ago, Petraccattack said:

Nothing worse than the politicization of sports. 

 

You must have really hated these moments...
 

3 hours ago, Big Demon said:

Nope, all players are effectively businesses that contract their services to a club so the players certainly don't work for the AFL.

No but when they sign their contracts they would agree to the afl's registration which in turn would have a code of conduct etc. Same way local footy players register and arw governed by local codes rules.

Dont agree? Don't play footy.

All of the players work for the AFL. 

Just wish the afl would stick  to bloody footy.

It was actually a commitment ceremony for Max, Brown and Heppell, who are all so outraged by the status quo of gender biased property commitment ceremonies celebrating sex slavery (ie heterosexual marriages) that they have agreed to form a non-gender specific polyamorous life partnership/union based on mutual love and respect.

Gil was best man non-hierarchical non-gendered attendant and Clarkson was to be celebrant patriarchal and/or matriarchal authority figure, but the loving couple bunch rejected him (in a nurturing non-judgemental validation of his individual belief system), as they do all representatives of phallocratic brainwashing social institutions.

I for one wish them all the best. Hopefully some stability in Max's private life will see him back to his best form.

Wow thats deep man!!!

happy to vote no more.

1 hour ago, 64" said:

Just wish the afl would stick  to bloody footy.

Yeah, no more of that Reach or reading in schools program nonsense, eh!

I think the AFL does have a reasonable mandate to take some social actions. The case as I see it is -

1. Everyone should feel welcome and safe attending or playing football.

2. Some people can reasonably believe they are not welcome and safe attending or playing football.

3. The AFL should take reasonable steps to overcome the gap.

As for endorsing the Yes campaign. Well... hard to imagine someone feeling especially welcome at an AFL game if the sport is boldly declaring 'maybe' when asked the question "Is this person's relationship so soiled and awful as to be afforded lesser civil rights than murderers, drug traffickers, terrorists and rapists?".

Yeah, 'maybe' doesn't cut it, does it?

People can have their religious beliefs, and even have their belief that their religious belief should be imposed on the whole of society, but for a secular 'whole of society' organisation, it is important to show that basic level of respect for equal rights.

Once a upon a time.....and next you will be believing we live in democracy and we are all equal.Thanks comrade

Saw this on reddit: "AFL Changes logo in support of Adem Yze: