The ABC is reporting on a coterie group holding its season launch at the male-only Australia Club.

"The event, promoted on the group's social media page, is being held on March 9, the day after International Women's Day.

Featured guests on the night will include Melbourne Football Club president Glen Bartlett and former AFL players Gary Pert, Mark Williams, Adem Yze, Alan Richardson and Garry Lyon."

They've also highlighted the recent change to Bartlett's title, which is seemingly at odds with the choice of venue.

"The Australian Club, established in 1878, excludes women from membership, but has in recent years allowed female guests to visit.

Last month, Fox Sports reported Glen Bartlett's title at Melbourne Football Club had been changed from chairman to president following feedback from female members."

Thoughts? Is it all much ado about nothing, or does it send the wrong signal? 

https://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2021-03-05/melbourne-football-club-fans-to-host-event-at-male-only-club/13221318

The fact that it has made the papers means it is a tone deaf choice.  All of the effort to be community leaders in demonstrating equality through the AFLW etc quickly gets compromised by something small (arguably innocuous) like this.  One of two things will happen - they’ll put their hands up and say ‘no harm was intended but we realise it wasn’t the best choice now and will change it’ or they will cry poor and shout ‘the world is going f’n mad’ (Racetrack Ralphy has already done this). I hope they choose the former and show that we have the ability to listen to people. 

Gee that doesnt sound like the ABC 

Wow!

Wow is this the first time in a while that Garry Lyon is attending a MFC event?

Have your own opinions about him, but from a Melbourne perspective it's good to have a former great in Gaz back attending a club function. 

Looks like somebody’s been left out.  
 

Mutiny committee? ?

Should be held at the Melbourne Club.

 

The ABC is a pitiful 'news' service.  Your tax dollars at work, folks.

Hope the lads enjoy the event.

Edited March 5, 20214 yr by Pickett2Jackson

As long as they're not specifically excluding women I don't see the problem. There are female only coterie groups, what's the difference?

https://www.essendonfc.com.au/fans/coteries

The ABC is obsessed with the gender wars.

Maybe they should have held it at a Womens Only Gym.

 

There is one simple fact here. It is the wrong venue. They are tone deaf. Justice must not only be done it must be seen to be done. My view of Bartlett has been sliding for a while. We better have a good year or Goodwin will not be the only heading out the door. 

PS buy some bigger shirts Glen.

Edited March 5, 20214 yr by old dee

Not sure if its MFC sanctioned OD but however you play it it's a bad look.

 

Whether you think the premise is right or wrong, don't think anyone can disagree it's completely inconsistent by Bartlett.

He's gradually being found out IMO.

 

Quote

Today, we are encouraging our Members to be most welcoming of both male and female guests into the Club to enjoy not only its special unique heritage surroundings, but also its fine cuisine and attentive service.

Women are absolutely welcome to attend and I'm sure the female coterie members will have no issue with the venue, because the type of people who have joined the Melbourne coterie like nice venues and don't care about ridiculous PC nonsense. 

Hosting an event at the Australia Club is no different to hosting an event at an RSL, an Italian club, a Church, a private golf club or even in the MCC. Those are all exclusive clubs with restrictions on who can join, but no one would complain if a club held a function at one of those venues. 

 

 

3 hours ago, The Jackson 6 said:

The fact that it has made the papers means it is a tone deaf choice.  All of the effort to be community leaders in demonstrating equality through the AFLW etc quickly gets compromised by something small (arguably innocuous) like this.  One of two things will happen - they’ll put their hands up and say ‘no harm was intended but we realise it wasn’t the best choice now and will change it’ or they will cry poor and shout ‘the world is going f’n mad’ (Racetrack Ralphy has already done this). I hope they choose the former and show that we have the ability to listen to people. 

Your profile name and photo is offensive. Luke Jackson is not and was not a member of the Jackson family and to suggest otherwise is cultural appropriation.

I hope you put your hands up and realise it wasn't the best choice and change it.

 

13 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

I'm sure the female coterie members will have no issue with the venue

I'm glad you were able to speak on their behalf.

So what.

The perpetually offended will be outraged. 

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Non-issue

 

 

 

14 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Your profile name and photo is offensive. Luke Jackson is not and was not a member of the Jackson family and to suggest otherwise is cultural appropriation.

I hope you put your hands up and realise it wasn't the best choice and change it.

 

Who exactly has been offended ?

Your comments sound a lot like Chinese Communist Party Press Releases

BTW I'm thinking of changing my name to The Jackson 5.5

Is that ok ?

19 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I'm glad you were able to speak on their behalf.

Well I’m awaiting one of them actually being offended rather than an ABC journalist and a bunch of well wishers 

11 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

Who exactly has been offended ?

Your comments sound a lot like Chinese Communist Party Press Releases

BTW I'm thinking of changing my name to The Jackson 5.5

Is that ok ?

I think it was a joke.

12 minutes ago, Cranky Franky said:

Who exactly has been offended ?

Your comments sound a lot like Chinese Communist Party Press Releases

BTW I'm thinking of changing my name to The Jackson 5.5

Is that ok ?

You’ve missed the joke here Franky. 

Just now, DeeSpencer said:

Well I’m awaiting one of them actually being offended rather than an ABC journalist and a bunch of well wishers 

I must have missed the part of the article that said people were offended. Perhaps your personal take/bias and want to blast the 'outraged and offended' made you see things that weren't there?

The point is the hypocrisy given Bartlett's recent 'virtue signalling' (to use a phrase I'm sure you'll understand).