2 hours ago, Better days ahead said:

I’ll listen to the views of our female members (and happy to be corrected) but I doubt if many of them are losing too much sleep because they can’t join a musty old boys club. Trust me ladies, you're not missing anything. Like plenty of similar clubs their membership is aging and dwindling. Let nature take its course.

I think there are more pressing problems to deal with such as building our home base and getting our team to win footy matches.

I'm a female member and am not losing sleep.  The choice of venue is up to the coterie.  As long as it is a mixed event I don't have much of a problem with it. 

Sure the optics aren't great:  male member only club, stuffy establishment types etc etc. but are the optics enough for our leaders to refuse to attend?  Should they refuse to attend a fan function at a female member only club?  Most would say they should go to be inclusive and help support the female fan cause.

I simply do not feel comfortable for decisions based on 'optics' without considering the substance, especially if based on an article which doesn't give the full picture and to me implies exclusion of and a lack of respect for women.   

Edited March 7, 20214 yr by Lucifer's Hero

Jeez, maybe we could all chip in some money to get some psychological help for all the posters who are so evidently triggered and rattled by a benign discussion about gender. 

Poor things. 

Just now, binman said:

Jeez, maybe we could all chip in some money to get some psychological help for all the posters who are so evidently triggered and rattled by a benign discussion about gender. 

Poor things. 

As this follows my post is it referencing my comments?

These triggered fools are so easily triggered,byou barely have to pull the trigger and they throw a tantrum.

21 minutes ago, faultydet said:

Some of you dweebs must seriously struggle to get out of bed every morning with all of this oppression to deal with.

They were educated at the University of Twitter with a degree in wokeness.

Or worse, have a degree in gender studies.

Will “Ivan from Ivanhoe” be a guest speaker?

32 minutes ago, Lucifer's Hero said:

As this follows my post is it referencing my comments?

Nup. When I posted your post wasn't up yet, so I hadn't read it (still haven't- will now)

2 hours ago, Lord Nev said:

I don't think it's about the club itself, or that it exists. Some people might be upset about the membership thing there, but that doesn't seem to be the issue.

I believe the issue is the MFC's official involvement in a function at a place with such rules. This is the club that initially championed the AFLW, a club that a week or so ago was patting itself on the back over its title change to president under the apparent guise of being more inclusive; and a club with some of the finest female football ambassadors in the land; who would not be able to attend this function unless they were given permission to do so by a man.

The Australian Club can do whatever they want whether we agree or not, but the MFC aligning itself with a venue with the rules it has is a massive hypocrisy when looking at how its tried to position itself from a brand/values perspective in recent times.

For mine, just another example at how much we've lacked proper direction since Bartlett has put himself front and centre.

I agree it’s hypocritical and Bartlett has set himself up for it by making meaningless gestures. If the club really wanted to advance the interests of women it should support and further objectives such as:

• Attracting more female leaders to sit on club boards and committees
• Create pathways/opportunities for female coaches to work full time at football clubs. I would love to see a female coach of our AFLW team (and would probably be better than our current male coach)
• Figure out how female players can earn a decent living

The above requires more than lip-service. It requires genuine commitment and hard work. But rather than focus on these issues we waste valuable oxygen on pointless gestures and debates that effect no change and don’t fundamentally advance the cause of women in the AFL.

This event will come and go and I guarantee you than 5 minutes afterwards everyone will have forgotten about it.  And if Bartlett delivers the home base (and my faith is wavering that he will) nobody will care a jot that he attended this event either.

Bartlett 22/2: “We want to be inclusive with our members and although perhaps a small thing; it was really important to some people; symbolic that we would engage, listen and act on this.”

A sample of some female supporter sentiment on social media 6/3-7/3:

"Typical boy’s club mentality. It only took the MCC 212 years to allow women into the Long Room!"

"I have no problems with Men’s/Women’s Clubs. I just think in this scenario, the venue is inappropriate, especially when you are trying to encourage more females to get involved, become members and feel welcomed and inclusive, as the oldest VFL/AFL Club; set an example."

"The MFC is holding an event at a place that I am not welcome as a member. That is not appropriate. Nor would it be appropriate to hold it at a place where men were not welcome. There is a difference between being welcome and being tolerated. It is unfortunate that so many people seem to miss that point."

"I’m appalled by this decision. It sends a completely wrong message about the club. I do not want to belong to a club where a supporters’ group excludes women. Sexism needs to be called out! Change the venue now."

"The Australia Club is one of the last (maybe the last?) ‘gentlemen’s’ clubs where membership is ‘men-only’. Its image is one of elitism and male privilege and not a good look for an MF club event, even if women can attend as ‘visitors’."

"This is very disappointing when the club has been such supporters of women’s football."

"There are many venues that welcome males & females equally. I am not a member of the Coterie but if I was I would not be attending this event at a Male only membership club. No the club are not running it however by key personnel attendance they are supporting it."

 

Be interesting to see how much Bartlett chooses to listens to our members when it doesn't involve him giving himself a more flashy title.

Edited March 7, 20214 yr by Lord Nev

3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Bartlett 22/2: “We want to be inclusive with our members and although perhaps a small thing; it was really important to some people; symbolic that we would engage, listen and act on this.”

A sample of some female supporter sentiment on social media 6/3-7/3:

"Typical boy’s club mentality. It only took the MCC 212 years to allow women into the Long Room!"

"I have no problems with Men’s/Women’s Clubs. I just think in this scenario, the venue is inappropriate, especially when you are trying to encourage more females to get involved, become members and feel welcomed and inclusive, as the oldest VFL/AFL Club; set an example."

"The MFC is holding an event at a place that I am not welcome as a member. That is not appropriate. Nor would it be appropriate to hold it at a place where men were not welcome. There is a difference between being welcome and being tolerated. It is unfortunate that so many people seem to miss that point."

"I’m appalled by this decision. It sends a completely wrong message about the club. I do not want to belong to a club where a supporters’ group excludes women. Sexism needs to be called out! Change the venue now."

"The Australia Club is one of the last (maybe the last?) ‘gentlemen’s’ clubs where membership is ‘men-only’. Its image is one of elitism and male privilege and not a good look for an MF club event, even if women can attend as ‘visitors’."

"This is very disappointing when the club has been such supporters of women’s football."

"There are many venues that welcome males & females equally. I am not a member of the Coterie but if I was I would not be attending this event at a Male only membership club. No the club are not running it however by key personnel attendance they are supporting it."

 

Be interesting to see how much Bartlett chooses to listens to our members when it doesn't involve him giving himself a more flashy title.

ok

let's tar and feather bartlett or better still cancel the elite, privileged, sexist [censored]

let's pass a law that all decisions be ratified by the chattering class on social media

there, that sounds like a good solution  

3 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

ok

let's tar and feather bartlett or better still cancel the elite, privileged, sexist [censored]

let's pass a law that all decisions be ratified by the chattering class on social media

there, that sounds like a good solution  

Perhaps missed the point by a margin there old chap.

Barlett was more than happy to blow his own trumpet by making a 'small' change to his own title after feedback from female members, so will be interesting to see it he's consistent with that standard he's now set for himself.

7 News now covering it also. I assume that means they're now lefty virtue signalers also...

‘Staggered’: AFL club accused of sending ‘worst message’ in gender controversy

 

10 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

Bartlett 22/2: “We want to be inclusive with our members and although perhaps a small thing; it was really important to some people; symbolic that we would engage, listen and act on this.”

A sample of some female supporter sentiment on social media 6/3-7/3:

"Typical boy’s club mentality. It only took the MCC 212 years to allow women into the Long Room!"

"I have no problems with Men’s/Women’s Clubs. I just think in this scenario, the venue is inappropriate, especially when you are trying to encourage more females to get involved, become members and feel welcomed and inclusive, as the oldest VFL/AFL Club; set an example."

"The MFC is holding an event at a place that I am not welcome as a member. That is not appropriate. Nor would it be appropriate to hold it at a place where men were not welcome. There is a difference between being welcome and being tolerated. It is unfortunate that so many people seem to miss that point."

"I’m appalled by this decision. It sends a completely wrong message about the club. I do not want to belong to a club where a supporters’ group excludes women. Sexism needs to be called out! Change the venue now."

"The Australia Club is one of the last (maybe the last?) ‘gentlemen’s’ clubs where membership is ‘men-only’. Its image is one of elitism and male privilege and not a good look for an MF club event, even if women can attend as ‘visitors’."

"This is very disappointing when the club has been such supporters of women’s football."

"There are many venues that welcome males & females equally. I am not a member of the Coterie but if I was I would not be attending this event at a Male only membership club. No the club are not running it however by key personnel attendance they are supporting it."

 

Be interesting to see how much Bartlett chooses to listens to our members when it doesn't involve him giving himself a more flashy title.

I wouldn't use social media as a barometer. If the club wants a balanced female perspective then use a survey or similar to gather feedback.

Just now, Better days ahead said:

I wouldn't use social media as a barometer. If the club wants a balanced female perspective then use a survey or similar to gather feedback.

I'm not using it as a barometer as such (although anecdotally I would say around 75% comments are similar to the above). The point is Bartlett didn't have a survey about his title change, he went off seemingly fairly minimal member feedback. He's set that bar for himself so now he has to live by it.

10 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

7 News now covering it also. I assume that means they're now lefty virtue signalers also...

‘Staggered’: AFL club accused of sending ‘worst message’ in gender controversy

 

no just click bait parasites.....but you knew that didn't you

19 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

ok

let's tar and feather bartlett or better still cancel the elite, privileged, sexist [censored]

let's pass a law that all decisions be ratified by the chattering class on social media

there, that sounds like a good solution  

Whatever your views are on the gender issue daisy, i'm sure you agree that there was every chance this would become a 'story' (even if you think it isn't one). 

And I'm sure you'd agree that  it is now an unhelpful distraction. An entirely avoidable distraction.

So surely you agree it was srltupid for pert and Bartlett to agree to attend. Or perhaps broker a different venue (of which,  in the current climate,  must be hundreds)?

1 minute ago, binman said:

Whatever your views are on the gender issue daisy, i'm sure you agree that there was every chance this would become a 'story' (even if you think it isn't one). 

And I'm sure you'd agree that  it is now an unhelpful distraction. An entirely avoidable distraction.

So surely you agree it was srltupid for pert and Bartlett to agree to attend. Or perhaps broker a different venue (of which,  in the current climate,  must be hundreds)?

nothing surprises me these days, binman

just disappoints me how petty things can get so quickly

obviously, ymmv

56 minutes ago, Better days ahead said:

• Attracting more female leaders to sit on club boards and committees
• Create pathways/opportunities for female coaches to work full time at football clubs. I would love to see a female coach of our AFLW team (and would probably be better than our current male coach)
• Figure out how female players can earn a decent living

The above requires more than lip-service. It requires genuine commitment and hard work. But rather than focus on these issues we waste valuable oxygen on pointless gestures and debates that effect no change and don’t fundamentally advance the cause of women in the AFL.

The change of title was a response to women who are actually involved in the club, it’s not a huge step but it’s directly related to your first point. Maybe check the website and look at our Vice Presidents.

We have 2 female assistants on the women’s team, the growth of assistants is the right pathway. A woman become a men’s assistant is the next step. Meanwhile our coach made 2 excellent bold positional moves last night and we beat the Saints and their female coach by 7 goals. 

Women’s players have been afforded lucrative media duties and marketing opportunities, they’re making a lot more money than the base wages. Their earnings are outpacing their revenue and rightfully so, but they have a path to really nice semi-pro careers. Short of somehow making the average crowds double overnight I don’t know that there’s more to be done.

2 hours ago, binman said:

Jeez, maybe we could all chip in some money to get some psychological help for all the posters who are so evidently triggered and rattled by a benign discussion about gender. 

Poor things. 

Are you taking about the people who are telling you whiners that this is a non issue, or the damaged woke army desperate to find an outrage where there is clearly none?

21 minutes ago, daisycutter said:

nothing surprises me these days, binman

just disappoints me how petty things can get so quickly

obviously, ymmv

It was always going to be a story. It doesn’t bother me, but i am old school 

Since the “me to” movement started, the goalposts have shifted. 
this just gives people another reason to dislike the MFC

It may also make it harder to negotiate money deals with The different Government Departments. 
Yes it is a Coterie Group event, and not the MFC. 

But it would have been a better decision for diplomatic reasons if Bartlett and Pert had quietly declined the invitation 

Just now, faultydet said:

Are you taking about the people who are telling you whiners that this is a non issue, or the damaged woke army desperate to find an outrage where there is clearly none?

I don't think binman knows or perhaps he/she could have it eachway.

Maybe they should of chosen the Alexandra Club.

1 hour ago, Lord Nev said:

 

Be interesting to see how much Bartlett chooses to listens to our members when it doesn't involve him giving himself a more flashy title.

There are members in this very thread who want Bartlett to go ahead with it, and to hell with the bleaters.

But of course the outrage army should be listened to in the name of "virtue" right? 

27 minutes ago, DeeSpencer said:

Maybe check the website and look at our Vice Presidents.

We only have the 1 vice president I believe, Kate Roffey.

Kate is the only female involved at any level of board or executive. But sure, let's pat ourselves on the back.

Doesn't seem Kate is speaking at this particular event?

1 minute ago, faultydet said:

There are members in this very thread who want Bartlett to go ahead with it, and to hell with the bleaters.

But of course the outrage army should be listened to in the name of "virtue" right? 

I didn't say there wasn't. There was also plenty of members not wanting the title changed to president, yet it still happened.

The point is Bartlett being consistent in his leadership and decision making. This is anything but.

Your imagined grievances against 'outrage' and 'virtue' are your own issues to deal with.

3 minutes ago, Lord Nev said:

I didn't say there wasn't. There was also plenty of members not wanting the title changed to president, yet it still happened.

The point is Bartlett being consistent in his leadership and decision making. This is anything but.

Your imagined grievances against 'outrage' and 'virtue' are your own issues to deal with.

I will sleep just fine when this event goes ahead. You will be the one laying in bed grinding your teeth.

 

Deal with that hey.