I see we’ve come to the part where you have no actual argument so you fling insults. I guess that means I win.
Says the person who arguments he doesn't like, then acts like he's a tough guy who sticks out the fight. Very Ted Cruz-ian.
You make a great argument Nova! Now run it up the flagpole! Pitch your idea to the fight sports world and see how far it gets. See if one state sanctions elite level MMA fights with trans women versus natural women. Regional organizations (or other countries) might allow it because they need to fill seats every chance they get but it will never fly in the UFC, Bellator, PFL, or Invicta (the all female league). How you wish things should be do not match up with how things are in this particular case. You are biased and delusional.
And if an endocrinologist disagrees with you, then what? Because the video I posted was Joe Rogan mentioned an endocrinologist who said transgender women do have advantages.
Then you should have linked right to their study instead of making us dig bare-handed through the hog shit of a Rogan video.
Now, see, if you'd used your words, that might have been an interesting discussion. Is this endocrinologist's opinion backed up with research or is he just like Rand Paul sorta kinda ophthalmologist who feels he knows more about epidemiology than Dr. Fauci, who's been doing it since lil Randy was in diapers? And, no, I'm not going to wade through your video. Use your words.
Not to mention, what is the endocrinologist's name? I'd like to google him and then we can discuss his credentials as an endocrinologist.
He didn't mention their name otherwise I would have googled them and linked to the article he talks about. I did find something though. https://www.theverge.com/2013/3/21/4131174/fallon-fox-mma-science-transgender-fighting-athletes Rogan did say that Fallon Fox had only taken the hormones for two years, which does seem like an advantage to me. I'm pretty sure this is the endocrinologist that Rogan is talking about because I just googled her and the first thing that came up was the same exact thing Rogan mentions in that video and it came out in 2013 when this controversy began. Here's what I found. https://www.bloodyelbow.com/2013/3/...-discusses-possible-advantages-fallon-fox-has
Interesting. And, while google searches indicate that Ramona Krutzik is probably the endocrinologist in Rogan's podcast, it also appears as though she has payed a firm to "clean up" her name when googled because I can't find anything about her since 2013. Seems to me, if she was absolutely certain of what she said in interviews in 2013, she would have continued to present further "proof" as the years continued. Or maybe she was bored and didn't continue. Whatever, makes no difference. What you've posted here does not contradict anything anyone has said in this thread. Yes, men have more muscle mass and bone density. The amount of loss due to hormones (whether testosterone or estrogen) will be different for each person as every person is different. So, a specific amount cannot be quantified, if that's what you're looking for. I completely disagree with her assessment of "imprinting" for several reasons. A) it's another thing that cannot be quantified or measured. Men are not "naturally" more aggressive than women. It's entirely possible that, like cars and trucks vs dolls and tea parties, most men have a tendency toward aggression moreso than women might. But, that just goes along with all other male/female traits that are more socially imposed than naturally imposed. B) I disagree that a particular trait, male or female, could increase over time. I have a trait many would consider a male trait, I'm very good with direction. I used to say I had an ADF (automatic direction finder) in my head. If anything, as I aged, that trait lessened, it didn't increase. C) If a woman chooses to go into a sport in which she is fighting another human being, I'm guessing she also has that same aggression trait. As for Fallon Fox, she isn't as tough as she is made out to be. Some of the longest winning streaks are 20+ fights. Fox lost after her fourth professional match against against a cisgender woman. A cisgender woman defeated an opponent in 36 seconds and it took Fallon Fox 39 seconds to defeat the same opponent. The orbital socket for the eye is part of the skull, so saying Fox cracked an opponent's skull is proof she shouldn't be fighting women, is an argument against ALL forms of sport fighting regardless of gender - and regardless of whether or not the person is trans. So, while I appreciate you actually making your argument, I still disagree with it.
This is literally the most likely accounting for why and how trans people exists. Which is to say what follows thereafter is not a safe assumption. The flaw in all this is that it tries to impose broad general principles on individuals. Some males are 5'5" and 135 pounds, some women are 6'2 and 220. The IOC has a standard of one year of HRT to "normalize" performance and have had for over 16 years ...and no trans woman has yet qualified to compete in, let alone win, the Olympics. The NCAA has a similar standard, and has had for a decade, to date there's ONE Division II track champ who's trans. Many high schools allow competition without HRT requirements and there's no pattern whatsoever of trans dominance. I'm not questioning the validity of the initial supposition, before there was a track record. But the time for guesswork is past.
to elaborate on the "imprinting" thing - this doesn't reference cultural specific traits, it's about the brains conception of what is "right" for the individual. One very good analogy is this - if you are right handed and try to do things with your left, it feels unnatural - off. You can't explain HOW your brain knows this is the wrong hand...but it knows. It's impossible to say whether the hormonal "gendering" of the brain (which is a real thing) has much at all to do with culturally ascribed traits such as aggression or nurturing or whatever - it certainly need not necessarily do so. We certainly haven't remotely established any such thing scientifically.
Since you previously said this: Granted you might know more about MMA than Joe Rogan and the commissioners who regulate MMA but I'm guessing that you do not. let's apply the same standard. EVERY relevant professional organization (save the little outfits that are shell corps for Religious Pharisees) who have addressed this subject are in complete agreement that puberty blockers are, in fact, essential treatment in support of trans kids at that age. Are you prepared to defer to their experience, education, and training? Or are we going to weight how you "feel" about it? But hey, since we're talking about feelings: 99.999999999% of trans people who by wont of circumstance had no choice but to transition well after puberty will tell you that in a vacuum (i.e, not factoring subsequent romantic connections or other mitigating circumstances) that we would leap at the chance to have not experienced the wrong puberty. We know from lived experience that to block, or not block, puberty is not a value-neutral decision. You WILL experience one or the other. Blockers give the child being treated MORE TIME to be certain of their identity, absent them nature forces a choice - one that can often lead to a lifetime of difficulty, or a short life ending in suicide. Moreover, blockers are not a "just decided today" choice - particularly given that they are ridiculously expensive. A child that is prescribed blockers at the onset of puberty is one that's already been socially transitioned for years. Far more kids - of those who feel safe enough to come out as a minor at all - profess their identities at 5,6,7 years old (some even younger) and have already had 5,6,7 years of social transition serving to affirm the genuineness of their profession. Yet even so, rather than default to HRT at 12, the UberCautious medical approach is to do ANOTHER 2-4 years on blockers before finally getting HRT, typically at 16. Yet here you are with "feelings" about an entirely reversible treatment with no lasting effect which is designed specifically to give the child MORE TIME before making an irreversible choice? I'ma go out on a short safe limb here and say maybe you should no more about a topic before forming opinions that might affect, say, the way you vote. Republicans in Alabama, South Carolina and elsewhere (and it will be much more widespread next year once these pass - MS had one in committee this year that would forbid medical support, even affirming psychological support, for anyone under !21!) are already legislating against this medical support and such bills will literally kill trans kids. But bigot Pharisees have never ever give a shit who died as long as it was the "others" that they feel entitled to look down on. Plenty of left wing parents wouldn't want their kids on puberty blockers either. They are out there, but they are not immune to the prejudices which flow through our culture which are ALL directly derivative from Western Christian culture. A lot of folks took a long time to come around on same sex marriage who were not themselves Right Wing Pharisees - but they had that bias formed in the cultural stew of Christian tradition. The difference is that some parents can be persuaded by reason. That's the difference in innocent ignorance and firmly held bigotry. Learn more here, if you like (one of many links I could offer) https://www.motherjones.com/politic...VbGOrvD4Jx3xlalgkw_da4EPGkpyi0jH-rRw3BKYIQj3c Particularly this bit: Gillian Branstetter, media manager for the National Women’s Law Center, says politicizing trans health care is not only bad for doctors—it could tear families apart. “You’re talking about parents who are scared, who want to do right by their kid, but are now being told, ‘Don’t listen to your doctor, listen to this Facebook post you saw, listen to the state senator you’ve never heard of.’ It’s a wedge issue not necessarily because it’s going to drive people away from one party or another. It’s going to drive a wedge between parents and their kids.” Even Marshall, who has full family support, worries about the damage these bills could do. “For me and other trans kids,” he says, “it’s much more abusive to allow [us] to keep living in pain.” and “These types of measures have the same fatal flaws as the previous measures that failed,” says Alex Rate, the legal director of the ACLU of Montana, which has already fended off one anti-trans health care bill this year, although another watered-down version is now pending. “You’re talking about measures that are incredibly invasive, incredibly debasing to human dignity and privacy, and which are facially discriminatory on the basis of sex.” And yet, these proposals aren’t exactly designed to succeed. As Andrew Reynolds, a political science professor at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, told me when these bills popped up last year, gender identity is one of the last cultural wedge issues conservatives can rely on. “It’s the only lever, I would say, that still can drive conservative, religious, white voters—fearful voters—to Republicans.” Nevertheless, the result is a target on the back of trans kids, their families, and their doctors. David Fuller, a police sergeant from Gadsden, Alabama, took a full day off work in February to ask lawmakers not to pass an anti-trans health care bill. Fuller’s now-adult daughter came out to him at age 16 and, after nearly a year of talk therapy and consultations, received transition-related medical care at the University of Alabama at Birmingham. “I was probably like you guys,” Fuller told Alabama House Judiciary Committee members. “I didn’t like this, I didn’t understand it, I was ignorant to it. But I was a police investigator for a long time, so I put myself to the grindstone and started investigating. Unfortunately, the first thing I found was that half the kids, the teens that are transgender, try to kill themselves. I was terrified. But after a little more looking, I found out that number drops to just below normal for kids their age if they’ve got cooperation from their family, health care, and therapists.” Fuller described his daughter’s doctors as “angels” and begged the lawmakers, “You’re asking me to someday put handcuffs on these people that are heroes in my life and arrest the people that saved my daughter? Please don’t ask me to do that.” The Alabama bill is still being considered by the House Judiciary Committee; a nearly identical proposal passed the Senate and is being considered by a different House committee. “It’s an attack on doctors and science, and a direct shot at trans youth—some of the most vulnerable folks who are trans,” says Hill from the Campaign for Southern Equality. “It worries me for them in terms of their actual access to care. But it also worries me for them when I think about trans youth suicide rates.” The evidence bears out Hill’s concerns: Trans Lifeline, America’s first helpline established specifically for transgender folks, for example, saw average daily calls double the week the Trump administration rolled back Obama-era protections allowing trans kids to use the bathroom of their choosing. A recent survey by the Trevor Project found that more than90 percent of respondents (all LGBTQ youth) said that recent politics had negatively influenced their wellbeing. “I think about the messages that this sends to them about who they are, and there being something wrong with just who they innately are and the shame that comes with that.” The bills make Lowell nervous, too: Some of them would make her a felon and bar her from practicing medicine. “It’s something that I worry about a lot,” she told me recently. “But I think that I’m too far in it. If they want to put me in jail, they probably could based on everything that I’ve already done. And if we say, ‘Okay, we’ll get out of Alabama,’ they’re going to come after Georgia, Mississippi, and half the other states we serve.” Similarly, Marshall and his family said they worry about such bills but have never considered postponing his transition. “I have no doubt that I would find a way to get whatever he needed,” said Laura, Marshall’s mother. She said without hesitation that her family would cross state lines to fill his prescriptions, and even consider leaving Georgia permanently. “We would go to whatever state we needed to. I’m not afraid to break the law.” and most of all this Lowell and her team told me that emotional turnarounds are common, often showing up even before the physical manifestations of hormone therapy. For every kid I met at Queer Med like Marshall—a fragile first-timer—I met two or three who had been seeing Lowell for years and were absolutely exuberant. “I’m not shy about sharing my story,” Marshall says. “It’s been helpful to me to see other trans people be able to live their lives confidently and bravely, and part of me wants someone else to see that there are other kids out there, to give them some sort of hope.” Hormones don’t fix everything, Lowell says, but the “gender dysphoria, seeing that just evaporate is the coolest thing.” “The times that I’m most reminded how much this is needed are families that come in with the kid, having wanted this for years, begging their parents who are very much against it. And then over time, the parents come to see how much it’s harming the kid to withhold therapy,” Lowell explained. “So they arrive here, still sort of against it, but not sure. And then we meet for an hour and talk through everything. By the end of it, the kid is practically in tears, because they’re going to get to do this thing that they thought was unattainable. And the parents are so relieved, just hearing the medical risks of hormone therapy, what it’s going to do, what it’s not going to do, how long it’s going to take, what the side effects are, and the medical risks. “The whole thing just gets less scary,” Lowell said. “Everybody walks out feeling a ton better, and I get to have changed somebody’s life.” Now comes the test - what is more compelling to you, the medical science and lived experience of people and families going through this, or how the ex-army dude who's never spent 10 consecutive minutes in his life thinking through the realities of this topic "feels" about it?
Whatever else you might have accomplished with this post, you threw away with "left wing narrative" OUR FUCKING ***LIVES*** ARE NOT A GODDAMN "NARRATIVE" FOR ROGAN, OR BEN SHAPIRO OR THE POLITICAL PHARISEES, OR ILL-INFORMED DOPES LIKE YOU TO DEBATE. Y'ALL DO NOT GET A FUCKING VETO OVER OUR LEGITIMACY. PERIOD. IF YOU THINK THIS IS A DISCUSSION OF "LEFT WING NARRATIVE" THEN YOU CAN KINDLY FUCK OFF INTO THE SUN. IT'S LITERALLY LIFE AND DEATH FOR REAL PEOPLE.
Of course you know this but they give exactly zero fucks about women's sports, or about kid's medical care, or about restrooms or whatever other bullshit campaign they come up with. They care about straight, undiluted, virtue signalling. (laying aside their busted ass conception of "virtue") More than that though they are signalling to US. "We don't take you seriously." "Your claims are not legitimate." "Your dignity, activity, and bodily integrity are subject to our veto and you best know your place and stay our of our comfort zone lest we decide to limit your rights further." Same shit as always, just a new scapegoat.
So where are all the dominant trans women competitors? If your theory is correct you shouldn't have to keep going back to one mediocre MMA has been. For example, there's a trans woman cyclist, in her 40's - beat one of the more successful cyclists in her age bracket a couple of times and that woman is salty about it like it proves something. EXCEPT that SHE has beaten the trans woman in question a couple dozen times. So, ya know, anecdotal evidence.
"Follow the science" says the crowd who literally denies science on every god damn fucking subject in the universe except when they mistakenly think it props up their bigotry.
This is what I've been asking on Facebook, that none of the bigots have an answer for. They say, about all these high school sports bans, that they can't wait for a problem to actually appear, they must act preemptively to ward off the inevitable harm...so using that "reasoning"... If Biden proposes to confiscate all semi-auto weapons in order to preemptively avoid future mass shooting, or all handguns in order to preemptively reduce the potential for gun suicides and the number of kids who accidentally kill other kids, what would our right wing folks say? "HOW DARE YOU RESTRICT THE FREEDOMS OF LAW ABIDING GUN OWNERS BASED ON A PREDICTION OF A FUTURE HYPOTHETICAL CRIME?" And that despite the fact that gun control advocates can cite an actual historical pattern of these deadly outcomes. BUT, when we suspect that there's a hypothetical possible future outcome where some privileged white girl occasionally loses a goddamn footrace and, well, we have no choice but to enact swift, bold legislation to prevent this anticipated disaster! (for which no historical pattern exists) They can't square that circle.
And thus we have the results of THAT test. Your views are based in resolute bigotry, not actual evidence - of which you can't cite any. Thanks for stopping by. Now piss off.
Their are people in all medical and scientific fields who allow their professional views to be informed primarily by their own biases and religion. That's why you should refer to professional organizations, and clinical studies, that do not amount to one individuals "in my opinion"
Yup. The self-certified "eye doctor" thinks that just because he slapped "Dr." in front of his name he gets to spew rank anti-trans bigotry and obvious falsehoods on the floor of the U.S. Senate and be taken seriously. He's not alone in this delusion.
I knew about the fine motor skills, but not the pen-clicking. It makes sense, though. Both are revenants of our rise from the caves. Men with faster reflexes survived the hunt. Women dressed the skins the men dragged home, prepared the meat, kept the baby from crawling into the fire.
Forget Fallon Fox. It was quite a few years ago she didn't "break her opponent's skull". Her opponent got a few staples and a broken orbital - it's not super common in female MMA fights but it does happen. The point is it could have been much worse. If right now today the floodgates were open and trans women fighting was allowed and commonplace there would be serious crippling injuries. Female MMA is already pretty brutal at times, but those slight physical advantages a trans fighter would have are cumulative, and sooner versus later it would turn tragic. The experts with skin in the game (ya know, like doctors, state sanctioning bodies, promoters, and last but not least the actual fighters) just might know a bad idea when they see it. Can you give them that much credit at least? If you want to test the waters on trans women competing against natural women you might want to ease into it with golf, volleyball, track and field, weight lifting, sports like that.
Damn those "scientists" and their facts! How DARE they say trans have significant advantage for eight years! Basically they keep an advantage for much of their competitive athletic career! Don't they know we are running a social engineering experiment here? "A major question remains whether gender-affirming hormone treatment overcomes sex-based physical advantages sufficiently to maintain fairness so that an exception can be made for transwomen (natal males) treated with estrogens. The Roberts study based on prospective analysis of the U.S. military’s compulsory annual physical performance database shows convincingly that transmen (natal females) caught up with average male performance within 12 months of standard testosterone treatment as adults. By contrast, transwomen treated with estrogens after completing male puberty experienced only minimal declines in physical performance over 12 months, substantially surpassing average female performance for up to 8 years. Sporting federations should incorporate these findings into strategies for including transwomen in elite female competitions while maintaining fairness and safety for other women. " Transgender women outpace cisgender women in athletic tests after 1 year on hormones (healio.com)
While I couldn't read the entire article because there was a big popup telling me they didn't like my ad blocker, what I did get out of it was that, within the first two years of the actual medical procedure, there was increasingly reduced difference and that after two years, the only difference was running and even then, transgender women were only 12% faster - which would be of no help within an MMA ring. So, the article still doesn't contradict anything already said in this thread.
