Current Events > Transgender MMA Fighter Breaks Female Opponent's Skull

(+) Yeah! (+)

WhinyZach posted...

CyricZ posted...

kayoticdreamz posted...

Men are physically stronger than women 99.99% "of the time

I feel this is less fact and more personal fantasy, possibly by someone who got beat up by his sister once or twice as a kid.

There's lots of proof out there.

Serena and venus getting beaten by a male tennis player that was drinking beer and smoking cigarettes.

US's womens team (they won the world cup) lost to 15 year old boys

the current fastest man ever runs 100m in 9.58s, the fastest women runs 100m in 10.49s Now, if you didn't know racing you'd think 1 second is not a big gap to over come. It's a huge gap. For reference the last time the male record for the 100m dash was slower than 10.49 was in the 1920's. Just take in for a minute, with how far sports and training has advanced, the fastest woman in 2018, wouldn't beat the fastest man from 1921.

but in this particular case the transgender fighter in question has an unremarkable record against very bad competition
---

Imagine being so stupid that you'd try to excuse some guy with a mental illness breaking a woman's skull.

What a time to be alive.
---

This is why Trump won.
---

WhinyZach posted...

There's lots of proof out there.

The examples you give are largely of the professional level of each gender pitted against each other.

The way that guy said was like he could easily take on 99% of all women himself.

That's the fantasy he appeared to be telling himself.
---

WhinyZach posted...

but in this particular case the transgender fighter in question has an unremarkable record against very bad competition


Coming from wikipedia, i see she is 5-1 and has destroyed her opponents in each of those wins in under 5 minutes.

Yeah, good job. Check out their sherdog records

Balrog0 posted...

Fallon Fox lost to a second tier at best fighter that now fights at a weight class 20 pounds lower than her. She has 5 wins -- 2 of those are against women who themselves have no wins, another is against someone who is 2-8. The best record any of her opponents have is seriously 4-3

btw, the one win she has that is in the 3rd round came from that 4-3 person, almost like skill had something to do with it
---

omega cookie posted...

Imagine being so stupid that you'd try to excuse some guy with a mental illness breaking a woman's skull.

What a time to be alive.

LMFAO!!

Always truth in good humor.
---

Squall28 posted...

gunplagirl posted...

Squall28 posted...

Sports should be separated by sex not gender. Why is this so hard?

Fallon is a woman so you're spot on there

Fallon is a biological male.

This. It's a dude
---

What people don't seem to understand is that there's a significant difference between sex-based differences existing and them being unmanageable for transgender athletes or even necessarily relevant to a given event.

As you can clearly see, we still have people who don't even get "transgender", so asking them to understand those concepts is a little beyond.
---

Dragonblade01 posted...

What people don't seem to understand is that there's a significant difference between sex-based differences existing and them being unmanageable for transgender athletes or even necessarily relevant to a given event.

I think quite a few do understand it. But you also have (loud) extremist bigots who just hate trans people and don't want to understand. As well as extremist ideologues who think biology isn't real and there is no need to do anything to manage them.

Really interesting article with two trans athletes presenting the two sides of if trans people should need to manage their testosterone levels in cycling:
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2018/01/11/these-transgender-cyclists-have-olympian-disagreement-how-define-fairness/995434001/
---

CyricZ posted...

kayoticdreamz posted...

Men are physically stronger than women 99.99% "of the time

I feel this is less fact and more personal fantasy, possibly by someone who got beat up by his sister once or twice as a kid.

How in God's name did you pass basic biology in high school? Evolution and physiology are things. Men develop more muscle and are generally stronger than women. It's literally a basic fact.
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

Men develop more muscle and are generally stronger than women.

"99.99% of the time"? Is that something you learned in "basic biology"?
---

Balrog0 posted...

tennisdude818 posted...

CyricZ posted...

Knowledge_King posted...

That's a dumb point to bring up, that no one complains when transwomen lose.

I think it's an important thing to remind ourselves of, given that there's a perception that the moment transwomen step into the competition they immediately dominate everything without question.

Transitioning enables them to succeed more than they would with men, it doesnt mean they win everything. For example,
I was average at the mens D1 college tennis level. If I claimed to be trans and played women, I would have completely dominated the womens college level and may have even been an ok pro, but I would still lose to top pros. On the mens pro tour I would get thrashed at all levels.

Can you point to an example of a post-op transgender who has done this, though? Fallon Fox lost to a second tier at best fighter that now fights at a weight class 20 pounds lower than her. She has 5 wins -- 2 of those are against women who themselves have no wins, another is against someone who is 2-8. The best record any of her opponents have is seriously 4-3

So we're not talking about her dominating high level competition, these are seriously entry level events on the regional circuit. Maybe similar to playing A league minor baseball

I'm not sure how I can provide an example because we would have to compare the performance of this fighter to an alternate reality where they never transitioned. Dominating or not, the unfair advantage screws over the opponents that Fallon beat. It's like an A league baseball player using steroids, which is unfair regardless of how far the boost takes them.
---

kayoticdreamz posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

kayoticdreamz posted...

Anyone that thinks trans women should be competing against women is to blinded by idealogy to have a rational discussion with

Also notice it's never trans men fighting men.

The fact is contrary to idealogy the sexes are different.

I don't think it's automatically case that transwomen should never be permitted to compete against ciswomen, so long as regulations are in place to regulate fairness.

ssjevot posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

The better solution is to recognize that segregating sports through such a simple metric is perhaps not the best method in the first place.

Yep. I am in agreement with this. But also don't support the anti-science radicals that keep trying to say physiology isn't impacted by sex. Which requires some serious disconnects from reality.

We could probably use some of the regulations put in place to restrict transgender participation as a baseline for such a system as well, along with regulations seen in other sports (such as weight divisions).

Theres no case for them competing against each other

Like it not the two sexes are different. Men are physically stronger than women 99.99% "of the time. Playing dress up, taking some pills that would otherwise disqualify you but we don't want to offend trans folks, and fighting actual women and calling it fair, is bulls***

I refuse to use the term " cis"

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.
---

He must be a joy in organic chemistry. Your labels are triggering me!
---

Amy-Rose posted...

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.

It is, however, unnecessary and redundant . It is the standard configuration for the overwhelming majority of
mammalian life on the planet. There's literally no need to fabricate a label for humanity's default setting, is there?
---

midgar posted...

Amy-Rose posted...

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.

It is, however, unnecessary and redundant . It is the standard configuration for the overwhelming majority of
mammalian life on the planet. There's literally no need to fabricate a label for humanity's default setting, is there?

Did you just assume that a majority of mammals are cis? The squirrel in my backyard is trans and you'd better apologize on Twitter, BuzzFeed, and huff post or else Trevor Noah might make fun of you.
---

midgar posted...

Amy-Rose posted...

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.

It is, however, unnecessary and redundant . It is the standard configuration for the overwhelming majority of
mammalian life on the planet. There's literally no need to fabricate a label for humanity's default setting, is there?

Why not? Just because something is most common or default doesn't mean it can't have a separate label to distinguish it from less common varieties.

Space_Man posted...

midgar posted...

Amy-Rose posted...

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.

It is, however, unnecessary and redundant . It is the standard configuration for the overwhelming majority of
mammalian life on the planet. There's literally no need to fabricate a label for humanity's default setting, is there?

Did you just assume that a majority of mammals are cis? The squirrel in my backyard is trans and you'd better apologize on Twitter, BuzzFeed, and huff post or else Trevor Noah might make fun of you.

That would require him to actually be funny. But yes, I must publish an immediate redaction, before it's too late!

Can't have protesters outside the house with their hey-hos.
---

FLUFFYGERM posted...

CyricZ posted...

kayoticdreamz posted...

Men are physically stronger than women 99.99% "of the time

I feel this is less fact and more personal fantasy, possibly by someone who got beat up by his sister once or twice as a kid.

How in God's name did you pass basic biology in high school? Evolution and physiology are things. Men develop more muscle and are generally stronger than women. It's literally a basic fact.

This

Girls gain fat to help with child bearing.... Boys gain size and muscle during puberty... This gives us our adult form.

No amount of feminist liberals idealogy can change basic fundamental biology and physiology

midgar posted...

That would require him to actually be funny.

Don't say that or he might do his shitty fake American accent at you
---

Space_Man posted...

midgar posted...

That would require him to actually be funny.

Don't say that or he might do his shitty fake American accent at you

I'm equipped with an equally shitty fake Brittish accent. Come at me, I say.
---

midgar posted...

Amy-Rose posted...

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.

It is, however, unnecessary and redundant . It is the standard configuration for the overwhelming majority of
mammalian life on the planet. There's literally no need to fabricate a label for humanity's default setting, is there?

This

We need to draw the line... Men are men, not cismales.

If trans are going to be a thing, they can have the descriptive qualifier in front of the noun. 1% of the world's population shouldn't be allowed to force 99% of the world to do something... That's not how democracy works.

Dragonblade01 posted...

Why not? Just because something is most common or default doesn't mean it can't have a separate label to distinguish it from less common varieties.

I think the question is more why, not why not. Also, less common is probably a bit generous, given the rarity.
I'm not sure why the default requires additional steps to identify itself. It's not the variation, it's the standard.
---

kayoticdreamz posted...

midgar posted...

Amy-Rose posted...

Imagine thinking cis is some sort of insult. It's not.

It is, however, unnecessary and redundant . It is the standard configuration for the overwhelming majority of
mammalian life on the planet. There's literally no need to fabricate a label for humanity's default setting, is there?

This

We need to draw the line... Men are men, not cismales.

If trans are going to be a thing, they can have the descriptive qualifier in front of the noun. 1% of the world's population shouldn't be allowed to force 99% of the world to do something... That's not how democracy works.

And nobody is forcing anyone to use the term cis. You're trying to make something that's not an issue into one.
---

Do people who reject cis also reject heterosexual as a label?
---

jfc, are we really back to "adjectives, how do they work?" territory again?
---

ssjevot posted...

Do people who reject cis also reject heterosexual as a label?

I generally refer to people as people and sort the rest out as necessary, which is rarely.
---

midgar posted...

sort the rest out as necessary, which is rarely.

Clearly today.
---

CyricZ posted...

midgar posted...

sort the rest out as necessary, which is rarely.

Clearly today.

Do tell.
---

midgar posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

Why not? Just because something is most common or default doesn't mean it can't have a separate label to distinguish it from less common varieties.

I think the question is more why, not why not. Also, less common is probably a bit generous, given the rarity.
I'm not sure why the default requires additional steps to identify itself. It's not the variation, it's the standard.

It's not that we always need to use cisgender. It exists for when it's important to distinguish. You don't go around referring to people as heterosexuals, but the term exists when it's relevant. You don't refer to milk as "whole milk" in normal conversation, but the distinction is used as necessary.

Dragonblade01 posted...

It's not that we always need to use cisgender. It exists for when it's important to distinguish. You don't go around referring to people as heterosexuals, but the term exists when it's relevant. You don't refer to milk as "whole milk" in normal conversation, but the distinction is used as necessary.

I see what you're saying and understand, but it's not like there's a default milk that dominates 98% of the
market lol. In instances where it would matter, you've probably already identified the variant. But no, I get
it. Maybe not in a typical social interaction, but for the sake of scientific study or comparison, I see why it
is used. But it's only practically relevant when comparing beyond biological gender and sexual orientation.
---

midgar posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

It's not that we always need to use cisgender. It exists for when it's important to distinguish. You don't go around referring to people as heterosexuals, but the term exists when it's relevant. You don't refer to milk as "whole milk" in normal conversation, but the distinction is used as necessary.

I see what you're saying and understand, but it's not like there's a default milk that dominates 98% of the
market lol. In instances where it would matter, you've probably already identified the variant. But no, I get
it. Maybe not in a typical social interaction, but for the sake of scientific study or comparison, I see why it
is used. But it's only practically relevant when comparing beyond biological gender and sexual orientation.

Perhaps, but considering this topic is expressly about transwomen competing against ciswomen, this would definitely be one of the times where its use is appropriate.

---

Dragonblade01 posted...

Perhaps, but considering this topic is expressly about transwomen competing against ciswomen, this would definitely be one of the times where its use is appropriate.

You mean a dude with tits vs a woman.



But seriously, it's a trans woman vs a woman. The label is only needed for the one, technically.
Also, are we sure the poor dear with the cracked skull is strait? I thought cis implied that.
---

It was a man for 30 years and now wants to be treated like a lady so he can beat the shit out of them. Odd. I guess that's one way to make a living. Fucking disgusting defending this.
---

midgar posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

Perhaps, but considering this topic is expressly about transwomen competing against ciswomen, this would definitely be one of the times where its use is appropriate.

You mean a dude with tits vs a woman.



But seriously, it's a trans woman vs a woman. The label is only needed for the one, technically.
Also, are we sure the poor dear with the cracked skull is strait? I thought cis implied that.

You could technically only use ciswoman as well. A lot can be understood via context alone, but we use both terms for added clarity. That's why they exist in the first place.

Also, cis does not imply heterosexuality. It exclusively refers to those whose gender identity matches their assigned gender at birth.

Dragonblade01 posted...

Also, cis does not imply heterosexuality. It exclusively refers to those whose gender identity matches their assigned gender at birth.

I see, that's right.

...so it's an even more useless additional layer to add.

But again, why would one use an unnecessary identifier for a biological woman who identifies as a woman?

You could just say woman without any qualifiers and say the same thing.
---

Dudes in female clothing are considered female? Wtf
---

When SJWs say youre a bigot if you dont want transwomen competing in the womens league or youre a bigot if you wont date transwomen most people will just accept being called transphobic.
---

midgar posted...

But again, why would one use an unnecessary identifier for a biological woman who identifies as a woman?

You could just say woman without any qualifiers and say the same thing.

Because transgender people exist. The whole purpose of using cisgender where relevant is precisely because there is another category as well.

Dragonblade01 posted...

midgar posted...

But again, why would one use an unnecessary identifier for a biological woman who identifies as a woman?

You could just say woman without any qualifiers and say the same thing.

Because transgender people exist. The whole purpose of using cisgender where relevant is precisely because there is another category as well.

Born with both parts then sure. Just trying to create-a-character yourself because you don't like the hand you were dealt is ridiculous.

If you want to roleplay something you're not, go play Dungeons & Dragons.
---

LARPing really got big.

That's not what it means to be transgender.

Dragonblade01 posted...

That's not what it means to be transgender.

Is it when a dude relates to this or something?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJL4UGSbeFg" data-time="

TheCurseX2 posted...

If you want to roleplay something you're not, go play Dungeons & Dragons.

I mean, you're trying to flame, but this is kinda what it feels like a lot for me. :/

SaithSayer posted...

Born with both parts then sure. Just trying to create-a-character yourself because you don't like the hand you were dealt is ridiculous.

This, too. I just kinda have to accept that no matter what, people are gonna look at me as a crossdresser.
---

SaithSayer posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

That's not what it means to be transgender.

Is it when a dude relates to this or something?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJL4UGSbeFg" data-time="

No

Dragonblade01 posted...

SaithSayer posted...

Dragonblade01 posted...

That's not what it means to be transgender.

Is it when a dude relates to this or something?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJL4UGSbeFg" data-time="

No

I need an explanation then.

What exactly is the difference between a trans woman (before the operation) and an effeminate gay man? Because as far as I can tell, it seems like one of those "You just gotta take their word, I guess." situations.