You aren’t transphobic if you don’t want to ban Southpark. That’s dangerous thinking. It’s a very thin line that not everyone can agree on- the line between satire that provokes thought while amusing and the line that is just bigotry or hate. It doesn’t make you a monster if you want to DISCUSS wether controversial content is the former or the latter- with rare exception coated in nuance- “ban it” isn’t the “right” way to handle controversy. Discuss it. Keep an open mind- hear the perspectives of others. You may soften or change your stance- or you may find it even more justified- but not everything that offends us is inherently bad- sometimes the only way to reach people is to offend them- sometimes the truth of things is simply offensive if you strip it down bare.
The issue of transgender athletes for instance is inherently full of discomfort. It crosses over through women’s rights, trans rights. And several other spheres that people are passionate about and often have sensitivity to from personal experiences. Trans M/F athletes do have certain biological differences inherent to their biological sex. The question of how to handle these differences is full or perils and how to do so in a way that is most fair to all involved. While it is extreme satire and I can see how it could offend or hurt certain people- or be taken at “face value” as an indictment of trans athletes- thinking that a show that explores and lampoons social issues through comedy and caricature shouldn’t be cancelled for a topical episode isn’t transphobic inherently.
I mean have you seen the matches with the mtf UFC fighter brutalizing women with shit technique just because of those differences? not really fair competition and kind of fucked to watch
Subjective. One could argue it is inherently “fucked to watch” any two creatures brutalizing each other- but much depends on details and individuals. Of course- there is a good example. And what would the solution be? Make M/F trans fight in a “men’s league” asides the issues some could have with identity and politics- from a practical point of view- a biological male who takes hormones that reduce traits that are critical in a fight- against biological males who are either peak biological males genetically and physically (and honestly quite a few are likely taking hormones that increase those traits..) You still will have a brutal mismatch.
And on the flip side- an F/M fighter will likely be taking hormones that will act from a biological and practical view- the same as a biological female fighter who is taking steroids. So is that fair? To allow this person to fight women who aren’t taking hormones that improve their performance. And well- an F/M fighter still lacks certain biological advantages a biological woman would- so is watching a biological male fight a biological female on low dose steroids so much better?
You can make a “trans league” but.... let’s not split hairs. The support, the fans, the money, and even the people required to populate the league- aren’t there. There are few sports where such a league would ever get off the ground- and creating a “trans league” in the world today is in essence the same thing as just saying trans people can’t compete.
It’s a big sticky mess from a purely practical and biological perspective already- but.... when you add people’s feelings and politics and all the other things- it gets REALLY messy. Trans people want to play too- telling them they can’t play because they are trans is exclusionary. Drawing lines and gender politics and many other things just make it a mess.
Whatever the decision, unless they can revert bone growth and hormone differences in childhood years they shouldnt be allowed to compete against cis women. We have weight classes so a 300 pound guy doesnt have a one-sided murder match against some 150-pound guy, same idea applies here.
Well that sort of touches on it doesn’t it? It seems that in many cases- we could not only better accommodate more athletes- but theoretically enhance the competitiveness of certain sports through changing classifications right? Racing is a clear example of this- where outside of “spec” type races where all cars are identical- you get all sorts of variations competing against each other. In one such series- competitors could use a part called a turbo charger if they liked- but doing so would have that vehicle treated as though its engine was 2 class larger in size. Often weight is added to cars with unfair advantage, or they are given restrictions like air blocking plates on the throttles or smaller tires for less grip.
Through averages and evaluations- we can use similar systems of handicaps or advantages to even disparities between competitors who are close enough to being grouped in the same class.
For example- say that evaluation shows a W/M fighter has the equivalent disadvantage of a male with 20lbs less muscle- well- we could do something like class 130lb biological males with 150lb biological females. We could easily require different gear- gloves with different weights or padding to effect the speed and power available for punching, even perhaps weighted clothes to slow and add fatigue to competitors. We could spec different types of footwear to effect grip- or it is common in training for athletes to wear masks which simulate high altitude environments for the benefits to blood cell counts- as testosterone and other hormones and changes in biological males give benefits to blood respiration- either banning the use of such devices and methods by male competitors- or making them compete with equipment that reduces oxygen uptake- could balance this.
Using technology and an actual desire to include people and make it fair- we could class people not by gender but by other metrics and apply rules designed to level competition. Of course... this solution is far from perfect. In racing for example- it’s far easier to reconfigure cars than people- but asides that- there are usually cars and set ups that are found to- despite attempts to “level” the field- have clear advantages. On most autocross courses you’ll find Miatas and certain other cars tend to often hold a disproportionate number of wins because the format of the sport is such that in general- they are just well suited to winning that sport.
But- that’s my point. There isn’t a really “easy” solution that also gives everyone a fair shot at play. Fighting as an example is a sport rife with pointlessness and gaming the system. Dehydration before weigh in is a common technique at all levels of fighting- if you push the upper limit of “middle weight” after fasting and dehydration- you fight middle weights- but get some food in you and water before the fight and you’re actually a low heavy weight. You can go the other way- it’s less common- but cheating up a weight class when you are on the upper limit of a lower class in “real fighting shape” can give you advantages to speed and endurance while not seriously reducing your power compared to an opponent. Higher classes are also usually linked to higher prizes and prestige.
Of course- use of performance enhancing substances is prevalent in professional sports- the amount of people who get caught vs. the amount of people using obviously can’t be quantified- but we not only know that top level athletes can use with complete obviousness for years without penalty- from those caught on the past- but anecdotal and other evidence and accounts paint a picture that we can hopefully see. It’s literally science- the same people who would get upset at someone for thinking the earth was made 6,000 years ago and humans rode dinosaurs will ignore that there are pro athletes and fitness figures who often:
> gain muscle mass at rates either not physically possible naturally and never recorded in control groups naturally; or are at the utmost theoretical limits of human capability
>lose and keep off huge amounts of body fat while gaining record breaking muscle.
>carry a physique that is not possible or is barely possible by human biology. There is a mathematical index you can use to calculate body composition and the recorded upper limits of this index are regularly broken by athletes.
...
Of course by nature- pro athletes theoretically represent the peak of human genetics and physiology. But... the number of competitors in professional sports is so high that by percents- that every single exceptional specimen of genetics would have to be on sports teams- AND we’d have to have totally miscounted the odds of a peak specimen. In other words- the numbers don’t add up. Not all of them are natural by far- science and math say it is so.
And so- it’s complex. It isn’t fair to biological women to fight biological men lb per lb using the rules of a competitive fight where they can’t take advantages outside of the ones allowed- which by the sport naturally favor males. If you allowed changes to the rules and venues so that male dominant traits weren’t the primary or only source of advantage- then it might become fair- but we can’t realistically have “anything goes roof top death matches” can we?
Making F/M fighters fight biological males is likewise unfair to them- as they are disadvantaged because of developments in puberty - and M/F fighters against biological females are for our purposes here- “women on steroids” and that’s not fair making them fight someone who either isn’t on steroids or has to limit their cycles to avoid detection.
It’s a mess- and ultimately it causes a hurt in society because we are deciding who gets fucked. Do we say “meh- fuck the women’s league?” M/F trans are more likely to lose fighting men, F/M trans are more likely to win fighting men. F/M trans have an advantage fighting women, M/F trans have an advantage fighting women. If we put trans and women in a league- that doesn’t just disrespect the gender identities of the trans fighters- it creates a league where the M/F trans will likely sweep top spots and biological women will likely usually be at the bottom.
So basically what we are saying is “we really only care about men’s leagues and the rest of you are just here because you wanted to play and can’t play with the men but we couldn’t exclude you.”
What is perhaps MORE important than even an actual solution- is if we put effort into a solution. It’s a hard question- but wrestling with the specifics and the nuances, making changes and sacrifices to TRY to create the solution that best allows everyone a fair and even shot- that is important in showing that we value all these people equally regardless of gender or whatever else.
so, i'm not that good at boxing against other men, but if i say i'm transgender, I can defeat all the female competitors, win the prize money, then have a change of heart. I mean, they can't say I'm not transgender, that's discrimination.
Well- that’s part of the issue right? Traditionally you couldn’t change classes or leagues so easily as to make a declaration. A poor example but in concept- a sports all star couldn’t say “I’m really a kid at heart...” and go dominate children’s league games. If you wanted to fight as a lightweight from heavy- you have to drop a bunch of weight.
There really isn’t a “standard” program for transitioning- so comparing two “trans women” they could have vastly different hormone levels, they may have no surgery, they may have top only, bottom only- so we can’t define who is or isn’t a “trans woman” off a set of rigid metrics right? I mean- probably the closest we could come would be to say: “to qualify for a gendered league you must have lived as that gender for X years before” and possibly add a clause that you’d be stripped of titles or prized if you change genders within X years after. That itself is problematic though.
If A male champion legitimately had wanted to change genders their whole life- is retiring from the sport- won’t compete AT ALL ever again- and just wants to finally be a woman now that their career is over and the pressure is off- they’d have to wait or lose all their accomplishments right? And many people don’t have the resources or freedom or acceptance to transition until later in life- often after 18 or even their 20’s.
So given that these early years of teens and twenties are prime years for competitors- those requirements of X years as X gender- could make a huge impact on a career. What’s more- without standardization- we can’t really say all M/F or F/M trans athletes are equivalent in performance.
@famousone- I am not debating your correctness. You are generally correct about fighters-but just letting you know that my comment was general to the issue of trans inclusion across sports. The average NBA Star is 26 years old. But the path to the NBA starts usually in high school or college. The same is often true with UFC fighters- for the most part UFC champs aren’t lifetime couch potatoes who got up one day at 27 or 28 and decided they’d go do pro UFC bouts at 30. Most have a background in athletics and martial arts, and experience in various forms of fighting.
For reference- though- speaking just of fighting- 40% of all UFC champions have a background in wrestling and as of 2019 50% of current champs had a wrestling background. Wrestling- another sport generally grouped by weight class, division, and gender. All factors that could effect a trans gender persons ability to gain connections, experience, renown, sponsors, and other building blocks of which to launch a successful UFC career.
There are some exceptions to any “norm” but in general- across most athletic sports- careers are made like they are in most other fields- through processes of escalation- opportunity for challenges being met and excelled at, recognition, and progression to higher levels.
So there is a case to be made that if we required a person live as a certain gender for a period before or after competing in a league of a certain gender- that could naturally hold some bias. It goes the other way too. If the average fighter for example is 30- an M/F transition that happens later makes for a fighter who has lived, developed, and trained with higher testosterone and the benefits of that to muscle and bone mass etc. so we can make cases where the point of transition can work for or against the trans person- but there isn’t an “age of transition” where every person must decide what gender to live the rest of their lives as.
And that opens all sorts of doors. Parents already do all sorts of unethical or questionable things concerning kids and sports. Teen athletes- not even pros- highschool players- use or are given performance enhancing substances, put through mentally or physically unhealthy training or conditioning etc- because the love of the game, the desire to win- or the fact that their families know if they make it pro everyone is probably set for life. So depending on how we would set rules for transgender competition- there is a risk that players or even parents of minors could look for ways to take advantage of those through unethical means as well.
It seems outlandish perhaps- but people have done worse for less. Many people see kids more as retirement plans than anything else- and multi million dollar contracts and prizes are a heck of an incentive consider all the other things parents are known to put kids through for less. It’s...
>lose and keep off huge amounts of body fat while gaining record breaking muscle.
>carry a physique that is not possible or is barely possible by human biology. There is a mathematical index you can use to calculate body composition and the recorded upper limits of this index are regularly broken by athletes.
...
Of course by nature- pro athletes theoretically represent the peak of human genetics and physiology. But... the number of competitors in professional sports is so high that by percents- that every single exceptional specimen of genetics would have to be on sports teams- AND we’d have to have totally miscounted the odds of a peak specimen. In other words- the numbers don’t add up. Not all of them are natural by far- science and math say it is so.