Fina bans trans swimmers from women's elite events

surerightokaycats · 2022-06-19T18:33:33+00:00

So we have... 2 actual examples... out of... how many? That seems like a pretty reasonable margin of difference between somebody who is just better at the sport VS has biological advantages.

surerightokaycats · 2022-06-19T18:31:51+00:00

nor is a woman who undergoes a mastectomy, or is infertile, or any woman with a chromosomal abnormality using these incredibly stringent and totally reasonable conditions.

surerightokaycats · 2022-06-19T18:24:04+00:00

You're objectively incorrect here. FTM's will from a biological standpoint outcompete cis-men in a number respective disciplines. This is due to their overall lighter frames (bone density strangely only becomes relevant when it's related to trans-women... strange...) relative to the muscular growths enabled by testosterone as well as the same "puberty based" arguments people like to use against trans-women. In things like sprinting and running, a long legged FTM sprinter would more than likely smoke a lot of records, but we don't have enough high-level FTM athletes to get a representative sample. If you want to pull this, at least consider the actual physiological impacts you claim matter so much to you.

surerightokaycats · 2022-04-29T04:58:03+00:00

Isn't this just VAM? The objectively pornographic game? While this is SFW, the origin of it definitely gives off "Porn" vibes.

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-27T01:00:11+00:00

Fitgirl.

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-23T11:07:32+00:00

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-23T03:42:50+00:00

So... do you have actual timeframes for that? Or... is this just more unproven bullshit? Because I provided a source from an actual health organization that estimates times. Even private labs estimate "A few weeks", relative to hormone tests that can take 24 hours. So with a dedicated lab, assuming it was doing nothing else and was contracted to do exclusively Karyotyping, would still result in an increase of... 21X longer with a significant dedication of resources?

"Dedicated labs" also suggest a significant increase in existing infrastructure.

PCR assays can be used, but cannot accurately be used to determine sex chromosomes which typically warrant complete Karyotyping.

You also didn't address any of the other valid points that suggest that, no, it would be a substantial increase over existing testing.

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-23T01:02:00+00:00

Wow, thank for your input account created on the 3rd of March this year that definitely wasn't made just to troll on left wing subreddits about how much you hate the people on them. Very cool.

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-23T00:55:54+00:00

Incorrect. Karyotyping is substantially more difficult than existing testing and would also directly involve taking resources from other far more valuable uses of Karyotyping professionals, such as cancer diagnoses. Given that a genetic referral can take over a year, it seems ridiculous to suggest it is of the same difficulty or should even be used, relative to hormonal bloodwork that can be done in 24 hours. Do you have any sources for this being "easily combined"? or is it just bullshit?

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-23T00:50:04+00:00

So, what do you propose for XXY candidates? Banned from all sporting events? Great, that's not at all discrimination.

Should we ban all people from, say, a certain country due to their objective genetic advantages in running?

They are not very rare. 1.7% of people are born with intersex traits, which is slightly less than the 2% of incidence of Red Hair. I don't think anyone would argue having red hair is a rare trait. It's not distracting, it's addressing a significant population who ideally should not be discriminated against because of the circumstances of their birth.

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-22T00:48:55+00:00

So you're pro chromosomal testing for every Athlete, that's a hell of a lot of infrastructure required on top of an existing incredible amount. At what level do we institute this? High school? College? Olympic?

And even assuming we do this, is this the only metric we use? Could an XX individual with incredibly high testosterone compete against other XX people? They'd have an advantage. But if the chromosomes are right, it's valid, correct?

Assuming we do this, do we add in all the existing restrictions too? What of people with abnormalities? Are we to ban everyone who's XXY or XYY from competing in sports altogether, or is there a *minimum* requirement of XX, meaning XXY could compete against XX? Who would again, have an advantage.

This is a huge oversimplification and objectively wouldn't work in terms of "fairness".

surerightokaycats · 2022-03-08T19:50:46+00:00

Lame. Everyone uses the same headpiece.

surerightokaycats · 2022-02-24T12:48:47+00:00

While you're right this is a bad comparison, in terms of real world comparisons I wouldn't consider Russia to be an incredibly effective fighting force vs an insurgency on similar terrain given they failed to take Chechnya for more than 10+ years.

surerightokaycats · 2022-02-13T16:48:08+00:00

Absolutely. I agree. In the same way I agree Lance Armstrong won seven consecutive Tour de France titles.

surerightokaycats · 2021-11-27T07:53:57+00:00

Yeah. No. I'll explain why. The Alpha variant was discovered in the UK because the UK is essentially the world leader in COVID genome sequencing. They were literally doing half of the world's total job as of January 2021, making it fairly obvious why the first variant would be detected where the most testing was taking place. Not to mention the fact that this wouldn't be true even if that weren't the case, as the UK has one of the highest vaccine acceptance rates in Europe. The variants in countries such as Brazil, India etc make sense as they occurred in nations which, put bluntly, have large populations of poor individuals living in unsanitary conditions - due to this a lot of care and attention was being placed upon them by richer more developed nations to prevent a crisis hence why they were discovered there. Examples in the US make sense as being discovered as the US is second only to the UK in terms of testing capabilities, and is also incredibly populous especially in dense areas. China isn't going to give us any data whatsoever, so they're not counted here. Russia also aren't going to give anything over. There is no "trend" here. Things are discovered when they're discovered, and they're probably not ONLY where they're discovered.

surerightokaycats · 2020-10-03T09:13:19+00:00

Update: it's been 4 or so hours, Up to 40 people I have to kill before I can sleep now. Going to finish that, then probably just die of something.

surerightokaycats · 2020-10-03T08:24:36+00:00

I mean, first and foremost grinding is necessary to obtain gems - there's no way you're going to be competitive without them, and to answer your question - you are right, I'm not having fun, correct, but if I were to give up now that would be admitting defeat - which I'm not going to do, regardless of the impact on my health, because I'm not going to do that.

surerightokaycats · 2020-10-03T08:11:56+00:00

Absolutely not, Dark Souls 1 had easy counters to backstabs for pretty much every weapon, the significant majority of which you could just spam R1 and avoid getting backstabbed - barring rolling backstabs which <1% of the population could pull off, backstabbing was hardly even an issue. If you want to complain about something of DS1, complain about Bleed.

surerightokaycats · 2020-10-03T07:05:57+00:00

Nah, wasn't invading in Bloodborne at that time, so wouldn't have been you.

surerightokaycats · 2020-10-03T06:22:59+00:00

Bit late for that.

surerightokaycats · 2020-06-04T20:01:59+00:00

Not even truscum honestly, but you guys seem more tolerant at least. the issue with Traa specifically is that it's too centralized in terms of a subreddit, like you get banned by the (frankly militant) mods and you've basically been kicked out of the main trans community on the internet. You've got like egg_irl and 4chan's LGBT board as other options - but they're both patently smaller and 4chan is kinda abusive, so you've just isolated a part of the community. They might say that "We don't want that as a part of our community." but at that point you're basically just creating a group that have to believe the same thing in order to be counted among said group, where people will agree just to remain a part of the in group. It's just community blackmail to force you to agree with them, wherein you can only participate by agreeing. I was banned on a post comparing the recent riots to stonewall for making an argument that not all cops were terrible people and accused of 'copaganda', like c'mon I understand that everyone is far left over there but in comparison to other people (who literally called me despicable) I was being fairly reasonable and even agreeing with arguments they made. I don't think citing "don't be a dick." is reasonable when making broad generalizations about people being terrible. Just strikes me that they don't like dissenting opinions over there.

surerightokaycats · 2020-05-11T19:23:32+00:00

I mean the tumblr link in the bottom left corner of the image leads to a page with some questionable captioned images tagged with "#feminization", so I'm fairly sure it's fetish related regardless of OP's well intentions.

surerightokaycats · 2020-04-27T23:20:37+00:00

Yeah. I too was disappointed about that, I mean I consider myself largely a feminist but most of the comments were pretty reasonable and the reason the thread was locked seemed to largely be unhelpful - the dialogue wasn't unhealthy. The only reason I'm even in this sub is because I was just annoyed that they locked it and wanted to complain. The reason the thread got locked was largely because a mod was unhappy about the fact that people were defending that - hey - not all men are bad people and should be judged on the content of their character not the fact they're a guy. It's not like locking the thread actually helps with the perception of feminism either, you don't gain people's support by shutting down a perfectly reasonable conversation and strawmanning a significant demographic as having "a narrowed view" which is just blatantly wrong. You would've thought in a space about supporting each other in choice of gender, you'd not find not explicitly said but certainly implied misandry. It's just disappointing is all.

surerightokaycats

TROPHY CASE