I like to think that I'm a better critical thinker than most, but I fell for the initial news story about her being trans or intersex and the fight being unfair. Then I saw the pictures of her over the years and as a kid, and I dug deeper into what actually happened and I honestly feel dirty. I've since been unsubbing to a lot YouTubers.
This is called growth. Good on you.
I have noticed that YouTube by default pushes a lot of right wing-esque stuff. My YouTube recommendations are fucked when I am not logged in, so much misinformation and clickbait all over the place. So I can see why it’s easy to fall for misinformation.
They've also started using a lot of channel names which are totally unrelated to politics. No huge surprise of course that it's the right wing doing stuff like this...
Youtube’s recommendation algo is insane.
I get 2nd amendment nutcases telling me the dems are gonna steal my guns and trans women are gonna rape all my family in public toilets.
I’m British, living in Britain, but I sometimes looking up what the best gun attachments are on call of duty…
Turn off having it track your browsing history, and subscribe and search to/for stuff you like.
I do not have that experience at all. Mine is all video games and science. Its based on what you interact with, even if its negative. Engagement is engagement. Even just hovering over a video can result in it being recommended again.
They literally said it pushes those things when not logged in. So when YouTube doesn't know your tastes it pushes things like that.
Logging in does affect it, but there's many more factors that aren't related to your login status.
yeah, no.
thing is: YT/google/the data kraken knows you regardless of wether or not you're logged in.
they track everything from IP, to location (even just approximate based on IP), screen size, browser, OS, and sooo much more.
being logged in makes it easier to track you within a site, but you get tracked regardless.
Good for you. We all have biases, it's best to be aware of it and challenge it from time to time.
Happy you did!
Also, afaik, there are guidelines for trans athletes in most major sports competitions, in terms of testosterone levels etc., to ensure fair play, so this wouldn't matter anyway.
And also, Algeria is officially a Sunni Islam country where gender transition is outlawed.
Check out the podcast "Tested". It's three episodes and goes into the history of testing female athletes to make sure they are "female enough" to compete.
terms of testosterone levels etc.
So why is it if a man has elevated testosterone levels it's allowed for him to have that advantage, but if a woman has elevated testosterone levels that's not?
If we're interested in fair play shouldn't all competitors be tested and those with less testosterone be given more so that they are on an even playing field?
Yes or at least organize athletes by testosterone like we do with weight if it's truly that big of a deal. Then men with lower T shouldn't be against men with higher T either.
if it's truly that big of a deal.
That's the question, is it? I believe in the podcast I mentioned they said the IOC's (flawed) tests only showed an advantage in a few Track and Field events (I think it was mid length runs).
So let's do some proper testing first to see how much of an advantage Testosterone actually gives, it's entirely possible it's irrelevant and we should stop testing for it all together.
If there is something that provides a noticeable advantage then just separating everyone by the "weight class" equivalent would be better than an arbitrary gender division.
Agreed. The book "Delusions of Gender" by Cordelia Fine points out that sexes are generally much more alike than different.
That's what separates is from them...the ability to digest comflicting information and change our opinion.
I went through the same mental shenanigans over the last two weeks.
Another misconception people have is that trans women are inherently stronger than cis women, which isn't true. I know from anecdotal evidence, that it is extremely difficult for me to open jars now that I've been on estrogen and t blockers for over a year. My t is actually under the normal range for cis women, and usually I have to get my cis sister to open jars because she's stronger than me now.
Also newer studies have shown trans women don't actually have the competitive advantage conservatives say they have.
Would this be different if someone were to transition at a later age (say mid 20s - 30s)? Honest question, trying to learn something here.
I do think their muscle would still be significantly reduced by the hormones, but the older someone is the more their body is "set in place." This means any changes will take longer to occur and they may not happen to the degree that they would have if they started younger. So someone starting mid 20s - 30s likely won't have skeletal changes, since that part of their body has already finished growing. (Someone starting as a young teen definitely will have skeletal changes though.)
It's crazy what an impact hormones have!
Thanks for clarifying :)
It’s a great case of how tempting doubt is, and how people will automatically believe that accusations wouldn’t be made if something were not happening, so we have a 55% starting bias to believe “guilty.”
In college I was once the object of a salacious rumor that was 100% fabricated by someone and spread throughout my circles in school. By the time I heard about it, friends-of-friends and the entire faculty in my department had as well. Closer friends said things like “I never bothered to ask you about it because I figured it wasn’t true. And if it was true I didn’t care. Is it true?”
It was very frustrating how ready everyone was to believe it. People not very close to me ALL believed it. To this day I bet some people I know doubt whether I have just been lying this whole time to defend myself. But I know what I did and didn’t do, and I learned that people will absolutely get up one day and decide to manufacture something out of thin air and then spend energy spreading it around as if true.
I no longer think “well something must have happened if there’s this much hubbub about it…”
Fuck every person who engaged in this shit. Lie after lie
Starting with that shitty Italian boxer who was a giant coward. She should be banned from boxing in the Olympics since this is a habit of hers. Basic decency and sportsmanship should be required.
Surrendering is part of the rules, why are you blowing on hate, exactly?
Boxing is a combat sport. While she is a fucking idiot for suggesting anything was incorrect, if there is anything she is it's not a coward.
She is just not very good at boxing. She got beat handily by a woman, and a woman that will likely go pro and absolutely dominate for as long as she wants.
She didn't suggest anything was incorrect. She literally said that she is nobody to judge the match and that she gave up due to pain.
and then the Hungarian she was to fight after posted a picture depicting her as a bullman/minotaur, no actions were taken against either of them. goes to show most Europeans are shitty mannerless folks
"Europeans", a notoriously homogeneous class of people, with a sample of size of 1.
goes to show most Europeans are shitty mannerless folks
Well, that's uncalled for... I can show you American MMA fighters saying/doing some pretty fucked up things, but it wouldn't really be fair to make such a statement about Americans, would it?
EDIT: Just to give an example, here and here is a (at the time) UFC champ, who suffered precisely 0 consequences for any of this.
As a general rule, people who pursue fighting as a career are typically not great people.
Allez Imane!
(EDIT: Just wanted to add I have donated 10 dollars for each current downvote (7) to women's rights charities in Algeria. Thanks for supporting Algerian women's rights!)
(EDIT 2: Fuck it, I added another 10 for the late downvote. Thanks for supporting Algerian women's rights!)
That's not fair, I want to downvote you now.
Too bad, you'll have to donate in your own name. ;)
When I watched the video, I was shocked this even was a thing that happened.
I heard about the controversy for a while, heard some people say when they saw the fight they "understood why there was questioning", and heard something about a punch. As an avid MMA fan, I expected a scary knockout, like those where you hold your breath until you see the person start moving again.
Imagine my surprise when I finally saw the video, and watched an Olympic boxing fight for the first time. I see of them wearing headgear, one of them gets hit with a few good punches, gets to pause to adjust headgear, gets hit with a few more good punches and calls off the fight without her knees ever even buckling or getting stunned, and doesn't even have a mark on her face. Perhaps the neatest, least harmful fight I've ever seen.
To be clear, I don't hold it against her for realizing she probably won't be winning and quitting before taking unnecessary damage, I'm just shocked anyone would think Imane is trans or a man based on that fight. Imagine if those people ever saw Amanda Nunes, or Dakota Ditcheva, or Zhang Weili. But I'd guess most of those people never actual watch women compete in any sports unless there is a controversy like this one, at which point they become experts.
I'm just shocked anyone would think Imane is trans or a man based on that fight.
Fan fact: there has never been a single case of a man trying to compete in women's sports by claiming to be a woman.
I also love MMA and shared the same sentiment. I recall seeing this gallery of Joanna Jedrzeczyk's opponents before and after.
Your opponent doesn't need to be a man to break your face. Sometimes you're just outmatched.
Love Zhang Weili
If I'm understanding correctly the argument against her competing hinges upon a genetic test that the article provides no information for.
The evidence that she's a woman seems overwhelming. But the article doesn't provide the necessary information for an reader to understand and defeat the objection. We're not to reason for ourselves. Instead, we're to rely on ad hominem: The objection itself doesn't matter because it came from Russia. The article also ignores fallacy fallacy: There's also a very small possibility that Russia has reached the "good" conclusion for entirely "bad" reasons.
I know three things:
She's almost certainly a biological woman.
She won.
The author thinks you're stupid.
Afaik the IOC did all the standard testing on her and didn't find any issues (no doping, normal testosterone levels, etc). Idk if they did a genetic sex test - I'd imagine that isn't standard. Is that correct? Regardless of the Russian-run boxing federation's intentions, I'd still trust the IOC's findings over theirs.
Plus, even if she was XXY or something, does that actually have any impact on athletic performance? I'd imagine not
Edi: yep. Looks like it is widely believed that having a y chromosome is unfair, but the science doesn't necessarily back that up.
"improved understanding about genetic factors that lead to selection in sport should offer reassurance that female athletes with hyperandrogenism do not possess any physical attribute relevant to athletic performance that is neither attainable, nor present in other women."
The fact that trans athletes aren't all at the top of their leagues is proof that a y chromosome isn't unfair.
The gradient caused by sexual dimorphism is smaller than the gradient caused by intense, advanced training in all but the most pure strength based competitions like powerlifting.
There is no info, because it was just Russian misinformation from a former boxing org. boss. She was disqualified after beating a Russian. There is nothing more to this story, just the “West” again show its weakness and vulnerability for Russian news manipulation.
The austrian commentator (who was working for an austrian boxing committee before) on her semifinals fight said about that boxing org: "i've has seen quite a lot in my time, but they were the most corrupt org i ever saw" (he said "korrupter haufen", which is derogatory for a corrupt group of people)
Repetition doesn't break reason.
The author was right about you.
Arguments made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
If I made an absurd claim, such as: "Donald Trump was not born in the United States, he was born in Kenya." Without any evidence supporting my claim, It doesn't matter if a bunch of idiots jump on board agreeing with me. There is no moral imperative for Donald Trump to provide his birth certificate (good evidence) in order to dismiss my made up nonsense claims.
The article is pretty well done and shows exactly why this discussion is moot. There's simply no merit to the accusation, plain and simple.
If an accusation comes from Russia and only from Russia, it's part of their misinformation warfare. That's not ad-hominem, that's paying some fucking attention.
Exactly. So sick of reading about this non-news. There is nothing here, were just chewing on Russian propaganda and arguing with each other (as intended).
It just bugs me the wording "wrongly questioned" - it's never wrong to question, you just have to be prepared to accept answers.
Not true, 'just asking questions' is a common media manipulation tactic.
For example, Why hasn't Ted Cruz commented on the fact that many people believe he is the Zodiac Killer? It seems pretty odd to me that despite the public outcry, he has made no public statement as to this accusation. Why are you looking at me like that? I'm just asking questions...
Prove to me that you're not a rapist right now. I'm just asking questions, but you better come back with proof fast before I start spreading the word.
No.
Come on, this is a complete fallacious argument... Being a rapist is connected to actions, which can't be proven that didn't happen. This is completely different from measurable and observable properties like "being blonde" or "having certain chromosomes".
You can 100% disagree on having to prove anything, but your example is completely wrong.
But it's never wrong to question, you just have to be prepared to accept answers.
With that said, this wasn't a denial.
I was not the person you were answering too. Just a random observer that has underlined the fallacy of that particular argument (it's hard or impossible to prove things are not or did not happen).
I was being tongue-in-cheek and you still walked right into a hypocrisy trap.
Which hypocrisy...?
The whole point of your argument is already addressed. You can't prove anybody didn't commit actions. mah...
She basically told the transphobic bigots to fuck themselves.
Transphobia hurts literally everyone, not just transgender people. Unfortunately this statement hits a little too close to home.
I feel so sorry for this person. Dragged into the spotlight of the world where everyone's got a say about their gender, completely forgetting that they're human first.
The "for" and "against" using her are sociopathic. Nothing feels more alienating that strangers sending positive and negative things to you, like they know you.
Nothing feels more alienating that strangers sending positive and negative things to you, like they know you.
I feel like you are creating a pretty strong false equivalence here. A bunch of people said nasty awful things about her that were untrue, attempting to interfere with her ability to remain in the Olympics, and potentially impacting her career. But somehow the folks sending positive messages her way are just as bad?
Seriously, it sounds like some "Both Sides" bullshit.
That's because it is some both sides bullshit
Transphobia and misogyny hurt all of us, not just the targets of the bigotry. I hope more people understand that now.
Cue the Cool J.
::: spoiler NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for NBC News:
We have regulations for just about anything but not gender in Olympics?
Olympic committee should put forward specific classification rules for woman and man in a binary sporting event.
It's a Olympic committee problem not an athlete problem. Don't let them sweep this issue under the rug.
Except even if they had regulations it would not have changed anything since she is a ciswoman
Imagine a corrupt state really wants gold. Why wouldn't they register a whole batch of males as female (or duplicate register as both sexes) wait 20 years then clean up the women's events?
so, the heart of your argument itself is sexist. Your argument is, basically, that a man is better than a woman at sports, just because he's a man.
Athletes at this level are insanely talented and fit. Some are even genetic anomalies, which explain why they can be so good at their sport. Simone biles is really small, which is why she's so good at flipping.
A female boxer at this level would decimate a male boxer who isn't genetically selected for and who hasn't trained his whole life to get to that level. Being male doesn't make one good at sports.
On the scale youre talking about, the government would be complicit in widescale corruption to rig a single event in an event where there's no money involved for the winner, requiring several hundred people to be the athletes who might be good enough to go to the event, boatloads of money to train them, and even then, they might get one through the event if the athlete isn't injured. All for what reward? A single relatively worthless gold medal?
Your argument is, basically, that a man is better than a woman at sports, just because he's a man.
No. Women should always have the option to compete against men, (and prove they are better), if they chose to. But just look at world records if you need concrete proof that males have an advantage.
Many sports there is no physical advantage and some (e.g. climbing) women have the advantage.
On the scale youre talking about, the government would be complicit in widescale corruption to rig a single event in an event where there's no money involved for the winner,
Not a single event, this could be done for multiple events, even without the athlete's knowledge. For the first decade only a few record keepers need to be in the conspiracy.
All for what reward? A single relatively worthless gold medal?
Why? You should ask cold war Russia.
What exactly do you think the Soviet Union achieved by winning a bunch of medals?
The person you are responding seems uninformed on the topic of Imane and in spreading misinform.
However, Russia does have a sordid history messing with international sports. Look up all the scandals in figure skating and also last year Olympics. I'm not sure why they do it. I think it has to do with projecting power on the world stage.
I'm steering clear of the topic of Imane.
No you aren't. You're arguing about trans women athletes competing in the Olympics against cis women in a thread specifically about Imane.
I'm arguing about the classification rules of the Olympic committee because the current rules are not sufficiently clear and have caused needless distress to at least two gold medal winners.
No, the rules are very clear. It's just right wing nutcases making up shit just to stir up trouble. The rules are there, and they've been in place long before this particular Olympic event.
Propaganda and ideological superiority of communism.
Cold war rivalry. Proxy battle.
National pride and unity.
International prestige.
So nothing important then.
Yes, you've definitely come up with a plausible reason why a Muslim country would be okay with a transgender athlete. Algeria is just desperate for international prestige. It will definitely do something or other.
Yes, you've definitely come up with a plausible reason why a Muslim country would be okay with a transgender athlete.
Have I? Strange. I wasn't asked that question.
I love how your whole conversation here is like "I'm not saying Khelif isn't a woman and shouldn't compete, but someone who is a person who boxes women that I have not named, but have decided is not a woman, should not compete with women. But I'm not saying it's Khelif."
My point is to reduce future similar incidents. Not discuss any specific case. As it is, this discussion is doomed to be repeated.
What do you think they would achieve in any practical way by winning a bunch of gold medals?
It's the Olympics, not trade negotiations.
It's estimated that the value of a gold medal is around $1 million in terms of economic impact, considering factors like increased tourism, sponsorship, and national pride.
That's a pathetically tiny amount of capital for a state.
You are asking about the total benefits of sending athletes to the Olympics, not the statistical weighing of gold medals in a regression model.
Please do provide actual evidence for that claim. Specifically for a gold medal in women's boxing.
I found that statistic on Bing. You can too.
I'm not specifically discussing women's boxing.
Yes, you can find all kinds of fake statistics on Bing. That's how the internet works. Let's see the source of yours.
We should expect Rules and regulations regarding a cis woman. The Olympic committee should either allow them as is or lay out specific rules.
Decisions cannot be adhoc.
You realize that she's a cis woman, right? Right?
Or did you take the word from people on YouTube who talk about everything in a certain way?
It's so fucking ridiculous to me that people are suggesting fucking Algeria has a trans athlete. Where next, Saudi Arabia?
They have a specific rule: if your birth certificate and passport say you're a woman, you get to compete as one.
Except she was born a woman, raised as a girl and is a woman according to her passport from a country where being trans is illegal. So your argument is moot.
This the Olympics. What they do in their country is their problem.
If trans was illegal in that country why would they want to highlight that issue by selecting that athlete. Makes no sense.
Because she's not trans
Right. I was replying to a comment about trans athletes.
I think you might have come full circle here. Being trans is her country is illegal. Why would such a country send a trans athlete? Because she isn't trans.
You aren't talking about trans athletes, you're talking about a woman who won a sport, and was demonized for being trans, and she isn't even trans. The right wing had to make this shit up just so they would have a boogie man to be scared of.
She isn't trans, what part of this are you having trouble with?
Hmmm maybe she's not trans? Hmm?
She's a cis woman.
Isn't a little weird to focus on someone else's genitals?
Like really weird? Creepy even? Are you weird too?
9If that wiki page is correct, then chromosome testing should be done. Was the testing done? What were the results? If it was not done, then why not?
How is women fighting women in a sport discriminatory against women?
Chromosome testing is still discrimination against intersex athletes.
Winding back to my first post. The Olympic committee has to decide.
Decisions shouldn't be adhoc.
Athletes spend time and effort. They shouldn't have to prepare for a competition where they will be expelled.
What makes you think these decisions were "ad hoc?"
What do you think ad hoc means? And what part of "we checked out this athelete and she met all of our criteria to compete in womans' boxing" don't you get?
What failing do you think the IOC commited in allowing a cis woman to compete in womens' boxing?
I'm starting to think that you need some testing.......
feeling is mutual.
Feelings are great, let me know when you can think critically instead of regurgitate nonsense and repeat disproven or intentional vagueries.
So was it critical thinking that made you say that I needed testing? Obviously critical thinking is not your forte.
Are you against regulations? That's fine. I happen to support regulations.
What "disproven or intentional vagueries" have I said?
You stated that this person was intersex, and that was a valid reason for her disqualification up and down this thread, before the mods intervened of course.
Continuing to believe in disproven theories, or concepts without imperical evidence, is clearly a logical falicy at best, or you are intentionally spreading misinformation because you are a Russian bot at worst.
Give the above assertions, yes, mental health, intelligence, and a prescription of "touching grass" at a minimum. Are you an athlete? Do you compete at an Olympic level? No? Then how does that impact you in any way shape or form? Did you ever watch the Olympics to have any kind of investment? Honestly that's all a little weird.
There are very simple regulations. You just don't like the regulations. She was identified as biologically female at birth. It says so on her birth certificate. Her passport says she's a woman. Those are the regulations whether you like them or not.
Why should testing be done over some allegation by an organization that's not recognized by the IOC?
How do you not know that chromosomes don't tell anything near to the whole story? You can be XX and look biologically male your whole life or XY and the opposite.
I hate it when people think something as ridiculously complex as the human genome can be summed up so simply.
Yo mean xxy?
No, I do not. Like I said, it is nowhere near that simple. It’s like you didn’t even read that far down my post.
What issue is that exactly?
Really living up to your name.
Injecting testosterone is considered doping. So whatever their gender is, it's not allowed. This makes trans people by default not eligible, regardless of what gender they're playing as.
My personal opinion is that trans people should just get their own part of the Olympics. Otherwise there is absolutely no way to keep it fair.
Whatever that decision is the Olympic committee should expand rules and regulations to cover edge cases.
Decisions shouldn't be adhoc.
It's not like we didn't know about hunan genetic makeup before this Olympics.
Genitals genitals show me your genitals!
Injecting performance enhancing substances like testosterone is not allowed. So the rule is already there. The reason for injecting them is irrelevant and not part of the rule. If we can simply use a counter argument to nullify a rule that doesn't really make it a rule anymore. We should however add possible edge cases in the future, but that doesn't mean that we should be using opinions in current rulings before finding something that suits everybody.
Keep in mind that I'm not claiming anything about Imane Khelif.
Make it 2 classes, open and restricted.
Clear rules on who is allowed in the restricted class.
Edit People down voting, do you not want a restricted class?
When it's a cis woman you're worried about against other cis women? No? I'm starting to think that we should have civics tests to use the Internet.....
It seems that, going forward, a stricter definition and (private and respectful) testing of cis categorisation would reduce the pain and suffering (from armchair commentators like ourselves) of all future competitors at top levels of womens sports.
Umm is the person in the correct weight class for this event? Yes. Okay next!
For the "men's" event, yes. Weight is the only restriction. Women should be able to fight in the men's event if they qualify.
For the women's classification there must be a clear line drawn somewhere between "has given birth" and "changed their name to Sue".
(I have no preference exactly where that line is drawn)
The youngest Olympian this year is a 12-year-old from China competing as a skateboarder. The youngest ever was an 11-year-old who competed in gymnastics.
Should we be letting those young girls know whether or not they count as girls through some sort of unspecified genetic test?
Why do you think women need to be protected by having to prove they're women? Do you really not get that tons of women would be discouraged from competing if they felt they had to satisfy some white knight's genetic criteria?
Should we be letting those young girls know whether or not they count as girls through some sort of unspecified genetic test?
If there is no gender advantage there is no need.
Do you want to go further and say for skateboarding and gymnastics there should be no segregation?
Women do need segregation, for saftey more than anything. There needs to be a clear line otherwise these arguments will continue to occur.
If there is no gender advantage there is no need.
So there's no need?
Do you want to go further and say for skateboarding and gymnastics there should be no segregation?
So there is a need?
Women do need segregation, for saftey more than anything.
Women do not need your protection, nor have they asked for it.
Of course woman need the protection of their sporting governing bodies. That's their job.
You think women need protection and men don't. That's the issue here. You're being a white knight.
Governing bodies also provide safety regulations for men.
That is an excellent question that the Olympic committee should answer clearly and definitively.
You are the one claiming she's not a real woman. It's up to you to define it.
They already have an answer, you just don't like it.
I've not claimed anything about any individual.
I'm saying that a male/female checkbox on a passport is an inadequate test for a top level sporting event. The Olympic Committee need a better answer to avoid similar discussions in the future.
Fine. What is the test they should use? You don't like their criteria, so what should the criteria be?
The test should be repeatable, definitive and standardised.
It should also satisfy the majority of members of that governing body.
This is the final time I will ask you, because you are now setting off my troll alarm: What should the criteria be? You have a lot of very strong opinions unless anyone challenges them, and then you try to weasel out of it.
You are also very much skirting the trans bigotry line and I'm going to keep letting you do that if you wish to remain here.
Not for me to decide the criteria.
There must be a line somewhere, and that line needs to be much more consistent, clearer and well defined than a field on a passport.
Weirdly, the only people who seem to find it inadequate are the people who just can't accept Ms. Khelif is a woman who can box other women.
It is inadequate because what is written on a piece of paper can be different in reality.
An intersex person is unlikely to have that listed on their passport.
Again, it seems like the only people who find it inadequate are people like you who think women need the protection of people with penises from other people with penises when this is not something most female athletes want.
But hey, you know what's best for women, right? They shouldn't worry their pretty little heads about it.
I think you are projecting.
See my other comment about me thinking you're a troll. This is not helping.
I like to think that I'm a better critical thinker than most, but I fell for the initial news story about her being trans or intersex and the fight being unfair. Then I saw the pictures of her over the years and as a kid, and I dug deeper into what actually happened and I honestly feel dirty. I've since been unsubbing to a lot YouTubers.
This is called growth. Good on you.
I have noticed that YouTube by default pushes a lot of right wing-esque stuff. My YouTube recommendations are fucked when I am not logged in, so much misinformation and clickbait all over the place. So I can see why it’s easy to fall for misinformation.
They've also started using a lot of channel names which are totally unrelated to politics. No huge surprise of course that it's the right wing doing stuff like this...
Youtube’s recommendation algo is insane.
I get 2nd amendment nutcases telling me the dems are gonna steal my guns and trans women are gonna rape all my family in public toilets.
I’m British, living in Britain, but I sometimes looking up what the best gun attachments are on call of duty…
Turn off having it track your browsing history, and subscribe and search to/for stuff you like.
I do not have that experience at all. Mine is all video games and science. Its based on what you interact with, even if its negative. Engagement is engagement. Even just hovering over a video can result in it being recommended again.
They literally said it pushes those things when not logged in. So when YouTube doesn't know your tastes it pushes things like that.
Logging in does affect it, but there's many more factors that aren't related to your login status.
yeah, no.
thing is: YT/google/the data kraken knows you regardless of wether or not you're logged in.
they track everything from IP, to location (even just approximate based on IP), screen size, browser, OS, and sooo much more.
being logged in makes it easier to track you within a site, but you get tracked regardless.
Good for you. We all have biases, it's best to be aware of it and challenge it from time to time.
Happy you did!
Also, afaik, there are guidelines for trans athletes in most major sports competitions, in terms of testosterone levels etc., to ensure fair play, so this wouldn't matter anyway.
And also, Algeria is officially a Sunni Islam country where gender transition is outlawed.
Check out the podcast "Tested". It's three episodes and goes into the history of testing female athletes to make sure they are "female enough" to compete.
So why is it if a man has elevated testosterone levels it's allowed for him to have that advantage, but if a woman has elevated testosterone levels that's not?
If we're interested in fair play shouldn't all competitors be tested and those with less testosterone be given more so that they are on an even playing field?
Yes or at least organize athletes by testosterone like we do with weight if it's truly that big of a deal. Then men with lower T shouldn't be against men with higher T either.
That's the question, is it? I believe in the podcast I mentioned they said the IOC's (flawed) tests only showed an advantage in a few Track and Field events (I think it was mid length runs).
So let's do some proper testing first to see how much of an advantage Testosterone actually gives, it's entirely possible it's irrelevant and we should stop testing for it all together.
If there is something that provides a noticeable advantage then just separating everyone by the "weight class" equivalent would be better than an arbitrary gender division.
Agreed. The book "Delusions of Gender" by Cordelia Fine points out that sexes are generally much more alike than different.
That's what separates is from them...the ability to digest comflicting information and change our opinion.
I went through the same mental shenanigans over the last two weeks.
Another misconception people have is that trans women are inherently stronger than cis women, which isn't true. I know from anecdotal evidence, that it is extremely difficult for me to open jars now that I've been on estrogen and t blockers for over a year. My t is actually under the normal range for cis women, and usually I have to get my cis sister to open jars because she's stronger than me now.
Also newer studies have shown trans women don't actually have the competitive advantage conservatives say they have.
https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/olympic-trans-women-ioc-study-rcna148437
Would this be different if someone were to transition at a later age (say mid 20s - 30s)? Honest question, trying to learn something here.
I do think their muscle would still be significantly reduced by the hormones, but the older someone is the more their body is "set in place." This means any changes will take longer to occur and they may not happen to the degree that they would have if they started younger. So someone starting mid 20s - 30s likely won't have skeletal changes, since that part of their body has already finished growing. (Someone starting as a young teen definitely will have skeletal changes though.)
It's crazy what an impact hormones have!
Thanks for clarifying :)
It’s a great case of how tempting doubt is, and how people will automatically believe that accusations wouldn’t be made if something were not happening, so we have a 55% starting bias to believe “guilty.”
In college I was once the object of a salacious rumor that was 100% fabricated by someone and spread throughout my circles in school. By the time I heard about it, friends-of-friends and the entire faculty in my department had as well. Closer friends said things like “I never bothered to ask you about it because I figured it wasn’t true. And if it was true I didn’t care. Is it true?”
It was very frustrating how ready everyone was to believe it. People not very close to me ALL believed it. To this day I bet some people I know doubt whether I have just been lying this whole time to defend myself. But I know what I did and didn’t do, and I learned that people will absolutely get up one day and decide to manufacture something out of thin air and then spend energy spreading it around as if true.
I no longer think “well something must have happened if there’s this much hubbub about it…”
Fuck every person who engaged in this shit. Lie after lie
Starting with that shitty Italian boxer who was a giant coward. She should be banned from boxing in the Olympics since this is a habit of hers. Basic decency and sportsmanship should be required.
Surrendering is part of the rules, why are you blowing on hate, exactly?
Boxing is a combat sport. While she is a fucking idiot for suggesting anything was incorrect, if there is anything she is it's not a coward.
She is just not very good at boxing. She got beat handily by a woman, and a woman that will likely go pro and absolutely dominate for as long as she wants.
She didn't suggest anything was incorrect. She literally said that she is nobody to judge the match and that she gave up due to pain.
and then the Hungarian she was to fight after posted a picture depicting her as a bullman/minotaur, no actions were taken against either of them. goes to show most Europeans are shitty mannerless folks
"Europeans", a notoriously homogeneous class of people, with a sample of size of 1.
Well, that's uncalled for... I can show you American MMA fighters saying/doing some pretty fucked up things, but it wouldn't really be fair to make such a statement about Americans, would it?
EDIT: Just to give an example, here and here is a (at the time) UFC champ, who suffered precisely 0 consequences for any of this.
As a general rule, people who pursue fighting as a career are typically not great people.
Allez Imane!
(EDIT: Just wanted to add I have donated 10 dollars for each current downvote (7) to women's rights charities in Algeria. Thanks for supporting Algerian women's rights!) (EDIT 2: Fuck it, I added another 10 for the late downvote. Thanks for supporting Algerian women's rights!)
That's not fair, I want to downvote you now.
Too bad, you'll have to donate in your own name. ;)
When I watched the video, I was shocked this even was a thing that happened.
I heard about the controversy for a while, heard some people say when they saw the fight they "understood why there was questioning", and heard something about a punch. As an avid MMA fan, I expected a scary knockout, like those where you hold your breath until you see the person start moving again.
Imagine my surprise when I finally saw the video, and watched an Olympic boxing fight for the first time. I see of them wearing headgear, one of them gets hit with a few good punches, gets to pause to adjust headgear, gets hit with a few more good punches and calls off the fight without her knees ever even buckling or getting stunned, and doesn't even have a mark on her face. Perhaps the neatest, least harmful fight I've ever seen.
To be clear, I don't hold it against her for realizing she probably won't be winning and quitting before taking unnecessary damage, I'm just shocked anyone would think Imane is trans or a man based on that fight. Imagine if those people ever saw Amanda Nunes, or Dakota Ditcheva, or Zhang Weili. But I'd guess most of those people never actual watch women compete in any sports unless there is a controversy like this one, at which point they become experts.
Fan fact: there has never been a single case of a man trying to compete in women's sports by claiming to be a woman.
I also love MMA and shared the same sentiment. I recall seeing this gallery of Joanna Jedrzeczyk's opponents before and after.
Your opponent doesn't need to be a man to break your face. Sometimes you're just outmatched.
Love Zhang Weili
If I'm understanding correctly the argument against her competing hinges upon a genetic test that the article provides no information for.
The evidence that she's a woman seems overwhelming. But the article doesn't provide the necessary information for an reader to understand and defeat the objection. We're not to reason for ourselves. Instead, we're to rely on ad hominem: The objection itself doesn't matter because it came from Russia. The article also ignores fallacy fallacy: There's also a very small possibility that Russia has reached the "good" conclusion for entirely "bad" reasons.
I know three things:
Afaik the IOC did all the standard testing on her and didn't find any issues (no doping, normal testosterone levels, etc). Idk if they did a genetic sex test - I'd imagine that isn't standard. Is that correct? Regardless of the Russian-run boxing federation's intentions, I'd still trust the IOC's findings over theirs.
Plus, even if she was XXY or something, does that actually have any impact on athletic performance? I'd imagine not
Edi: yep. Looks like it is widely believed that having a y chromosome is unfair, but the science doesn't necessarily back that up.
"improved understanding about genetic factors that lead to selection in sport should offer reassurance that female athletes with hyperandrogenism do not possess any physical attribute relevant to athletic performance that is neither attainable, nor present in other women."
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40279-014-0249-8
The fact that trans athletes aren't all at the top of their leagues is proof that a y chromosome isn't unfair.
The gradient caused by sexual dimorphism is smaller than the gradient caused by intense, advanced training in all but the most pure strength based competitions like powerlifting.
There is no info, because it was just Russian misinformation from a former boxing org. boss. She was disqualified after beating a Russian. There is nothing more to this story, just the “West” again show its weakness and vulnerability for Russian news manipulation.
The austrian commentator (who was working for an austrian boxing committee before) on her semifinals fight said about that boxing org: "i've has seen quite a lot in my time, but they were the most corrupt org i ever saw" (he said "korrupter haufen", which is derogatory for a corrupt group of people)
Repetition doesn't break reason.
The author was right about you.
Arguments made without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
If I made an absurd claim, such as: "Donald Trump was not born in the United States, he was born in Kenya." Without any evidence supporting my claim, It doesn't matter if a bunch of idiots jump on board agreeing with me. There is no moral imperative for Donald Trump to provide his birth certificate (good evidence) in order to dismiss my made up nonsense claims.
The article is pretty well done and shows exactly why this discussion is moot. There's simply no merit to the accusation, plain and simple.
If an accusation comes from Russia and only from Russia, it's part of their misinformation warfare. That's not ad-hominem, that's paying some fucking attention.
Exactly. So sick of reading about this non-news. There is nothing here, were just chewing on Russian propaganda and arguing with each other (as intended).
It just bugs me the wording "wrongly questioned" - it's never wrong to question, you just have to be prepared to accept answers.
Not true, 'just asking questions' is a common media manipulation tactic.
For example, Why hasn't Ted Cruz commented on the fact that many people believe he is the Zodiac Killer? It seems pretty odd to me that despite the public outcry, he has made no public statement as to this accusation. Why are you looking at me like that? I'm just asking questions...
Prove to me that you're not a rapist right now. I'm just asking questions, but you better come back with proof fast before I start spreading the word.
No.
Come on, this is a complete fallacious argument... Being a rapist is connected to actions, which can't be proven that didn't happen. This is completely different from measurable and observable properties like "being blonde" or "having certain chromosomes". You can 100% disagree on having to prove anything, but your example is completely wrong.
But it's never wrong to question, you just have to be prepared to accept answers.
With that said, this wasn't a denial.
I was not the person you were answering too. Just a random observer that has underlined the fallacy of that particular argument (it's hard or impossible to prove things are not or did not happen).
I was being tongue-in-cheek and you still walked right into a hypocrisy trap.
Which hypocrisy...? The whole point of your argument is already addressed. You can't prove anybody didn't commit actions. mah...
She basically told the transphobic bigots to fuck themselves.
Transphobia hurts literally everyone, not just transgender people. Unfortunately this statement hits a little too close to home.
I feel so sorry for this person. Dragged into the spotlight of the world where everyone's got a say about their gender, completely forgetting that they're human first.
The "for" and "against" using her are sociopathic. Nothing feels more alienating that strangers sending positive and negative things to you, like they know you.
I feel like you are creating a pretty strong false equivalence here. A bunch of people said nasty awful things about her that were untrue, attempting to interfere with her ability to remain in the Olympics, and potentially impacting her career. But somehow the folks sending positive messages her way are just as bad?
Seriously, it sounds like some "Both Sides" bullshit.
That's because it is some both sides bullshit
Transphobia and misogyny hurt all of us, not just the targets of the bigotry. I hope more people understand that now.
Cue the Cool J.
::: spoiler NBC News - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report) Information for NBC News:
::: spoiler Search topics on Ground.News https://www.nbcnews.com/sports/olympics/algerian-imane-khelif-wins-boxing-gold-rcna166029 ::: Media Bias Fact Check | bot support
We have regulations for just about anything but not gender in Olympics?
Olympic committee should put forward specific classification rules for woman and man in a binary sporting event.
It's a Olympic committee problem not an athlete problem. Don't let them sweep this issue under the rug.
Except even if they had regulations it would not have changed anything since she is a ciswoman
Imagine a corrupt state really wants gold. Why wouldn't they register a whole batch of males as female (or duplicate register as both sexes) wait 20 years then clean up the women's events?
so, the heart of your argument itself is sexist. Your argument is, basically, that a man is better than a woman at sports, just because he's a man. Athletes at this level are insanely talented and fit. Some are even genetic anomalies, which explain why they can be so good at their sport. Simone biles is really small, which is why she's so good at flipping.
A female boxer at this level would decimate a male boxer who isn't genetically selected for and who hasn't trained his whole life to get to that level. Being male doesn't make one good at sports.
On the scale youre talking about, the government would be complicit in widescale corruption to rig a single event in an event where there's no money involved for the winner, requiring several hundred people to be the athletes who might be good enough to go to the event, boatloads of money to train them, and even then, they might get one through the event if the athlete isn't injured. All for what reward? A single relatively worthless gold medal?
No. Women should always have the option to compete against men, (and prove they are better), if they chose to. But just look at world records if you need concrete proof that males have an advantage.
Many sports there is no physical advantage and some (e.g. climbing) women have the advantage.
Not a single event, this could be done for multiple events, even without the athlete's knowledge. For the first decade only a few record keepers need to be in the conspiracy.
Why? You should ask cold war Russia.
What exactly do you think the Soviet Union achieved by winning a bunch of medals?
The person you are responding seems uninformed on the topic of Imane and in spreading misinform.
However, Russia does have a sordid history messing with international sports. Look up all the scandals in figure skating and also last year Olympics. I'm not sure why they do it. I think it has to do with projecting power on the world stage.
I'm steering clear of the topic of Imane.
No you aren't. You're arguing about trans women athletes competing in the Olympics against cis women in a thread specifically about Imane.
I'm arguing about the classification rules of the Olympic committee because the current rules are not sufficiently clear and have caused needless distress to at least two gold medal winners.
No, the rules are very clear. It's just right wing nutcases making up shit just to stir up trouble. The rules are there, and they've been in place long before this particular Olympic event.
"The gender and age of the athletes are based on their passport"
These definitions are not medically certified nor standardised across countries.
Propaganda and ideological superiority of communism.
Cold war rivalry. Proxy battle.
National pride and unity.
International prestige.
So nothing important then.
Yes, you've definitely come up with a plausible reason why a Muslim country would be okay with a transgender athlete. Algeria is just desperate for international prestige. It will definitely do something or other.
Have I? Strange. I wasn't asked that question.
I love how your whole conversation here is like "I'm not saying Khelif isn't a woman and shouldn't compete, but someone who is a person who boxes women that I have not named, but have decided is not a woman, should not compete with women. But I'm not saying it's Khelif."
My point is to reduce future similar incidents. Not discuss any specific case. As it is, this discussion is doomed to be repeated.
Bullshit.
What do you think they would achieve in any practical way by winning a bunch of gold medals?
It's the Olympics, not trade negotiations.
It's estimated that the value of a gold medal is around $1 million in terms of economic impact, considering factors like increased tourism, sponsorship, and national pride.
That's a pathetically tiny amount of capital for a state.
You are asking about the total benefits of sending athletes to the Olympics, not the statistical weighing of gold medals in a regression model.
Please do provide actual evidence for that claim. Specifically for a gold medal in women's boxing.
I found that statistic on Bing. You can too.
I'm not specifically discussing women's boxing.
Yes, you can find all kinds of fake statistics on Bing. That's how the internet works. Let's see the source of yours.
What the the absolute fuck are you talking about? This is some deranged paranoid nonsense.
Search the soviet unions athletic history for examples.
We should expect Rules and regulations regarding a cis woman. The Olympic committee should either allow them as is or lay out specific rules. Decisions cannot be adhoc.
You realize that she's a cis woman, right? Right?
Or did you take the word from people on YouTube who talk about everything in a certain way?
It's so fucking ridiculous to me that people are suggesting fucking Algeria has a trans athlete. Where next, Saudi Arabia?
They have a specific rule: if your birth certificate and passport say you're a woman, you get to compete as one.
What rule do you think they should be using?
Except she was born a woman, raised as a girl and is a woman according to her passport from a country where being trans is illegal. So your argument is moot.
This the Olympics. What they do in their country is their problem. If trans was illegal in that country why would they want to highlight that issue by selecting that athlete. Makes no sense.
Because she's not trans
Right. I was replying to a comment about trans athletes.
I think you might have come full circle here. Being trans is her country is illegal. Why would such a country send a trans athlete? Because she isn't trans.
You aren't talking about trans athletes, you're talking about a woman who won a sport, and was demonized for being trans, and she isn't even trans. The right wing had to make this shit up just so they would have a boogie man to be scared of.
She isn't trans, what part of this are you having trouble with?
Hmmm maybe she's not trans? Hmm?
She's a cis woman.
Isn't a little weird to focus on someone else's genitals?
Like really weird? Creepy even? Are you weird too?
We already have regulations about gender in the Olympics. They're discriminatory against transgender and intersex athletes, and disproportionately affect female athletes of color.
9If that wiki page is correct, then chromosome testing should be done. Was the testing done? What were the results? If it was not done, then why not?
How is women fighting women in a sport discriminatory against women?
Chromosome testing is still discrimination against intersex athletes.
Winding back to my first post. The Olympic committee has to decide. Decisions shouldn't be adhoc.
Athletes spend time and effort. They shouldn't have to prepare for a competition where they will be expelled.
What makes you think these decisions were "ad hoc?"
What do you think ad hoc means? And what part of "we checked out this athelete and she met all of our criteria to compete in womans' boxing" don't you get?
What failing do you think the IOC commited in allowing a cis woman to compete in womens' boxing?
I'm starting to think that you need some testing.......
feeling is mutual.
Feelings are great, let me know when you can think critically instead of regurgitate nonsense and repeat disproven or intentional vagueries.
So was it critical thinking that made you say that I needed testing? Obviously critical thinking is not your forte.
Are you against regulations? That's fine. I happen to support regulations.
What "disproven or intentional vagueries" have I said?
You stated that this person was intersex, and that was a valid reason for her disqualification up and down this thread, before the mods intervened of course.
Continuing to believe in disproven theories, or concepts without imperical evidence, is clearly a logical falicy at best, or you are intentionally spreading misinformation because you are a Russian bot at worst.
Give the above assertions, yes, mental health, intelligence, and a prescription of "touching grass" at a minimum. Are you an athlete? Do you compete at an Olympic level? No? Then how does that impact you in any way shape or form? Did you ever watch the Olympics to have any kind of investment? Honestly that's all a little weird.
There are very simple regulations. You just don't like the regulations. She was identified as biologically female at birth. It says so on her birth certificate. Her passport says she's a woman. Those are the regulations whether you like them or not.
Why should testing be done over some allegation by an organization that's not recognized by the IOC?
How do you not know that chromosomes don't tell anything near to the whole story? You can be XX and look biologically male your whole life or XY and the opposite.
I hate it when people think something as ridiculously complex as the human genome can be summed up so simply.
Yo mean xxy?
No, I do not. Like I said, it is nowhere near that simple. It’s like you didn’t even read that far down my post.
What issue is that exactly?
Really living up to your name.
Injecting testosterone is considered doping. So whatever their gender is, it's not allowed. This makes trans people by default not eligible, regardless of what gender they're playing as.
Have a look at this list: https://www.antidopingdatabase.com/facts/prohibited-list
My personal opinion is that trans people should just get their own part of the Olympics. Otherwise there is absolutely no way to keep it fair.
Whatever that decision is the Olympic committee should expand rules and regulations to cover edge cases. Decisions shouldn't be adhoc. It's not like we didn't know about hunan genetic makeup before this Olympics.
Genitals genitals show me your genitals!
Injecting performance enhancing substances like testosterone is not allowed. So the rule is already there. The reason for injecting them is irrelevant and not part of the rule. If we can simply use a counter argument to nullify a rule that doesn't really make it a rule anymore. We should however add possible edge cases in the future, but that doesn't mean that we should be using opinions in current rulings before finding something that suits everybody.
Keep in mind that I'm not claiming anything about Imane Khelif.
Make it 2 classes, open and restricted.
Clear rules on who is allowed in the restricted class.
Edit People down voting, do you not want a restricted class?
When it's a cis woman you're worried about against other cis women? No? I'm starting to think that we should have civics tests to use the Internet.....
It seems that, going forward, a stricter definition and (private and respectful) testing of cis categorisation would reduce the pain and suffering (from armchair commentators like ourselves) of all future competitors at top levels of womens sports.
Umm is the person in the correct weight class for this event? Yes. Okay next!
For the "men's" event, yes. Weight is the only restriction. Women should be able to fight in the men's event if they qualify.
For the women's classification there must be a clear line drawn somewhere between "has given birth" and "changed their name to Sue".
(I have no preference exactly where that line is drawn)
The youngest Olympian this year is a 12-year-old from China competing as a skateboarder. The youngest ever was an 11-year-old who competed in gymnastics.
Should we be letting those young girls know whether or not they count as girls through some sort of unspecified genetic test?
Why do you think women need to be protected by having to prove they're women? Do you really not get that tons of women would be discouraged from competing if they felt they had to satisfy some white knight's genetic criteria?
If there is no gender advantage there is no need.
Do you want to go further and say for skateboarding and gymnastics there should be no segregation?
Women do need segregation, for saftey more than anything. There needs to be a clear line otherwise these arguments will continue to occur.
So there's no need?
So there is a need?
Women do not need your protection, nor have they asked for it.
Of course woman need the protection of their sporting governing bodies. That's their job.
You think women need protection and men don't. That's the issue here. You're being a white knight.
Governing bodies also provide safety regulations for men.
What convinced you of this?
Do tell us what makes a woman a real woman.
That is an excellent question that the Olympic committee should answer clearly and definitively.
You are the one claiming she's not a real woman. It's up to you to define it.
They already have an answer, you just don't like it.
I've not claimed anything about any individual.
I'm saying that a male/female checkbox on a passport is an inadequate test for a top level sporting event. The Olympic Committee need a better answer to avoid similar discussions in the future.
Fine. What is the test they should use? You don't like their criteria, so what should the criteria be?
The test should be repeatable, definitive and standardised.
It should also satisfy the majority of members of that governing body.
This is the final time I will ask you, because you are now setting off my troll alarm: What should the criteria be? You have a lot of very strong opinions unless anyone challenges them, and then you try to weasel out of it.
You are also very much skirting the trans bigotry line and I'm going to keep letting you do that if you wish to remain here.
Not for me to decide the criteria.
There must be a line somewhere, and that line needs to be much more consistent, clearer and well defined than a field on a passport.
Why does there need to be a test?
Whatever the decision is the Olympic committee should make it and not run away from contested issues.
What is contested about a cis woman boxer boxing cis women?
They made it.
Not really. "the gender and age of the athletes are based on their passport." is inadequate. For example this definition doesn't cover intersex cases or state sponsored fraud.
Weirdly, the only people who seem to find it inadequate are the people who just can't accept Ms. Khelif is a woman who can box other women.
It is inadequate because what is written on a piece of paper can be different in reality.
An intersex person is unlikely to have that listed on their passport.
Again, it seems like the only people who find it inadequate are people like you who think women need the protection of people with penises from other people with penises when this is not something most female athletes want.
But hey, you know what's best for women, right? They shouldn't worry their pretty little heads about it.
I think you are projecting.
See my other comment about me thinking you're a troll. This is not helping.