Jump to content
IGNORED

Laurel Hubbard


Silvio Dante

Recommended Posts

37 minutes ago, RalphMilnesLeftFoot said:

Wonder how well this topic aged. 

Out, no lifts. 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/58054891

So much for advantage... 

 

I wouldn't say it's proof of no advantage, she needed to hit 120+ to be in contention for a medal. She could have gone "safe" with a 115 maybe first (and I dont know why she didnt) but clearly she thought she could hit 125.

116 still would have beat half the field and I dont think that would have been any issue for her

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, RalphMilnesLeftFoot said:

Oh gosh, re awoken this. 

I've explained my position multiple times. 

You can and these are just some options. 

a) Accept my explanation and move on.

You're not getting an apology for something I've not done.

Especially when you've continued to selective quote, misquote and harrass, guilt and shame to try and 'prove your point'   I believe it's called harrassment at this point. 

b) report me

c) put me on ignore 

d) stop trolling for a reaction 

e) or a combination of all the above. 

I'm not going to answer you again. 

Many Thanks 

Play the victim card again. So predictable.

Pathetic tbh.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, RalphMilnesLeftFoot said:

So competitive but not winning, nor decimating the field nor actually having an advantage then? 

I think a few of us said from the start that she wouldn't "dominate". Obviously just being born a man doesn't mean she will beat every woman ever. Wenwen is an incredible lifter, she was always going to take gold. She set the World Record a few months ago and just set the Olympic Record.

I doesn't prove it one way or another IMO based on one performance. She could easily have out lifted half the field in her warm up - is that because she used to be a man or because she's a better lifter?

The abuse of her has been disgusting though. Completely unfair, she hasn't done anything wrong.  Glad we managed to take silver though

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Riaz said:

This proves what exactly?

The IOC changed their rules to allow trans athletes in 2003. 

Since then have been over 17,000 cis women that have competed at the Summer Olympics.

There has been 1 trans woman. Who didn't get a medal.

At the moment, it all suggests it's an absolute non-issue that's just being hyped out of all proportion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

The IOC changed their rules to allow trans athletes in 2003. 

Since then have been over 17,000 cis women that have competed at the Summer Olympics.

There has been 1 trans woman. Who didn't get a medal.

At the moment, it all suggests it's an absolute non-issue that's just being hyped out of all proportion.

 

Not wishing to re-open this particular can o' worms, but there've been two at this Olympics.

Laurel Hubbard and a Canadian footballer. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just because she didnt win and failed miserably. Proves nothing.

There are other variables. such as age. She is in her forties. And probably not very good?

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows its not fair. And never will be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Just because she didnt win and failed miserably. Proves nothing.

There are other variables. such as age. She is in her forties. And probably not very good?

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows its not fair. And never will be.

And qualified for the Olympics. Previous record as a male and at ages closer to physical peaks? I don't know. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Just because she didnt win and failed miserably. Proves nothing.

There are other variables. such as age. She is in her forties. And probably not very good?

Anyone with an ounce of common sense knows its not fair. And never will be.

The logic is simple

If she loses - She is still a hero in their eyes

If she wins - She is a hero

People with common sense will always lose in this debate, she didn't win, was not very good and had a clear advantage over her counterparts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, 2015 said:

The logic is simple

If she loses - She is still a hero in their eyes

If she wins - She is a hero

People with common sense will always lose in this debate, she didn't win, was not very good and had a clear advantage over her counterparts. 

I haven't seen anybody call her a hero.

Your argument seems to be:

She wins = clear advantage over her counterparts 

She loses = clear advantage over her counterparts 

That makes zero sense, common or otherwise. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BS2 Red said:

I haven't seen anybody call her a hero.

Your argument seems to be:

She wins = clear advantage over her counterparts 

She loses = clear advantage over her counterparts 

That makes zero sense, common or otherwise. 

But thats not the logic. The logic is, she was born a male, has gone thru puberty and developed phyiscial advantages over female born athletes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Riaz said:

But thats not the logic. The logic is, she was born a male, has gone thru puberty and developed phyiscial advantages over female born athletes.

But has transitioned, is suppressing her testosterone and is fully compliant with IOC rules.

As she didn't even place (let alone win), it appears her advantage wasn't actually an advantage over her competitors.

As I said earlier, there have been tens of thousands of women competing in the Olympics since the rules were changed to allow transgender athletes. And there have only been 2 transgender women who have made it to the games. 

It's a complete non-story.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

But has transitioned, is suppressing her testosterone and is fully compliant with IOC rules.

As she didn't even place (let alone win), it appears her advantage wasn't actually an advantage over her competitors.

As I said earlier, there have been tens of thousands of women competing in the Olympics since the rules were changed to allow transgender athletes. And there have only been 2 transgender women who have made it to the games. 

It's a complete non-story.

reducing testosterone does not reverse the physical advantages that a male has over females

Its not a non-story because its only the start of things - and in other sports its been happening including in MMA where a trans woman inflicted beatings on female born women. Which is a disgrace.

https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-when-transgender-fighter-fallon-fox-broke-opponent-s-skull-mma-fight

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Riaz said:

reducing testosterone does not reverse the physical advantages that a male has over females

Its not a non-story because its only the start of things - and in other sports its been happening including in MMA where a trans woman inflicted beatings on female born women. Which is a disgrace.

https://www.sportskeeda.com/mma/news-when-transgender-fighter-fallon-fox-broke-opponent-s-skull-mma-fight

It's hardly the start of things, the rules were changed in 2003.

Do cis women in MMA never inflict beatings on other cis women fighters? What has MMA got to do with the Olympics anyway, other than an attempt to deflect?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

It's hardly the start of things, the rules were changed in 2003.

Do cis women in MMA never inflict beatings on other cis women fighters? What has MMA got to do with the Olympics anyway, other than an attempt to deflect?

Not an attempt to deflect - it was in response to your "nothing to see here" comment. We're going to see more of this sort of thing. Its nowhere near a one off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Not an attempt to deflect - it was in response to your "nothing to see here" comment. We're going to see more of this sort of thing. Its nowhere near a one off.

Right, but we are talking about the Olympics, not MMA.

MMA have their own rules and it's a completely different competition. As far as I'm aware, injuries are common in MMA no matter the biological makeup of the fighter. Highlighting one trans fighter isn't fair unless you have actual evidence that trans fighters inflict worse injuries than cis fighters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

Right, but we are talking about the Olympics, not MMA.

MMA have their own rules and it's a completely different competition. As far as I'm aware, injuries are common in MMA no matter the biological makeup of the fighter. Highlighting one trans fighter isn't fair unless you have actual evidence that trans fighters inflict worse injuries than cis fighters.

Fractured skulls arent very common in MMA.

Why are we playing this game where we are pretending men arent stronger than women??? its ridiculous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Fractured skulls arent very common in MMA.

The injury you're talking about was an orbital fracture. Which is a common MMA injury.

The most common reasons for recommended ophthalmology follow-up was orbital fracture (n=25, 44%)
 

https://www.dovepress.com/prevalence-patterns-and-characteristics-of-eye-injuries-in-professiona-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-OPTH#

But even if it was a one off (and it wasn't!) that's not great evidence. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, BS2 Red said:

The injury you're talking about was an orbital fracture. Which is a common MMA injury.

The most common reasons for recommended ophthalmology follow-up was orbital fracture (n=25, 44%)
 

https://www.dovepress.com/prevalence-patterns-and-characteristics-of-eye-injuries-in-professiona-peer-reviewed-fulltext-article-OPTH#

But even if it was a one off (and it wasn't!) that's not great evidence. 

Why do you need evidence??? Its a biological male versus a biological female!

Why are you pretending that males arent physically stronger than females??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Riaz said:

Why do you need evidence??? Its a biological male versus a biological female!

Why are you pretending that males arent physically stronger than females??

I'm not pretending anything. But things are not as simple as you make them out to be.

As I understand it, the trans MMA fighter you refer to only had 6 fights and lost one of them. So in that case, no she wasn't physically stronger than the cis woman.

There are plenty of females that I know would kick my ass, even if we are similar heights/weights.

The questions you should ask are

1. Why do the IOC and MMA organisations allow trans competitors if the advantages are as obvious as you make out?

2. Why aren't trans athletes dominating women's sport if the advantages are as obvious as you make out?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...