Is there anyone in the LBGT community who disagree with Fallon Fox fighting women?

To give a brief summary, Fox ( http://cdn1.sbnation.com/entry_photo_images/790359... ) is a transgender who has been licensed by the state of California to fight professionally with females (not transgenders, but naturally born women). So far Fox has KO'd 2 women in devastating fashion within the 1st round.

Do anyone feel that this is fair given the physical advantages that come with being born a man (bone density/structure, muscle mass etc), transgender or otherwise?

Update:

_____________________

@Clones

I'm sorry, I think you have me mistaken for somebody else lol. I never said any of those things you quoted me on. And you come off as extremely defensive, i'm simply asking for opinions.

And you ask for my facts? Well it's a fact that by and large men are born with wider shoulders, denser bones and bigger hands, and in the world of fighting (a sport I am actively involved in) that translates to harder punches.

Update 2:

______________________

@Clones

How am I wrong when it's a fact that men are born with different bone structure compared to women. Ask any licensed orthopedic doctor, men have bigger hands, shoulders, joints and they have thicker skulls compared to women. It's a fact, sorry if that upsets you.

And just because we differ on opinions as to whether transgender women should fight women does not mean I'm "transphobic". I completely support a person's right to undergo surgery in order to become whatever gender they wish, however in a sport where people's lives are on the line even with similarly sized opponents, having a person fighting with any advantage is an extremely dangerous risk.

Update 3:

___________________

@British

Frankly, YOU nor Clones don't seem to know what you're talking about. I've competed (and coached) in boxing, jiu jitsu (on a high level) and MMA.

"There are plenty of biological women who are strong, who are tall and some who even have an abnormally high level of natural testosterone in their bodies."

born-women (and men for that matter) who have abnormally high levels of testosterone aren't allowed to compete with most athletic commissions in the US.

The IOC studies (studies many other committees and sanctions oppose) are irrelevant because MMA is not an olympic sport. It seems as though you and Ms. Clones believe Fox's right to compete and be treated equally supersedes any safety or fairness concerns to her competition. This isn't tennis or freestyle swimming, this is a sport where the objective is to cause bodily harm to your opponent.

If transgenders hold zero physical advantage, then they should be allowed to

Update 4:

...compete in combat sports, however there simply isn't enough evidence stating so.

2 Answers

Relevance
  • .
    Lv 6
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    You're entire argument is basically founded on Fallon Fox having a genetic advantage above other women. So what? It's the equivalent of saying a biological woman with distinct genetic advantages, such as height and being naturally more muscular than other women should not be allowed to compete against other woman who do not possess these desirable genetic traits. There are plenty of biological women who are strong, who are tall and some who even have an abnormally high level of natural testosterone in their bodies. Should they not be allowed to compete because it isn't "fair" on the others?

    Fallon Fox is hormonally stable as a woman, not producing testosterone in male range and therefore does not have anymore muscle mass than a biological woman. Testosterone is the only hormone in the body, which is capable of building muscle mass, without it you simply will not have "male" muscles. Transsexual women do not have testosterone in male range, they lose all of their male strength.

    Now to address bones, since Fallon Fox has a male skeleton, but no longer has the required muscle mass to support her skeleton. She has lost strength in her muscles, due to lack of testosterone, which means she is already using much of her strength to support her bulky bones. This basically means she is actually disadvantaged compared to biological women, whom have smaller bones and therefore a greater range of movement, in comparison to someone with weak muscles using most of their strength to carry their own weight.

    Countless study after study has showed transwomen are actually more disadvantaged than biological women because of their "male" skeletons in regard to sports.

    You really have no idea what you're talking about.

    Edit: What amuses me is that you've asked a "question", but really all you want is for people to rally behind your ignorant way of thinking. It doesn't matter what sports you do and frankly it's all nonsense anyway (my opinion). You don't understand the biology and you haven't properly addressed anything i said. Many studies have been done on this issue already and it is the results of studies and scientists looking into these concerns, which have actually ended up unintentionally backing transsexual women.

    Transsexual people receive so much abuse and hate. There's really no one backing them ever. So it's really not a case of being politically correct and no such political correctness even exists for trans people. The fact is Fallon Foxx wouldn't have been allowed to compete at all with women if her physiology wasn't within female range.

    From a biological point of view, there is very little difference between the male sex and the female sex, what really separates us is our sex hormones, and Fallon Foxx no longer has a male testosterone range. She is not even very tall at 5'7. As far as i can see she has no real significant advantage, not hormonally nor in any other physical way.

    Furthermore that type of sport is extremely dangerous anyway and completely unnecessary in my opinion. Those involved should be aware of the dangers. Add to the fact that there are many biological women who are bigger and stronger then Fallon Foxx. Should they not be allowed to compete either? You have completely ignored the point i made about some biological women being naturally more "gifted" with regard to physical strength and build.

    For example this is actually a biological woman, who underwent gender tests because people believed she had an unfair advantage, but she's actually just a normal bio female.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/othersports/athle...

  • 8 years ago

    Of course it is unfair. Just because someone cut their penis off and decided to become an immitation (fake) of a woman, doesnt imply that they are women.

    People who undergo any sex change shouldnt be allowed to play sports. It is not fair for the other team players. But hey, gays are like blacks, whiny and sensitive. If you even remotely say something negative about either or, they will end up rioting.

    Ungrateful jerkoffs.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.