Personally I think not having karma limits is nice currently! I understand why they were used but grinding karma as a lurker on reddit was frustrating.

  • Synnikel@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I am aware of the concept of being transgender I am just wondering what your “polite disagreements” are with it

    • sleepyTonia@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’d say that a fairly debated topic related to transgender people, which isn’t just transphobes attacking people trying to live their own life, is the presence of transgender athletes in competitions. Some will take it as a personal attack whether you take a side or sit on the fence. I’m not looking to start that conversation here, but yeah. It’s definitely possible to hold a polite conversation about this while disagreeing on parts of the question. In a healthy space.

      • PlasmaK@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I think that after HRT the difference is not that big. Trans athletes may even be at the disadvantage since there are some cis woman that have higher than average amount of testosterone.

        In the long shot I think it would be for the best to abolish gender based separation altogether and replace it with something more like weight categories.

        • oldindianmonk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Consider two 5’6" 65kg athletes, one man and one woman, are you saying that the man doesn’t have an advantage?

          I used to believe the same until I saw the recent Women’s Premier League in Cricket. They had to reduce the size of field and the weight of ball. Even with that, the fastest bowl in the tournament was 130kmph while that speed is considered a “slower ball” in men’s cricket.

          Now some of these female cricketers earm more than any Pakistani male cricketers. Which is fair, bigger market, bigger payout. But female cricketers don’t stand a chance against the male cricketers

          • PlasmaK@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Here is a surprise for you: HRT actually does things to your body. I don’t think this should have been that hard to find on your own, but I can’t judge your circumstances.

          • Bernie Ecclestoned@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Consider two 5’6" 65kg athletes, one man and one woman, are you saying that the man doesn’t have an advantage?

            No, my MMA teacher was female and she’d kick my arse regularly

            They had to reduce the size of field and the weight of ball. Even with that, the fastest bowl in the tournament was 130kmph

            Now you’re undermining your first point, you’re not comparing same heights and weight. Physics is real.

            • oldindianmonk@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Okay.

              Ellyse Perry, the fastest bowler in women’s cricket is 176cm at 60kg (amazing athlete, represented Australia at both Cricket and Football world cups!). Her fastest ball was 130.1kph

              Shoaib Akthar, the fastst bowler in men’s cricket is 180cm at 80kg. His fastest was 161kph

              Laws of cricket dictate that women should use a ball that is between 415⁄16 and 55⁄16 ounces (139.98 and 150.61 grams); which could be up to 13⁄16 ounces (23.03 grams) lighter than the ball used by the men.

              Also made me think, the whole height-weight distinction will only work in purely physical sports like boxing (maybe even some american sports like baseball and nfl). It is not going to work in global sports like Cricket and Football. Think about the greatest footballers of our generation. Cristiano was 183cm (6ft) and Messi 169cm (5ft 6in).

                • oldindianmonk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago
                  • his mass is 33% more and the ball goes 23% faster? Momentum is mass x velocity iirc.

                  Do you understand why this statement is wrong?

                  You’re mixing the mass of the person throwing the ball with the mass of the ball.

                  • his mass is 33% more

                  This would matter if he was flying himself at the batsman.

                • oldindianmonk@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I only pointed out the difference between the fastest. There’s plenty of shorter, leaner bowlers in men’s cricket who bowl faster than Perry. Kemar Roach for instance is in the same height and weight category as Perry and regularly bowls 150kph

                  Tbf it’s expected. You know women going below 16-18% body fat is completely unhealthy while top male athletes are perfectly healthy at 6% or so

                  Edit: wtf mate? Momentum is not mass of propeller times velocity. By your logic a sumo wrestler would easily be the fastest cricket bowler!

                  • Bernie Ecclestoned@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Momentum is mass x velocity. Google it.

                    Would you rather get hit by a featherweight or heavyweight? Mass matters

                    I’d say the difference between men and women’s cricket will reduce as women get more training and money, I don’t see any reason why not

      • Landrin201@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        the presence of transgender athletes in competitions

        I disagree, that isn’t a “polite disagreement” and is, absolutely, “just transphobes attacking people trying to live their own life” as you put it. Every time that “Argument” happens it’s openly done in biologically unfounded ways by people who simply don’t understand how our bodies actually work- yet those arguments get mass upvoted by people who also don’t understand how biology actually works and who believe that trans athletes get some insane, unfair advantage.

        If you want to pass laws to restrict trans people from sports, then you want to pass laws to discriminate against trans people. That’s not really up for debate IMO, it’s a straight up fact; it’s what you’re doing when you advocate for laws that are not founded in science, that are specifically targeting a tiny minority for the chance that one of that tiny minority might beat cis athletes in an “unfair” way, you’re advocating for bigoted laws.

        Such arguments are also inevietably filled with people misgendering trans people, deliberately calling trans women “men” and hiding behind the “I’m talking about biology” argument to do so.

        Replace the word “trans” with “black” and you’ll find that people are making literally identical arguments to those against desegregating professional sports leagues 80 years ago. Literally word for word.

        • usernotfound@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Every time that “Argument” happens it’s openly done in biologically unfounded ways by people who simply don’t understand how our bodies actually work.

          I’ll be the first to admit I don’t know how our bodies work, but I think explaining it will be more helpful in the long run than just making the subject taboo and banning everyone who asks it.

          At the beginning of the pandemic a common argument against masks was “the virus is too small to be caught in a mask” - which made sense from a layman’s point of view. When people started explaining that masks did stop the water droplets the virus needs to be airborne - that argument become a lot less common.

          Not everybody who has questions is “just asking questions”, if you catch my drift.

          • Landrin201@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Not everybody who has questions is “just asking questions”, if you catch my drift.

            I agree with that statement, context is everything.

            I think that in the context of someone starting out going “it’s unfair for men to compete in women’s sports,” the person is “just asking questions.” That context poisons the well for questions.

            But if someone comes in and makes a thread like “I don’t understand how hormone therapy works, can someone please explain it?” that, to me, is a good faith question and 100% should not be bannable.

            • usernotfound@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              All good :)

              Now that I have your attention though, what would be a good counter argument on why trans women should be allowed to compete in the same league as non-trans women (please excuse my lacking vocabulary)?

              Like I mentioned, at first sight as a layman, the argument that trans women would have an competitive advantage makes sense to me. So I’d be grateful if you could take away my ignorance.

              • Landrin201@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                First for the vocabulary:

                non-trans = cisgender. cis meaning “same,” as in “same gender as assigned at birth.”

                Second, I’m not the best at doing that, but I know of a really good report which has good citations of studies and really thoroughly discusses the issue. PDF WARNING: It can be found here.

                • usernotfound@lemmy.ml
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Thanks for the former, guess I should have known that, but I’ll be sure to remember now. As for the second… I’m interested in the answer, but not 86 pages scientific report interested. Guess I’ll just have to wait around for the “water droplet”-size answer, but thanks for your patience nonetheless :)

    • JasSmith@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you genuinely interested or just looking to start a fight? I know recreational outrage is a thing on Reddit and I had hoped to leave it there.

          • Hannah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            What the hell is this? Trans person here. This is not the thread to start concern trolling about trans issues. If you really want a space to talk freely about your concerns you can start a community or even your own instance.

            • dannoffs@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Yeah, this is just run of the mill transphobic sealioning. They even complain about reddit having been run by tankies and repeated the “current thing” conservative reactionary trope. I’m totally fine if this kind of person doesn’t feel welcome here.

            • imaqtpie@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              He’s literally responding to a user who said

              I’m genuinely interested to hear your perspective and why it was a point of contention

              So he explained his perspective. Concern trolling lmao.

              If you want a space where you don’t encounter other perspectives, there are plenty of spaces like that both in the real world and on the internet.

          • Lenins2ndCat@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            @dessalines@lemmy.ml this is exactly why tone policing is bullshit moderation policy.

            Your modteam is allowing this transphobic screed to exist, and has in fact unbanned the user that posted it despite the very very obvious fact that they are a transphobe doing concern-trolling and “just asking questions” style veiled bigotry, while simultaneously banning everyone that has reacted to their behaviour by rightfully calling them the names they deserve to be called.

            This policymaking is what results in people in the left calling someone a terf or a fascist getting banned while the fascists and terfs roam free. The site will be taken over by this and the left will slowly be banned and pushed out by it. The fact that the team can’t seem to get into their heads that trans people might get a little fucking heated when bigots are allowed to exist and clearly defended by some of the incompetent members the modteam is another part of the problem.

            You should get some trans people on your team to keep the rest of the idiots on it making these shit decisions in check. This nerd should absolutely be rebanned and every other person that copped a ban over this shit should be unbanned.

              • Lenins2ndCat@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                It’s pleasant to see that the Lemmy team saw reason on this. I intentionally used a few names in it for effect and that was a risk to me getting banned but seemed to work out demonstrating that a person can be completely correct and should be listened to despite their tone. Wasn’t even really intentional either I was just fucking heated over the way this was being handled. Lemmy does need some on-point trans mods that are willing to argue with the rest of the team internally over poor decision making and do some internal education.

          • TheOubliette@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            @dessalines@lemmy.ml please reconsider reprioritizing civility fetishism, particularly in defense against transphobia. The course of events here was extremely uncool and is tantamount to making this space systemically transphobic.

            All it will take to drive trans people off is for you to ban them when they defend themselves against transphobic hate. And all it will take for transphobes to make that happen is for transphobes to harass people here until they react. This pattern has happened many times on many platforms and I’m surprised if you’re not aware of it.

            • bh11235@infosec.pub
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m torn on this. One the one hand there’s something to be said against insta-banning a person just because they wrote “I don’t know if a 12-year-old can meaningfully consent to gender affirming care”. On the other hand you get people who engage in that kind of discourse just to hide their power level. e.g. one of the links in the above-discussed comment goes to transgendertrend dot com, a website I did not know of until today, but it took me exactly one look at its main page and its “about us” section to suspect that anyone who linked anything from there must be way more radicalized than the stage where they are “open to evidence and to honest discussion and debate”. As a filthy moderate myself, I know that a fellow filthy moderate would at least make the minuscule effort to find a source that pretends not to be propaganda.

              The author of that manifesto two levels up is not making an argument out of the bottom of their heart; they are proselytizing. They are engaging in what the Musk fan, Tim Urban, once described in his blog as “thinking like an attorney”:

              An Attorney and a Sports Fan have a lot in common. They both have a preferred [conclusion], while also still maintaining some level of dedication to [the process of objective reasoning]. They’re both conflicted between the values of truth and confirmation. The critical difference is in which value, deep down, is higher in their Values Stack. A Sports Fan wants to win, but when pushed, they care even more about fair play than winning. An Attorney’s job is to win, and no matter how hard you push them, nothing can alter their allegiance. Because has THIS ever happened? [A crude drawing of a courtroom; a judge asks “anything more from the defense?” and the defense attorney, to the horror of the defendant, answers: “actually, your honor, the prosecutor just made some really excellent points. I guess my client is guilty after all.”] No. That has never happened.

              “Civility fetishism” is a real problem and I have personally seen it destroy some spaces I have held dear, via attorneys attorney-ing all day and shouting “debate me, debate me, it’s just facts and logic, what are you so afraid of”. So I fully understand the weariness of the person I am replying to.

          • Sphere@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I am completely appalled at this instance right now for allowing this absolutely vile comment to persist on here, but since some reactionary admin decided your disgusting falsehoods should remain up, allow me to provide an extremely easily-found data point you “couldn’t find” in your search:

            New Study Confirms Extremely Low Regret Rates for Gender-Affirming Surgery

            Regret rates for sex reassignment surgery are among the LOWEST for ANY type of surgery OF ANY KIND. They’re even lower than the complication rate! (Yes, really!) How’s that for hard data?

            Given the fact that this was incredibly easy for me to find (a single Google search pulled it up easily), I can only conclude that you “couldn’t find” evidence that transitioning is beneficial because you weren’t actually looking for it; you were looking for evidence of exactly the opposite point.

            If this comment is indicative of things you said to your relative who took their life, then you should absolutely feel partially responsible; this kind of patronizing pseudo-concern BS is exactly the kind of toxicity that makes trans people feel that they will never be accepted by the people in their lives.

            • Evan@lemmy.ml
              shield
              M
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              1 year ago

              I’ve removed it. Please understand I’m a human and overloaded

              • Sphere@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Apologies if I made unwarranted assumptions, and thank you for your efforts to keep this community free from toxicity!

          • Biorix@lemmy.fmhy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I’m not gonna lie, when someone calls out about censorship and not being able to talk about trans I’m inclined to think they’re not people that have interesting to say.

            But your comments is exactly how we should discuss a subject, thank you

            Although I think that in an enormous community like reddit, YouTube, Facebook, etc. the moderation is necessarily a bit aggressive since it takes time to analyze the real intentions. And with the army of bots, and trolls organizing, or masking their intend behind falsely neutral point of view, it’s easy to start blasting.

            Still, I agree that lots of mods, drunk on power or following the subreddit trend was abusing and just censoring.

            Ps: sorry my comment is not really a response to this one specifically haha