Transgender MMA Fighter Destroys Female Opponent

originally posted by: introvert
Excellent post. It's good to get a first-person perspective.

You actually read all that? Thank you!

First, if you haven't read the 2nd and 3rd paragraphs of my post on page 4, maybe start there? I talk a bit about my own body, hormones, muscles and strength but these are only things I know about me. As an additional caveat, also consider that compared to other women of past transsexual (surgical) experience, there aren't a whole heck of a lot out there that went through this process 40 years ago that were on HRT 4 years before that. Also consider that in the 4 or 5 others like myself I have ever met in my lifetime, they have all been taller and larger than me and have also had lives as men with muscles and stuff before transitioning. I started hormones when I was 18, skinny, underdeveloped and didn't have a muscle in my body before I started so I may be the exception rather than representative?

You know if you look at statistics and averages men usually are generally bigger and more dense than women and there's got to be a joke in there somewhere about dense men but it escapes me at the moment. I know nothing about this "sport", how the different classifications are setup or how or what criteria is used for matching up competitors. Just looking at a few pictures, it seems all the women are bigger, tougher and more muscular than the average of other woman of the same height and age?

When a physiological male starts on HRT, they are also given an additional drug that blocks the production of testosterone and the balance of these is adjusted to maintain the proper ratio. From what I understand, the loss of male muscle tone and definition is one of the first things to start going, noticeably so after 3 months or thereabout and may continue to decline for up to a year maybe or even longer. Every body reacts differently. The longer on this chemical cocktail, the more the body feminizes. After sex reassignment surgery (SRS) and removing of the testosterone producing bits, the serum levels of "T" usually drop below those of natal females. Both male and female gonads (and other places in the body) each produce estrogen and the big T. When the testes are removed, this leaves what little testosterone is produced to other parts of the body as the sole source while natal females have those from other places plus the ovaries cranking out T so it is entirely possible that Fox could have lower testosterone levels than a natal female while also having comparable estrogen levels. Whew!

In the few things I've read about this, some probably even here, is the criticism is that Fox built up her muscle mass and strength in the past that was carried over when she became female. To some degree, that may be true but the longer she has been female the more this will fade. She looks pretty tough and muscly but I don't know how to compare her to other fighters in the same division or weight class or however they do it?

A muscle is a muscle. Pound for Pound and identical in size, there is no magic extra zing or latent superpower in one from a male vs one from a female. That's like saying your Ferrari is faster than my identical Ferrari because yours is red and mine is yellow, disregarding the commonly held belief that red cars are always faster, of course. Add testosterone and one of those Ferrari's will be faster than the other and go further on a gallon of gas.

So, does Fallon Fox have an advantage as far as muscles go? Wikipedia says Fox had SRS ten years ago so I'm going to call this one a draw if she hasn't taken androgenic compounds or testosterone exogenously during that time. Aren't there some doping standards or checks on something on this?

So what else is there or what crushing advantage does she have beyond training, technique and experience?

Some have suggested this magic bullet is skeletal or bone size or density and there may be something to this? I don't know. I do know that loss of bone density is common and problematic in post-SRS women with insufficient estrogen levels but I doubt this is the case with Fox. Other things like the size of the hand/fist is probably larger in Fox due to the effects of natal puberty as well as the width of the shoulders and the ratio of forearm to the upper arm and from the shoulder to the elbow but she doesn't really look that much bigger and nastier than some of the other ladies I looked at. This may factor in as a matter of leverage if these proportions are significantly different in Fox but her natal female opponents will have the advantage of lower center of gravity.

So basically, I have no idea if formerly being male gives her an advantage or if she is just one mean ol' hardcore bad ass with a lot more varied types of training? Certainly it is up to the sponsoring body or promoter or whoever to see that opponents are going to have a fair fight. I don't know anything about this.

Now on to the ethics and politics of the whole thing and that's where things kind of go off the rails for me because I'm not a sports person other than being a fan of MotoGP and Formula 1. Certainly as a woman, I want to see all women get a shot at whatever and that transgender and transsexual people have the same opportunity BUT as a general rule or statistical median, someone that went through the natal puberty is likely to have some physical advantages over natal females. People come in so many different shapes and sizes though and it seems that both sexes that are bigger, stronger or faster than their peers and tend to gravitate toward athletics which really brings the need for classifications and standards to bring the right parity between competitors.

Now this is where things really get wonky and steps into areas of transgender politics I dare not tread due to a certain degree of not drinking the right Kool-Aid and not exactly towing the party line of what some call the Transgender Borg Collective and which is also way outside the scope of this topic. In a nutshell though, the majority of transgender women, although they live fully as women and look and act and do everything like women, retain their OEM parts downstairs. That doesn't mean that they use them or anything, (though they might) and they certainly keep them well hidden and "tucked" but for whatever reason, they don't want it, don't need it, etc., and a degree of inclusion is also desired for them. A trans woman sufficiently estrogenized and de-testosteronized (made those up) can theoretically not have competitive advantages over a natal female as having shriveled up, atrophied junk in and of itself offers no specific competitive advantage.

(There may be the sale of bridges involved here somewhere? I'm not being disrespectful, just poking the bear a bit)

Continued next post -

a reply to: Annee

Gee Annee IDK, have you been reading the thread?

Go fish.

--continued from above-

So don't shoot the messenger here please because I'm having a bit of a struggle assimilating it all myself wondering what the hell can of worms has been opened or if athletics has been changed forever? Don't blame me, the Borg did it but it would be polite and PC of me to not throw them under the bus even though there may be hard drugs involved in compiling these guidelines? (They may not be final - not sure?)

International Olympic Committee Guidelines on Transgender Athletes

1. Those who transition from female to male are eligible to compete in the male category without restriction.

2. Those who transition from male to female are eligible to compete in the female category under the following conditions:

2.1. The athlete has declared that her gender identity is female. The declaration cannot be changed, for sporting purposes, for a minimum of four years.

2.2. The athlete must demonstrate that her total testosterone level in serum has been below 10 nmol/L for at least 12 months prior to her first competition (with the requirement for any longer period to be based on a confidential case-by-case evaluation, considering whether or not 12 months is a sufficient length of time to minimize any advantage in women's competition).

2.3. The athlete's total testosterone level in serum must remain below 10 nmol/L throughout the period of desired eligibility to compete in the female category.

2.4. Compliance with these conditions may be monitored by testing. In the event of non-compliance, the athlete's eligibility for female competition will be suspended for 12 months.

-edit for clarification-

SRS is not a require for MtF athletes providing the above conditions are met
Chromosome testing will not be employed (and hasn't been for a long time)




It does appear that each case will be reviewed and evaaluated on an individual basis.

Now, please be polite and don't blast this thread with anti-transgender hate and rants and bitch about things you don't know about or understand. Please be respectful and I will continue to contribute. Be a jerk and I'll be a jerk back. Ask a genuine question and I'll answer whatever as best as I can. Talk about bathrooms in any of the other 10 threads talking about bathrooms and know that talking about transgender children is my hot button and to be avoided (pretty please) - DOH! Thanks Annee! (she's trying to keep my head from exploding!)

PS - I really don't like this MMA fighting stuff

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: Annee

Gee Annee IDK, have you been reading the thread?

Go fish.

Yes.

And I think there's a lot of hype and sensationalism because it was a transgender female.

So, I researched women's fighting and found extreme injuries happen with natural born women.

a reply to: sg1642

You are right cause like I said before I am pretty sure this girl knew. Also could probably see film I am sure. If she did not know which I think we concluded she did She would not know the added punch. In this case she obviously under estimated it. Most good fighters want a challenge. I am also wanting to see if there are girls trying to show him up. I still think the adrenaline and blood and blood flow may play a deeper roll than we think . Especially if Fox is doping via removing and adding blood which I think they still can't detect. Just crazy to think a girl fighter may have to schedule around that time of the month or have the BC that stops it? I do not know how that works either yikes though.

Sorry to get off reply. To be fair you are correct as to all the woman who know.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: Annee

Gee Annee IDK, have you been reading the thread?

Go fish.

Yes.

And I think there's a lot of hype and sensationalism because it was a transgender female.

So, I researched women's fighting and found extreme injuries happen with natural born women.

Injuries happen in MMA period.

Now having greater skeletal integrity can reduce some injuries.

You must've missed this;

originally posted by: Lysergic
Males have larger skeletal size and bone mass than females, despite comparable body size.

In summary, despite comparable body size, males have greater BMC and BMD than females at the hip and distal tibia but not at the spine. Differences in BMC and BMD were related to greater cortical thickness in the tibia. We conclude that differences in bone mass and geometry confer greater skeletal integrity in males, which may contribute to the lower incidence of stress and osteoporotic fractures in males.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Annee are you okay, are you okay Annee, Annee?
(soz couldnt resist that haha)

Because human beings can’t deal with objective reality we have to create attachments to dogmas and religions that try to cover all of life’s contradictions and conundrums in a delusion of neatness and symmetry.

We can’t separate problems from generalized dogmas. Here clearly this vicious sport can easily have woman being killed by such “freedoms” and "equality" but the new dogma must be obeyed so the generalized society can recognize woman as “equals” so barbaric stuff like this will occur...

Next they’ll be pushing for woman in violent combat.

The way through this is to always recognize that nuance and subtleties in life always tend to contradict established presuppositions either from the right or the left and humans aught to have the capacity and fluidity of mind to adjust to this….but we don’t on the most part.

Indeed, gay modern lifestyles needed never to be a contradiction to religious principles as secular principles could have adapted to religious rights…if both with a little fluidity of mind understood that under the banner of freedom of choice we all could get along fine.

In terms of bathrooms the solution is very easy: CREATE TRANGENDER ONLY BATHROOMS. Or unisex bathrooms.

It may be a cost to the municipality in question but so what.

In terms of woman having to get beaten to near death by the inate more powerful male specious can also be dealt with by Transgender sports.

For the fact of the matter is that it’s a nuance of reality of the equality principle that is in question: that men are just as of now evolutionarily psychically stronger than woman and the people espousing symmetrical equality have to learn to accept anomalies in law, in principles, and real life.

Men don’t get pregnant, right. Or do the proponents of equality symmetry want to change that…good luck trying

...Make men have to carry a pregnancy…you know make some kind of male womb so the baby can be transferred from the woman to the man in the name of equality.

Is that what were evolving to.

I hope not

If so then liberal secularists have become as rigid and intolerant as the religions bigots and as dumb.

a reply to: Lysergic

Nice find. I have not seen anything close to that against Fox yet. To bad Ashley Evens was bad and we did not get to see that fight again. Both have un-fair advantages but it was a good fight.

originally posted by: Lysergic

Annee are you okay, are you okay Annee, Annee?
(soz couldnt resist that haha)

Do you want me to look for a rebuttal?

'Cuz you can find whatever you want on the internet.

a reply to: Annee

Sure. Find one saying women have thicker bones I'll be here.

What have you to say about the study I posted?

Don't be upset because I miss Michael Jackson.



Hey wanna refute this one too?

Skeletal fractures occur when bones are subjected to mechanical loads which exceed their strength. Diminished skeletal strength is a primary risk factor for fracture, and gender differences in skeletal structure and strength play a powerful role in determining gender differences in fracture risk. Skeletal structure adapts to the long-term loads exerted on the skeleton exerted as a result of physical activity, and the most powerful loading forces are conferred by muscles, which must exert enough force to move bones while acting against extremely short lever arms. Thus, skeletal muscle is one of the most powerful determinants of bone strength and gender differences in the bone-muscle relationship are of key interest in understanding gender differences in bone growth, in age-related bone loss, and in risk of fracture.

The Bone-Muscle Relationship in Men and Women.

It says there be differences. Shocking.

Gender differences in the relation of muscle and bone growth are generally not evident in early childhood, and studies show little to any differences in the relation of muscle to bone area. However, gender-variant patterns emerge during adolescence, reflecting the different musculoskeletal effects of testosterone and estrogen in males and females [5]. In males, the changes of bone and muscle during puberty are dominated by the increasing levels of testosterone and IGF-1, which result in increased muscle mass and strength. The combination of higher deformation forces and the higher bending moments due to longitudinal growth leads to a bone growth pattern dominated by periosteal apposition. Thus, in men, the growth in muscle and bone is more parallel in nature and the peak values of cortical area and muscle cross-sectional area tend to coincide within half a year in men. In girls, with lower levels of testosterone, and higher levels of estrogen, bone mass, but not total cross-sectional area, tends to increase more rapidly in relation to muscle area. The increase in bone mass appears to take the form of increased endosteal apposition, rather than periosteal apposition. A study examining gender differences in bone structure in young men and women at the hip, distal tibia, and distal radius found that men have higher total and cortical bone cross-sectional area, but volumetric density values similar to those observed in women [6]. When the data are adjusted for differences in body height, gender differences in cortical thickness and area are highly attenuated, but differences in total bone cross-sectional area remain large. The higher total bone area is consistent with higher muscle cross-sectional area found in young men compared to young women. In young adulthood, there are apparent gender differences in the correlation of muscle area to bone area. In men, more of the variation in bone dimensions is explained by muscle area in men [7]. Women have higher values of bone in relation to muscle, but a lower percentage of the variation in cortical area in women is explained by muscle mass [8].

originally posted by: Lysergic

Sure. Find one saying women have thicker bones

I'll be here.

What have you to say about the study I posted?

Science seems to be on Fox’s side. “Male to female transsexuals have significantly less muscle strength and bone density, and higher fat mass, than males,” says Dr. Eric Vilain, director of the Institute For Society And Genetics at UCLA. Vilain examined Fox’s medical records and wrote a letter supporting her bid to fight as a woman. He also helped the Association of Boxing Commissions write its transgender policy. In order to fight against women, male-to-female athletes who had surgery after puberty must show that “surgical anatomical changes have been completed, including external genitalia and gonadectomy” and that “hormone therapy appropriate for the assigned sex (female) has been administered by a board certified endocrinologist or internist, pediatrician, or D.O. or any other specialist known to have significant knowledge with transsexuals and transgender individuals for a MINIMUM of TWO YEARS after gonadectroy. This is the current understanding of the minimum amount of time necessary to obviate male hormone gender related advantages in sports competition.” keepingscore.blogs.time.com...

Of course there's a rebuttal to this too.

Its all opinion.

Your article is an opinion.

Did Fallon Fox have other fights? Or just this one that's being sensationalized.

a reply to: Annee

Cute, however what I posted as my source were peer reviewed papers....


Your source?

Thanks for playing.


Oh and your "source" backpeddles a bit.

Still, could Fox be stronger than the other women because she used to be a man? “She could be,” says Vilain. “But sports is made up of competitors who, by definition, have advantages for all kinds of genetics reasons. And no one complains about it.” A woman runner may be naturally faster, a woman basketball player taller, than her cohort. To exclude Fox because of her surgery, Vilain argues, would be discriminatory.

He doesn't seem very certain.

a reply to: Annee

So are you going to find one saying that men do not have greater skeletal integrity?

You going to even address that fact?

originally posted by: Annee

Its all opinion.

Your article is an opinion.

.... sigh.....

Guessing A, you didn't read it whatsoever and jumped to your response foolishly.

Guessing B, you have no idea how peer reviewed papers work.

YOURS is an Op-ed, GET REAL.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: Annee

Cute, however what I posted as my source were peer reviewed papers....

So? Peer review vs a doctor. Your argument is what?

Anyway, one of your doctors is: Jeri Nieves.

What is her specialty? Bones. So, she's gonna focus almost entirely on bones and not really weigh in other factors.

She sees what's important to her. And that's where her opinion is based.

originally posted by: Lysergic

originally posted by: Annee

Its all opinion.

Your article is an opinion.

.... sigh.....

Guessing A, you didn't read it whatsoever and jumped to your response foolishly.

Guessing B, you have no idea how peer reviewed papers work.

YOURS is an Op-ed, GET REAL.

I have nothing else to say to you.

You've made up your mind. I doubt anything I present to you would make a difference.

So, I'm moving on.

a reply to: Annee

pwned.

originally posted by: Lysergic
a reply to: Annee

pwned.

Apparently, someone thinks its a competition.

Here, have a medal feel good about yourself.

a reply to: Annee

No, its more of you failed to acknowledge any of the things I said, only attempted to refute them but failed miserably, and then you dismissed me, basically taking the ball and going home. And lets be real, you act like I am not open to other facts, thats hilarious because you automatically dismissed what I had linked and said, ohh want me to go find something to refute it? Remember that part? No?

I know you think you refuted my points, but I tell you, you did not, but whatever, right?

So moving on, or going to address those points?

I am waiting for a transgender basketball player(s) in the WNBA. Then the NBA will come out and say, " while we think that a guy should be allowed to pee in a women's room in North Carolina. A man cannot take a female basketball players job. So we the nba is staying segregated by sex

In a side note, I cannot wait for a womyn's group to go after the NBA for paying men millions and the women make 15 bucks an hour, or some amount like that