156 points

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.

permalink
report
reply
75 points

This is called growth. Good on you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
68 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

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…

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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…

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Turn off having it track your browsing history, and subscribe and search to/for stuff you like.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

They literally said it pushes those things when not logged in. So when YouTube doesn’t know your tastes it pushes things like that.

permalink
report
parent
reply
44 points

Good for you. We all have biases, it’s best to be aware of it and challenge it from time to time.

permalink
report
parent
reply
13 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
10 points

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?

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Would this be different if someone were to transition at a later age (say mid 20s - 30s)? Honest question, trying to learn something here.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

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.)

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

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…”

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
115 points

Fuck every person who engaged in this shit. Lie after lie

permalink
report
reply
8 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points

Surrendering is part of the rules, why are you blowing on hate, exactly?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-24 points

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
18 points

“Europeans”, a notoriously homogeneous class of people, with a sample of size of 1.

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
63 points
*

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!)

permalink
report
reply
13 points

That’s not fair, I want to downvote you now.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Too bad, you’ll have to donate in your own name. ;)

permalink
report
parent
reply
59 points
*

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.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Love Zhang Weili

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
48 points

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:

  1. She’s almost certainly a biological woman.
  2. She won.
  3. The author thinks you’re stupid.
permalink
report
reply
40 points
*

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

permalink
report
parent
reply
9 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
38 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
11 points
*

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)

permalink
report
parent
reply
-8 points

Repetition doesn’t break reason.

The author was right about you.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
23 points
*

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

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).

permalink
report
parent
reply
-16 points

It just bugs me the wording “wrongly questioned” - it’s never wrong to question, you just have to be prepared to accept answers.

permalink
report
parent
reply
14 points

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…

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

No.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-3 points

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.

permalink
report
parent
reply

World News

!world@lemmy.world

Create post

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

  • Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:

    • Post news articles only
    • Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
    • Title must match the article headline
    • Not United States Internal News
    • Recent (Past 30 Days)
    • Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
  • Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think “Is this fair use?”, it probably isn’t. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.

  • Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.

  • Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.

  • Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19

  • Rule 5: Keep it civil. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

  • Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.

  • Rule 7: We didn’t USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you’re posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Community stats

  • 12K

    Monthly active users

  • 5.5K

    Posts

  • 54K

    Comments