Blob/Cat

2020/02/12 9:30:46 PM UTC

Sports aren't fair to begin with so by claiming that "trans women have a natural biological" advantage is a moot point. Some cis women are naturally stronger than others but no one's outraged about that - because it's a dumb thing to be outraged about.

"Women are losing athletic scholarships because they can't say that came in first" - good, athletic scholarships shouldn't be a thing

Really, what we need to do is desegregate things like track altogether, then you can pick whatever metric you like (top black athlete, top male athlete, top trans athlete, top cis female athlete, etc).
replies
4
announces
3
likes
6

2020/02/12 9:33:00 PM UTC

@mewmew I think that gets into trouble with some competitive sports mind you. Like with the translady who was beating the tar out of the previous stop athletes. She wasn't even on HRT for all that long (only 2 years) at the time -- that's not long enough.

2020/02/12 9:33:51 PM UTC

@mewmew

i mean once you go on t blockers your muscles start deteriorating, even with upkeep you're going to get around to the same muscle mass as any other woman within a few months iirc

it's a huge non-issue and just comes out of people being anti-science shitheads (and transphobia)

2020/02/12 9:35:13 PM UTC

@kazuma @mewmew My understanding is it takes much longer than a few months, closer to 3-5 years for it all to go away. As always, the research data would just be what I go by, but I'm not aware of any real studies being done on the subject and all I've got to work on here is subjective options from various people I've spoken to.

2020/02/12 9:35:14 PM UTC

@shebang sure, but I think as long as you limit the hormone levels to be in the same range for cis and trans athletes, that's enough. I don't draw a distinction between "inherent muscle mass" and "gained through workout" muscle mass because to do so would reject all diversity in cis women. Just because trans women happen to have a higher average doesn't mean that they're inherently better.

2020/02/12 9:36:19 PM UTC

@nerthos well yeah, I don't have much respect for sports and honestly when I see people complaining about "muh first place" and "muh scholarships" I just facepalm.

2020/02/12 9:37:39 PM UTC

@mewmew Point proven

If you don't have respect for sports just let sports fans and athletes decide what to do with their hobby

2020/02/12 9:38:16 PM UTC

@nerthos yeah, this is just my personal view on it.

2020/02/12 9:38:22 PM UTC

@mewmew Yeah it probably is. Although I'd still want a waiting period (ideally to be determined by research) so someone can't just pop a few titty skittles and start beating down people.

2020/02/12 9:38:56 PM UTC

@nerthos @mewmew can I have a scholarship for collecting games? I'm real good at that hobby

2020/02/12 9:39:01 PM UTC

@mewmew @shebang

>getting kicked out of my own reply

:blobcatsob:

2020/02/12 9:40:03 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew I mean if you can get enough people to get excited over comparing game collections, why not?

2020/02/12 9:40:44 PM UTC

@nerthos @mewmew so... scholarships are basically popularity contests? or am I understanding the direction you're going in wrong

2020/02/12 9:46:04 PM UTC

@mewmew I think your conclusion is nice. However I think you may underestimate the difference in athletic ability between the men and women. Low ranking male athletes can be champions in women's sports.

2020/02/12 9:46:49 PM UTC

@shebang @mewmew

it's okay, i understand

that's really interesting though

i wonder how much a woman who over produces testosterone compares to a woman that produces the normal amount

that'd be a pretty unethical study though i think...

2020/02/12 9:48:01 PM UTC

@kazuma @mewmew Well no VOLUNTARY study would be too much of a problem. But "hyper t" women do exist, and yes -- often dominate in their sports.

2020/02/12 9:48:04 PM UTC

@mewmew Well, I don't really care about sports at all, but the reason they were segregated in the first place is because of the high disparity.

2020/02/12 9:48:06 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew Scholarships are granted on the basis of either:
-Recipient shows extremely high aptitude for the field the college teaches, and will probably raise the reputation of the institution upon graduation (for example, scholarships for high iq kids)
-Recipient is very talented in an activity that will benefit the college directly or through publicity, and the college's standing in competitions against other colleges (for example, sport scholarships)
-Recipient fulfills a set of criteria that will enhance an image the college is trying to show by attending class (for example, racial quotas)

So it's less about individual popularity contests and more about being good at an activity that is considered popular and relevant by the college board, enough that the college considers it stands to gain more by having you on board with them or preventing you from going to another college than by charging you.

2020/02/12 9:48:21 PM UTC

@mewmew

I wonder why tennis grand slam for men is 5 sets but for women only 3 hmm

2020/02/12 9:49:02 PM UTC

@nerthos @mewmew and this is why private education bad, kids :^)

2020/02/12 9:52:19 PM UTC

@shebang @mewmew

maybe instead we should segregrate by t levels than gender if that's the case...

honestly now i kind of don't care if a woman comes out and wants to compete in women's sports the next season (or day)

2020/02/12 9:54:38 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew It's kinda the same in public education honestly, just that it's a ministry or some other state organization that sets the criteria instead.
As I see it there's nothing wrong with private colleges giving scholarships to whoever they like, it's their money after all. For state-paid scholarships, it's a bit more complicated as they should be granted solely on the basis of aptitude for the field of study.

2020/02/12 9:56:00 PM UTC

@mewmew @alex >so?

so that's why we have men's and women's sports :blobthinksmart:

2020/02/12 9:58:41 PM UTC

@nerthos @mewmew
I just think that institutions whose goal is to educate students shouldn't be doing stuff that isn't, well, educating students
instead, we're seeing them almost exclusively doing that stuff, and leaving actual education in the dust:
- teachers are underpaid (both public and private schools, outside of the ivory league, and even then it's not great)
- classes are overpopulated
- actual education quality is in the absolute gutter, for a large variety of reasons (I've had this multi-page rant a bunch of times, no really in the mood to get into it again)
I don't think there's anything wrong with talented athletes/individuals/etc getting money for being good, I just think it should be **ENTIRELY SEPARATED FROM THE ED. SYSTEM**
also, considering how collegiate leagues work (look at basically any headlines regarding college athletes, it's almost always about them being abused or exploited by the system), it shouldn't even be gated based on being in college or not - just a semi-pro league in general is fine, maybe with an age restriction

2020/02/12 9:59:18 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew On the plus side, college sports and other such competitions create the possibility for people that have interest in fields with no practical application to get scholarships too.
State paid scholarships can't be justified for careers that in no direct way benefit the nation.

2020/02/12 9:59:59 PM UTC

@nerthos @mewmew
alternatively consider: not needing a scholarship to get an education L M A O

2020/02/12 10:05:33 PM UTC

@kazuma @mewmew I think that without actual research done on the topic, just allowing anyone to go anywhere is going to result in unfair circumstances. Breaking traditions that have worked for all of human history in the absence of data is just a bad idea.

2020/02/12 10:11:28 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew Well, I'll agree on a lot of this. In the USA universities are doing everything but being universities, have their list of classes inflated by assignements that have nothing to do with the skills and knowledge required for the stuff a student will do with the diploma for the sake of padding and charging for more college time (causing weird situations like how a basic engineering degree gotten in countries like argentina that have no padding at all is equivalent to a postgrade or masters degree at a yankee university, despite taking about the same time to complete, since about two years of classes at yankee ones are just filler)
The issue with class overpopulation and poor conditions for teachers is of severe gravity, and isn't tackled at all by either private or public education, and both problems are tightly related. The optimal size of a class is about 16 students per teacher, something you'll almost never see in practice because it is too expensive when nothing stops you from cramming >30 people in a class (t. actual teacher)
There's also the whole thing with universities taking poitical positions instead of just focusing on teaching students, which means a lot of good teachers get fired or harassed for ideological differences, and students just drop out as they can't stand it.

I think there's a place for college sports, and a very long tradition endorsing them, but yeah it needs to start being more about enjoyment of physical activity and genuine, friendly competition between students like they were at the beginning, and less about exploiting the league for generating huge amounts of money and publicity. Sports in general should become a bit more amateur again to both improve conditions for athletes and reduce profiteering and abuse related to sports.

2020/02/12 10:13:59 PM UTC

@nerthos @mewmew 👍
re: optimal size of class, I'd say 16 students per teacher is the hard limit, ideally you want closer to 8ish, imo
let's have a chat in more detail sometimes (when I'm not feeling like absolute crap), eh? ^^
if you wanna reach me I'm on irc and discord (ask for either in DMs)

2020/02/12 10:16:44 PM UTC

@nerthos @toast @mewmew There's a fantastic first-hand source on this by a guy who ran a blog for a few years and sadly he stopped sometime in the past month because he got cancer and has less than a year to live. I'll link it here for posterity:

http://professorconfess.blogspot.com

tl;dr it's all due a combination of corruption, self-sustaining bureaucracy, free secure student loans, "inclusionism", and the universal boomer meme demanding EVERYONE go to university even if they're as dumb as a rock

2020/02/12 10:17:36 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew I mean yeah, ideally people wouldn't be charged ridiculous amounts of money for education. Some careers have really big costs to them and little payback to society though, so private education and scholarships do have a place. Some branches of art for example, that require expensive equipment and materials like marble that can't be recycled.

The problem is also exacerbated by the belief that a college degree is a must to get basic employment, when it shouldn't be. University should be completely optional, but careers that give a direct benefit to society like medicine and engineering should be at least partially tax-funded as even in economic terms, getting talented people to go into those careers and not be kept out due to lacking money is a net positive. And not being treated like a necessity, people that have no real interest or talent for it just wouldn't sign up, so there's not a lot of wasted money in it.

2020/02/12 10:20:54 PM UTC

@toast @mewmew It depends a lot on assignment, and ideally you'll have a class assistant (usually a very talented student or someone doing an internship) to divide the load, so yeah about 8 students per "leading figure"

But ye let's talk about it again I never open IRC so add me on discord (Nerthos#7093)

2020/02/12 11:17:21 PM UTC

@mewmew Don't we like have some kind of way to measure how good an athlete is and put them in classes? So an athlete would gradually rise and always have challengers within the bracket they can actually fairly compete with.
I guess it would make a lot of the steroids and stuff pointless though.

2020/02/15 8:42:15 PM UTC

@mewmew can we just test a little to make sure. Like give T to some females and see if they can be competitive with males :comfythink:

2020/02/15 8:47:44 PM UTC

@toast @nerthos @mewmew

Well, collecting games is directly related to hygiene and health, but perhaps not in the same way.

2020/02/15 8:52:04 PM UTC

@kazuma @shebang @mewmew

And you will have people dangerously modulating those levels the same way that weight class is abused to the point of detriment.

2020/02/15 8:56:09 PM UTC

@daughter @mewmew @shebang

just get fat its not that hard unless you have a hyper-metabolism

alternative, modern sports is bullshit

2020/02/15 8:56:46 PM UTC

@daughter @kazuma @mewmew That seems likely, yes, and playing around with hormone levels is often dangerous. They are powerful things, and the current thought on them seems to be that they can just be played with without repercussions, or the changes can be reversed, etc. In particular changes hormones can be really hard on the heart.

2020/02/15 8:57:30 PM UTC

@kazuma @mewmew @shebang

That seems to be the mood in the thread, but I'm betting that's mostly envy from the physically inadequate speaking.

Heaven forbid the body was the focus of any attention or admiration, it slights the mind.

2020/02/15 8:58:23 PM UTC

@shebang @kazuma @mewmew

So we can look forward to some bright, if short, sports careers.