The one on the left has their arm in flexion, making their bicep contract, making it shorter and rise up like that. The one on the right has their arm in extension and therefore the bicep is longer and less exposed. We also know nothing about hydration, and all sorts of other things that would make the perceived size of their muscles different.

TL;DR your argument seemed disingenuous or misinformed. I am guessing that is the reason for down votes.

[–] logi@lemmy.world 10 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I don't actually see an argument anywhere? Just an observation, so the downvote confuse me. Is everyone on a hair trigger because of all that manufactured controversy?

She's also got tan lines that would make a cyclist proud while blonde needs to get out more.

[–] Chocrates@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Fair. It is so easy to misunderstand and assume things in text from, and in English in general.

The person I was replying to "could" have been dog whistling as well. Probably that was the thought in my head. I need to get off the fucking Internet.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I'm not dog whistling. Red looks a lot stronger to me, with clearly bigger muscles, arms in flexion or not.

Red's opponents have said "I've never been hit so hard", as reported in the media.

There is clearly something going on here. I am saying that.

But what I'm not saying a word of is whether or not I think this person should be able to compete against women. That is not for me to decide. I also actually don't have an opinion on the matter. That's the doggone truth. 🤷‍♂️

[–] Whattrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

You're not dog whistling, you're just certain that something fishy is going on when one athlete is bigger and stronger than another. You clearly are trying to imply something, why not just woman-up and say it?

The people whose job it is to decide already did and she qualified. What more is there to do, unless you think they need to look at it again because they got it wrong?

Yes, you totally have no opinion on it whatsoever which is why you vague-posted a "just asking questions" type comment on here.

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

You clearly are trying to imply something

I'm not trying to imply anything, no. Everything I wanted to express, I already have, in words, in these comments. Nothing to hide.

why not just woman-up and say it?

lol

The people whose job it is to decide already did and she qualified. What more is there to do, unless you think they need to look at it again because they got it wrong?

I'm not saying they got it wrong. This is a very ethically tricky question with a large gray area, considering the large protests and anger sent in both directions.

It's very difficult to be morally/ethically objective in this matter because we don't know exactly all the details of what it means, physiologically, to be trans, or non-binary, or whatever else. And especially when someone who might have a chromosome anomaly enters the picture, the gray zone expands. "Fairness" is extremely tricky now because of how we set up the binary-separate competitions of men and women, now that we finally know that gender can be very fluid.

Yes, you totally have no opinion on it whatsoever which is why you vague-posted a "just asking questions" type comment on here.

You are confusing "observation" and "opinion". I have made an observation, that the boxers facing this person as opponents are themselves reacting to the unusual build and strength of this person, and I am also reacting to and observing the visual difference that I can readily see.

But I have no opinion on whether or not they should be able to compete against women, because I have next to no knowledge whatsoever on trans or non-binary physiology/psychology, or for other such LGBTQ+ people. It wouldn't make sense to try to form an opinion based on nothing at all.

The only opinions that I have on this is that 1) respect comes above all, and that 2) sports should be played on equal terms. 🤷‍♂️ Whether or not (2) is achievable in this case, I have no idea. Maybe, maybe not. We probably will never know. At least not in our lifetime.

"just asking questions" type comment

I'm not asking any questions either, because I'm not really actually interested in boxing, nor in trying to actually figure out whether or not this person should be able to compete. That would be a huge undertaking, requiring lots of resources, if it's even possible at all.

Thank you for joining in the discussion. I hope my stance is clearer now. 🤝

[–] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

They're in the same weight class. Do you want shoulder-width classes as well? Does that fit your snowflake sensibilities?

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Uh... Why are you calling my sensibilities "snowflake"?

I get that they're in the same weight class, otherwise they wouldn't be competing.

No I don't want "shoulder classes", what kind of suggestion is that? Do you think I'm making some kind of complaint here? I'm just saying that Red's shoulders are much stronger than Blue's. Relax.

[–] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world -1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Mike Tyson looked a lot stronger than his opponents. Should he get to compete?

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 7 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Are you implying that I'm saying one of these women shouldn't get to compete?

[–] BleatingZombie@lemmy.world 5 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Hey, I wanted to apologize. I disagree with what you were saying, but that doesn't give me an excuse to "straw-man" you to hell and avoid understanding what you're saying. I misunderstood parts of what you were saying and willingly chose to stay ignorant instead of re-reading

I'm sorry

[–] victorz@lemmy.world 2 points 3 months ago

We all make mistakes sometimes. No harm done. 🤝 Thank you.