matt mitrione suspended for "breach of conduct"

I am really glad this thread is here. I have known two men who have undergone a gender transformation and one of them is headed toward gender reassignment. I also know someone who went all the way through with it and now lives as a woman in a womans body. She was a fireman before and is now a firewoman and she found herself faced with a lot of these same issues. When a person is making a change of their gender, they undergo intense hormonal therapy for a long time. Over the span of a bout a year to a year and a half, no matter how manly they were at the start, their physiology does change drastically. I do not believe Fox should have to disclosed anything to her trainers as she is no longer transgender, but female. Gender reassignment is more than just chopping off a persons cock and balls. As a woman who has been in a few fights, I can honestly say that I would have no problem fighting Fox. I would feel that we both have an equal advantage and I may possibly have an edge over her in that I have had my whole life to get used to utilizing the hormonal level I experience. She's only had a fraction of that time to get used to a whole different set of feelings, emotions, and hormones. It seems to me, that the biggest and saddest issue here whether we are talking about Joe Rogan or Matt Mitrione, or anyone else, is that there is a lack of knowledge out there about the physiological, mental, biological, and emotional changes that occur here.

Well, my stance from the get-go has been that I don't approve of the lyling Fox engaged in. I have no problem with anyone changing gender; you only live once, and if you want to change who you are, go right ahead. My problem is with Fallon Fox the person. Whether Fox was a man or is a woman, I have some serious character questions, because that person intentionally lied to the commissions in order to get licensed to fight women. I have to believe that Fox at least partially had the thought of gaining an unfair advantage, and that was a big reason to lie about being transgender.

i absolutely agree with brandi. i have a friend that is a transgender man to woman and i do not look at her as a man or get a feeling of masculinity.
there is a lack of knowledge among general population about transgender people. to call one just a dude without balls is an insult to everything they represent and risked in their life.

trigger, your statement assumes that Fox believes in the advantage of being a transgender.
are you sure she think she has one?

if she doesnt, then she has no need to declare anything.

Triggerman, I see your point and would agree if she actually were transgender at this point. After the gender reassignment surgery though, she is in all respects a woman. So the question I would pose is more this : Is it really dishonest for her to have kept her reassignment a secret?

I say no because being that she now posseses the anatomy and physiology of a woman, how she became that way is irrelevant.

I do not think Fox was showing a lack of character. Gina Carrano doesnt have to let people know that shes a female every time she has a fight. Neither should Fox. They both have the same equipment and hormonal levels. Save a functioning uterus, but those things are over rated anyway.

My point is that it is against the rules, not that it is a question of morality.
The rules state that Fox was supposed to declare being transgender, and knowingly did not.

That is my point about the need to declare being transgender, not because I personally feel one way or the other.

If the rules state that one has to state that they are transgender, then I would support that. Would you say that she still qualifies as transgender after having had the surgery?

im not sure the rules state that she has to declare is she is trans. and, yes, brandi, she is trans. i think all transgenders look at them-self as transgender because its a major part of their history and life decisions.
if the rules state so, i do not believe fox lied and believed that nobody would ever find out. that would be stupid. impossible to hide such a thing.
it is possible that she did all of this for pr or to start this conversation.

brandiluvswandi wrote:

If the rules state that one has to state that they are transgender, then I would support that. Would you say that she still qualifies as transgender after having had the surgery?

Yeah, that's my only point here. I'm not here to get on my high-horse and preach about what I feel is morally right and wrong. I'm just saying there was some intentional rule-breaking going on here. That's all.

And Commie, I'm not really sure what you're logic is when it comes to "lying". Fox lied in the plainest sense of the word. Whatever reasoning there was for that doesn't really matter. A liar demonstrates that they have questionable character, whether they are black, white, gay, trans, or whatever. Fox can be a transgender while also being a bad person, and that's what it looks like to me at this point. I'm sure the transgender people you and Brandi know are great people, but that doesn't mean Fox is just Because Fox is also transgender.

As far as what Fox qualifies as, that's a discussion that I admittedly don't have the ammo to participate in. I just don't know enough about the procedures and classifications to have an intelligent discussion about it, so I would feel stupid even trying.

Here are two professional's views on the subject...

Quote :

Dr. Marci Bowers, who has performed hundreds of sex reassignment surgeries told our sister site Bloody Elbow that Fox wouldn't have much of a physical advantage, nothing beyond the normal variations in body type that exists among biological females. "Most measures of physical strength minimize, muscle mass decreases, bone density decreases, and they become fairly comparable to women in their musculature. After as much time as has passed in her case, if tested, she would probably end up in the same muscle mass category as her biologically born female counterpart."

Quote :

But not all doctors agree with her. Dr. Ramona Krtuzick, an endocrinologist well versed in the finer points of hormone therapies, says that because Fox started her treatment so late in life, it's unlikely her skeleton and musculature would change significantly. As Krutzick told Bloody Elbow:

Typically, you're looking at about 15 years after androgen suppression and sexual reassignment surgery to really start to see significant changes in bone density. It's been too early for her to see much of a decrease in bone mass or to make her equal to that of a female. She started off with a much higher bone density than other women her same age, and therefore will maintain a lot of that for a while. Additionally, because she is taking estrogen, that will actually help to maintain that bone mass. Women also have lighter, child bearing hips because of the difference in hormones during the body's developmental years. Her skeleton and body mass and shape developed a long time ago. Those changes cannot be undone. They are permanent.

Her testosterone levels are more than likely in the normal female range, since her adrenals are the primary source for it now. She didn't undergo hormone therapy and surgery until she was fully developed, as compared to someone who completes therapy and surgery in their adolescence or very early adulthood, when they haven't completely developed. She has the potential to be significantly stronger because her muscle development reached several years beyond full maturity, giving her the potential to be significantly stronger than other age matched women.There's not really a way to determine how much her muscle mass will decrease over time. What can be said is that she has a naturally higher propensity to build and maintain muscle mass because she was once a fully developed, adult male. You can't ever take that away from her.

source

i do not mean to say that trans people are all decent people. wht i am saying id that it seems to me that she lied to the commission fully knowing that there is no way she would ever get away with it for any extended period of time. assuming that to be true, i presume she did it to stir controversy, raise the transgender question in sports and maybe, promote herself, but it seems implausible that she did it to gain fighting advantage.
if all of this is right, then she is not a liar and a cheater but probably somebody that is trying to raise awareness. if she declared her nature beforehand, i dont think anybody would be talking and arguing about this and maybe learning something about the issue, it would be swept under the rug.
but really, who the fuck knows, she might be the cunt that everybody assumes her to be.

Whether to stir controversy, bring awareness or just for the fuck of it... doesn't really matter. A lie is a lie, no matter what "justification" may be attached to it.

Quote :

it seems to me that she lied to the commission fully knowing that there is no way she would ever get away with it for any extended period of time.

Her first fight was 06/10/2011... that was 3 ammy and 2 pro fights ago... a fairly nice chunk of time if you ask me.

Your taking a lot of liberties with Fox's presumed intent there, Commie old boy.

The only thing we know for sure, %100 to be true, is that Fox outright, knowingly lied to the commission. There's no way around that. Whether you want to paint Fox out to be a martyr or an activist or whatever, Fox is still a liar. Nothing can change that.

really?
a lie is not a lie.
there are a lot of different reasons to lie, even noble ones. you as a intelligent guy should know that.
and the number of fights before shit hit the fan is not the point. my point is that her nature is not something she was hiding on daily basis, or everybody was unaware of. for her to think that she can build a career out of lying about her sex change would be stupid.
she could be that stupid, but its improbable

Triggerman99 wrote:

Your taking a lot of liberties with Fox's presumed intent there, Commie old boy.

The only thing we know for sure, %100 to be true, is that Fox outright, knowingly lied to the commission. There's no way around that. Whether you want to paint Fox out to be a martyr or an activist or whatever, Fox is still a liar. Nothing can change that.

yes, i agree fully.
but applying logic never hurt, and branding somebody without knowing reasons is dangerous

Exactly, and that's what you are doing....just as much- if not more- than I am.
You're assuming that Fox had noble reasons for telling such a huge lie, while I am simply saying that Fox lied. My stance has definite proof, while yours does not.
That's all I'm saying. Putting all speculation about intention aside, Fox is a liar.

the commie wrote:

really?
a lie is not a lie.
there are a lot of different reasons to lie, even noble ones. you as a intelligent guy should know that.

Is a lie truly noble if it's intent is to lead others to believe something that is untrue?

Quote :

her nature is not something she was hiding on daily basis, or everybody was unaware of.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding your statement here. But, essentially everyone was unaware of it... if they weren't, there would have been no need for Fallon to "come out".

For fucks sake, we're losing the issue here. Combat sports are full of lying scumbags, that's just how it works. We could sit here all day and name off people who have had title belts around there waists who have been liars and cheaters and everything else we deem socially unacceptable. Liars are allowed to compete.

The issue is whether or not having once been a man gives you an advantage in a competitive sport like this. The unequivocal answer is yes. There are not so subtle differences on a chromosomal and genetic level that occur and are unchangeable. Bone density and musculature are the obvious ones. But even smaller things are important as well, like the depth of the "socket" in "ball and socket" joints i.e. your shoulder and hip. Those sockets are deeper in men. This makes the joint much more capable of sustaining leverage whether applied to the joint or incorporating the joint in applying leverage to someone or something else. In a sport where submissions are in play, I'm sure we can all realize the advantage there. That is not something that goes away because you have been on a hormone treatment plan for 18mo. That is permanent.

I don't know Fallon Fox so I can't really comment on Fox possibly being a lying liar who lies. That's not even the issue. The issue is whether or not she now has an advantage over naturally born women. If a doctor went over her physique with a fine toothed comb I don't think it'd take him or her very long to discover advantageous traits when compared to Miesha Tate, none of them having to do with being truthful to the commission. Now, if there was a question on the license application that said "Were you born a man?" and she said "No", that is lying. I think that question needs to be on all fight license applications from here on out for obvious reasons.

Maybe she knew she had an advantage, maybe she didn't. I don't think what she knew even matters. What matters is that she was born a man, and because of that she's now more capable of destroying women in a combat sport environment. That is an unfair advantage and can't be allowed.

But DEP... what about what Dr. Bowers says...................

Quote :

Dr. Marci Bowers, who has performed hundreds of sex reassignment surgeries told our sister site Bloody Elbow that Fox wouldn't have much of a physical advantage, nothing beyond the normal variations in body type that exists among biological females. "Most measures of physical strength minimize, muscle mass decreases, bone density decreases, and they become fairly comparable to women in their musculature. After as much time as has passed in her case, if tested, she would probably end up in the same muscle mass category as her biologically born female counterpart."

Chrom wrote:

But DEP... what about what Dr. Bowers says...................

Quote :

Dr. Marci Bowers, who has performed hundreds of sex reassignment surgeries told our sister site Bloody Elbow that Fox wouldn't have much of a physical advantage, nothing beyond the normal variations in body type that exists among biological females. "Most measures of physical strength minimize, muscle mass decreases, bone density decreases, and they become fairly comparable to women in their musculature. After as much time as has passed in her case, if tested, she would probably end up in the same muscle mass category as her biologically born female counterpart."

That whole thing is flawed. Read it carefully and look at how suggestive it is.

"wouldn't have much of a physical advantage". Admitting that there would still be an advantage.

"Most measures of physical strength minimize". Not all of them.

"nothing beyond the normal variations in body type that exist among biological females". We're talking about a biological male, not a female. You can't judge "her" on a scale of females. He may become physically weaker than an average male while still blowing out the females.

"they become fairly comparable to women in their musculature". Fairly comparable. My Toyota 4runner is "fairly comparable" to a Porsche GT3 because it has 4 wheels and a gas tank.

I'll add that it would likely be bad for business if Dr. Bowers said anything to the contrary of that.
I mean... you have 2 doctor's professional opinions on the matter that I posted. It just so happens that one of said professionals benefits from saying these things.

Statement of the Stockholm consensus on sex reassignment in sports

On 28 October 2003, an ad-hoc committee convened by the IOC Medical Commission met in Stockholm to discuss and issue recommendations on the participation of individuals who have undergone sex reassignment (male to female and converse) in sport.

This group was composed of:

Prof. Arne Ljungqvist (SWE)
Prof. Odile Cohen-Haguenauer (FRA)
Prof. Myron Genel (USA)
Prof. Joe Leigh Simpson (USA)
Prof. Martin Ritzen (SWE)
Prof. Marc Fellous (FRA)
Dr Patrick Schamasch (FRA)

The group confirms the previous recommendation that any "individuals undergoing sex reassignment of male to female before puberty should be regarded as girls and women" (female). This applies as well for female to male reassignment, who should be regarded as boys and men (male).

The group recommends that individuals undergoing sex reassignment from male to female after puberty (and the converse) be eligible for participation in female or male competitions, respectively, under the following conditions:


Surgical anatomical changes have been completed, including external genitalia changes and gonadectomy
Legal recognition of their assigned sex has been conferred by the appropriate official authorities
Hormonal therapy appropriate for the assigned sex has been administered in a verifiable manner and for a sufficient length of time to minimise gender-related advantages in sport competitions.

In the opinion of the group, eligibility should begin no sooner than two years after gonadectomy.

It is understood that a confidential case-by-case evaluation will occur.

In the event that the gender of a competing athlete is questioned, the medical delegate (or equivalent) of the relevant sporting body shall have the authority to take all appropriate measures for the determination of the gender of a competitor.

If its good enough for the Olympics its good enough for the UFC.

Let her fight.... (bring back Cyborg)

Bullshit.

There are irreversible physical differences between men and women that make a man more physically capable and better suited for combat. These differences need to be addressed. However, since they're irreversible they CAN'T be addressed and therefore combine to provide the transgender athlete with an unfair advantage. That's the long and short of it. Enough with the feel good PC bullshit. Call a spade a spade and nothing else.

The IOC voted to get rid of wrestling... I don't think I need to say more....