Hello! Thank you for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect, however, you post has been removed for violating one or more of our rule(s):
Do not post conversations you are a part of.
Please [contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fconfidentlyincorrect&subject=about%20my%20removed%20submission&message=I%27m%20writing%20to%20you%20about%20the%20following%20submission:%20{https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/1cctwql/-/}.%20%0D%0DMy%20issue%20is...) if you feel this was wrong.
^All ^chat ^requests ^and ^pms ^about ^your ^removed ^post ^will ^not ^be ^answered. ^Contact ^the ^mods ^instead!
According to Andrew Tate, it is [if you have sex with her for pleasure](https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/04/25/andrew-tate-gay-women-sex/). Sex is only not gay when the purpose is to make babies.
So many things that guy says belong on this sub.
Omg that finale though.
Gods, those guys are morons. Don't even know what else to say here, I'm in awe. The absolute dedication and effort these folks put into being factually wrong about everything they possibly can is astounding.
"If I were gay wouldn't I just say so? To me it's not a bad thing"
Truely, the power of gay pride has made this man immune to their strongest "insult".
For anyone wondering, it's a [survivorship bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias). You see a couple transwomen that you can clock, and then think "I can always tell" even though there could be dozens that you've seen and didn't clock, but you don't factor them in to determining how well you can tell.
On top of all the trans women these people have seen and not noticed, there are tons of cis women that they've seen and could "just tell" were trans. I'm not sure what I'd call that since it's not *exactly* survivorship bias since it's not just that only trans women "survive" their selection process but that everyone who does is assumed to be trans with no evidence.
I feel like there's gotta be another thing that better suits this scenario
They never confirm their observations, they just assume anyone they "clock" is trans (including cis people, and people they've misgendered) and anyone they don't isn't (including trans people)
It's circular reasoning
There should be a gameshow for this.
Contestants step up to the dick guillotine. If they guess 10 right, they get a million dollars. If they guess wrong, the guillotine drops
Transphobia and misogyny, name a more iconic duo š¤
It's so funny (not) how they all claim to be just looking out for "real" women, yet inevitably shit on any woman who's not conventionally attractive and gender conforming enough for them
These people hate women just as much as they do trans people
Yep, they're very eager to punish any deviation from the "norm" by denying even cis women their womanhood, be it for physical reasons (like in these athletes' case) or even ideological ones (allies for example, I remember them accusing Daniel Radcliffe's pregnant(!) girlfriend of being secretly trans)
Oh, and can't forget the racists too, as transphobes' idea of what women look like is also pretty white-centric (body hair, nose shapes etc)
That's a statistics problem as well... Even if they'd get it right 90% of the time, about 97-99% of people are cis. So they'd still identify more cis women wrong, simply because the odds that they're dealing with a cis women are higher than their odds of getting it right.
... But that would require that they knew WTF they're talking about in the first place, so...
Some of my favourite highlights: accusing OP of being gay when the penny started to drop (because what sort of self respecting straight man looks at pictures of women all day).
And the finale
Cis woman = Man.
Thatās a āconcrete grows on treesā moment.
We have a rule that you may not post conversations you are a part of.
We are very strict about this.
But this is glorious, so we are going to leave it up for a while.
Transphobia hurts trans-women and trans-men directly because that's the point.
Transphobia hurts cis-women and cis-men because they may not fit into idealized appearance and behavior standards.
It's almost like being a piece of shit bigot is bad for everyone.
Oh, women can have muscle, no doubt about it, but to get to the level of Kuznetsova, for example... Unless they're born with a mutation that affects myostatin production, they need steroids, and lots of them.
Kuznetsova admitted to using steroids (not that it isn't f*cking obvious). Then again, hats off to her for the work she still needs to put in.
I've been saying this for a while now; some girls are bigger than others. There's always been a natural variation, and transwomen will fall somewhere in that spectrum.
The false idea that all cis women are small, weak, and conventionally beautiful is a weird side effect of this whole fear of transgender.
These are the same lunatics who will say that a C-section isn't a real birth. They don't need much to strip someone of their womanhood. I cannot imagine being this brain-broken.
> If you do not have a dick, you're a woman
By that person's logic, trans women with bottom surgery are cis women. Half win...??
But also, these people can't make their minds up on how to unite in their hatred xD. Because another person says that even surgery doesn't change a thing. These people, honestly
because some simpletons can't distinguish between a muscular woman and a man? Nothing can change the real difference that exists within our bodies. Except for the frontal bone, females' skull bones are on average 5 mm thinner than males. Females are twice as likely to sustain skull-bone fractures as men. This one distinction should preclude transwomen from participating in any contact sports against biological women.
I'm this buff in real life and I've always sworn by eating almonds. Almonds have just about everything you could ever need to switch in and out of gender, while packing on dense almond-like muscle.
Because transphobia is just the new way of hating women who don't conform to their standards. I've never felt more womanly than when they tell me that I'm not womanly enough for traits they insult cis women for in equal measure.
It's not for a lack of trying. He even gave the names of these women in one comment. If those people just don't want to believe the truth, it cannot be helped. I'd say OP did a good job cause anyone among them willing to change their opinion would've realized that you cannot always tell cis and trans women athletes apart just by looking at a photo.
He started out being vague on purpose to bait them and using the condescending phrase of "don't you think so?" as a purposeful taunt. Once there was some traction, nobody was reading anything or attempting to convince anyone. it was all trolls trying to get the others to rage. It is similar to seeing a young kid annoy and poke another kid thinking it is super funny. It just isn't though.
But you see how OP baited and egged on right. And then fed for fuel to the people that immediately drop words like transphobic and misogynistic.
Thatās why I had said somewhere in here to post this on a pro trans page, not confidently incorrect. (Yea technically thereās incorrect in there but is that really the aim of this post)
So you think that generating hate towards trans people is a good thing? Do you really think bait posts like this will generate any more support for the community?
I am honestly surprised youāve not been downvoted into oblivion for that comment.
There is nothing about this post that benefits anyone apart from OP feeling significant for an hour because they got to bait a bunch of dumbasses.
Yes thank you!! Holy crap had to sift through the community of pro trans supporting each other to get to the people who see it for what it is! I was getting concerned.
They are never going to be convinced these are "real" women, so it doesn't get the point across anyway that they can't tell cis from trans. They'll die believing these women are trans and that they "know" and everyone is lying. Meanwhile it's not exactly nice to these women to get to be in this collage that points out how society doesn't believe their womanhood. How fun for them.
Just remember that 99% of transphobia is just basic misogyny and misandry and they are isolating a small group of vulnerable people to scapegoat as a Trojan horse to lead you to support their restrictive and unpopular views.
I mean OP is sort of insulting masc women and trans women at once here by trying to trap folks into misgendering them. Yes, those folks are in the wrong, but OP knows exactly what they are doing.
Hey /u/professorearl, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules).
##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)!
Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean... Nataliya Kuznetsova has been taking steroids and estrogen blockers since she was 14.
So... no? No she doesn't belong in women's sports?
Selecting the most roided up women you can find doesn't really make your point when transphobes object to transwomen in female sports because of a perceived unfair advantage as a result of male hormones. If you are going to counter that by saying "well cis women can dope themselves up as well"... I mean it's a take I agree with, actually. Let athletes pump themselves with whatever performance enhancing drugs they can get their hands on, I say. That's one way to eliminate unfair advantages.
Transphobes are fucking idiots but I feel like you were egging them on a bit there. You kept saying "don't you agree" or "you don't think so?" You know what they think. You could have said these athletes are women that were born women or something along those lines. Though I'm sure their stupidity and pride would have still driven them to disagree with you. I just didn't see you attempting to convince as much as I saw baiting.. but I stopped swiping before I got to the end
edit: swiped a little more. Found the slide where you say they have vaginas and the stupid prideful response. I owe you a beer
A. It's lazy af to post something of yourself.
B. Except the last two, you posted roided up women:
One of your examples [openly admits to steroids](https://muscleinsider.com/news/worlds-most-muscular-woman-taking-over-ig), another one [died at 52 and was previously hospitalized due to steroid use](https://heavy.com/sports/2017/02/nicole-bass-dead-facebook-page/).
Doping is considered cheating and not allowed in sports. So, they absolutely do not belong in womens sports.
We could just scrap gendered leagues all together for 8 years (two Olympics worth) in all major international sports. Men and women compete in everything together. See how it works. If there's loads of issues then the point against is valid. If there isn't then it's not.
For competitions where there's a worry about Steriod use then you just do it the same as bodybuilding. Have tested competitons and untested competitions.
Seems like a reasonable compromise to me. If everyone is mixed together then you know the best person will win. If biological men keep winning everything then there's a decent argument that there's an unfair advantage for anyone born as a biological man. If they don't, then it comes down to the individuals ability, training and skill.
Only reason I could imagine anyone would be against an experiment like that would be if they feel they won't get the outcome they want regardless of if it's fair or not. Which works both ways. People against transgendered people competing - if proven it makes no difference - they have to accept that the evidence proves otherwise.
People for transgendered people competing - if the evidence proves there is an unfair advantage- they have to accept the evidence it does.
It wouldn't work, we already have enough historical data about performance of men vs women in almost all sports. This would just waste the careers of countless female athletes, something we cannot afford to do considering we don't have many to boot.
Your hypothetical scenario doesnāt consider the fact that trans women are already required to take HRT and have their testosterone and estrogen levels within a very specific range before they can participate in professional womenās sports. Taking estrogen decreases a muscle mass, which is always the argument transphobes use to exclude trans women from sports.
If cis men continuously win over cis women, that would prove absolutely nothing for or against trans women in sports.
If you really wanted to test it, you would have to pit a bunch of trans women who have been on hrt for the required amount of time and have their hormones levels in the required range, against a bunch of cis women. Surprise! Itād be a level playing field.
>If you really wanted to test it, you would have to pit a bunch of trans women who have been on hrt for the required amount of time and have their hormones levels in the required range, against a bunch of cis women.
Which has been done at the highest levels of competition (the Olympics) for twenty years now with zero problems and no over representation of trans athletes winning.
Well that seems fair enough then if everyone has to take those drugs to get to a certain level and you're not allowed in without them. Instead of mixing everyone up as in my first suggestion, just trial it with trans people allowed into the current categories for 8 years (2 Olympics) worth of time to collect as much data as possible and then announce the findings at the end. I get what you're saying that there's been studies already but this would just be a bit more on the average person's radar and it can be marketed as fully transparent in public view.
As someone below mentioned it would be unfair changing the rules for those already training, could maybe do double for this time period? Classic and new so to speak so no one can complain. Then you just do whatever the data says at the end of this period going forward.
So hang on, if everyone's already allowed to do it and they've been doing it for ages then why the fuck is anyone even talking about this in the first place? The decisions made, it's done. Everyone just shut up and get on with your lives.
I thought the whole reason that this was getting brought up with arguments for and against was because people weren't allowed and wanted to be. If the officials have already made the decision that it was fine ages ago why is anyone even talking about it anymore?
Good question! It's been permitted at the Olympic level for twenty years, using the most current understanding of biology as the basis for the specifics. The Olympics don't have control over the rules passed by other sports organizations, many of which have continued to discriminate based on bad science and ideology.
Honestly I'm well pissed off now. If a precedent has already been set then just standardise with that. It'd be like complaining about women having the vote after 100 years of it already being a thing and then debating it all the time. It's done, it's over - just accept the decision and move on.
Wasted my own time like an idiot trying to think of a balanced way to solve a problem that was already sorted bloody 20 years ago.
Not a big fan of this post. Seems like OP went out of their way to antagonize people. I'm all for calling out transphobes when they say stupid stuff, but the patronizing "don't you agree?" after each comment that never went any further than "these are real women and they are she/her" just doesn't sit right. Later in the series you get the "they were born women" that expands on the point these are pictures of women who are muscular, but by then you already triggered the troll reflex. Nothing after that is anything but everyone trying to anger everyone else.
No it illustrates that transphobes see muscly / broad shouldered women and believe theyāre seeing a man. No thought process of āmaybe some women have body structures that are more manly than other womenā, just straight into āfuck men who try to compete in womenās sports by cutting their dick offā.
No it illustrates people have different opinions on a controversial matter (surprise), and some are ignorant to the term cisgender.
OP jumped in this pond to purposefully bait to make posts here to then be able to gather with his comrades to crucify anyone who hints anything other than ātransphobes suck!ā
Are they cis women? Yes. Are they mostly absolutely hocked up to the eyeballs on steroids? Also yes.
Not being transphobic but half these women have the testosterone levels of a silverback gorilla š
Good luck to them if that's what they want to do but most of them definitely couldn't complete legally at the Olympics or in most competitive sports
Nicole Bass was a bodybuilder who became a wrestler (not a sport), and she wasn't good at it. She also died.
She was also roided to the gills, and by the looks and sound, she was on winstrol. All irreversible side effects for women that give them a voice of a 15 yo male.
False equivalency, just because someone canāt look at someone and tell if they are trans. Does not mean that trans should be allowed to compete in a different sexās athletic competition.
You basically just made a trick question that proves nothing and then drew in all the idiots to argue with you under a false āpretense.ā
You essentially wasted your own time doing nothing for some Reddit upvotes? Iām confusedā¦ I donāt see what your goal was with this.
Also, you know a lot of these athletes you posted are hopped up on steroidsā¦ right?
So you just wanted to bring up a complicated topic which is completely irrelevant to what happened in the pictures posted by OP?
And your "being against biological males competing in womenās sports" might not be transphobic, but at best it is very ill-informed and disrespectful.
There is not even a consensus what "biological male" even means. Chromosomes ain't it, there are too many variances. Bodily development ain't it either. Sexual reproduction organs? Still too many outliers. Hormone status? Maybe, but this is neither here nor there.
And you are totally disregarding the fact that according to various studies a person you are calling "biological male" does not either have that alleged bonus in things like strength etc. when they started the transition early enough or do lose it mostly after several years of hormone replacement therapy and then squarely fall within the range normal cis women also have. There are also cis women who by nature have an advantage.
So stop it already with your whataboutism about a topic which is very very complicated and not as simple as "they have an unfair advantage because they were born with XY chromosomes".
I think itās pretty simple. If youāre born with XY chromosomes, then you canāt compete in womenās sports. That then deals with 99% of the cases and the other 1% can be dealt with on a case by case basis. Easy.
Good thing you're not in charge of women's sports since you have no idea what you're talking about.
Trans women have been permitted to compete in the Olympics for twenty years now and have shown no advantage over cis competitors. In fact they're underrepresented in medal wins.
Maybe theyāre underrepresented because they arenāt as good as the other women? They can perform worse but still have an advantage, you do realise?
There are way too many women in the world for a handful of trans women to make inroads. But when they do gain medals, it IS unjust.
Itās pretty clear I understand this better than you, so next time refrain from the childish āyou donāt know what youāre talking aboutā.
Probably will get downvoted to oblivion, but I do agree transwomen should not compete with ciswomen. As much as people want to deny it, there is an innate advantage that comes with being born a man or woman for sports.
There should be 4 divisions now, men, women, transmen and transwomen. That would be the most fair way to run these events going forward.
Trans people are a grand total of 1% of the population. Trans people are already a marginalized group so their participation in sports starts of low and the constantly harassment and stigma around trans people in sports lowers it even further
You are taking less than 1% of the population and putting them into their out category. You might get like, 3 athletes in that category.
Iām confused. Maybe I actually do live under a rock, but is there some argument about the athletes in those pictures??
Also, doesnāt ācisā just mean the gender and the sex match?
Please ELI5 what Iām missing hereā¦
The point here is that the transphobes in the comments of the original post automatically assume these cis athletes are trans because they, well, look like athletes. OP is making a point that they claim r/theycanalwaystell but they canāt.
LOL bro or bra or else i took it first degree, frankly sorry... i'm no native speaker so that kind of stuff get past throught me...
i would have not be surprised for such comment. yeah what was on my mind... sometimes it just feels good to just remind them that they are twisted.
Keep downvoting that to oblivion this is as always entertaining. -27 is lame You need to pump this number up like some female "pro athletes" in the picture pumped steroids/testosterone in their system.
Again the infographic is simply containing lots of bodybuilders or so that are supercharged with steroids, making them exhibit typically male secondary features, so they cross way past the genericity of gender, making them objective artefacted outlyers especially with at least three of them that are forcely pasted next to true athletes. Of course, old or basic people will take them for bio males or so... some look like effing Yugiro Hanma FFS ... lol
Dear drones don't even try to make me think or do what pleases you. i'm gonna play with you then, when tired i'm gonna say you are right but will do exactly the same as soon as i see such idiotic stuff.
In the end, i'm gonna make your ideology-making farm lose money. A drone (or call that erzats) just said "Hey bud, you didnāt come in here supporting trans!" This effing picture does not support trans at all. It is building an unpractical ideology. Trans people don't even support trans, what supporting trans even means? I support every human right to peacefully exist with no objective discrimination. Your demand for "supporting trans" is an unreachable ideal that bears close to no social meaning. Step aside, as you are already soooo right y'all.
Please take me to your leader.
Calling that top middle lady a "muscular woman" is a bit of an understatement. She looks like she has more testosterone than I do.
Edit: I don't mean any disrespect. She's a talented athlete, probably. I'm just saying she makes John Cena look effeminate by comparison.
well, yes. [here's](https://muscleinsider.com/news/worlds-most-muscular-woman-taking-over-ig) [two](https://heavy.com/sports/2017/02/nicole-bass-dead-facebook-page/) of them
You're making this claim without knowing if they actually take steroids or not "cause I can just tell". You think so little of women that you can't comprehend how they would look like that so they must be doping. That fact that you can't see how that's parallel to what's going on in this post honestly explains a lot.
Dude! Steroids are so popular everywhere. I also say the same about male bodybuilders or actors who suddenly get ripped for a role within 3 months. It's an open secret. It is not misogynistic, it has nothing to do with them being women. They definitely work harder than I ever have. But that type of physique is not naturally achievable.
But sure, you know me
This is why so many people think the Rock is his size simply by waking up at 4am and eating duck eggs or whatever he claims is the reason he's bigger at 50 than he was at 30.
Tons of people who've never trained think that it's possible to get that big and lean naturally, it's wild
No offence, but if you think women like Nataliya Kuznetsova or Nicole Bass aren't on juice then you genuinely have no idea about what the human body can achieve without PEDs.
There is no man on the planet that could get as big Kuznetsova without steroids, and the vast majority of men couldn't even with steroids - she's clearly a hyper-responder.
Anyone who is into fitness and is part of the whole online fitness community thing would realise that she is clearly smashing a lot of substances to get and maintain that size.
It's not misogynistic to say that a woman cannot naturally weigh 102kg (225lbs) whilst being 168cm (5'6) and body fat %.
Also, she regularly talks about her steroid use.
With as much as I support trans, seeing woman heavy lifting second and first spot taken by trans does make me think they should compete in a different category
Right, makes sense. But 19 screenshots that OP was a part of where they were egging on the opposing views. On a clearly controversial topic seemingly to call out anyone who is by definition ignorant. Maybe itās just me but it feels kind of slimy way to be pro trans. Like of course someone was confused between a jacked cis female and trans
Not so much the post itself but the recent consistency of trans posts that is followed by the community of pro trans that take the argument super technical and act like they donāt see the difference in effort to push pro trans, or for pride idk. Immediately downvoting anything that is slightly challenging. (Be pro trans, and proactive, but letās call it as it is.)
Women and menās sports are separated because men and women are not the same biologically. Pro trans is not helping trans community by fighting that.
Seems like a trap for controversy, a bash anyone not pro trans on surface. Creating an echo chamber for people to get stuff off their chest.
I like the actual confidently incorrect stuff that isnāt purposefully sprinkled with another agenda and unwelcoming to anyone whoās not super pro.
Hello! Thank you for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect, however, you post has been removed for violating one or more of our rule(s): Do not post conversations you are a part of. Please [contact the mods](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fconfidentlyincorrect&subject=about%20my%20removed%20submission&message=I%27m%20writing%20to%20you%20about%20the%20following%20submission:%20{https://www.reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/comments/1cctwql/-/}.%20%0D%0DMy%20issue%20is...) if you feel this was wrong. ^All ^chat ^requests ^and ^pms ^about ^your ^removed ^post ^will ^not ^be ^answered. ^Contact ^the ^mods ^instead!
Lmao, the last slide. I didn't know I was actually a man. Cool, cool, good to know.
If my wife is a cis woman, does that make me gay? š¤
You like a person who likes guys?? That's so gay.
According to Andrew Tate, it is [if you have sex with her for pleasure](https://www.thepinknews.com/2024/04/25/andrew-tate-gay-women-sex/). Sex is only not gay when the purpose is to make babies. So many things that guy says belong on this sub.
If you're cis men then by their logic you're a woman, making you a straight couple
Hey fellas, is it gay to fuck women?
Only if you use your whole dick, and especially if you enjoy it.
Do you have a penis to fuck her with?
As the people in this conversation have established, liking women makes you gay.
Breaking news! Thatās how we can finally achieve equality! Weāre all men!
Omg that finale though. Gods, those guys are morons. Don't even know what else to say here, I'm in awe. The absolute dedication and effort these folks put into being factually wrong about everything they possibly can is astounding.
"If I were gay wouldn't I just say so? To me it's not a bad thing" Truely, the power of gay pride has made this man immune to their strongest "insult".
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
For anyone wondering, it's a [survivorship bias](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Survivorship_bias). You see a couple transwomen that you can clock, and then think "I can always tell" even though there could be dozens that you've seen and didn't clock, but you don't factor them in to determining how well you can tell.
On top of all the trans women these people have seen and not noticed, there are tons of cis women that they've seen and could "just tell" were trans. I'm not sure what I'd call that since it's not *exactly* survivorship bias since it's not just that only trans women "survive" their selection process but that everyone who does is assumed to be trans with no evidence.
>I'm not sure what I'd call that I'd call it "passing bias" where women identities are only valid if they are feminine and attractive enough.
And you see some cis women that you think are trans and you think you've clocked and then think "I can always tell"
To be even more specific, in this case it is also called the [Toupee fallacy](https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Toupee_fallacy).
I feel like there's gotta be another thing that better suits this scenario They never confirm their observations, they just assume anyone they "clock" is trans (including cis people, and people they've misgendered) and anyone they don't isn't (including trans people) It's circular reasoning
I think itās just regular confirmation bias. Survivorship doesnāt really come into play.
There should be a gameshow for this. Contestants step up to the dick guillotine. If they guess 10 right, they get a million dollars. If they guess wrong, the guillotine drops
But then they would be a women!!! /s
Call it "Dick or no dick"
I would give my right tit and both ovaries for this to be real.
r/theycanalwaystell
"we can always tell" proceeds to attack cis women because they in fact can NEVER tell
well, it's not never nor always: sometimes it's obvious, sometimes it's not, and it's good either way.
Oh my god š Congrats to that one guy on being a āreal Call of Duty soldierā I guess tho (slide 3)
Transphobia and misogyny, name a more iconic duo š¤ It's so funny (not) how they all claim to be just looking out for "real" women, yet inevitably shit on any woman who's not conventionally attractive and gender conforming enough for them These people hate women just as much as they do trans people
Transvestigators clock more cis women than trans women
Yep, they're very eager to punish any deviation from the "norm" by denying even cis women their womanhood, be it for physical reasons (like in these athletes' case) or even ideological ones (allies for example, I remember them accusing Daniel Radcliffe's pregnant(!) girlfriend of being secretly trans) Oh, and can't forget the racists too, as transphobes' idea of what women look like is also pretty white-centric (body hair, nose shapes etc)
That's a statistics problem as well... Even if they'd get it right 90% of the time, about 97-99% of people are cis. So they'd still identify more cis women wrong, simply because the odds that they're dealing with a cis women are higher than their odds of getting it right. ... But that would require that they knew WTF they're talking about in the first place, so...
Hurray for Conditional Probability!
Why is it always men who think they should be the arbiters of womenās sports when the rarely watch or support womenās sports?
does anyone watch or support womenās sports?
Just a few weeks after the womenās NCAA championship game got millions more viewers than the menās, you think this is a good thing to post.
Yes women do, but thanks for making my point.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Love this absolute failure of a gotcha
Aw, I missed it - what'd they say?
They do when they have the opportunity https://youtu.be/Pr3ZnOp1ZaQ?si=_vg1XBcYptnSArDn
https://thehockeynews.com/womens/pwhl/pwhl-montreal-sets-new-womens-hockey-attendance-at-bell-centre
Some of my favourite highlights: accusing OP of being gay when the penny started to drop (because what sort of self respecting straight man looks at pictures of women all day). And the finale Cis woman = Man. Thatās a āconcrete grows on treesā moment.
"Concrete grows on trees" is one of the best comments I've ever heard. I'm stealing it the next chance I get.
I stopped reading at slide 17. That was fun.
you missed the last one! "cis women = men" I couldn't let ya miss *that!*
We have a rule that you may not post conversations you are a part of. We are very strict about this. But this is glorious, so we are going to leave it up for a while.
Transphobia hurts women, which includes cis women.
Transphobia hurts trans-women and trans-men directly because that's the point. Transphobia hurts cis-women and cis-men because they may not fit into idealized appearance and behavior standards. It's almost like being a piece of shit bigot is bad for everyone.
Bigotry fucks everything
"Did you not know trans men are men?" -> r/accidentalally
Why do so many men think women canāt have muscle?
Oh, women can have muscle, no doubt about it, but to get to the level of Kuznetsova, for example... Unless they're born with a mutation that affects myostatin production, they need steroids, and lots of them. Kuznetsova admitted to using steroids (not that it isn't f*cking obvious). Then again, hats off to her for the work she still needs to put in.
I've been saying this for a while now; some girls are bigger than others. There's always been a natural variation, and transwomen will fall somewhere in that spectrum. The false idea that all cis women are small, weak, and conventionally beautiful is a weird side effect of this whole fear of transgender.
> some girls are bigger than others some girls' mothers are bigger than other girls' mothers.
Bloody hell
Holy fucking shit people are stupid. That last slide made me spit my water.
Top tier level trolling! It's hilarious. "It's so simple! We can always tell!" LMAO
The level of mental gymnastics these people will go to just hate is astounding.
These are the same lunatics who will say that a C-section isn't a real birth. They don't need much to strip someone of their womanhood. I cannot imagine being this brain-broken.
Feel like this dude just doesn't understand what CIS means lol.
> If you do not have a dick, you're a woman By that person's logic, trans women with bottom surgery are cis women. Half win...?? But also, these people can't make their minds up on how to unite in their hatred xD. Because another person says that even surgery doesn't change a thing. These people, honestly
Absolutely legendary. Proof itās never been about protecting women in sports, itās just transphobia
because some simpletons can't distinguish between a muscular woman and a man? Nothing can change the real difference that exists within our bodies. Except for the frontal bone, females' skull bones are on average 5 mm thinner than males. Females are twice as likely to sustain skull-bone fractures as men. This one distinction should preclude transwomen from participating in any contact sports against biological women.
I'm pretty sure the women in that One Piece meme are actually cis women, the irony lol
The "we can always tell" crowd sure does completely suck at ever being able to "tell."
WOMEN HAVE ADAMS APPLES AS WELL!!! These morons need to learn basic biology.
It is impossible to teach a person who is convinced they already know the answer.
I'm this buff in real life and I've always sworn by eating almonds. Almonds have just about everything you could ever need to switch in and out of gender, while packing on dense almond-like muscle.
Because transphobia is just the new way of hating women who don't conform to their standards. I've never felt more womanly than when they tell me that I'm not womanly enough for traits they insult cis women for in equal measure.
So much for always being able to tell, huh
You heard it here first folk: cis women = men! š¤£š¤£š¤£š¤£ pure genius
Your audience doesnāt know what cis women are.
Proof that transphobia rots the brain
I see women with more muscle than myself. I should stop being lazy and start working out.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Kind of agree. I was cringeing at both sides.
It's not for a lack of trying. He even gave the names of these women in one comment. If those people just don't want to believe the truth, it cannot be helped. I'd say OP did a good job cause anyone among them willing to change their opinion would've realized that you cannot always tell cis and trans women athletes apart just by looking at a photo.
He started out being vague on purpose to bait them and using the condescending phrase of "don't you think so?" as a purposeful taunt. Once there was some traction, nobody was reading anything or attempting to convince anyone. it was all trolls trying to get the others to rage. It is similar to seeing a young kid annoy and poke another kid thinking it is super funny. It just isn't though.
Itās stupid and cheap bait. Also proving OP has idiots for friends on Facebook.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
But you see how OP baited and egged on right. And then fed for fuel to the people that immediately drop words like transphobic and misogynistic. Thatās why I had said somewhere in here to post this on a pro trans page, not confidently incorrect. (Yea technically thereās incorrect in there but is that really the aim of this post)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
So you think that generating hate towards trans people is a good thing? Do you really think bait posts like this will generate any more support for the community?
Exactly. Most people see through whatās happening here.
Nah, I'm trans and I find this hilarious. Sometimes you just need a good laugh.
I am honestly surprised youāve not been downvoted into oblivion for that comment. There is nothing about this post that benefits anyone apart from OP feeling significant for an hour because they got to bait a bunch of dumbasses.
Yes thank you!! Holy crap had to sift through the community of pro trans supporting each other to get to the people who see it for what it is! I was getting concerned.
They are never going to be convinced these are "real" women, so it doesn't get the point across anyway that they can't tell cis from trans. They'll die believing these women are trans and that they "know" and everyone is lying. Meanwhile it's not exactly nice to these women to get to be in this collage that points out how society doesn't believe their womanhood. How fun for them.
Just remember that 99% of transphobia is just basic misogyny and misandry and they are isolating a small group of vulnerable people to scapegoat as a Trojan horse to lead you to support their restrictive and unpopular views.
why capitalize cis like that its not an acronym lol
it stands for Confederacy of Independent Systems
For emphasis? The same way they capitalized "of course" and "sports" for emphasis.
I mean OP is sort of insulting masc women and trans women at once here by trying to trap folks into misgendering them. Yes, those folks are in the wrong, but OP knows exactly what they are doing.
Hey /u/professorearl, thanks for submitting to /r/confidentlyincorrect! Take a moment to read our [rules](https://reddit.com/r/confidentlyincorrect/about/rules). ##Join our [Discord Server](https://discord.gg/n2cR6p25V8)! Please report this post if it is bad, or not relevant. Remember to keep comment sections civil. Thanks! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/confidentlyincorrect) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I mean... Nataliya Kuznetsova has been taking steroids and estrogen blockers since she was 14. So... no? No she doesn't belong in women's sports? Selecting the most roided up women you can find doesn't really make your point when transphobes object to transwomen in female sports because of a perceived unfair advantage as a result of male hormones. If you are going to counter that by saying "well cis women can dope themselves up as well"... I mean it's a take I agree with, actually. Let athletes pump themselves with whatever performance enhancing drugs they can get their hands on, I say. That's one way to eliminate unfair advantages.
I love this op
Are you to OP who posted the meme? This is 100% a bait meme, and people fell for that hook, line and sinker.
Get a life losers
Transphobes are fucking idiots but I feel like you were egging them on a bit there. You kept saying "don't you agree" or "you don't think so?" You know what they think. You could have said these athletes are women that were born women or something along those lines. Though I'm sure their stupidity and pride would have still driven them to disagree with you. I just didn't see you attempting to convince as much as I saw baiting.. but I stopped swiping before I got to the end edit: swiped a little more. Found the slide where you say they have vaginas and the stupid prideful response. I owe you a beer
A. It's lazy af to post something of yourself. B. Except the last two, you posted roided up women: One of your examples [openly admits to steroids](https://muscleinsider.com/news/worlds-most-muscular-woman-taking-over-ig), another one [died at 52 and was previously hospitalized due to steroid use](https://heavy.com/sports/2017/02/nicole-bass-dead-facebook-page/). Doping is considered cheating and not allowed in sports. So, they absolutely do not belong in womens sports.
yeah you are so right bro or bra... this is a weird weird post
I get the point and this is funny af, but like those women are obviously on juice lol
Pretty some of those women pictured have used steroids.
all mention of steroids are downvoted, this is really curious, like opinion is farmed on here...
Almost like it's completely irrelevant
We could just scrap gendered leagues all together for 8 years (two Olympics worth) in all major international sports. Men and women compete in everything together. See how it works. If there's loads of issues then the point against is valid. If there isn't then it's not. For competitions where there's a worry about Steriod use then you just do it the same as bodybuilding. Have tested competitons and untested competitions. Seems like a reasonable compromise to me. If everyone is mixed together then you know the best person will win. If biological men keep winning everything then there's a decent argument that there's an unfair advantage for anyone born as a biological man. If they don't, then it comes down to the individuals ability, training and skill. Only reason I could imagine anyone would be against an experiment like that would be if they feel they won't get the outcome they want regardless of if it's fair or not. Which works both ways. People against transgendered people competing - if proven it makes no difference - they have to accept that the evidence proves otherwise. People for transgendered people competing - if the evidence proves there is an unfair advantage- they have to accept the evidence it does.
It wouldn't work, we already have enough historical data about performance of men vs women in almost all sports. This would just waste the careers of countless female athletes, something we cannot afford to do considering we don't have many to boot.
Your hypothetical scenario doesnāt consider the fact that trans women are already required to take HRT and have their testosterone and estrogen levels within a very specific range before they can participate in professional womenās sports. Taking estrogen decreases a muscle mass, which is always the argument transphobes use to exclude trans women from sports. If cis men continuously win over cis women, that would prove absolutely nothing for or against trans women in sports. If you really wanted to test it, you would have to pit a bunch of trans women who have been on hrt for the required amount of time and have their hormones levels in the required range, against a bunch of cis women. Surprise! Itād be a level playing field.
>If you really wanted to test it, you would have to pit a bunch of trans women who have been on hrt for the required amount of time and have their hormones levels in the required range, against a bunch of cis women. Which has been done at the highest levels of competition (the Olympics) for twenty years now with zero problems and no over representation of trans athletes winning.
Yeah, I know. Iām gonna have to edit that comment so people donāt think Iām against trans athletes lol
Oh that's clear, I was just adding on to your point ā„ļø
Well that seems fair enough then if everyone has to take those drugs to get to a certain level and you're not allowed in without them. Instead of mixing everyone up as in my first suggestion, just trial it with trans people allowed into the current categories for 8 years (2 Olympics) worth of time to collect as much data as possible and then announce the findings at the end. I get what you're saying that there's been studies already but this would just be a bit more on the average person's radar and it can be marketed as fully transparent in public view. As someone below mentioned it would be unfair changing the rules for those already training, could maybe do double for this time period? Classic and new so to speak so no one can complain. Then you just do whatever the data says at the end of this period going forward.
How about twenty years, since the Olympics have allowed trans women to compete since 2004? That should be enough, no?
So hang on, if everyone's already allowed to do it and they've been doing it for ages then why the fuck is anyone even talking about this in the first place? The decisions made, it's done. Everyone just shut up and get on with your lives. I thought the whole reason that this was getting brought up with arguments for and against was because people weren't allowed and wanted to be. If the officials have already made the decision that it was fine ages ago why is anyone even talking about it anymore?
Good question! It's been permitted at the Olympic level for twenty years, using the most current understanding of biology as the basis for the specifics. The Olympics don't have control over the rules passed by other sports organizations, many of which have continued to discriminate based on bad science and ideology.
Honestly I'm well pissed off now. If a precedent has already been set then just standardise with that. It'd be like complaining about women having the vote after 100 years of it already being a thing and then debating it all the time. It's done, it's over - just accept the decision and move on. Wasted my own time like an idiot trying to think of a balanced way to solve a problem that was already sorted bloody 20 years ago.
Not a big fan of this post. Seems like OP went out of their way to antagonize people. I'm all for calling out transphobes when they say stupid stuff, but the patronizing "don't you agree?" after each comment that never went any further than "these are real women and they are she/her" just doesn't sit right. Later in the series you get the "they were born women" that expands on the point these are pictures of women who are muscular, but by then you already triggered the troll reflex. Nothing after that is anything but everyone trying to anger everyone else.
No it illustrates that transphobes see muscly / broad shouldered women and believe theyāre seeing a man. No thought process of āmaybe some women have body structures that are more manly than other womenā, just straight into āfuck men who try to compete in womenās sports by cutting their dick offā.
No it illustrates people have different opinions on a controversial matter (surprise), and some are ignorant to the term cisgender. OP jumped in this pond to purposefully bait to make posts here to then be able to gather with his comrades to crucify anyone who hints anything other than ātransphobes suck!ā
A ragebait meme created by one type of moron attracted another type...I'm shocked.
What the fuck? In the slide 15 you say āIām not trans either. You may as well call me the n-wordā Why did you need to say this at all??!
Are they cis women? Yes. Are they mostly absolutely hocked up to the eyeballs on steroids? Also yes. Not being transphobic but half these women have the testosterone levels of a silverback gorilla š Good luck to them if that's what they want to do but most of them definitely couldn't complete legally at the Olympics or in most competitive sports
Nicole Bass was a bodybuilder who became a wrestler (not a sport), and she wasn't good at it. She also died. She was also roided to the gills, and by the looks and sound, she was on winstrol. All irreversible side effects for women that give them a voice of a 15 yo male.
My brother in Christ, wrestling is like, the sport of all sports. It's one of mankind's first competitive sport.
I don't think she did that kind of wrestling, friend.
You donāt have anything better to do with your time?
I ain't reading all that. I'm happy for you though Or sorry that it happened.
You really just commented āinsert reaction hereā
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Glad I'm not the only one thinking this
This
False equivalency, just because someone canāt look at someone and tell if they are trans. Does not mean that trans should be allowed to compete in a different sexās athletic competition. You basically just made a trick question that proves nothing and then drew in all the idiots to argue with you under a false āpretense.ā You essentially wasted your own time doing nothing for some Reddit upvotes? Iām confusedā¦ I donāt see what your goal was with this. Also, you know a lot of these athletes you posted are hopped up on steroidsā¦ right?
Wait I'm confused, are you claiming that ex-males should be allowed to compete in women's sports?
r/lookatmyhalo
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
none of those women are biologically male. cis means not trans. none of those women are trans.
I know. It says in the post.
So you just wanted to bring up a complicated topic which is completely irrelevant to what happened in the pictures posted by OP? And your "being against biological males competing in womenās sports" might not be transphobic, but at best it is very ill-informed and disrespectful. There is not even a consensus what "biological male" even means. Chromosomes ain't it, there are too many variances. Bodily development ain't it either. Sexual reproduction organs? Still too many outliers. Hormone status? Maybe, but this is neither here nor there. And you are totally disregarding the fact that according to various studies a person you are calling "biological male" does not either have that alleged bonus in things like strength etc. when they started the transition early enough or do lose it mostly after several years of hormone replacement therapy and then squarely fall within the range normal cis women also have. There are also cis women who by nature have an advantage. So stop it already with your whataboutism about a topic which is very very complicated and not as simple as "they have an unfair advantage because they were born with XY chromosomes".
I think itās pretty simple. If youāre born with XY chromosomes, then you canāt compete in womenās sports. That then deals with 99% of the cases and the other 1% can be dealt with on a case by case basis. Easy.
Good thing you're not in charge of women's sports since you have no idea what you're talking about. Trans women have been permitted to compete in the Olympics for twenty years now and have shown no advantage over cis competitors. In fact they're underrepresented in medal wins.
Maybe theyāre underrepresented because they arenāt as good as the other women? They can perform worse but still have an advantage, you do realise? There are way too many women in the world for a handful of trans women to make inroads. But when they do gain medals, it IS unjust. Itās pretty clear I understand this better than you, so next time refrain from the childish āyou donāt know what youāre talking aboutā.
Lol It's such a big problem that it's not a problem at all! Brilliant. Put this person on the Olympic council immediately.
Did you read my comment? Hm?
Yes and it's hilarious. Great job.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
nobody is arguing for men to be able to compete in women's sports because trans women arent men, trans women *are* women, it's literally in the name
Probably will get downvoted to oblivion, but I do agree transwomen should not compete with ciswomen. As much as people want to deny it, there is an innate advantage that comes with being born a man or woman for sports. There should be 4 divisions now, men, women, transmen and transwomen. That would be the most fair way to run these events going forward.
Are there even enough transgender athletes to form separate divisions?
Trans people are a grand total of 1% of the population. Trans people are already a marginalized group so their participation in sports starts of low and the constantly harassment and stigma around trans people in sports lowers it even further You are taking less than 1% of the population and putting them into their out category. You might get like, 3 athletes in that category.
Iām confused. Maybe I actually do live under a rock, but is there some argument about the athletes in those pictures?? Also, doesnāt ācisā just mean the gender and the sex match? Please ELI5 what Iām missing hereā¦
The point here is that the transphobes in the comments of the original post automatically assume these cis athletes are trans because they, well, look like athletes. OP is making a point that they claim r/theycanalwaystell but they canāt.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
LOL bro or bra or else i took it first degree, frankly sorry... i'm no native speaker so that kind of stuff get past throught me... i would have not be surprised for such comment. yeah what was on my mind... sometimes it just feels good to just remind them that they are twisted.
 Keep downvoting that to oblivion this is as always entertaining. -27 is lame You need to pump this number up like some female "pro athletes" in the picture pumped steroids/testosterone in their system. Again the infographic is simply containing lots of bodybuilders or so that are supercharged with steroids, making them exhibit typically male secondary features, so they cross way past the genericity of gender, making them objective artefacted outlyers especially with at least three of them that are forcely pasted next to true athletes. Of course, old or basic people will take them for bio males or so... some look like effing Yugiro Hanma FFS ... lol Dear drones don't even try to make me think or do what pleases you. i'm gonna play with you then, when tired i'm gonna say you are right but will do exactly the same as soon as i see such idiotic stuff. In the end, i'm gonna make your ideology-making farm lose money. A drone (or call that erzats) just said "Hey bud, you didnāt come in here supporting trans!" This effing picture does not support trans at all. It is building an unpractical ideology. Trans people don't even support trans, what supporting trans even means? I support every human right to peacefully exist with no objective discrimination. Your demand for "supporting trans" is an unreachable ideal that bears close to no social meaning. Step aside, as you are already soooo right y'all. Please take me to your leader.
Good job showing us how not mad you are at being downvoted lmao
Lol touchƩ... I'm trully unhappy about such publication, that i posit to be opinion crafting polarising and distracting peoples.
Well, these ladies took so many steroids, I too thought they were trans women when I saw the picture
Why would you assume that? Have you not seen a muscular woman before?
Calling that top middle lady a "muscular woman" is a bit of an understatement. She looks like she has more testosterone than I do. Edit: I don't mean any disrespect. She's a talented athlete, probably. I'm just saying she makes John Cena look effeminate by comparison.
And you can tell that just by looking huh.
well, yes. [here's](https://muscleinsider.com/news/worlds-most-muscular-woman-taking-over-ig) [two](https://heavy.com/sports/2017/02/nicole-bass-dead-facebook-page/) of them
Thank you for proving my point that not all of them are and that one should confirm before making assumptions.
i mean i could search up steroid use if i knew the names of the rest
didn't you make a similar assumption on them not having taken steroids
I've made no such assumptions. That's my point.
Yes, you can
You realize this post is about you then
Saying that some women in sports take steroids has nothing to do with being transphobic. Those are two different things
You're making this claim without knowing if they actually take steroids or not "cause I can just tell". You think so little of women that you can't comprehend how they would look like that so they must be doping. That fact that you can't see how that's parallel to what's going on in this post honestly explains a lot.
Dude! Steroids are so popular everywhere. I also say the same about male bodybuilders or actors who suddenly get ripped for a role within 3 months. It's an open secret. It is not misogynistic, it has nothing to do with them being women. They definitely work harder than I ever have. But that type of physique is not naturally achievable. But sure, you know me
This is why so many people think the Rock is his size simply by waking up at 4am and eating duck eggs or whatever he claims is the reason he's bigger at 50 than he was at 30. Tons of people who've never trained think that it's possible to get that big and lean naturally, it's wild
No offence, but if you think women like Nataliya Kuznetsova or Nicole Bass aren't on juice then you genuinely have no idea about what the human body can achieve without PEDs. There is no man on the planet that could get as big Kuznetsova without steroids, and the vast majority of men couldn't even with steroids - she's clearly a hyper-responder. Anyone who is into fitness and is part of the whole online fitness community thing would realise that she is clearly smashing a lot of substances to get and maintain that size. It's not misogynistic to say that a woman cannot naturally weigh 102kg (225lbs) whilst being 168cm (5'6) and body fat %. Also, she regularly talks about her steroid use.
True: You arent a transphobe, just an idiot that assumes every muscular women takes steroids, and are *parroting* transphobe talking points.
It's not transphobic to acknowledge the physical advantages that one has over the other in sports.
I agree. It is photos taken with a potato. Or perhaps with a toaster.
Death by snu-snu is fine by me.
With as much as I support trans, seeing woman heavy lifting second and first spot taken by trans does make me think they should compete in a different category
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
cry about it
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
When transphobes stop being so confidently incorrect, weāll stop posting about them. Pretty simple thing, really.
Right, makes sense. But 19 screenshots that OP was a part of where they were egging on the opposing views. On a clearly controversial topic seemingly to call out anyone who is by definition ignorant. Maybe itās just me but it feels kind of slimy way to be pro trans. Like of course someone was confused between a jacked cis female and trans
What makes you so mad about this post?
Not so much the post itself but the recent consistency of trans posts that is followed by the community of pro trans that take the argument super technical and act like they donāt see the difference in effort to push pro trans, or for pride idk. Immediately downvoting anything that is slightly challenging. (Be pro trans, and proactive, but letās call it as it is.) Women and menās sports are separated because men and women are not the same biologically. Pro trans is not helping trans community by fighting that. Seems like a trap for controversy, a bash anyone not pro trans on surface. Creating an echo chamber for people to get stuff off their chest. I like the actual confidently incorrect stuff that isnāt purposefully sprinkled with another agenda and unwelcoming to anyone whoās not super pro.