Also, echoing @Imotali@lemmy.world's comment below (unfortunately you can't sticky comments on lemmy): comments that express hate towards any group are a violation of instance guidelines. BE NICE.
Mod here. Just want to openly and unequivocally state... I will remove your comment if you're transphobic. I will refer to trans people to let me know if you are being transphobic. I will ban you if you make an egregiously off colour comment. and I will take pleasure in doing this. Fuck your transphobic bullshit, go somewhere else. Nobody wants you here.
That's the thing about choosing an instance, it's his house, his rules. At least with Lemmy it's like you can move out to the next building, Reddit is like living in jail nowhere left to move.
This is my job: to make perfectly clear what is and isn't allowed. In no uncertain terms I will make sure this place is as free from transphobia as possible.
It's funny because the original trans sports bans were justified by saying that they would have an unfair advantage. This beauty pageant ban is just transphobes saying that trans women are unfairly attractive lmfao.
These contests are full of ideology, so a trans person has a significant advantage over the others. There aren’t enough heartwarming and sob stories in the world to compensate for that.
On the other hand, I don’t really care if those kind of competitions are unfair. If they help trans people convey a message, that’s probably the best thing that can come out of them.
I think it would have been fair to have a rule saying "no surgical modifications"... because doing things like facelift, nose-job, breast/buttox implants, cheek lifts, wrinkle removal, etc, are obviously unfair advantages (in a beauty contest) for those who have the money pay for it; and having a generic blanket rule like that would have accomplished the same thing they were trying to accomplish without being so blatantly transphobic... so a rule like what they have only proves that they are both despicable AND dumb. The entire notion of beauty pageants is outdated and stupid if you ask me.
Lol, you implement that and basically all beauty pageants stop existing. Which would be a good thing, mind you. But I've never met a pageant contestant in my life that isn't … let's say … heavily enhanced by medical procedures.
Like any kind of contest, finding rules violations is hard and not foolproof. It's like sports that forbid using steroids - competitors do regularly take those substances while training, then quit taking them for competition and go uncaught. Competitors who are discovered later to have been violating rules are stripped of titles.
That said, I don't think it's a very controversial concept that a beauty pageant shouldn't be a contest about who could afford the best surgeons. Well - as I said earlier I think beauty pageants are absurd to begin with, but if they have to exist I don't think it should be a contest between surgeons.
Elia Bonci, who also spoke to la Repubblica, said: “I took courage, used my deadname and signed up for Miss Italy because fighting transphobia is intersectional and even though I’m not a trans woman, I’ve decided to fight for their rights.”
I went to high school with a Ruth. She decided to change her name to Elizabeth when she went to college. She still goes by Elizabeth. Is she mentally ill because she doesn't want anyone to call her Ruth?
For context, Miss Italia is no longer broadcasted on important tv channels and almost no one watches or care about who wins now. Years ago (10?) it was a big thing and winners would make commercials and do movies/series and be remembered for life. But it’s too an old school concept now
I just googled it, apparently it might come back to the first national tv channel for 2023, we'll see, anyway it was streamed on the official website before that and for the last 4 years
I know right? It'll finally make pagents worth watching.
We should also get drag queen bodybuilding competitions. If everything is going to be reality TV for a while (support the strike, by the way) I'd at least want them to be entertaining.
YES. This is EXACTLY what I’ve been saying!!! Like honestly, as a cis woman from Italy I’m so embarrassed by this nonsense. Like, cutting trans women out of the competition at this moment just means people are recognizing that trans women are “unfairly” more good looking than cis women. Which, personally, is true in my case but you don’t see me bitching about it.
Fuck yeah trans dudes, trans chicks and non-binary buddies.
Because excluding trans women from sports was never actually about fairness. It's about normalizing excluding trans people from aspects of public life.
Ok, hold on, why would you forbid trans women from competing? Because of “unfair advantages”?
First off, trans women who completed their transition don’t have a male body. They have a female body. And some athletes are naturally better at some sports than others. Like, shorter basketball players are naturally disadvantaged at basket, which is why they need to train twice as hard as taller players or switch to another sport.
Also, every whiny white woman complaining about trans women doing better than them always forgets to mention the athletes winning are still the cis ones, which destroys the idea that trans women have an advantage.
The point never held up either in sports nor anywhere else. And it was never about sports anyway.
This is fantastic, while having them obviously in drag is delicious, it would be even more stark if some of them present as traditional male too and really bring the point home.
That's cool, except if only certain people with certain body configurations have the uncontrolled freedom to be themselves, that's still a problem.
Or, as long as people who do not identify with the body they were given are ostricized, there are problems. As long as there are people who are groped because their body is different, lynched because their skin is different, or kept out of certain rooms just because of growths on their bodies they have no control over, there are problems.
Just because you remove a label doesn't mean there isnt a problem any more.
"Patriarchy." You use the word but you dont know what it means. We're not talking about heads of households, we're talking about the halls of power; which are controlled by cis men. Gender Equality advocates are not making claims that "men don't exist," just that gender its a highly varied spectrum.
My guess is you already know this, and willfully ignore nuance so you can push a counter ideological stance. That makes you a lame-o. Sorry.
No, there still is. Trans men suffer from all of the same patriarchal oppression that cis men suffer from. The loneliness, the isolation, the expectation that they have no emotion. If you somehow watch trans people TikTok, The men's biggest complaint is that they now have no friends.
So yes, the patriarchy exists even if gender is a construct. Because one of those constructed genders oppresses the others, and themselves.
They were banned for transphobia. Finish that comment. Don't cherry pick their words. Transphobia and bigotry are against the rules here. As a cis person, I don't get to decide what is transphobic; trans people do.
I think the issue is that there is no such thing as a "biological woman". Manhood/womanhood is an issue of gender, not sex, and gender is something that we collectively made up whose meaning varies from person to person and from culture to culture. The only person who is capable of saying "Person McFaceface is/is not a woman" is Person McFaceface.
Even if we were to interpret their comment to mean "sex", that isn't a simple binary yes/no kind of question. There is no single trait that determines maleness or femaleness, and lots of people have traits indicative of both sexes or of neither sex (or they were born that way then surgically altered shortly after birth), and sometimes those traits are so hidden and so internal that the person themself doesn't know about it.
No, because trans men are "biologically women" and are thus specifically allowed by this approach. It's the same kind of conflation that causes the bathroom issues. People only seem to understand that trans women exist and think they are the same as trans men. Reminding people that trans men exist hopefully gets peoples brains working.
What is protest part? Not sure it is malicious compliance either because contestant was not rebirthed as woman. Not that it's possible unless you are buddhist.
But why would they make such a distinction? If it's a contest for women, all women should be allowed to compete. What does it matter if they are trans or cis?
In this case it's ok (IMO), trans or not, they should be able to participate. But a hill I'm willing to die on is that when it comes to sports, only trans women who got blockers before puberty should be able to participate.
Ok sure. But it's not really an effective protest as they're fulfilling the requirement to enter the competition. Because the competition is steered by judges they will simply eliminate the trans men in the first round.
The rule is there to make sure the judges are not sexually aroused when they see a trans woman.
A greater means of protest would be if the non-trans competitors all quit the pageant. But their look is their only talent, so they won't.
Has anyone ever seen a "woman from birth"? Like a whole-ass adult woman popping out of somebody not appreciably larger than her? Ready for a beauty pageant at zero minutes old?
Completely independent of gender, people should know that "women" are adults and have zero overlap with "children" or especially "newborn infants".
Perhaps it should say "female from birth". But anyone with basic reading comprehension would understand this. Probably you know this and are being unnecessarily pedantic/argumentative.
Not really seeing any malicious compliance here. They're biologically female so they're eligible to enter. That's the whole point of the rule - biological women only.