Talk:Fallon Fox

Past pronouns

According to the GLAAD media reference guide on transgender individuals:

"It is usually best to report on transgender people's stories from the present day instead of narrating them from some point or multiple points in the past, thus avoiding confusion and potentially disrespectful use of incorrect pronouns."

Fallon Fox should be referred to as a woman even when discussing her past. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kenect2 (talk • contribs) 03:20, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

That's how I tend to do it, it seems polite. I do wonder if we have a Wikipedia policy about this yet though. Ranze (talk) 21:00, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Yes, the Manual of Style guideline section MOS:IDENTITY: "...reflect that person's latest expressed gender self-identification. This applies in references to any phase of that person's life." --Geniac (talk) 03:35, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Except in direct quotes. Just to be clear. Ignatzmice•talk 06:21, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Why are we addressing past issues with the pronoun of "she", when that is inaccurate. Just because you want to be a different gender, doesn't give you the right to change your past, if you have always been a male. Now if he wants to refer to himself as a "she" post surgery, that is different, but the correct term would be a "post-op" female.99.6.4.126 (talk) 06:07, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Because this article is the biography of a trans woman, it should adhere to Wikipedia's guideline on identity for trans women. According to MOS:IDENTITY, such a woman should be referred to using the gendered names and pronouns (e.g., "she", "her") that "reflect [her] latest expressed gender self-identification." This applies in references to any phase of her life. --Redrose64 (talk) 10:21, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

wikipedia takes the position that verifiability trumps truth. If it says female on his drivers license than that is verifiable. The truth is unimportant according to the standards of this "encyclopedia" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.207.136.200 (talk) 14:28, 21 November 2014‎

Basis of objections

Regarding some of the protests, while guys like Matt Mitrione are clearly being bigoted, I am hoping the basis of objection from more respected sources like Joe Rogan could be clarified. There is a bit of a valid objection regarding things like testosterone levels, physical strength, etc. Like could we clarify if FF's test levels are down to the usual level of females, or if they might be higher and closer to average males? Ranze (talk) 21:01, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

• For trans sportswomen who are taking anti-androgens, testosterone levels are a misleading measure, since those reduce the effects of testosterone (including on physical strength) more than they reduce the actual blood concentration of testosterone (although they do reduce that as well indirectly). Fallon Fox however has had reassignment surgery and therefore her testosterone levels are highly likely to be within the typical range of those of cisgender women. Even if that were not the case, it's unclear how it would help to ask whether her T levels are "down to the usual level of females"; the mean testosterone level in females is a different thing to the range of testosterone levels in females, which is a different thing to the range of testosterone levels in female MMA fighters. --Daira Hopwood ⚥ (talk) 21:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

• Can drugs reduce male bone mass that much if drugs weren't started till she was 30 years old?From what i understand someone that started these treatments in their younger teens would have a different outcome than someone that started treatments well after maturity into adulthood. Oct 7th 2014 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.16.206.56 (talk) 00:56, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

The differences between men and women beyond muscle mass is pretty large. Men have 30% increased lung capacity due to the lungs being larger in proportion to their body. Their hearts are larger in proportion to their body. They have larger hands and feet and thicker wrists and ankles. Broader shoulders, Different shaped hips, stronger chin structure. Men have more spacial skills than women. They have an increased reaction speed. They have a different fight/flight reflex. ect. And then of course there is the muscle mass which when someone went through puberty with male hormones does not ever reduce to the amount of a woman. I don't feel the need to source these well known facts because I know it's not getting into the article because of bias. The talk page will have to do. Carry on with your encyclopedia article claiming that estrogen completely balances out the athletic differences between men and women in combat sports. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.207.136.200 (talk) 08:15, 4 February 2015 (UTC)

The pesky problem with "well-known facts" that don't have to be sourced: So often the source is "freshly pulled from the speaker's prejudices." La Maupin (talk) 17:27, 15 November 2015 (UTC)

Lung capacity: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12773331. Heart differences, at least with age: http://www.livescience.com/52523-male-female-heart-differences.html. Reaction times: http://www.pwlk.net/reaction/experimental_report.pdf. Muscular differences (male muscles are not only larger, but stronger for their size): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8477683. Men tend to gain type 2 (fast-twitch fibers for strength) muscle during puberty, while women gain type 1 (slow twitch for endurance): http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1442138. I cannot find a good source for spatial abilities related to fighting, but men tend to do better in time-sensitive spatial tests. There's also evidence muscles get permanently enhanced with anabolic steroid use (e.g. by growing more nuclei), but I cannot find a source linking similar effects to puberty. I hope I don't need a source for the skeletal differences. While I'm sure Fallon's treatments have significantly reduced her athletic potential, its frankly ridiculous to say there aren't numerous sources of possible advantage. Males adapted to fighting over millenia of violence, and these adaptations are more than hormone-deep. Glbeaty (talk) 00:06, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Paragraph separation

Under Fallon_Fox#Controversy could we have a paragraph break between "report on the issue." and "Due to controversy"? The discussion of the fight being postponed is very distinctive from the discussion about what commentators like Joe Rogan are saying, in terms of different contexts of results. Ranze (talk) 21:04, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

 Done. JohnCD (talk) 14:05, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Privacy violation

{{editprotected}} "Still living as a heterosexual male, Fox impregnated her girlfriend at the age of 19."

This should be deleted; it is irrelevant to the article and a violation of Fox' and her girlfriend's privacy. Since it is a privacy violation, please also delete this Talk section once the edit is made. --Daira Hopwood ⚥ (talk) 21:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

• Irrelevant, perhaps; privacy violation, most definitely not. From the Sports Illustrated interview:

  "I did experiment, trying to figure out what I did and didn't like," said Fallon. "Around 19, I got a girl pregnant. I really didn't want to get married, but I was raised with the belief to marry that person and take care of our child."

  I really don't think it can count as a privacy violation if she herself said it. Note that Fox said "a girl", not "my girlfriend", though. Maybe that should be changed. Ignatzmice•talk 22:45, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
  • This New York Times profile should clear up a lot of things. (She was in fact married to that woman, and remained so until 2007.) It also includes what appears to be a consensual reporting of her birth name. (The Times is a pillar of journalistic ethics, after all, and acknowledges and complies with her request that her daughter not be named.) Shall we include the name? — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 06:41, 12 May 2013 (UTC)
    • I'm going to expand all the refs (I guess I'll put the accessdate as today, though that's a bit weird) and I'll see if I can incorporate her birth name. Maybe just in the infobox—"Born: Boyd Burton, Toledo, OH", and leave it at that. Ignatzmice•talk 15:43, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Fallon's age

The fight tonight listed her as age 36. Wikipedia lists her as 43. Please investigate.  :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.74.1.103 (talk) 03:33, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

• The cited source says she was born 1969. Feel free to dig up another one, if possible. Ignatzmice•talk 03:38, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Changed to 37–38 per New York Times and Time. A specific D.O.B. would be best, but it's possible that Fox has worked to keep any official sources from saying it, since that could lead people to information it appears she'd rather keep private, such as her daughter's identity. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 05:46, 25 May 2013 (UTC)
  • Also, out of idle curiosity I just watched the fight on AXS, and can confirm that they said 37, not 36. So looks like all the RS's are in agreement here. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 07:13, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Minor note on birth name

Time gives her birth name as Burton Boyd, while the New York Times and other sources give it as Boyd Burton. Since blog posts tend to get a bit less editorial oversight than articles, and since a Google search gets pretty much nothing, I'm pretty sure that the Time guy just made a mistake. Still, if anyone else sees it given in that order anywhere, we can throw in a footnote saying that it's unclear. (Like with Scooter Libby or a similar article.) — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 05:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Pronoun warning template

A very basic user-warning template can be found at User:Ignatzmice/uw-transpronoun (apparently caps are important), if anyone wants to use it. I'll be AFK for the rest of the day, most likely; if someone with more experience wants to add bells and whistles, feel free. Ignatzmice•talk 14:01, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Usage: {{subst:User:Ignatzmice/uw-transpronoun|number of equivalent warning}} (note: use 1, 2, 3, 4, 4im)
{{subst:User:Ignatzmice/uw-transpronoun|number of equivalent warning|IP}}(to add shared-IP notice) Ignatzmice•talk 15:55, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Category question

Is there a reason she isn't included in Category:Female_mixed_martial_artists? (Not sure how to link to it without attaching it to this talk page.) --98.220.56.22 (talk) 17:40, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

You can link categories in either of two ways: put a colon before the word Category, as in [[:Category:Female mixed martial artists]] or you can use the {{cl}} template, as in {{cl|Female mixed martial artists}} which gives Category:Female mixed martial artists. Anyway, I can't think of a good reason why not. --Redrose64 (talk) 19:01, 14 January 2014 (UTC)

I added the category to her page, then. Thanks for the info! --98.220.56.22 (talk) 06:18, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Defining "cisgender"

Per WP:LINKSTYLE, in general, if readers may not be familiar with a certain important term, we should explain it briefly in the article in addition to providing a link to a fuller explanation. To that end, I included a brief explanation of the term cisgender after its first usage in the article. (I'm the one who made use of the term here in the first place, for what it's worth.) I did that after User:Silverhand's edit a few weeks prior; while the link he added was redundant, I certainly saw his point that "cisgender" is likely too technical a term for many of our readers.

Anyways, now it seems that there's some disagreement as to whether the explanation is necessary. IP user 96.40.167.57 (talk · contribs) contends that it is not; User:Ignatzmice appears to support its inclusion. So I thought I'd bring us all together to talk about this. The way I see it, there's two questions here:

• Is the explanation necessary in the first place? I've already made my argument for this above.
• Is the definition I gave accurate? IP 96 says that it's not. I'd like to hear his reasoning. If I've misstated things, I want to clear them up as much as the next guy.

Let me know what y'all think. — PinkAmpers&^{(Je vous invite à me parler)} 12:56, 28 January 2014 (UTC)

the issues for me 1: cisgender was incorrectly defined, 2: are you going to explain cis/trans on every single transperson's page and if not then how do you decide which ones, 3: it was not the best place in that article for explaining cis/trans 96.40.167.57 (talk) 04:19, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

I honestly don't have the time or mental energy to get into this right now, and I'll not try to think about whether your points 1) and 3) have merit. (Most likely they do.) But point 2) is invalidated, I believe, by the guidance page WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS. Look at the page in question as a separate entity, don't hold it up to every other page. Ignatzmice•talk 05:54, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

I admit, I don't understand the concept of explaining a technical term in a seperate article, when an article for the technical term itself exists. I'm not trying to be argumentative, but doing so seems to eliminate the need for links entirely or, in the alternative, reinvents the wheel. Maybe I'm missing something?Silverhand^Talk 19:36, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

Cisgender is a pejorative and has been removed.Factchecker170 (talk) 18:36, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Advantage

Should advantage read "unfair advantage" or perhaps "unique advantage"? Every superior athlete has an advantage. Advantages are generally not controversial. The controversy is over if the athlete has an unique advantage that give her an unfair edge over other female athletes. Certainly as the only transitioned female MMA competitor she is "unique", and the claims that her former male body is stronger than any biologically female bodies implies that the advantage is "unfair".Factchecker170 (talk) 18:41, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Gonna have to come up with a new term if/when the next comes along. SChalice 05:06, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Birth name

What is it's birth name ? The article doesn't list it's birthname.