Caitlyn Jenner on the cover of Sports Illustrated...

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Buttery Commissar**

Oh, I'm not saying she's not a terrible publicity and attention whore. I would say that's mostly nothing to do with being trans, and all to do with being a horrible human being.
But as mbuildr started this topic due to our discussions of "the transgenders", I was replying in line with that.

**Frazzled**

Sgt. Vanden wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Why? What bearing does her being a woman now have on the fact that she won it fair and square?

Because...its a sports magazine. If you are going to show women with awards it should be women who competed in womens' events. It takes away from women athletes.

For example: If Dale Earnhart changed his name to Darlene, he still couldn't claim he was the first woman to win blah blah number of races or whatever. That is what we call...fraud.

Two words:
Cheap
Stunt

Okay, les get this straight.

Female gets up one morning;
-Huh, I want to do something with my life, I'll go for a jog.
Female comes back from jog;
-Huh, that was nice. I'll do that everyday!
Female continues routine everyday, one day, she feels compelled to do something bigger. Goes competes in a local race; wins.
-Huh, that was nice, I want to do that every year!
Female continues winning races year after year, one day, she feels compelled to do something bigger. Goes and joins the Olympic running team. Spends the next 5 years of her life training. After two Olympic games pass, she decides that she will join the next one; her running team coach allows her. She runs in the Olympics, wins gold and comes back proud.
-Huh, that was nice, but I do not like how I am, I'll change that.
Female changes gender.

Male loses all amounts of pride that the Female (HE) was earned. Has to restart life anew and try doing something else.

Is that what you're trying to say? Just because ones gender and name does not match up with the achievements, that they are not worthy to hold said achievements?

Your words, not mine.

**Sgt. Vanden**

Frazzled wrote:
Sgt. Vanden wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Why? What bearing does her being a woman now have on the fact that she won it fair and square?

Because...its a sports magazine. If you are going to show women with awards it should be women who competed in womens' events. It takes away from women athletes.

For example: If Dale Earnhart changed his name to Darlene, he still couldn't claim he was the first woman to win blah blah number of races or whatever. That is what we call...fraud.

Two words:
Cheap
Stunt

Okay, les get this straight.

Female gets up one morning;
-Huh, I want to do something with my life, I'll go for a jog.
Female comes back from jog;
-Huh, that was nice. I'll do that everyday!
Female continues routine everyday, one day, she feels compelled to do something bigger. Goes competes in a local race; wins.
-Huh, that was nice, I want to do that every year!
Female continues winning races year after year, one day, she feels compelled to do something bigger. Goes and joins the Olympic running team. Spends the next 5 years of her life training. After two Olympic games pass, she decides that she will join the next one; her running team coach allows her. She runs in the Olympics, wins gold and comes back proud.
-Huh, that was nice, but I do not like how I am, I'll change that.
Female changes gender.

Male loses all amounts of pride that the Female (HE) was earned. Has to restart life anew and try doing something else.

Is that what you're trying to say? Just because ones gender and name does not match up with the achievements, that they are not worthy to hold said achievements?

Your words, not mine.

Sorry, I just interpreted what you said like that. Just put what I thought were your words into a story so its easier to understand.

**Buttery Commissar**

Mdlbuildr wrote:
Buttery Commissar wrote:
If it seems "disingenuous", that is due to your expectation of what a transgender person is.
That they must suddenly cut all ties from their previous life, perhaps. That isn't always the case, and it's not up to you or anyone to decide if they will.

If she had won an academic prize, would anyone say that she no longer deserves to be proud of it?

If you want to be known as a woman, how does make sense to say "Look what I did when I was a man!!!!"

As I said, it's not right nor wrong. I'm not looking to defend her or denounce her. I find it very strange, though. That's all. Live and let live. Doesn't mean I can't have an opinion about it. Especially if it's plastered all over a national magazine.

It is strange. But it's also identity, and I don't mean in the political correct sense. The hundreds and thousands of tiny things that make up your life. Some feel gendered, some don't. Some people simply don't feel tortured by their past.

But I think really the lesson is to stop looking at Caitlyn as any kind of metre stick other than as a celebrity.

**Frazzled**

Buttery Commissar wrote:
Oh, I'm not saying she's not a terrible publicity and attention whore. I would say that's mostly nothing to do with being trans, and all to do with being a horrible human being.
.

True words.

Thats also the problem, this is about being an attention whore and nothing to do with anything else.

If Bruce had just died and it was a memorial pic...cool.
If Bruce had just won it...cool
If Caitlin had just won it...cool.

A pic of Caitlin with an award he won 40 years ago? Publicity. DG just your whole family GO AWAY

**Chute82**

Jenner and his daughters will do anything to stay relevant. They are like herpes, flair up every few months

**Mdlbuildr**

Sgt. Vanden wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

Why? What bearing does her being a woman now have on the fact that she won it fair and square?

Because...its a sports magazine. If you are going to show women with awards it should be women who competed in womens' events. It takes away from women athletes.

For example: If Dale Earnhart changed his name to Darlene, he still couldn't claim he was the first woman to win blah blah number of races or whatever. That is what we call...fraud.

Two words:
Cheap
Stunt

Okay, les get this straight.

Female gets up one morning;
-Huh, I want to do something with my life, I'll go for a jog.
Female comes back from jog;
-Huh, that was nice. I'll do that everyday!
Female continues routine everyday, one day, she feels compelled to do something bigger. Goes competes in a local race; wins.
-Huh, that was nice, I want to do that every year!
Female continues winning races year after year, one day, she feels compelled to do something bigger. Goes and joins the Olympic running team. Spends the next 5 years of her life training. After two Olympic games pass, she decides that she will join the next one; her running team coach allows her. She runs in the Olympics, wins gold and comes back proud.
-Huh, that was nice, but I do not like how I am, I'll change that.
Female changes gender.

Male loses all amounts of pride that the Female (HE) had earned. Has to restart life anew and try doing something else.

Is that what you're trying to say? Just because ones gender and name does not match up with the achievements, that they are not worthy to hold said achievements?

That's not what he is saying at all. You are taking it that way to be argumentative.

He is saying if you have achievements as a man, that is fine. But when you flaunt those achievements in a national magazine when you say you want to be only known as a woman and not be associated with your previous name as a male...well...

**Ouze**

Your obsession with Caitlyn Jenner is more than a little weird.

**OgreChubbs**

I didnt even think people bought magazines anymore.....

**Ouze**

Mdlbuildr wrote:
when you flaunt those achievements in a national magazine when you say you want to be only known as a woman and not be associated with your previous name as a male...well...

It is common for transgender people to disavow their pretransition lives, which were often painful. Caitlyn disavows neither Bruce nor his accomplishments. “I loved Bruce,” she says. “I still love him today. I like what he did and the way he set an example for hard work and dedication. I’m proud of that part of my life. But this woman was living inside me, all my life, and it reached the point where I had to let her live and put Bruce inside. And I am happier, these last 12 months, than I’ve ever been in my life.”

Here's the article you won't read

**Chongara**

I don't care about Sports Illustrated. Seriously? Magazines are still a thing?
I don't care about Caitlyn Jenner. She's a popular celeberity with a cause. Great for folks who are into the celeb-with-a-cause thing.
I'd never even heard of Bruce Jenner before the whole public transition thing.

Registers as total non-news for me.

**Mdlbuildr**

Ouze wrote:
Your obsession with Caitlyn Jenner is more than a little weird.

You say that like being weird is a bad thing, LOL.

Seeing as how you keep replying in this thread, what does that make you?

**Prestor Jon**

Buttery Commissar wrote:
She still did it.

Look at it this way: Should she have things taken away that she qualified for before transitioning?

Exam results? Driving license?

Then why should she throw off something because it is a bit more public?

Agreed. That medal was earned fair and square and that accomplishment doesn't go away because of transitioning or any other changes to the person who won it.

I think society in general needs to do a better job of separating individuals from groups. Generalizations and stereotypes are easy traps to fall into and perpetuate but they just do everyone involved a disservice. The lack of respect I have for Caitlyn Jenner is solely based upon her actions and character (just like my lack of respect for the rest of Kardashian clan) and has noting to do with Jenner being transgender. I'm sure there's plenty of awesome transgender people that I would respect and be happy to hang out with because they didn't behave like self absorbed attention seeking publicity whores. People like Chris Mosier for instance.

**Frazzled**

Where's the stereo type here? You have a person who's a limelight seeking attention monkey because it brings bank, who's about to run out of her second 15 minutes of fame.

**Prestor Jon**

Frazzled wrote:
Where's the stereo type here? You have a person who's a limelight seeking attention monkey because it brings bank, who's about to run out of her second 15 minutes of fame.

I was speaking about society in general. I think transgenders can get a bad rap in some circles but that's based mostly on me living in NC, the land of ridiculous bathroom laws.

**jhe90**

Prestor Jon wrote:
Buttery Commissar wrote:
She still did it.

Look at it this way: Should she have things taken away that she qualified for before transitioning?

Exam results? Driving license?

Then why should she throw off something because it is a bit more public?

Agreed. That medal was earned fair and square and that accomplishment doesn't go away because of transitioning or any other changes to the person who won it.

I think society in general needs to do a better job of separating individuals from groups. Generalizations and stereotypes are easy traps to fall into and perpetuate but they just do everyone involved a disservice. The lack of respect I have for Caitlyn Jenner is solely based upon her actions and character (just like my lack of respect for the rest of Kardashian clan) and has noting to do with Jenner being transgender. I'm sure there's plenty of awesome transgender people that I would respect and be happy to hang out with because they didn't behave like self absorbed attention seeking publicity whores. People like Chris Mosier for instance.

The whole fact is yes she earned the medal when she was a he. The name is always going to be Bruce. Maybe now with a bracketed Catlyn next to it.
Now the fact she was he. Its true. She was he at the time and that's no disrespect to say they are.

That's a basic fact of time.
Now to refer to she as je after the transfer in relation in a article. Yeah.

Being on the whole kardashian clan does never help your reputation... But you get dollors for gak all so yeah....

At end of day. Though this is hardly gonna break the world.

**Frazzled**

Prestor Jon wrote:
Frazzled wrote:
Where's the stereo type here? You have a person who's a limelight seeking attention monkey because it brings bank, who's about to run out of her second 15 minutes of fame.

I was speaking about society in general. I think transgenders can get a bad rap in some circles but that's based mostly on me living in NC, the land of ridiculous bathroom laws.

I hear you. I think we need to separate Ts -normal bell curve of good bad and meh- and Jenner/Kardashians- Satan's genital warts.

**DutchWinsAll**

Frazzled wrote:

A pic of Caitlin with an award he won 40 years ago? Publicity. DG just your whole family GO AWAY

So your complaint, if I'm understanding it correctly, is that you're upset that a magazine, an article of entertainment media that is published, is using publicity to get published?

Do you get mad at truck manufacturers for welding steel onto sets of tires? Gun manufacturers for producing items that make small objects travel at high velocity?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you have a problem with a business following standard business practices to well, produce more business. It's odd.

**sebster**

Mdlbuildr wrote:
HE won the gold medal. SHE is now wearing it on the cover of a magazine.

In the record books, the name used for the person who won the medal is Bruce Jenner. I am stating fact. Not being bait-y or whatever.

Are you implying that now the name should be changed in the record books?

What do you think happens when a woman wins a gold medal and later gets married and changes her name? Does anyone spend any time at all figuring out how to do with that, or is it a complete non-event?

Why would Jenner's situation be any different to that?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mdlbuildr wrote:
I find it disingenuous. You don't want to be known by that name or live that life, but you want to be celebrated for what you were. Doesn't make sense to me.

A person might change their gender and their name, but they aren't reborn in to a whole new person. If chocolate cake was their favourite kind of cake before transitioning... it will still be their favourite kind of cake. If they were a parent before the transition then they're still a parent. If they killed someone before transitioning, well then they still have to serve the time for that crime. They are not a wholly new person. Whatever they were like as a person before transitioning, and whatever they did, good or bad, is still a part of who they are.

What's happening here is that you're building a set of rules pretty much out of nothing and then saying that transgender people must follow your rules, or else they're being disingenuous. At no point have you considered that maybe your rules are mistaken. And even worse, at no point did you consider that whatever rules you invented are totally irrelevant to everyone who isn't you.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:
Your obsession with Caitlyn Jenner is more than a little weird.

It's just the right wing moving on the next issue to get all concerned about. They're basically surrendering the fight on gay marriage, and focusing on this new moral scare. So now it's transgenderism, and the early battles in that campaign seem to be focused around bathrooms and Caitlyn Jenner, for reasons that perhaps only Tony Perkins could explain.

**Mdlbuildr**

sebster wrote:
Mdlbuildr wrote:
HE won the gold medal. SHE is now wearing it on the cover of a magazine.

In the record books, the name used for the person who won the medal is Bruce Jenner. I am stating fact. Not being bait-y or whatever.

Are you implying that now the name should be changed in the record books?

What do you think happens when a woman wins a gold medal and later gets married and changes her name? Does anyone spend any time at all figuring out how to do with that, or is it a complete non-event?

Why would Jenner's situation be any different to that?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mdlbuildr wrote:
I find it disingenuous. You don't want to be known by that name or live that life, but you want to be celebrated for what you were. Doesn't make sense to me.

A person might change their gender and their name, but they aren't reborn in to a whole new person. If chocolate cake was their favourite kind of cake before transitioning... it will still be their favourite kind of cake. If they were a parent before the transition then they're still a parent. If they killed someone before transitioning, well then they still have to serve the time for that crime. They are not a wholly new person. Whatever they were like as a person before transitioning, and whatever they did, good or bad, is still a part of who they are.

What's happening here is that you're building a set of rules pretty much out of nothing and then saying that transgender people must follow your rules, or else they're being disingenuous. At no point have you considered that maybe your rules are mistaken. And even worse, at no point did you consider that whatever rules you invented are totally irrelevant to everyone who isn't you.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:
Your obsession with Caitlyn Jenner is more than a little weird.

It's just the right wing moving on the next issue to get all concerned about. They're basically surrendering the fight on gay marriage, and focusing on this new moral scare. So now it's transgenderism, and the early battles in that campaign seem to be focused around bathrooms and Caitlyn Jenner, for reasons that perhaps only Tony Perkins could explain.

I love it how the left fabricates all sorts of nuances and realities that were never intended just to pose as the thoughtful sort.

I have an opinion. You have an opinion. They differ. There is no malintent. It's okay that people disagree. Move on.

**FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs**

Can people not say transgendered? Its just an etiquette thing. Transgender, not transgendered, just like someone is gay, not gayed.

Another etiquette thing... most trans people tend to dislike being referred to as their previous gender in the past.

Although the most important thing here is to ask trans people about it if you are unsure and to follow the social cues of other people.

Mdlbuildr wrote:
sebster wrote:
Mdlbuildr wrote:
HE won the gold medal. SHE is now wearing it on the cover of a magazine.

In the record books, the name used for the person who won the medal is Bruce Jenner. I am stating fact. Not being bait-y or whatever.

Are you implying that now the name should be changed in the record books?

What do you think happens when a woman wins a gold medal and later gets married and changes her name? Does anyone spend any time at all figuring out how to do with that, or is it a complete non-event?

Why would Jenner's situation be any different to that?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mdlbuildr wrote:
I find it disingenuous. You don't want to be known by that name or live that life, but you want to be celebrated for what you were. Doesn't make sense to me.

A person might change their gender and their name, but they aren't reborn in to a whole new person. If chocolate cake was their favourite kind of cake before transitioning... it will still be their favourite kind of cake. If they were a parent before the transition then they're still a parent. If they killed someone before transitioning, well then they still have to serve the time for that crime. They are not a wholly new person. Whatever they were like as a person before transitioning, and whatever they did, good or bad, is still a part of who they are.

What's happening here is that you're building a set of rules pretty much out of nothing and then saying that transgender people must follow your rules, or else they're being disingenuous. At no point have you considered that maybe your rules are mistaken. And even worse, at no point did you consider that whatever rules you invented are totally irrelevant to everyone who isn't you.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Ouze wrote:
Your obsession with Caitlyn Jenner is more than a little weird.

It's just the right wing moving on the next issue to get all concerned about. They're basically surrendering the fight on gay marriage, and focusing on this new moral scare. So now it's transgenderism, and the early battles in that campaign seem to be focused around bathrooms and Caitlyn Jenner, for reasons that perhaps only Tony Perkins could explain.

I love it how the left fabricates all sorts of nuances and realities that were never intended just to pose as the thoughtful sort.

I have an opinion. You have an opinion. They differ. There is no malintent. It's okay that people disagree. Move on.

"how the left fabricates" Try not to paint with too broad a brush here. After that, I dont know exactly what you are referring to.

**thekingofkings**

The issue is that Jenner has done pretty much nothing in the world of sports in a long time. Winning a gold medal is certainly an accomplishment, but that was a long, long time ago. There are far more relevant athletes who have done something this year, this actual month that should be given the glory of a cover. Advocacy is admirable, but accomplishments are more so.

**FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs**

thekingofkings wrote:
The issue is that Jenner has done pretty much nothing in the world of sports in a long time. Winning a gold medal is certainly an accomplishment, but that was a long, long time ago. There are far more relevant athletes who have done something this year, this actual month that should be given the glory of a cover. Advocacy is admirable, but accomplishments are more so.

I don't own the magazine. If whoever does wants to make a political statement, more power to them. The more you make people think about something they are ill informed about in new ways, the less likely they are to stay ill informed. And that may be useful in this current political climate.

Although I am not much of a sport person.

**thekingofkings**

FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:
thekingofkings wrote:
The issue is that Jenner has done pretty much nothing in the world of sports in a long time. Winning a gold medal is certainly an accomplishment, but that was a long, long time ago. There are far more relevant athletes who have done something this year, this actual month that should be given the glory of a cover. Advocacy is admirable, but accomplishments are more so.

I don't own the magazine. If whoever does wants to make a political statement, more power to them. The more you make people think about something they are ill informed about in new ways, the less likely they are to stay ill informed. And that may be useful in this current political climate.

Although I am not much of a sport person.

There are plenty of magazines for statements and awareness. I read SI for the sports, I could care less about most of the private lives of these people, I do not care about Kobe's infidelities, I am concerned with what he does on the court. If Jenner was somehow relevant to the world of sports today, then by all means. But if its just for transgender issues, then why not someone much more relevant to todays sports, like Fallon Fox? an active fighter.

**FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs**

thekingofkings wrote:
FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:
thekingofkings wrote:
The issue is that Jenner has done pretty much nothing in the world of sports in a long time. Winning a gold medal is certainly an accomplishment, but that was a long, long time ago. There are far more relevant athletes who have done something this year, this actual month that should be given the glory of a cover. Advocacy is admirable, but accomplishments are more so.

I don't own the magazine. If whoever does wants to make a political statement, more power to them. The more you make people think about something they are ill informed about in new ways, the less likely they are to stay ill informed. And that may be useful in this current political climate.

Although I am not much of a sport person.

There are plenty of magazines for statements and awareness. I read SI for the sports, I could care less about most of the private lives of these people, I do not care about Kobe's infidelities, I am concerned with what he does on the court. If Jenner was somehow relevant to the world of sports today, then by all means. But if its just for transgender issues, then why not someone much more relevant to todays sports, like Fallon Fox? an active fighter.

Now write a letter to someone, I think we've found a winner!(not being sarcastic, just hyperbolic)

**timetowaste85**

One thing I didn't see come up in the thread is that male events in the olympics are generally more grueling than events for females. So while male Bruce won those medals, female Caitlyn's body may not be up to the challenge by current standards for the same accomplishments. I know this is a work of complete fiction...but look at the Futurama episode when Bender changed robo-gender.
I don't think it's as cut and dry as she deserves to wear them vs she doesn't deserve to wear them.
While I don't give a crap about the whole thing, I can see both sides why people are upset and why others don't see the issue. Personally, I'd rather see a younger woman on the cover.

**Spinner**

So if a former Olympic athlete doesn't stay in shape, they shouldn't wear or be associated with any medals they may have won?

This is a complete non-issue. Who cares if Caitlyn Jenner wears a medal she won when she was Bruce? You're just giving more attention to Caitlyn Jenner. Well done.

**sebster**

Mdlbuildr wrote:
I love it how the left fabricates all sorts of nuances and realities that were never intended just to pose as the thoughtful sort.

I've never intended to appear as the thoughtful sort. My logic is quite straightforward, and directly stated. I've never, for instance, used a phrase as goofy as 'nuances and realities that were never intended' when something perfectly simple like 'analogy' works fine.

So here's the thing - if it appears there's too much thought in my post for you to respond, the issue is almost certainly with the amount of thought you put in to your original post.

I have an opinion. You have an opinion. They differ. There is no malintent. It's okay that people disagree. Move on.

It's okay to have opinions. It isn't okay to spout opinions and then run away from criticism of that opinion by saying 'it's just my opinion'. If your opinion is worth a damn then you should be able to engage others in debate on the issue. If you are unable or unwilling to do that, then don't start threads on the subject.

thekingofkings wrote:
There are plenty of magazines for statements and awareness. I read SI for the sports, I could care less about most of the private lives of these people, I do not care about Kobe's infidelities, I am concerned with what he does on the court. If Jenner was somehow relevant to the world of sports today, then by all means. But if its just for transgender issues, then why not someone much more relevant to todays sports, like Fallon Fox? an active fighter.

This is a magazine that dedicates one issue every year to pretty girls in bikinis, and that includes the cover. I'm not sure that the issue here really has anything to do with SI moving away from recognising sporting achievement for one of their covers.

**MarsNZ**

FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:

"how the left fabricates" Try not to paint with too broad a brush here. After that, I dont know exactly what you are referring to.

Both "sides" are doing it in this thread. All over the internet you see people deride the dissenting political opinion as "I love how the left is so socialist" "I love how the right are so redneck", ignorant catch-all terms probably sourced from a Youtube comment section. In my experience people using these generalisations have little to no actual knowledge about current events beyond whatever TYT/FOX has fed them.

**Frazzled**

DutchWinsAll wrote:
Frazzled wrote:

A pic of Caitlin with an award he won 40 years ago? Publicity. DG just your whole family GO AWAY

So your complaint, if I'm understanding it correctly, is that you're upset that a magazine, an article of entertainment media that is published, is using publicity to get published?

Do you get mad at truck manufacturers for welding steel onto sets of tires? Gun manufacturers for producing items that make small objects travel at high velocity?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you have a problem with a business following standard business practices to well, produce more business. It's odd.

I find it odd you believe I am upset as I did not start the thread now did I.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

MarsNZ wrote:
FoWPlayerDeathOfUS.TDs wrote:

"how the left fabricates" Try not to paint with too broad a brush here. After that, I dont know exactly what you are referring to.

Both "sides" are doing it in this thread. All over the internet you see people deride the dissenting political opinion as "I love how the left is so socialist" "I love how the right are so redneck", ignorant catch-all terms probably sourced from a Youtube comment section. In my experience people using these generalisations have little to no actual knowledge about current events beyond whatever TYT/FOX has fed them.

You're just no fun whatsoever.