Moderation question: When if ever should we allow the discussion of someone else's body/appearance on LetsRun?

appearance guy wrote:

It would be tough to make definitive rules used to police comments regarding an athlete's appearance. Posting that an athlete looks heavy or needs to drop a few pounds to return to good form....as with Cain and Bekele....should be allowed.

Yes objectively they should be allowed but what I was wondering is, "What do we gain by allowing performance-related talk?" Or "what do we lose by banning suck talk?"

Everyone with a brain can tell that Cain is heavier than your average elite professional women's distance runner.

But what out of a courtesy to the difficult nature of this topic to many women, what if we just don't allow the discussion of weight and a specific women's performance at all. We just make a rule - you can't talk about weight an a specific women's performance period. If you want to start a thread about how to lose weight, or how weight impacts running so be it but you can't discuss an individual runners weight.

Yes, it's censorship. And yes it's treating women differently than men but so what? (Plus I guess we could make it apply to both genders.)

The only negative to me is that it's a little scary when the SJWs determine what is and isn't allowed to be talked about on a forum but if we make the decision ourselves, then so be it.

I'm just wondering, "What do we lose by banning suck talk?"

Predictor wrote:

She may be the most talented runner in the US but is not willing to get her body to the fitness level of Coburn, Simpson, or Houlihan. It is obvious that they spend hours in the gym.

That to me is an ignorant comment. You act like everyone can just work to get their body to a certain state. I imagine plenty of male distance runners could hit the gym for 3-4 hours a day and never get big enough to be NFL linemen.

Did a SJW contact you?

Ignorant to think that they spent several hours per day for years focused on getting as fit as possible? Give them the credit that they are due. They didn't just live an average life and wake up with those physiques. Those 3 should be role models for every young woman. Cain is probably more talented which is why I hope she decides to put in the same effort. I don't hope she does it if that is not what she wants in life. As an American track fan, that is why I personally hope she does it.

Unequivocally, weight, meaning body composition conducive to optimal performance, is a significant performance factor in most athletic pursuits.

Discussing weight (by coaches, peers, and the public) is entirely valid in a context of competitive running, just as is assessing races, workouts, attitude, recovery, nutrition, and such.

The subject should not be taboo.

People have varying opinions about everything, but opinions should be offered without malice and consider the subject's state of mind.

Not everyone is adequately/equally equipped to cope with critical feedback (e.g. Mary Cain).

It's reasonable posters don "kid gloves" for kids, steering clear of, or being particularly careful with, weight discussion relating to young athletes, particularly girls, as this is a sensitive issue entwined with body image and self worth.

Letsrun moderation has got this right.

But if the subject is an adult, fair comment is fair.

For example, seeing this picture, one might reasonably observe David Rushida packed on pounds and is not ready to compete at an international level.

As and adult and running celebrity, Rushida might expect this (and all sorts of) feedback when placing himself in the public eye:

https://www.letsrun.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/rudisha-instagram-dildo.jpg

I'm late to the show, but as long as it's not intended as an insult then let it fly.

It's fine to say "so and so looks a little heavy after coming back from their injury, I bet their times will drop significantly once they get further into their training and get back to racing weight".

What isn't okay is "so and so looks really fat in this picture, they need to stay away from the cheeseburgers"

That is objectively what she was told to do.

Have you seen how wrestlers and fighters are treated by their coaches when it comes to cutting weight? They are practically "shamed" to oblivion and are often running on treadmills in sweatsuits to force water out of their bodies. Even at the HIGH SCHOOL level. And they DO it.

Question: how many women moderators are there?

I think it would be useful to have women chime in on this.

I agree about subjectivity.

1) Anything that legally compromises the site. Libel, defamation, ...

-(mostly) objective

2) Any trollish uncivilized comments just to wind people up.

-subjective

HS / College / Pro are all fair game. Even Lauren Fleshman, a very intelligent and mature competitor, is super sensitive to those comments. The age / maturity argument does not work for me. No one grows into comfortably accepting shaming.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

His comments about Cain including "saddlebags" and "I'd smash" were extremely offensive.

This is something I agree with. There's no reason to be rude. You wouldn't want someone to say that to your mother or sister.

I think genuine comments about weight should be allowed as long as defenders are given an equal chance to freely talk about the other side of the argument. That's only fair.

Fatg shaming is a regular occurrence on this site.

Discussions of female runner bodies is a regular occurrence on this site.

Discussions of high-school runner bodies is a regular occurrence on this site.

This thread will lead to no change whatsoever. And rojo, the SJW comment was unnecessary.

the problem is that this forum has a disproportionate representation of one demographic, so the chances that comments, intentionally constructive or not, will be made about women's bodies in a certain context is higher, and as indicated by the multi platform dialogue in the fallout of Mary Cain & other runners, this forum is regarded especially by female runners quite negatively (and can you blame them?)

to be honest, despite my leftist tendencies, while I don't see neutrality as a tangible or real, I also don't know if the forum's moderation should necessarily reflect a position or serve actively as an agent of social change. that seems insincere to the reason why many of us come here; We come to Talk About Running, unfortunately that comes with the territory.

my one personal exception to this is that unless it is blatantly satire (see the: "the year is 2027 thread", that seems to be in good faith and is not taken really at severe expense of athletes/coaches given recent events) any discussion of underage runners in any context outside of results, performances, coaching, and interviews, should be banned, discouraged, and repeat offenders should have their IP addresses blocked.

the way some posters (especially unregistered ones) have discussed the bodies and behavior (esp in interviews) of underage, namely high school girls, has completely crossed a line on a number of occasions and is part of why the forum is seen How it is

If the comments are sexual or are evaluating attractiveness or desirability, they shouldn't be allowed.

Otherwise, I think you should allow them. It's not worth your energy to do more.

In my very humble opinion, opinions stated as fact regarding one's weight cross the line. Even if it's an obvious and probably true statement. Something like "cutting weight would give that guy a much better shot a Worlds" should probably be off limits, even if it's most likely true (and in running, it's generally true). There are a lot of weight dysphoria issues surrounding distance running, and stuff like that doesn't help.

On the other hand, I don't really think something like "she looks really lean and fit right now" or "he looks a little heaver coming back from injury" are problematic.

I think there can be discussions of problematic college programs without naming names. Sure, people can then go figure out who is being talked about, but the names don't need to be stated. In an era of Google searches and internet history that lives forever, it's unfair to Jane Smith if for the rest of her life (or at least for years to come) that every time someone searches "Jane Smith at Boise State" a LRC thread pops up criticizing her weight, whether too thin or too heavy.

So, to use Boise State as an example, I'd be fine with thread about "hey, Boise State seems like a toxic program, several of their top 5 look unhealthy and the coach seems to encourage it." But, for the reasons I said above, let's keep names out of the thread and out of the internet search history.

David S wrote:

The Floyd wrote:

2) No discussion about collegiate athletes whatsoever. This is more gray since the athletes are legal adults, but in my view they're still young amateurs and it's not appropriate to rake their bodies over the coals on the message boards, regardless of too heavy or too thin. Particularly in college, if it's a case of too thin, the coaches or others are well-aware of it and it doesn't need to be a topic of discussion. General discussion, sure, but not naming particular athletes.

I'm not sure if I agree with this. My main concern is that there have been a bunch of abusive college programs and that sort of behavior becomes normalized unless it's discussed critically. Can those issues can be raised somehow without discussing individual athletes? I'm not sure. Gotta go.

The Floyd wrote:

I think there can be discussions of problematic college programs without naming names. Sure, people can then go figure out who is being talked about, but the names don't need to be stated. In an era of Google searches and internet history that lives forever, it's unfair to Jane Smith if for the rest of her life (or at least for years to come) that every time someone searches "Jane Smith at Boise State" a LRC thread pops up criticizing her weight, whether too thin or too heavy.So, to use Boise State as an example, I'd be fine with thread about "hey, Boise State seems like a toxic program, several of their top 5 look unhealthy and the coach seems to encourage it." But, for the reasons I said above, let's keep names out of the thread and out of the internet search history.

I still struggle with this because some discussions that name college athletes are fine. There might be a thread that goes "Is So-and-so update?" "Oh, they had three stress fractures and was red-shirted the past two years." Is that out of line? But then to speculate that it might be caused by weight or eating issues is out of line? Or is it only a problem if you say you can see lanugo?

Or what if you go the other way, "Many Duke/UW women seem to be at unhealthy weights." "Well we know Person A had three stress fractures since she moved there."

I don't really get how those kinds of conversations would work.

Running is a power to weight ratio sport. If you can't talk about how to make that ratio more advantageous then just make this a forum to talk about politics.

My opinion is you know it's wrong when you see it so any specific rules can't be made.

Only discussion allowed should be evaluating NON-RUNNERS.

Actors, models, baristas, gfs, gf’s friends, milfs, etc...