The IBA is funded by Gazprom, and only disqualified Khelif after she defeated a Russian boxer.
A Russian boxer whose “perfect” record was ended by the loss. By disqualifying Khelif after the fact they invalidated the bout to protect the Russian’s record.
The right would rather attack a real woman than, oh, say, a literal child rapist
Holy fucking shit.
Plus his defense was essentially she was into it…he’s a gross person
While she was provided with alcohol
Wow…I’m impressed, he’s even more gross than I realized, which is impressive because he was already the mostest grossest, I thought
I only read about four or five paragraphs. This just blew my mind again. Holy shit. Fuck this guy.
I read about and heard about (podcast and RSS news from the same site) a pastor who claimed the same (the victim was an adult): she enjoyed it because she didn’t resist. Awful people.
Yeah, that’s how I found out about him too…the grossest part to me is the complete abdication of responsibility because she either “came onto” him or “wanted it too” … Seriously even if 100% did actually throw herself at him, he’s the adult and should know better without even thinking. And perhaps explain why the 12 shouldn’t do that and then NEVER TALK TO HER AGAIN… And it just occurred to me why in the hell was he even talking to her in the first place what good could come of a random19-year-old talking to a random12-year-old regardless of gender‽
deleted by creator
She is not trans. At most what I read is that she is somewhat in the intersex spectrum. (This is at leas what newspapers were reporting a few days ago)
That’s what the IBA claims, but it seems they did it so the Russian boxer she defeated would still have a “perfect” record by invalidating their match. They made the same claim against the Taiwanese boxer who is a double world champion (I can’t find the reasoning for it though). There is no credibility to the claims that either are anything but cis woman.
No, I read it from many newspapers and commentators that were defending her, if that matters. It is also something somewhat compatible with the initial claim of the IBA (having XY chromosomes), but of course nothing is certain at the moment.
They were reporting on the IBAs claim that she had XY chromosomes, which, as stated, has absolutely no credibility. They won’t reveal what test they did or how they arrived at those results. When all evidence suggests they made shit up to disqualify her it’s both disingenuous and cruel to give the claims any credence whatsoever.
No they were not (the articles), they were explicitly citing the IBA precedent as unreliable and instead providing possible alternatives, with the caveat that they are not confirmed. It was just the most “quoted” possibility at the time.
See for yourself was I was referring to (you can translate)
https://www.ilpost.it/2024/08/01/olimpiadi-boxe-pugile-angela-carini-imane-khelif/
Did you even read the full article you provided? It literally says that the only source of the claim is the president of the IBA. It points out that having XY chromosomes could mean intersex and not necessarily trans, but it explicitly says there have been no other claims to support this whatsoever.
How is it different from what I said?
In my very first comment I said exactly what’s written in the article. At the moment the opinion everyone is assuming (this was 1st of August) is that she is in the intersex spectrum. I said “at most” because it’s not even certain.
Not sure why you think you need to argue when I simply reported what mainstream news was reporting and I am not even contesting what you are saying lol.
deleted by creator
Ehhhhhhh. 😒
For the ‘but sport has to be fair’ people, stop. Sport will never be fair, there are always people with better genetics, and with better access to training and equipment and the time to devote to developing their potential, bla bla bla.
The people trying to lawyer about who is or isn’t a woman here aren’t here to make sport fair, they’re using the fact you’d like sport to be fair as a way to get you to support their demand to be able to reduce sport into a thing they can pick winners with by disqualifying people on arbitrary standards they get to invent.I mean, the people that have been insisting ‘you’re a woman if you were born with those parts’ are now insisting ‘you’re not a woman if I feel like you’re not a woman’. Your takeaway here is that the pretexts will continue to change in order to get or keep your support, the underlying thrust is they want to discriminate against people that don’t fit in to their ideas of what being a woman should mean.
I understand that the allegations are not very specific, but does the IOC do its own testing which would conclusively disprove them? I’ve seen a lot of discussion about the credibility of the accusers (low) and the ethics of transgender participation in sports, but all that discussion would be moot if these boxers are in fact biologically female with no abnormalities.
The IOC does have its own eligibility requirements and does its own testing. The IOC does not test for “gender”.
The boxer is not trans. How do I know this? She’s from fucking Algeria, she’d be dead if she was trans, not in the Olympics representing the country.
They don’t test her gender fluid??
They might still have some sort of intersex condition like Caster Semenya’s.
Who, btw, should never have lost her chance to stay in competition. Her testosterone levels are no more an advantage than Michael Phelps height, wingspan, hand/feet size and his body producing less lactic acid which shortens his recovery time.
Being a champion athlete requires both determination and innate physical advantages. This is in some sense unfair to people who try as hard as the champions do but, through no fault of their own, lack the champions’ physical advantages. Therefore you can argue that since there aren’t things like basketball leagues for short people, there shouldn’t be separate competitions for men and women either. This is ultimately a matter of opinion, but I expect that you will have a hard time convincing the public. There are separate competitions, and while that’s the case, it makes no sense to allow a person with the specific set of innate physical advantages that men have over women to compete in the women’s competition. The whole point of having a women’s competition is to prevent that.
Caster Semenya is entirely unexceptional by the standards of male runners. For example, she won first place in the Women’s 800 metres race at the 2009 World Championships with a time of 1:58.66, which would have gotten her 47th place (out of 48) in the men’s heats. She would therefore not even run in the semifinals. The winner of the men’s race had a time of 1:45.29, more than ten seconds less than hers. I don’t see the appeal of watching her win only because she is allowed to compete against women with much lower levels of testosterone than she has.
I don’t see the appeal of watching her win only because she is allowed to compete against women with much lower levels of testosterone than she has.
Let’s try adding your first argument to your second and see how it sounds.
“I don’t see the appeal of watching them win only because they are allowed to compete against people much shorter than they are.”
A genetic predisposition to success in a particular sport is either a problem for all sports or none of them.
If you are arguing that the current categories are what they are then testosterone shouldn’t be a factor unless you are positing that testosterone level has a threshold past which you are male.
The whole point of having a women’s competition is to prevent that.
The whole point of having a women’s competition is to separate “men” from “women”, if the point was to prevent unbalanced categories we’d be basing the categories on things that were important to the perceived integrity of the sport.
You could also argue that historically ( in the west at the very least ) it was partially to stop “women” from competing in “men’s” competitions, not because of a difference in physicality but because of a difference in societal expectations.
it makes no sense to allow a person with the specific set of innate physical advantages that men have over women to compete in the women’s competition.
Again, lets switch the subject of your phrase
“it makes no sense to allow a person with the specific set of innate physical advantages that tall people have over short people to compete in the short peoples competition.”
This is not a good argument.
As you said the theoretical solution to this is to based the brackets/categories on things other than biological sex, something that can be measured reliably and precisely, but also as you said , good luck convincing the public/advertisers to switch at this point.
You could also argue that historically ( in the west at the very least ) it was partially to stop “women” from competing in “men’s” competitions, not because of a difference in physicality but because of a difference in societal expectations.
Or sometimes it was just done to stop women from beating men.
In the 1992 Olympics, a woman won gold in the mixed sex skeet shooting category, beating male competitors.
In 1996 women were barred from the erstwhile mixed event, but did not get a separate category either. Only from the 2000 Olympics a separate women’s skeet shooting event was established.
You’re assuming that testosterone levels are the only thing that affects the outcome. It is not. Nor is it the strongest indicator of who will win. Stop being narrow minded and singular in your assessment.
It’s the biggest factor that affects the outcome when serious athletes compete. The most athletic people with standard female levels of testosterone will be nowhere near as good at most sports as the most athletic people with standard male levels of testosterone. That’s why I pointed out that Semenya’s first place finish in the women’s race would have been 47th place in the men’s. The fastest women at that competition were about as fast as the slowest men.
There’s also the famous incident where 203rd-ranked German Karsten Braasch beat Serena Williams and Venus Williams back-to-back at the 1998 Australian Open.
It’s the biggest factor that affects the outcome when serious athletes compete.
You have zero scientific proof of that.
Come back if you ever find any.
*She. Please don’t misgender her, it plays right into these transphobes’ hands of questioning her gender.
I’m not saying “they” to avoid specifying gender. I’m saying “they” because there are two boxers involved in this controversy.
The IBA said Khelif and fellow boxer Lin Yu-ting of Taiwan had failed “to meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors.”
Why do you keep quoting an organization that has been discredited by the very article youre commenting on?
It seems like you want to appeal to an authority that has none. Quoting liars as a source of truth doesn’t give the lies any weight.
The IBA has not disclosed the nature of the tests conducted on Khelif and Yu-Ting. The results therefore are not conclusive, nor are they reproducible.
The IBF, headed by russion dude, came up with this undiaclosed “test” three days after the algerian boxer beat an undefeated russian boxer.
The IBF was so openly corrupt, that the IOC kicked them and 20+ national boxing feds left IBF and created a new organization.
