Incredible that people still keep assuming sex = gender. Just a quick google will clear it up but some people still refuse to see a difference.
If you take some of the issues away, and look at certain hormones in blood, if a male presented with way over normal testosterone, they would be banned from competing. It would be interesting to see what this athlete's reading was.
Women's normal reading is below a maximum of 1.7 n/mol. Men it's from around 9 to 25. Below 12 you'll feel like shit being a male (I know having tested at 5 n/mol.)
It's a very complex situation.
Loads of folk saying Pogacar is on the Juice because of his performance recently.
Back to the original story, not sure what is going on these days, back in 2012 it was all about Semenya and forcing her to go through tests to prove she wasn't male, the IOC did bring in a change that banned her from 2019 though, so unsure why this doesn't capture other sports, as you'd think these boxers would be under the same type of biological issues against the tested levels to compete?
Anyway, i just see this as being mixed up with transgender athletes, i read the stories and see 'him' or 'male', but that's not the case here, same with Semenya and others, it just seems to be the continuation of that Lia Thomas debacle, don't think the IOC are helping themselves with so much change in isolation, rather than across the sports.
"but some people still refuse to see a difference."
Partially through choice, but there is some social/generational impact there too IMO.
I've just spent a term discussing prejudice/discrimination with a Y8 class as part of our PSHE curriculum. Pretty much without exception, every 12 year old I've worked with has understood the sex/gender difference and been happy with that. At least at the level we deliver it to that age group.
every 12 year old I’ve worked with has understood the sex/gender difference and been happy with that.
Good to hear and debates/misunderstandings/failure to acknowledge will eventually go away and just be for old people (just like so many other things that are not like they used to be)
Incredible that people still keep assuming sex = gender. Just a quick google will clear it up but some people still refuse to see a difference.
Or some people claim there is a difference, some disagree. There is no consensus on the use of the words
In the last couple of decades some folk have tried to redefine the words so that there is a difference.
there is no objective right and wrong here - only subjective opinions on both sides
Good to hear and debates/misunderstandings/failure to acknowledge will eventually go away and just be for old people (just like so many other things that are not like they used to be)
The way I've tried to explain things to the luddites at work is that homosexuality was the 'issue' for our parents and was something they had to come to terms with. For my generation homosexuality does not even register on my/our radar as it's the norm.
Gender fluidity/ identity is now the new 'homosexuality' for me/my generation in that we have to understand and come to terms with. For people of a younger generation than me it's the norm.
For that younger generation their 'thing' that they will have to come to terms with will be digital implantation/modifications (or somesuch societal future change)
Its the sign of a progressive society. People who resist can moan about it in the Daily Mail comments section or move to Saudi.
Back to the original story, not sure what is going on these days
IOC provides non binding guidelines, but defer to the eligibility rules of the governing bodies for each sport. The IBA banned Kehlif under their own rules, but they were ejected from the Olympics because of various scandals, and the IOC gave boxing control to an ad-hoc unit instead (who have applied different eligibility rules).
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/sports/olympics/2024/08/01/olympic-gender-testing-boxers/74615354007/
Or some people claim there is a difference, some disagree. There is no consensus on the use of the words
Case in point, just the point blank refusal to accept that there is a consensus.
A 2 second google, wikipedia states:
Sex generally refers to an organism's biological sex, while gender usually refers to either social roles typically associated with the sex of a person (gender role) or personal identification of one's own gender based on their own personal sense of it (gender identity). Most contemporary social scientists, behavioral scientists and biologists, many legal systems and government bodies, and intergovernmental agencies such as the WHO make a distinction between gender and sex.
I'd say that's a pretty strong consensus.
In that description “generally” and “usually” suggest that those terms are nearly always used that way… but with exceptions. Do we make exceptions for the tiny minority of people that need us to for them to live their lives openly and comfortably as themselves? That’s what all this debate hangs on. The differences in use of “sex” and “gender” should make perfect sense, but, and it’s a big but, are sometimes used to try and restrict and subdue people. For example, to exclude trans people the conversation will be switched from gender to sex… in an attempt to remove gender from the considerations and make everything about a simplified idea of sex rather than complicated notions of gender. For example refusing to use someone’s chosen name or observed gender and using sex as an excuse for doing so.
That really does not show consensus at all. ~far too many qualifiers. My point made.
also note I made no judgement about the validity of either point of view at all but was attacked as if I did.
The way forward is to help her to welcome the body she has, to love who she really is, and not try to make her feel she is in the ‘wrong body’. Right now, I don’t know how to do that, and more importantly neither do her parents. Which is why they are having counselling and therapy.
Depressing that there’s a paucity of actual empathy and understanding coming from certain individuals on here. And unsurprising that some people seem intent on bending all of us to their will. What happened to mutual respect?
More of this please! It's weird that as ideas of gender become more transient the labelling paradoxically becomes more rigid. 'Boy who likes wearing girls' clothes' => 'girl in the wrong body!', as opposed to "fair enough, boys can wear whatever they want". And 'tomboy' is taken to be something "more significant" rather than just "cool, you can be a tomboy"
Just to go at this at a slightly different angle, Carini abandoned after less than a minute because she said "I had to preserve my life." Regardless of the specifics of the authenticy of her opponent, a boxer surely goes into the ring comfortable with the fact that they might make an error or the opponent might be that much better than them and they might get a perfectly timed full force blow to the face/head that gets through and catches you completely unawares. You my be dropped straight away or you might by vulnerable and effectively defenceless to follow up blows until you do drop or the fight gets waved off. That is the ultimate worse case scenario as a boxer and you surely have to accept it might happen every time you fight.
My question is - does a 66kg woman risk any greater level of injury if a 66kg man punched her in the face than a 66kg man would in the same situation? In other words her "I had to preserve my life" claim - if you assume her opponent was able to punch like a man, was her life in any greater risk than every competitor in the men's competition faces every day?
By the sounds of it, this particular situation might be a non issue in a year two as there is a very real chance boxing might find itself no longer an Olympic sport. Not because of this but other issues means the IOC might be at the end of their tether with the sport; exacerbated by the fact that skateboarding, surfing and break dancing is more the look they are after than people getting punched in the face.
If you watch the fight, Khelif didn't land a lot, and nothing looked particularly heavy - we're not talking about a powerful athlete setting their feet and unloading full power shots against an opponent trapped against the ropes. If Khelif was THAT much more powerful, you wouldn't expect her to have lost almost 20% of her fights, or only have six KOs from 51 fights.
It’s weird that as ideas of gender become more transient the labelling paradoxically becomes more rigid. ‘Boy who likes wearing girls’ clothes’ => ‘girl in the wrong body!’, as opposed to “fair enough, boys can wear whatever they want”. And ‘tomboy’ is taken to be something “more significant” rather than just “cool, you can be a tomboy”
That really is not the direction the trans debate is moving, and I'm astonished anyone would think that.
The more I see clips of the fight, the less I see in terms of physical differences, beyond height difference. I reckon the Italian was mentally expecting a beating and lost it mentally rather than physically.
If Khelif was THAT much more powerful, you wouldn’t expect her to have lost almost 20% of her fights, or only have six KOs from 51 fights.
Maybe she's just a really shit boxer....
Or turn it around... She's won 80% of her fights. Would say that's a pretty good record.
Maybe she’s just a really shit boxer….
Or turn it around… She’s won 80% of her fights. Would say that’s a pretty good record.
Unless something has changed in the last 24 hours, there is no evidence either boxer has high testosterone.
There is a single telegram post from a Russian IBA official saying they have XY chromosomes.
They have both been boxing since 2018 and in the last 6 years no one saw anything to make them suspect they didn't belong in the women's category.
The hysteria around transgender inclusion means that a new narrative has been created and gleefully picked up where somehow transgender boxers have snuck into the Olympics and are committing GBH against the real women.
That is the sum total of our current information.
Or turn it around… She’s won 80% of her fights. Would say that’s a pretty good record.
For what's falsely claimed to be a man in a women's class? She's a tidy enough boxer - what's she's not is a man.
So, like, erm…. am I gay?
Does it matter? You be whatever you want to be.
This is a very useful quick read on the history of women being excluded from sport based on spurious claims about the primacy of chromosomes above all else:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2500237/
The story of Ewa Kłobukowska is particularly sad, a top athlete declared not a woman… she clearly in every meaningful way was. After being forced out of athletics, she went on to give birth to a child… even that wasn’t enough to have her status as a female athlete and one of the world’s best ever runners restored:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ewa_Kłobukowska
I'm guessing that using conventional sex definitions/metrics to determine male or female is becoming so much more complex and doesn't really have a part in modern sport
perhaps it should no longer be girls vs boys, and we should stick with a predetermined set of scientific metrics to define which category an athlete should be eligible for. Socially, gender is becoming so much more complex but perhaps fair competition shouldn't be defined by the same rules.
However, i guess it would then be possible for a (I'm going to use this word loosely) conventional cis male to use the rules to be eligible for a category that might be primarily female.. again not much difference to the controversy over transgender entries, but in this instance we aren't defining male or female, just the rules to enter that category, maybe even for a specific discipline.
For sure, these sorts of issues are going to increase in complexity over time, especially as we are on the cusp of genetic manipulation being a thing
i think ,what we are dealing with modern issues that we are trying to address with not so modern rules
Interesting articles Kelvin, thank you. I'd read about Klobukowska before, a horrible story.
So what is the solution?
- take the athletes word for it, they are the sex they declare they are?
- get rid of sex categories and just have open events?
- use modern sex determining methods, which are far quicker, more accurate, and less intrusive than those of the past?
To me the last of these seems to be the best out of poor options. It's not good, but better than either of the other options.
Or is there something I have not thought of that would satisfy everyone?
Since it won't change this case in the slightest, take your pick.
Well Khelif and Lin Yu-Ting could volunteer to do tests (I'm not saying they should, but that they could) which would settle the matter.
I noticed that you confidently stated in an earlier post that Khelif was 'not a man'. Do you have information I've not seen that leads you to say this? The WBO statements suggest otherwise - though as someone else pointed out they might not be a trustworthy source.
I'm genuinely open to suggestions about how this can be best resolved, I cannot see a way out that will leave everyone satisfied.
Which tests?
The WBO statements suggest otherwise – though as someone else pointed out they might not be a trustworthy source.
It's not the WBO, it's the IBA. And saying they are not trustworthy is somewhat of an understatement.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Boxing_Association
WBO is the professional organisation
Oops sorry, indeed IBA (btw, I trust Wikipedia about as much as I trust the IBA).
I don’t know Kelvin, I’m not an expert on sex tests. Chromosome testing would at least provide an accurate base for people to argue from.
Would you prefer one of the other options I put forward? Self determination or open events?
What "chromosome testing" would/should deny a woman a place in the competition? Remember, there are XY mothers out there, and XY women who have gained no physical advantage in their sport due to their chromosomes. If you are suggesting there is a test good enough to exclude women from their category, you will need to be more specific (be sure to read the summary of "sex tests" at the Olympics I linked to on the previous page before answering).
Well Khelif and Lin Yu-Ting could volunteer to do tests (I’m not saying they should, but that they could) which would settle the matter.
Settle what matter? They compete as women at the Olympics under IOC rules that they satisfy.
End of.
Though I am loving some of the social media pulling in some of the trans hating male commentators who admit to taking testosterone to counter their low testosterone levels. If high testosterone levels make women "men", surely it's only right that it works the other way....
Ok, so which do you prefer? Self declaration of sex, or open events for both sexes?
This thread currently make me cringe. I don't know what the rights and wrongs are but these two competitors are women under the current rules.
How do you think it make them feel to have constant questioning of their gender?
Some of you need to use your brains and have some empathy.
I’m not really referring to the current situation - as you say they are there under current regulations. I’m talking about how we could avoid a similar situation occurring in the future. And my question was to Kelvin, though I’m interested in anyone’s answer.
I'll wade in despite previously staying out. And indeed I am still staying out - I'm not getting into the transathlete debate again, and certainly not into the social TG debate, I've +1'ed Kelvin's comment on the last page that sums up where I am there.
I'll also state clearly IANAE on genetics and hence the below is from a position of relative technical ignorance. I also apologise for any clumsy phrasing, it isn't meant.
I googled and it suggests DSD occurs in between 0.1 and 0.02% (1 in 1000-5000) of births. And an athlete with (some types of) DSD may have potential advantages in some types of sport, but it's not an absolute - Imane Khelif for example wins 4/5 bouts which isn't exceptional, and sport isn't overrun with DSD athletes sweeping the board.
So what to 'do' with them? Should they be forced to take suppressing treatments to limit their advantage, whatever that is? Or be banned altogether.
My answer - no. Sporting success already is a mix between genetic advantage, talent, and hard work. To even be competitive at that level you have to have 'superior' genetics, whether internal (lung capacity, fast twitch fibres, whatever) or external - size, arm span, hand size, and so on. Bolt was dominant because of his height and an unnatural stride length, no-one suggests he should have been limited to make it 'fairer' for other athletes. Other sprinters couldn't win WC or Olympic models because they were born at the same time as Bolt, which is just tough.
Imane Khelif did not choose her genetics. She's a woman with a genetic abnormality that has worked ****ing hard to be good at her sport. Good for her, I wish her well in the rest of this competition.
Sporting success already is a mix between genetic advantage, talent, and hard work. To even be competitive at that level you have to have ‘superior’ genetics, whether internal (lung capacity, fast twitch fibres, whatever) or external – size, arm span, hand size, and so on.
Agree whole heartedly with this. This isn't connected to the original trans debate at all. This is about two women blessed/cursed with genetics that may (because they haven't been dominating the sport, let's face it) give them an advantage.
I presume there are testosterone limits in womens as well as mens boxing?
The female boxer was born female and its not like her record is incredible, she has six or something stoppages in 50 fights.
Just look at some of the female (and male) UFC fighters, juiced to the gills!
I’m talking about how we could avoid a similar situation occurring in the future.
What situation? Women being talked about as cheats because they look as if they might have unusual bodies? That situation is avoided by letting them get on with competing and shutting up. If tests for high testosterone are required (for all athletes in both men’s and women’s fields), so be it. But chromosome tests offer nothing useful. Women shouldn’t be subjected to them. History has taught us that.
I noticed that you confidently stated in an earlier post that Khelif was ‘not a man’. Do you have information I’ve not seen that leads you to say this? The WBO statements suggest otherwise – though as someone else pointed out they might not be a trustworthy source.
Sure, she's a woman. The ONLY question comes from a discredited Russian body that DQ'd her after she beat a Russian boxer, and since they won't even say how they tested her, I'm not minded to give that any credence whatsoever.
Thanks for telling me to shut up Kelvin, I'll bear that in mind when I read future posts from you.
Jesus - your fragility is startling.
Yes, you.
