2024 Paris Olympics General (non-Basketball/Track & Field) Discussion Thread

[dockingsched]

Read on Twitter

?s=46&t=AtPRYYXAIqrFGO95b7YfIA

[Nuntius]

NO. ANY point about trans or anything to do with trans issues is NOT my point.

It was not your point, I agree. But it was the point of some of the people whose tweets you posted in this thread.

But thanks for clarifying the point about motives, whose, etc. If I happened to mention it or mention the point of others talking about sex-based competition it is just that. If you find Dawkins' words displeasing fine. But their science knowledge and knowing that XY should not be competing with XX is hard to refute. Dismissing Hinton, Dawkins, Hooven only makes it seem like the science is ignored because it can't be refuted. How about focusing on their WORK.

I'm not trying to dismiss their work as a whole. I am simply saying that since this is a topic in which they have a demonstrable bias, that bias should be factored in when evaluating their positions. Because one's bias definitely affects their work.

Hooven's tweet is exceptional and informative, relevant to the specifics of DSD. Hinton's research is peer reviewed. And it actually pains me to include Dawkins because there isn't much philosophically I agree with him on (his stance on religion is infuriating) but again his knowledge on the topic of sexes and their differences is sound. These you cannot dispute even as they are dismissed because of their associations. The work stands on its own merit. You can try to discredit WHO says it, but that does not blot out WHAT they are saying. And what they are saying is that XY and their DSDs have an advantage over XX.

Once again, I'm not doubting their knowledge of the subject. What I am saying is that their biases can influence their opinions and can thus lead them to faulty results.

Are the opinions that they hold on this subject the scientific consensus on the topic?

Because, for what is worth, the World Medical Association is against sex verification in sports. Here's a press release from the WMA urging physicians to not implement the IAAF's rules:

The World Medical Association has called on physicians around the world to take no part in implementing new eligibility regulations for classifying female athletes.

The regulations from the International Association of Athletics Federations require women athletes with specific differences in sex development to medically reduce their natural blood testosterone level if they wish to continue racing as women in a few restricted events.

The DSD (Differences of Sexual Development) rule, introduced last year, followed the case of South African runner Caster Semenya, the world and Olympic champion, who has had to undergo gender verification testing to confirm her eligibility to compete in the women’s division.

Next week, the Court of Arbitration for Sport is due to issue a decision on the IAAF regulations.

At its Council meeting in Santiago, Chile, today, the WMA demanded the immediate withdrawal of the regulations. It said they constitute a flagrant discrimination based on the genetic variation of female athletes and are contrary to international medical ethics and human rights standards.

Following an initiative by the South African Medical Association the WMA fears the regulations would constrain the athletes concerned to take unjustified medication, not based on medical need, in order for them to be allowed to compete, and accordingly require physicians to prescribe such medication.

It is in general considered as unethical for physicians to prescribe treatment for excessive endogenous testosterone if the condition is not recognized as pathological. The WMA calls on physicians to oppose and refuse to perform any test or administer any treatment or medicine which is not in accordance with medical ethics, and which might be harmful to the athlete using it, especially to artificially modifying blood constituents, biochemistry or endogenous testosterone.

WMA President Dr. Leonid Eidelman said: ‘We have strong reservations about the ethical validity of these regulations. They are based on weak evidence from a single study, which is currently being widely debated by the scientific community. They are also contrary to a number of key WMA ethical statements and declarations, and as such we are calling for their immediate withdrawal’.

https://www.wma.net/news-post/wma-urges-physicians-not-to-implement-iaaf-rules-on-classifying-women-athletes/

I am interested in what the scientific consensus is on the subject matter. Based on the little I've read (because, again, I'm not an expert when it comes to medical issues), it doesn't look like there's a scientific consensus on this yet.

By the way, gender critical views are protected in law.

I am singling that part out because I wanted to make a separate point about it. Yes, gender-critical views are protected in law. Every expression of a political ideology is protected in law. Expressing support for national socialism, for example, is protected in law.

That does not mean that people cannot disagree with those stated views. That does not mean that those (or any other) political views are beyond reproach. Expressions of political ideology are protected indeed, the government cannot take away your right to express those opinions but people do absolutely have the right to disagree with those opinions and they do have the right to not like those opinions and do not accept them as valid.

To that end, yes you are consistent about Semenya but do you dispute that CS has a DSD specific to males only and therefore should not be running in the female category? It shouldn't be the case that socialization/passports/birth certificates trump biological advantage in sports categorization. Another open category? Fine. But females who went through female puberty are getting pummeled and beaten in races and results to the podium.

Once again, I'm fine with whatever solution is agreed upon by those who have actual expertise on the subject matter. I'm never going to pretend that I'm an expert on a topic I know little about. On topics I know little about, I have no qualms about trusting those who do know more than me.

For what is worth, Margaret Wambui, one of the athletes that has been hurt by the IAAF's rulings has suggested that World Athletics introduces a third category, in order to include intersex people.

Here's an article about it:

https://www.bbc.com/sport/africa/57239439

"It would be good if a third category for athletes with high testosterone was introduced - because it is wrong to stop people from using their talents," Wambui told BBC Sport Africa.

The sport's governing body, World Athletics, says it has no plans to introduce such a category and will stick to its current classifications of men's and women's events.

The idea of a third category in athletics has been floated before, external, but Wambui is the first athlete to express outright support for the suggestion.

"We would be the first people to compete in that category - so we can motivate others who are hiding their condition," she said.

"We could show them that it is not their fault, that this is how they were created, and that they've done nothing wrong."

So, yes, at least one of the athletes wants a third category. Sadly, World Athletics doesn't seem keen on the idea.

And it's the same patterns with IBA. Discredit IBA (and I'm not disputing the criticism of the organization), ok but that does not follow to automatically therefore ignore the tests, independent though they are said to be, even though the results themselves have yet to be refuted by the boxers themselves, even though I haven't read about those results themselves being questioned. And so while each boxer may have been raised as girls, the XX failed test is still lingering there. It's a huge issue that is easily verified or disputed but the parties involved refuse to require (IOC) or volunteer (athletes) clearing them up.

Allow me to answer this part along with the following post (since they essentially broach the same topics):

Try again:

Read on Twitter

Independent tests.

So, can someone view the results of these tests and independently verify and corroborate their results?

Now THAT is an excellent question and I would find is super suspect if it couldn't be answered. I also don't know what to make of both boxers either not appealing or dropping the appeal. The murkiness should ALL be clarified.

It is exactly due to the fact that this question has yet to be answered that I'm not willing to take the IBA's word for it. I mean, you can even look at the IBA's latest statement. They do mention when the tests happened but they do not mention what those tests actually were. There's no mention of XY chromosomes. As JDR said, there's no real way to know what those tests actually were.

As for the boxers not appealing, my guess would be that since the IBA is collapsing and about to be replaced by World Boxing, it's possible that they simply didn't consider it important to spend so much money on (Olympics boxers aren't exactly rich).

I do agree that the murkiness should be clarified.

So I say again: IOC must bring back cheek swab sex tests. Athletes should compete in the sex categories they are biologically proven to belong to. And if another open category is necessary then it should be created. This is truly inclusive, fair, and safe.

As I said before, I'm all for a third category if the athletes desire it.

That said, I will say that the "biologically proven to belong to" part of your post isn't that simple. Especially when it comes to intersex people, it's not exactly easy to prove where someone belongs to.

[Ghetto Gospel]

realistically, i'm not sure a third category athlete would work for most sports..? how many events can field enough of these athletes to stage a competitive event? how many 5x5 basketball teams would exist?

if anything, just completely open the men's category (is it open already? i don't know) and restrict the women's category. if you don't fit whatever criteria the powers that be decide who can compete in the women's category, then you may compete in the open

[madskillz8]

There is nothing political about this discussion.

And bringing up a person's background when they make a controversial decision is valid. Decisions aren't made in vaccuums. People have biases. People of questionable moral character should absolutely have their decisions put through greater scrutiny.

I agree with everything you said in the second paragraph. However, you just said this:

We're talking about a guy who potentially commited war crimes against Arab-speaking Muslims making a unilateral decision to ban an Arab-speaking Muslim from a sporting competition, a decision that the sport's other major governing body disputes.

That's what is wrong with that identity politics POV in general, making everything and everything else about identities. It is pure speculation to because IBA banned two boxers, one is being Muslim-Arab, and other is not. As far as we know there were two boxer in that situation and both banned. And is there, say a British athlete, who is in the same situation but not banned by IBA? If not, their decision only shows they are consistent, not they have a bias...

This was a decision made by a single person (correct me if I'm wrong) that is disputed by the IOC. If the IOC came to the same conclusion he did, I wouldn't be inclined to suggest that he may be biased.

I'm not saying he is definitively a bigot, but when someone of questionable moral character (being implicated in war crimes is pretty **** morally questionable) makes a controversial decision (again, the sport's other governing body disagrees with his decision), it's perfectly normal to discuss that person's background. It helps to understand the potential reasoning behind their decision.

And just to clarify (since there is a lot of quoting going on), this is my personal position on this, not Nuntius'.

Again agreed on most - but one thing, and it is important: of course it is not a one man decision. At least there is no info on that. Whoever said that, saying that it is a one man decision is just trying to find a way to discredit IBA to support his/her stance.

Serious question for you: Do you really believe that the organization which was the governing body of boxing (until having a dispute with IOC, which is also known as highly corrupted with numerous bribe scandals) was testing & handing bans with one man's word? Even though their testing widely is recognized by bodies including The International Testing Agency (ITA) and CAS... Reading such posts you may even think there is one desk and chair, no actual testing, and one corrupted **** is giving these bans based on his biases...

In reality though, considering the dominant countries, boxing is one of the sports which doping is very prevalent. And IBA, which has been handing hundreds of bans doping in the last decade, is still widely recognized by governing doping agencies like ITA and WADA. But when it comes to a boxer who you support for political beliefs of yours, these IBA decisions are becoming very questionable and made by a single person who is supposed to be **** .

Here is a list of recent bans handed by IBA, which are all approved by ITA, WADA, and CAS at the end of the day...
https://ita.sport/sanction/international-boxing-association-iba/

I am sorry but I am really disgusted by how easy for people to tell lies, and try spread misinformation for their political stance. And I know, it is very common... Look, I will give a very recent example from Paris 2024. A Turkish boxer, my countryman, recently caught by IBA for a prohibited substance. They appealed of course, and even travelled to Paris, just to learn IOC doesn't let him to weigh-in sessions because of the IBA's ban, and ITA's further investigation. But I was just told IOC does not care about corrupted, one man show and not respected IBA?

I love and support my country, and I literally bleed red like our flag, but I am not really surprised when some testing agency found a Turkish guy guilty. I am not trying to check CVs of secretaries of doping agencies, knowing that it is a traditional sport in some countries to find such "loopholes" to win no matter what, disregarding whole ethical values. Even Hedo Turkoglu received a rare doping ban in NBA because of the substances they gave him in national team camp. Ilyasova was actually 2-3 years older, but his club used that to dominate youth tournaments. 3-time Olympic champion wrestler, a self-proclaimed "very good Muslim", Riza Kayaalp has just "decided to withdrawn" from Paris 2024 because he caught with doping.

And I genuinely think we are the best in such ethical values compared to those other countries Algeria, Morocco, Egypt, Azerbaijan, and all other middle east countries... So if an athlete from such countries is caught, my experience suggest that they are most likely caught red handed than some guy in that federation doesn't like my country.

Lastly, you might question that why IOC often accept IBA decisions but not this time. I think the difference is what I called a political agenda. They want to promote something they believe using the Olympics. Which is reasonable But it is also the answer for the question: They are pushing this agenda from day 1 (opening ceremony), and their decision to dispute with IBAs decision this time is perfectly in line with that. They are already openly promoting transgenders' right to compete in women's category: https://olympics.com/en/news/laurel-hubbard-new-zealand-weightlifter-history-tokyo-2020-2021-games.

I said it is reasonable, thus I am just trying to explain why IOC, who often enforce IBA's decisions, made a different decision when it comes to this issue, and insisted on rejecting to do the same testing. One last question: do you really think the same organization that shares the above linked piece on Laurel Hubbard, and praises a transgender competing in women's category, would ban an intersex (or whatever) from the Olympics. I am not expecting an answer but think about it. Everything will make more sense.

That's my two cents and last post in this discussion since I feel like I contributed to the derailing the thread.

[Mavrelous]

Read on Twitter

[Nuntius]

Again agreed on most - but one thing, and it is important: of course it is not a one man decision. At least there is no info on that.

Here is the source for the claim that this ban was a one-man decision:

According to the IBA minutes available on their website, this decision was initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO. The IBA Board only ratified it afterwards and only subsequently requested that a procedure to follow in similar cases in the future be established and reflected in the IBA Regulations. The minutes also say that the IBA should “establish a clear procedure on gender testing”.

https://olympics.com/ioc/news/joint-paris-2024-boxing-unit-ioc-statement

It's right in the IOC statement posted earlier in this thread. And, according to the IOC statement, it is the IBA's own minutae that support this statement.

You can dispute the allegation if you want but to say that there is no info on that is inaccurate.

[madskillz8]

Again agreed on most - but one thing, and it is important: of course it is not a one man decision. At least there is no info on that.

Here is the source for the claim that this ban was a one-man decision:

According to the IBA minutes available on their website, this decision was initially taken solely by the IBA Secretary General and CEO. The IBA Board only ratified it afterwards and only subsequently requested that a procedure to follow in similar cases in the future be established and reflected in the IBA Regulations. The minutes also say that the IBA should “establish a clear procedure on gender testing”.

https://olympics.com/ioc/news/joint-paris-2024-boxing-unit-ioc-statement

It's right in the IOC statement posted earlier in this thread. And, according to the IOC statement, it is the IBA's own minutae that support this statement.

You can dispute the allegation if you want but to say that there is no info on that is inaccurate.

Well, thanks. Did you really read what they refer to though?

Part 6 simply shows that IBA, in contrast to what you portrayed in this thread, is transparent with their processes, democratic, and by no means a one-man-decides-all organization. Definitely more than I expected after reading all these awful things about them in this thread.

The IOC announcement on the other hand is trying to emphasize the minor details in the decision making process INSTEAD OF discussing the actual topic. They are trying to avoid that. Because they have no balls to say, "we don't care if they are intersex or transgender or etc, we let them compete in women's category". See the above shared link to see their stance on the subject.

Well, reading the "IBA minutes" report published in 2023, it is clear that they were facing an unusual case which is folded during in the middle of the tournament. At that point, they had to decide as soon as possible as two boxers are tested to have XY chromosomes. As it is an unexpected case which requires an immediate a decision, CEO and secretary (top officials) taking responsibility and coming up with the decision to recommend ban these two players. Then, board were having a legit discussion because it needed to be approved together, with majority votes. After different views and concerns were presented, they were indeed voting to ban these two players.

Yes, I know - ideally, you write board members about the situation, collect their views in a report and discuss the report on a meeting to make a decision first, then you ratify. But "ideally". If you are in the middle of a tournament, where there is a scheduled game a few hours later, you cant go with this kind of procedure that would normally take a week or so. According to them, they received results after semi finals (March 24, 2023). The meeting was held on March 25, 2023 - 10:00 AM, with final game is scheduled at 18:00.

The only, albeit minor mistake in the process that they were notifying athletes before this discussion (we are talking about 4-5 hours difference here), because it seems like they are panicking as the tournament goes on and the clock is ticking for the next round. After all, if they won't ratify, they would have had to inform them again that they can continue. Sure this mistake could have been avoided by staying calmer during the crisis, but it is easier said than done. I don't want to believe IOC is trying to use this minor mistake to reject IBA's decision without even discussing the test results.

Thus, reading this report and all the legit discussion on the decision and still claiming it is a one-man-decision because of that minor panic-mode mistake makes no sense. Zero.

The announcement you shared just shows IOC is trying to avoid discussing the actual subject - those two having XY chromosomes. The decision's being solely made by CEO (which is not true) or Nadia Comanaci (also not true) is not a valid reason for IOC to look the other way.

[DOT]

This whole thing really just shows the unseriousness of the anti-trans community

Cause Imane is cis. That’s the end of it

Furthermore, rather than doubling down on the “she failed a sex test!” argument, it should instead cast doubt on the accuracy of said tests if you can be a cis woman and fail them, or at the very least should mean they’re considered flawed tests

If you want to say not all cis women are women and shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports, you have to say where you draw the line and what criteria you’re using to define women. Just demanding there needs to be some line somewhere does nothing.

[Bergmaniac]

This whole thing really just shows the unseriousness of the anti-trans community

Cause Imane is cis. That’s the end of it

Furthermore, rather than doubling down on the “she failed a sex test!” argument, it should instead cast doubt on the accuracy of said tests if you can be a cis woman and fail them, or at the very least should mean they’re considered flawed tests

If you want to say not all cis women are women and shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports, you have to say where you draw the line and what criteria you’re using to define women. Just demanding there needs to be some line somewhere does nothing.

The goal of these tests isnt't to determine who is a "cis woman", which is not a scientific term and didn't even exist as a term when sex testing in sports began to be used.

[DOT]

This whole thing really just shows the unseriousness of the anti-trans community

Cause Imane is cis. That’s the end of it

Furthermore, rather than doubling down on the “she failed a sex test!” argument, it should instead cast doubt on the accuracy of said tests if you can be a cis woman and fail them, or at the very least should mean they’re considered flawed tests

If you want to say not all cis women are women and shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports, you have to say where you draw the line and what criteria you’re using to define women. Just demanding there needs to be some line somewhere does nothing.

The goal of these tests isnt't to determine who is a "cis woman", which is not a scientific term and didn't even exist as a term when sex testing in sports began to be used.

Leaving aside the fact that cisgender is literally a scientific term for when biological sex matches gender identity, then what exactly are the sex tests testing for?

Because if they're just testing for testosterone, testosterone levels don't really indicate your biological sex. Not only are they variable to begin with, but they're not hard to change, as a matter of fact steroids increase your testosterone. If they're testing for the presence of a Y chromosome, again outliers exist where you can be a woman and have a Y chromosome

If you wanted to say the cutoff should be at a certain level of testosterone or if a person has a Y chromosome, then you should have said so from the start and we could have had a discussion about that. You'd still be wrong of course, but the fact this started with people labelling Imane as trans and then only when it became overwhelmingly clear she's cis did they start backpedalling shows this was never a good faith discussion

The issue is that a lot of people stopped paying attention to science in 5th grade and are leaning on their elementary school level understanding of subjects which are designed to increase in complexity over time because younger kids can't quite grasp nuances yet.

[dockingsched]

This whole thing really just shows the unseriousness of the anti-trans community

Cause Imane is cis. That’s the end of it

Furthermore, rather than doubling down on the “she failed a sex test!” argument, it should instead cast doubt on the accuracy of said tests if you can be a cis woman and fail them, or at the very least should mean they’re considered flawed tests

If you want to say not all cis women are women and shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports, you have to say where you draw the line and what criteria you’re using to define women. Just demanding there needs to be some line somewhere does nothing.

The goal of these tests isnt't to determine who is a "cis woman", which is not a scientific term and didn't even exist as a term when sex testing in sports began to be used.

Cis means that someone’s sex at birth matches their gender identity, basically the opposite of transgender. Most people are cis. The post you quoted used that term to remove any doubt that Imane is a women.

Your response to the post really shouldn’t have been to criticize the term, but to really address how a test designed to test “sex” can “fail” someone who was assigned female at birth and continues to identify as a women. After all a “sex” test isn’t some magical tool that just appeared, it’s just a tool that measures something that people have determined is how they want to define and separate the sexes.

[Bergmaniac]

The IBA statement is quite clear that the tests Imani failed wasn't for testosterone.

I never labeled Imani as trans so not sure why are you pretending that I did. Imani is clearly not trans based on the information publicly available. The whole trans angle only muddles the whole issues and led to both sides making plenty of idiotic claims. But that doesn't automatically mean Imani should be allowed to compete in the women category. She failed a sex test and then withdrew her appeal to CAS for a reason. From what I've read, most likely she has a DSD condition (5-ARD) which means internal testes which produce testosterone which gives her a serious advantage. If that's true, she shouldn't be allowed to compete in the women category.

If the IOC had evidence that the two boxers which are involved in this scandal have XX chromosomes, don't have hugely elevated testosterone levels and don't have internal testes and that the IAB has invented the whole thing for some nefarious reason, I think they would have released it by now. They haven't done so and their statements on the topic are full of weasely words dancing around the main issue. They also directly state "The gender and age of the athletes is based on their passport" but that's obviously insuffient to prevent cases where due to having an intersex condition some persons being assigned female at birth but having internal testes and undergoing male puberty which give them a massive advatage, like Caster Semenya.

[DOT]

and led to both sides making plenty of idiotic claims.

Like what lol

I get you want to feel smart, but blanket "both sides are ridiculous, look at how intelligent I am" comments just make you seem uninformed.

[AdagioPace]

being italian I feel involved in this Carini vs Imane gate (it basically split a nation and the entire world)

My take is that until IOC sees kariotyping as not beneficial (thus avoiding it), every discussion on the topic will lead to a dead end. there's simply not enough info available.

[G R E Y]

This whole thing really just shows the unseriousness of the anti-trans community

Cause Imane is cis. That’s the end of it

Furthermore, rather than doubling down on the “she failed a sex test!” argument, it should instead cast doubt on the accuracy of said tests if you can be a cis woman and fail them, or at the very least should mean they’re considered flawed tests

If you want to say not all cis women are women and shouldn’t be allowed to compete in women’s sports, you have to say where you draw the line and what criteria you’re using to define women. Just demanding there needs to be some line somewhere does nothing.

The goal of these tests isnt't to determine who is a "cis woman", which is not a scientific term and didn't even exist as a term when sex testing in sports began to be used.

Leaving aside the fact that cisgender is literally a scientific term for when biological sex matches gender identity, then what exactly are the sex tests testing for?

Because if they're just testing for testosterone, testosterone levels don't really indicate your biological sex. Not only are they variable to begin with, but they're not hard to change, as a matter of fact steroids increase your testosterone. If they're testing for the presence of a Y chromosome, again outliers exist where you can be a woman and have a Y chromosome

If you wanted to say the cutoff should be at a certain level of testosterone or if a person has a Y chromosome, then you should have said so from the start and we could have had a discussion about that. You'd still be wrong of course, but the fact this started with people labelling Imane as trans and then only when it became overwhelmingly clear she's cis did they start backpedalling shows this was never a good faith discussion

The issue is that a lot of people stopped paying attention to science in 5th grade and are leaning on their elementary school level understanding of subjects which are designed to increase in complexity over time because younger kids can't quite grasp nuances yet.

Nope. And this is why there's been a lot of back and forth. It's not 'just' testosterone. It's chromosomes and the male or female puberty that comes with it, and with that, biological advantage, which for the purpose of sports competition cannot be overcome with more training.

Lots of us have tried hard to separate coming down on a group of people so dismissing these efforts as just bias is not constructive. Having failed T and XX tests and withdrawing appeal does no one any good. IOC removing cheek swab sex tests does not either.

For the purpose of comparison, Semenya was brought up as also being brought as a girl but without a uterus and with testes the male puberty that CS's body went through and the DSD being one that only males can have should be a case for a third competing category, not one which smokes XX competitors regardless of how great they are.

This is about fairness and safety on clearly defined equal playing fields/categories. It's easily testable.

[G R E Y]

being italian I feel involved in this Carini vs Imane gate (it basically split a nation and the entire world)

My take is that until IOC sees kariotyping as not beneficial (thus avoiding it), every discussion on the topic will lead to a dead end. there's simply not enough info available.

But IOC is completely complicit in the lack of clarity. They tested for sex categories up until 2000. It is a One Time Non-Invasive Cheek Swab. That's it. Many experts in the fields of evolutionary and developmental biology, over 80% of female Olympian athletes last polled, former Olympians and pros and coaches in various sports call for clarity and fair categories that this one test provides. Sports governing body organizations test for doping routinely. This should not be such an issue but is made one by the IOC's utter silence on it and refusal to re-implement it.

[Bergmaniac]

and led to both sides making plenty of idiotic claims.

Like what lol

I get you want to feel smart, but blanket "both sides are ridiculous, look at how intelligent I am" comments just make you seem uninformed.

I was talking about the general discussion on social media, not specifically here. But if you want an example from this thread, here is one:

Well, according to the Olympic statement before your post ( and below mine you replied to) the gender of the athletes is based on their passports.

And seeing how it's illegal to be trans in Algeria, this boxer couldn't get a passport that said she's a woman without being a woman. So no sex test needed, she's a woman. So I think that puts this controversy to rest.

It just completely ignores the existence of intersex conditions. Caster Semenya's passport stated she is a woman too. But she has 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency (5-ARD), a condition only affects genetic males with XY chromosomes. Because of this a few years ago she was banned from competing.

And also the obvious possibilities that passports can be fake (I am not saying this is the case here, but "Let's not check at all and just trust the passport" is basically inviting bad actors to take advantage and is plain dumb when a simple cheek swab test can reveal the truth). Federations in many sports over the years have faked birth dates to circumvent minimum age requirements, often with the assistance of the local government itself, and obviously doping abuse has been rampant in the history of the Olympics so it's quite naive to say "the passport says so, end of story".

[The Sebastian Express]

The goal of these tests isnt't to determine who is a "cis woman", which is not a scientific term and didn't even exist as a term when sex testing in sports began to be used.

Leaving aside the fact that cisgender is literally a scientific term for when biological sex matches gender identity, then what exactly are the sex tests testing for?

Because if they're just testing for testosterone, testosterone levels don't really indicate your biological sex. Not only are they variable to begin with, but they're not hard to change, as a matter of fact steroids increase your testosterone. If they're testing for the presence of a Y chromosome, again outliers exist where you can be a woman and have a Y chromosome

If you wanted to say the cutoff should be at a certain level of testosterone or if a person has a Y chromosome, then you should have said so from the start and we could have had a discussion about that. You'd still be wrong of course, but the fact this started with people labelling Imane as trans and then only when it became overwhelmingly clear she's cis did they start backpedalling shows this was never a good faith discussion

The issue is that a lot of people stopped paying attention to science in 5th grade and are leaning on their elementary school level understanding of subjects which are designed to increase in complexity over time because younger kids can't quite grasp nuances yet.

Nope. And this is why there's been a lot of back and forth. It's not 'just' testosterone. It's chromosomes and the male or female puberty that comes with it, and with that, biological advantage, which for the purpose of sports competition cannot be overcome with more training.

Lots of us have tried hard to separate coming down on a group of people so dismissing these efforts as just bias is not constructive. Having failed T and XX tests and withdrawing appeal does no one any good. IOC removing cheek swab sex tests does not either.

For the purpose of comparison, Semenya was brought up as also being brought as a girl but without a uterus and with testes the male puberty that CS's body went through and the DSD being one that only males can have should be a case for a third competing category, not one which smokes XX competitors regardless of how great they are.

This is about fairness and safety on clearly defined equal playing fields/categories. It's easily testable.

Grey you posted tweets and liked gavran's post calling Khelif a man.

[DOT]

This is about fairness and safety on clearly defined equal playing fields/categories. It's easily testable.

No, it really isn't

I know it isn't because it was being pushed by transphobes

You may think it is, but then again some people thought Gamergate was about ethics in journalism

If we're worried about fairness, why aren't there calls for Simone Biles or Katie Ledecky to be banned? Clearly their sports are significantly more unfair to their opponents because of them than boxing is because of Imane

I think it's rather misogynistic to say that women aren't allowed to have outliers. To say we need to keep some women out because it's not fair to the rest of them is paternalistic

Imane is a woman. So is Brittney Griner. So are all the other outliers. When there are calls for them to be banned from play, I will believe you when you say it's about fairness, but even then you would still be wrong. But until then, at best you're being used by transphobes/misogynists in their culture war without realizing it.

[G R E Y]

Leaving aside the fact that cisgender is literally a scientific term for when biological sex matches gender identity, then what exactly are the sex tests testing for?

Because if they're just testing for testosterone, testosterone levels don't really indicate your biological sex. Not only are they variable to begin with, but they're not hard to change, as a matter of fact steroids increase your testosterone. If they're testing for the presence of a Y chromosome, again outliers exist where you can be a woman and have a Y chromosome

If you wanted to say the cutoff should be at a certain level of testosterone or if a person has a Y chromosome, then you should have said so from the start and we could have had a discussion about that. You'd still be wrong of course, but the fact this started with people labelling Imane as trans and then only when it became overwhelmingly clear she's cis did they start backpedalling shows this was never a good faith discussion

The issue is that a lot of people stopped paying attention to science in 5th grade and are leaning on their elementary school level understanding of subjects which are designed to increase in complexity over time because younger kids can't quite grasp nuances yet.

Nope. And this is why there's been a lot of back and forth. It's not 'just' testosterone. It's chromosomes and the male or female puberty that comes with it, and with that, biological advantage, which for the purpose of sports competition cannot be overcome with more training.

Lots of us have tried hard to separate coming down on a group of people so dismissing these efforts as just bias is not constructive. Having failed T and XX tests and withdrawing appeal does no one any good. IOC removing cheek swab sex tests does not either.

For the purpose of comparison, Semenya was brought up as also being brought as a girl but without a uterus and with testes the male puberty that CS's body went through and the DSD being one that only males can have should be a case for a third competing category, not one which smokes XX competitors regardless of how great they are.

This is about fairness and safety on clearly defined equal playing fields/categories. It's easily testable.

Grey you posted tweets and liked gavran's post calling Khelif a man.

Ok