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

[G R E Y]

Enjoy! It's all legal for now after all so that's all that matters. Let's shoehorn this as a matter of word victims rather than women getting pummelled and getting death threats for talking about it.

Let's see once proper sex tests get reimplemented where these two boxers will fight, with M or F or yet a third open category. Or whether they will.

[madskillz8]

Imane and Yu-ting won?



The spirit of the Olympics in full effect? People intentionally referring to these women as men not getting what they want?



10/10 experience, would relive.

What's purpose of this provoking message?

You recently passive aggressively accused people as anti-trans here, even though all you refer was Fox TV crowd. Not the posters here. Well, you didn't receive the attention you seek, no one took the bait.

And, after all these quality and informative discussion here by multiple posters, you are trying this again? Really?

[G R E Y]

Imane and Yu-ting won?



The spirit of the Olympics in full effect? People intentionally referring to these women as men not getting what they want?



10/10 experience, would relive.

What's purpose of this provoking message?

You recently passive aggressively accused people as anti-trans here, even though all you refer was Fox TV crowd. Not the posters here. Well, you didn't receive the attention you seek, nobody baited.

And, after all these quality and informative discussion here by multiple posters, you are trying this again? Really?

I'm not even joking. In terms of the 'spirit of the Olympics' the official slogan of Paris 2024 is 'Games Wide Open'. If it weren't so insidious and dangerous it would be hilarious.

[Mavrelous]

Lasha Talakhadze took the gold again, but it was close-ish this time, nowhere near the dominance of Tokyo and Tashkent

[Mr Puddles]

I don't think this has been posted yet. Game winning buzzer beater in OT (at 5:00) is a pretty epic way to win a gold medal.

Watch on YouTube

Seriously, no love for a fall back three pointer buzzer beater in OT to win the gold medal, but a lively discussion going on about a mid-tournament water polo game?

What has this site become?

[madskillz8]

I don't think this has been posted yet. Game winning buzzer beater in OT (at 5:00) is a pretty epic way to win a gold medal.

Watch on YouTube

Seriously, no love for a fall back three pointer buzzer beater in OT to win the gold medal, but a lively discussion going on about a mid-tournament water polo game?

What has this site become?

That would look like a valid question

until you realize this:

Video unavailable
Playback on other websites has been disabled by the video owner

So we don't even know what is this video about

[Slacktard]

I don't think this has been posted yet. Game winning buzzer beater in OT (at 5:00) is a pretty epic way to win a gold medal.

Watch on YouTube

Seriously, no love for a fall back three pointer buzzer beater in OT to win the gold medal, but a lively discussion going on about a mid-tournament water polo game?

What has this site become?

That would look like a valid question

until you realize this:

Video unavailable
Playback on other websites has been disabled by the video owner

So we don't even know what is this video about

This is also the non-basketball/non-track discussion thread. So it's specifically where you would talk about something like water polo. 3x3 basketball was discussed in the basketball thread generally.

[Revived]

Read on Twitter

[The Sebastian Express]

Imane and Yu-ting won?



The spirit of the Olympics in full effect? People intentionally referring to these women as men not getting what they want?



10/10 experience, would relive.

What's purpose of this provoking message?

You recently passive aggressively accused people as anti-trans here, even though all you refer was Fox TV crowd. Not the posters here. Well, you didn't receive the attention you seek, no one took the bait.

And, after all these quality and informative discussion here by multiple posters, you are trying this again? Really?

Am I trying to respond to bigoted stances posted by people who liked your post?

Yes. Yes I am.

God bless and three cheers to these wonderful women winning their Olympic medals.

[G R E Y]

I don't think this has been posted yet. Game winning buzzer beater in OT (at 5:00) is a pretty epic way to win a gold medal.

Watch on YouTube

Seriously, no love for a fall back three pointer buzzer beater in OT to win the gold medal, but a lively discussion going on about a mid-tournament water polo game?

What has this site become?

That would look like a valid question

until you realize this:

Video unavailable
Playback on other websites has been disabled by the video owner

So we don't even know what is this video about

If you have VPN switch to the country of the video.

[madskillz8]

Am I trying to respond to bigoted stances posted by people who liked your post?

Yes. Yes I am.

God bless and three cheers to these wonderful women winning their Olympic medals.

Well, I don't know either of you. But listen:

There was an ongoing civil discussion about the issue, and you clearly weren't here to share your opinions about that. Instead you were here to provoke people, call them anti-trans, without contributing literally anything to the discussion. Anything. I know not everyone is capable to understand the difference between rejecting women's sports to become an open category and being "anti-trans". And I won't blame you - not everyone is a rational thinker or capable of simple understanding of p's and q's. That's ok. Not everyone is capable enough to understand posting one tweet of Richard Dawkins of all people which, as a detail, assumes a boxer is a male, doesn't mean that poster thinks the boxer is a trans, especially considering the poster posted very detailed posts with maybe more than 100 tweets from respectable and well-educated people on the subject.

While I don't know either of you, all I see in the last few pages that you and DoT are passive aggressively targeting one poster, avoiding to quote her directly, even though that poster is ignoring your multiple personal attacks and derailing attempts by only participating in an actual discussion. Just because of your political motivations, which can be seen from a mile. And huge props to G R E Y for not taking the bait. Huge props to Nuntius, Doctor MJ and others who were able to discuss on such a sensitive and polarizing topic in a best way possible. On the other hand, this looks very pathetic on your part IMO, especially considering you are a senior mod trying to derail a thread...

[Stannis]

Imane and Yu-ting won?



The spirit of the Olympics in full effect? People intentionally referring to these women as men not getting what they want?



10/10 experience, would relive.

So very proud of Imane.

Also, she's not stopping

Read on Twitter

So much vile attacks against her. So needless. People really need to start questioning things before going mental. And also realize the mental damage they are doing.

So many people just read a tweet that said "she's a man" and just ran with it.

[G R E Y]

While I wanted Canada to win, getting to the finals through Australia was a huge achievement.

Also, the Haka is always SO powerful and moving:

Read on Twitter

[Hellcrooner]

Interesting data

Added medals from the european Union

86 gold 89 silver 119 total:294
Mopping the floor with both china and usa.
And that not coungint ex EU medals from Uk.

They should compete united in the next olympics.

[The Sebastian Express]

Am I trying to respond to bigoted stances posted by people who liked your post?

Yes. Yes I am.

God bless and three cheers to these wonderful women winning their Olympic medals.

Well, I don't know either of you. But listen:

There was an ongoing civil discussion about the issue, and you clearly weren't here to share your opinions about that. Instead you were here to provoke people, call them anti-trans, without contributing literally anything to the discussion. Anything. I know not everyone is capable to understand the difference between rejecting women's sports to become an open category and being "anti-trans". And I won't blame you - not everyone is a rational thinker or capable of simple understanding of p's and q's. That's ok. Not everyone is capable enough to understand posting one tweet of Richard Dawkins of all people which, as a detail, assumes a boxer is a male, doesn't mean that poster thinks the boxer is a trans, especially considering the poster posted very detailed posts with maybe more than 100 tweets from respectable and well-educated people on the subject.

While I don't know either of you, all I see in the last few pages that you and DoT are passive aggressively targeting one poster, avoiding to quote her directly, even though that poster is ignoring your multiple personal attacks and derailing attempts by only participating in an actual discussion. Just because of your political motivations, which can be seen from a mile. And huge props to G R E Y for not taking the bait. Huge props to Nuntius, Doctor MJ and others who were able to discuss on such a sensitive and polarizing topic in a best way possible. On the other hand, this looks very pathetic on your part IMO, especially considering you are a senior mod trying to derail a thread...

I think you're mistaken that people who express bigoted stances are owed nuanced and thoughtful responses. Nuntius gave thoughtful responses with far more patience than I could, because my disappointment in seeing moderators from across realGM post misinformation and harmful rhetoric from known transphobic people was so infuriating. And for his troubles there were some of my fellow moderrators he engaged with who personally attacked him. Not his stances, him.

Every post I made specifically pointed out that there were people in this thread bringing in transphobic language and rhetoric. I pointed out that someone in this thread who bemoaned that the thoughtful, criticai posts coming her way were unfair had not only liked a post calling Imane a man, but had posted the same type of rhetoric from twitter. In response she said she would not disavow and was perfectly comfortable with posting the links to popular people calling Imane a man.

This entire thread was derailed since the first Imane fight because some people wanted to post trendy hashtags, bash women, hold up a corrupt organization as a beacon of true and unquestioned fact, and made this thread their agenda about who and who does not qualify as a woman. People begged for that to stop.

And Nuntius stopped. Others stopped. One specific person did not stop and continued making this thread about her anger towards someone she doesn't think is a woman fighting in a women's league. And Nuntius, grace to him, took up the mantle to not let that go unchecked. Bless him.

And the conversation died down again. Until yesterday when Imane won her fight and then the harm and agenda posting against Imane came back. So yes, I posted two gifs. Because it makes me happy to know Imane won. And this is a thread celebrating the Olympic spirit. I regret nothing. Why do I regret nothing? Because I don't like bigoted stances where someone runs free with misinformation and calls someone the wrong gender just to try to humiliate them and in anger. Which is what multiple people in this thread did.

And you'll excuse me for feeling genuine anger as a woman to see people shout from the rooftops about how women in sports must be protected. All while continuing to call Imane a man and not taking into account the danger that kind of bull across all platforms can do to put her in danger. Because we know where she comes from doesn't allow transition. And being queer is illegal. And all it takes is one person or a group of people to believe the bull lies are truth and decide that Imane must by lying, must really be a man and must be trying to fool everyone. And you know what happens to targeted individuals when people believe that?

They end up getting killed. So spare me the righteous indignation about protecting women sports because this isn't about protecting women, it's about protecting femininity. And you can spare me your anger about the thread being derailed because there's only one person in this entire thread that never let this conversation go and it's the one posting crazy people from twitter as if they're gospel.

[Jasen777]

Interesting data

Added medals from the european Union

86 gold 89 silver 119 total:294
Mopping the floor with both china and usa.
And that not coungint ex EU medals from Uk.

They should compete united in the next olympics.

As a joint team they'd get many fewer medals because they'd be reduced to one country's entry limits. Some sports are restricted to one entry per event (you could only get one medal for men's basketball, not 2) and others where you could have 3 they wouldn't always pick the right 3 to send.

[gavran]

Interesting data

Added medals from the european Union

86 gold 89 silver 119 total:294
Mopping the floor with both china and usa.
And that not coungint ex EU medals from Uk.

They should compete united in the next olympics.

No, they shouldn't.

[Nuntius]

RE: Height – comparing this kind of genetic feature – not sex influence – has nothing to do with male puberty advantage. Shorter than Wemby males are successful in the NBA. Almost no one at Wemby’s height can do what he can. And punching power is also really not comparable to height considering the dangers of increased injury. Be it among common public or at pro levels, male puberty has across the board benefits (more below).

This part of your post assumes that male puberty affects intersex people the same way it affects non-intersex people. In fact, your whole position on male puberty advantage hinges on that very assumption. The assumption that male puberty and elevated testosterone levels affect intersex people the same way they affect non-intersex people.

But isn't it a fact that the testosterone and androgen receptors of intersex people do not work the same way they work for the rest of us? Isn't this why a number of intersex conditions fall under the umbrella of AIS (Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome)?

Why are we assuming that male puberty affects intersex people and people with AIS the same way it affects everyone else? Doesn't your argument collapse if you cannot prove that male puberty actually does have that effect on the people in question?

RE: Khelif’s record. So what? All that points to is Khelif not being a particularly good boxer. Still, Khelif has won three golds and one silver in international and world competition; Yu-ting has won five golds and two bronzes in international and world competition. If their respective records show losses to XX women, that does not make them XX -- which could very easily been clarified had either boxer appealed the results which showed both failing two independent sex tests.

But ignoring the very notion that both boxers are pummelling their competition in the Olympics is glaring. I write this after Yu-ting had defeated yet another opponent (with no DQ or even points deducted for a rabbit punch) and two opponents wanting to end fights early. So is the point about taking up competing spots to begins with. And with them, opportunities, money, podium and ranking chances.

The argument that is commonly made against these athletes is that they are dominating the women's category due to having a Y chromosome. Comparing their records with other athletes in their category to see if they are actually statistically dominant is relevant, don't you think?

The main point about XY DSDs is that they should not be competing with XX (nor, of course, should XY).

So, in which category should AFAB athletes with a XY DSD compete in?

A point about terminology. The overwhelming majority of XX go through female puberty; the overwhelming majority of XY go through male puberty. So when XX or XY are referred to, the accompanying puberty is implied. The approximately 40 DSDs for either side, male or female, are very rare.

Yes, intersex people are indeed very rare. No one is denying that. But the discussion we've been having in this thread has been exactly about these rare conditions. So, how male and female puberty affect the bodies of non-intersex individuals is not relevant here. What's relevant is how they affect the individuals with these intersex conditions.

This includes 46XY-5-Alpha reductase deficiency like Semenya’s (which about 1 in 50,000 people in US have) More info here about how it comes to be:

Read on Twitter

and Swyer Syndrome (even more rare, with about 1 in 80,000 in US affected) the latter which is sometimes used at an intended gotcha trap or whataboutism. It is a condition which has XY chromosomes, yes, but here’s more info about how it comes to be:

Read on Twitter

Neither Khelif nor Yu-ting can have Swyer because of their higher T levels. And given the risk to more brittle bones with this DSD, competing in boxing would be madness.

From those who understand DSDs:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

So, the central claim of this part of the post is that Khelif and Yu-ting cannot have Swyer syndrome. And, also, that they suspect that the variation is the same as Semenya's, 5α-Reductase 2 deficiency.

The fact is that we do not know what kind of intersex variation Khelif and Yu-ting have. We have absolutely zero information on that. Emma Hilton and Colin Wright are simply making assumptions here.

We shouldn't base any determination upon assumptions, don't you agree? We need actual data, actually evidence, to make those determinations. Not assumptions.

The entire point of using XX vs. XY and their respective DSDs is which puberty route a given body goes through, male or female. Because regardless of whether a male puberty body loses to female puberty counterparts, the boost of male puberty is on the whole entirely advantageous. Here’s a basic list in handy visual form:

Read on Twitter

I'm not doubting the boost of male puberty.

What I'm doubting is what I mentioned at the very start of this reply. The assumption that male puberty and elevated testosterone levels affect intersex people the same way they affect non-intersex people.

This particular Sex Matters visual takes that assumption as a fact. But it isn't actually a fact that male puberty and elevated testosterone levels affect intersex people the same way they affect non-intersex people, is it?

Another in chart form (I know neither boxer in question is trans. This paper discusses competition post male puberty vs. female puberty competitors):

Read on Twitter

And a more comprehensive explanation:

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1111/cen.13350

Neither the chart nor the Wiley article refer to intersex people and the effect that male puberty or female puberty has on their bodies. So, they aren't relevant to this discussion because, once again, I'm not doubting the male puberty advantage in a vacuum.

And this part is relevant from previously posted https://quillette.com/2024/08/03/xy-athletes-in-womens-olympic-boxing-paris-2024-controversy-explained-khelif-yu-ting/

At the same time, on the substance, the IOC has acknowledged that after Khelif’s first win on Thursday, it scrubbed from its own website the notation that at least Khelif—if not also Lin—has high T. To explain this, it said in part that T levels don’t matter, that lots of females also have high T. This is intentionally misleading.

Female athletes with high T—including those with polycystic ovaries—have T levels towards the top of the female range, not outside of the female range or inside the male range. Their sex is not in doubt. As I explained above, “high T” in an athlete who seeks to compete in the female category is code in international sports for either doping with exogenous androgens or being biologically male with bioavailable endogenous androgens. There’s no indication that either Khelif or Lin is doping.
As an aside, the reason many federations and the IOC itself for years used T as a proxy for sex is that it’s an excellent one: neither ovaries nor adrenal glands produce T in the male range, only testes do. If you’re looking for biological sex rather than legal gender, it’s certainly more accurate than a passport.

This part is indeed relevant. It is definitely more relevant than the two previous links since this article does indeed talk about athletes with intersex variations. And that article does, in fact, make a claim about how testosterone affects intersex individuals. Here's that claim:

Athletes with 5-ARD and PAIS have an XY chromosomal complement; they have testes; their testes produce testosterone well outside of the normal female range; their androgen receptors read and process their “high T”; and as a result, their bodies masculinise through childhood and puberty in the ways that matter for sport. Thereafter, their circulating T levels continue to have their usual performance-enhancing effects.

The problem is that the article presents absolutely no evidence of that claim. It presents no sources, no data to back up that claim. And since the author of the article, Doriane Lambelet Coleman, is not a scientist in a related field (she is Professor of Law) and the claim itself has never been scientifically proven then there is no reason to take that claim as a fact. It is her opinion, it's NOT science.

Finally, even T suppression does not take away male biology advantage baked in through puberty:

Read on Twitter

Interesting thread but it once again isn't really relevant to the discussion we're having. The thread in question was written back in January 21, 2022, and seems to refer specifically to the Lia Thomas controversy that was in full swing at that time. Hence, all the points about T suppression. The thread is about transgender women, it's not about intersex people.

About those sex test results: It’s a misnomer that these were IBA tests. IBA responded to calls from coaches of boxers fighting Khelif and Yu-ting to conduct said tests. The tests were conducted by CAS approved independent labs. The results were sent to both boxers, and to IOC. And while private – both boxers recently sent letters to IBA that they did not consent to make the results public, as is their right – it is now clear that they did indeed fail XX tests as outlined here (https://www.iba.sport/news/iba-clarifies-the-facts-the-letter-to-the-ioc-regarding-two-ineligible-boxers-was-sent-and-acknowledged/) and here (https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Ltr-fr-IBA-to-IOC.pdf) and had a higher T advantage as well. So while the actual test results cannot be publicly revealed, what they can reveal allows for very short connection of dots.

And to clarify:

I never said that the tests weren't conducted by independent labs. My issue was never with the tests themselves, it was with the lack of available evidence at the time that what Kremlev said was factual.

But ever since Abrahamson came out and independently confirmed that he has also seen the tests and that they were indeed testing for XX/XY chromosomes, I have accepted them as a fact.

That's all I ever wanted from the start. An independent verification that what Kremlev said was factual. That was always my issue with it and Abrahamson's article (along with Bergmaniac who posted this article in here) cleared the air for me.

RE: Sex testing. Using outliers like a case with Ewa Kłobukowska , or bringing up nude ‘peek and poke’ tactics are a skewed presentation of available current info. Once again, these are presented but the calls from evolutionary and developmental biologists, from former Olympians, from the overwhelming majority of female athletes polled in Atlanta, and from civil rights lawyers don’t get equal – or any – billing here.

This whole discussion is precisely about outliers. So, I don't know how using an outlier like Ewa Kłobukowska is a skewed presentation of anything. Ewa Kłobukowska is a prime example of how sex verification has been used to disenfranchise women in the past.

You can definitely make the claim that sex verification isn't like that now and that going back down that route won't disenfranchise women now or in the future but I do not see how you can dispute that it absolutely did in the past.

Selective examples of ‘not exactly scientific’ sex tests as well as yet another branch swerving away from the main issue – that African or Asian women are vilified as ugly or manly – only serve to look elsewhere except the one glaring place – test the boxers. Not to say gender stereotypes doesn’t happen:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

But Martina Navatilova, for instance, to this day gets the ‘you look like a guy, would you pass the sex test?” taunts on X.

So, let me get this straight:

When I mention the fact that the vast majority of women whose sex has been in doubt are African and/or Asian, I'm "swerving away from the main issue".

But when you post tweets from utter randos like this "Innocent Bystander" account (I'd take a second look at that account before reposting their crap, by the way) or randomly talk about Navratilova, it's all cool and not swerving.

When I develop an argument that is not directly related to the topic at hand, I'm swerving, but when you do it, it's cool.

Is this really how you think a good faith discussion is supposed to go, G R E Y?

This happens to be a gross initiation into certain aspects of womanhood, like the male gaze and its heaps of expectations, that generations of women are all too familiar with. You know what else women since time immemorial are all too familiar with? Learn to take a punch and be **** silent about it. No.

The irony here is that this is exactly what you've been doing throughout this thread. This is exactly what you and all those tweets you posted have done to the athletes in question, athletes who were assigned female at birth and have spent their entire lives living as women. And, perhaps more tangibly, this is exactly what you have done in this thread, G R E Y.

You have bullied other women, like The Sebastian Express, into silence in this very thread. Do you even realize that?

And since you're pretending to talk on behalf of all women in this thread. Here are some who disagree with you -> https://www.womenssportsfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/participation-of-intersex-athletes-in-womens-sports.pdf

This is a brochure that, unlike a lot of the tweets and links you've posted in this reply, actually does talk about the topic of this discussion, intersex athletes. And here's what it says:

II. DO INTERSEX ATHLETES HAVE A COMPETITIVE ADVANTAGE
WHEN THEY COMPETE IN WOMEN’S SPORTS?
Intersex conditions, as we’ve said, are varied and defy generalization. Many intersex conditions are benign when it comes
to an individual’s physical characteristics that are relevant to sport. Other intersex conditions may cause female athletes
to have atypical quantities or responses to testosterone and therefore may generate concern about competitive advantage.
Sometimes, however, these concerns are misplaced or overblown. For example, an individual with Androgen Insensitivity
Syndrome (AIS) has XY chromosomes, and as a result, a body that produces testosterone. But AIS also limits—either
completely or partially—the body’s ability to respond to testosterone. This inability to respond to testosterone means
that individuals with complete AIS will have female bodies (except for the presence of undescended testes) because it is
testosterone produced in utero that, when received by the body’s unimpaired receptors, will trigger the development of male
genitalia as well as other male secondary characteristics. An athlete with complete or near complete AIS will have little or
no usable testosterone in her body, and therefore should not raise any concern about the competitive advantage over other
women. In fact, since women’s bodies typically do use testosterone (though in quantities generally less than men), women
with AIS would actually have less musculature and other physical characteristics that are perceived to relate to athletic ability
than do women without AIS.

So, let's make one thing clear. Your opinion here is not as ubiquitous among women as you're pretending it is.

And speaking of breaking stereotypes:

Read on Twitter

We already discussed how that Daily Mail tweet is a lie so let's skip this. Vet your sources better next time.

And non-binary Nikki Hiltz competes in women’s 1500m race.

Yep because she was assigned female at birth.

Is there any controversy of XX competing in male categories? You just don’t hear of it. I wonder why? If there’s a single thing that confirms male puberty advantage, this is it.

And we, once again, loop back to what I said at the start of this reply. The assumption that male puberty and elevated testosterone levels affect intersex people the same way they affect non-intersex people. This is the central point of contention here.

You cannot present only old sex test failures without looking into modern testing, ask whether scientific non-invasive tests exist, and answer that there’s no such procedure. Just because you don’t know about them, and haven’t looked too hard, doesn’t mean there have been no improvements:

Well some counterpoints: Here’s a thread discussing a type of test – CHEEK SWAB – and what it shows:

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

Read on Twitter

This thread addresses variations of testing, including touching on Kłobukowska:

Read on Twitter

The basic gist is cheek swabs are the initial gateways of testing and if any anomalies arise, further tests can confirm DSD and which one. There’s plenty of time to get this implemented – for the next Olympics, but there must be IOC will to ensure female categories are that and not open categories in practice.

AND: (And I’m so glad I took my time putting all this together in this post given the thread below) here’s a clear, chronological outline of the various sex tests since they were first used, to the 1960s, to the 1990s, to today, and all the issues and advancements along the way. So to say that there’s no such reliable test nowadays is incontrovertibly false:

Read on Twitter

Yes, science (and technology) has progressed immensely so it makes sense that modern testing is way better than it used to be in the past. Those tests can indeed be used to verify whether a particular athlete has an intersex variation or not and even what specific intersex variation they have.

But as long as it has not been proven that these variations actually affect the athletic performance of intersex athletes and thus give them an unfair advantage then what's exactly the point of them?

Unless, of course, this has nothing to do with the notion that these athletes have an unfair advantage at all. So, what is it, G R E Y? Why are you insisting on sex verification when there is no scientific consensus on whether those intersex variations actually give these athletes an unfair advantage?

RE: Semenya’s appeal – this has to do with being forced into lowering T levels. Ok. But it does not negate the fact that someone born with XY 5ARD DSD has normal level of T for males. And they didn’t have to do a peek and poke naked test to determine it. So it IS possible. And those born with such a DSD should not compete versus XX females.

Sure, athletes with Semenya's DSD have testosterone levels normal for men. No argument here. That is factual.

But I will ask once more:

Has it been scientifically proven that the testosterone circulating in the bodies of intersex people works the same way it works for non-intersex people? Because, once again, the testosterone and androgen receptors of intersex people do NOT work the same way that they work for non-intersex people.

So, why should those athletes be excluded when it has not been proven that they possess an unfair advantage?

As to the part about Doctor MJ’s point about external genitalia being a determining factor for where DSDs should be categorized – beyond the hugely offensive nature of such an assertion (I know it wasn't meant that way) – this is not it. Vaginas and penises don’t do the running, punching, competing. The external genitalia is not the determining competitive factor. It is a body going through male puberty that is *the* determining factor at given levels of competition.

Calling out Doctor MJ, possibly the only person in this discussion who has been civil throughout this whole thing, for something that he didn't even support (but mainly proposed as an option that he didn't even support) is absolutely hilarious.

Semenya smoked competitors. This year’s 800m F winner, Keely Hodgkinson ran it in 1:56:72. Semenya ran the 800m in Rio 2016 in 1:55:28.

Let’s look at this chart chronicling over 100 years of the 800m race:

https://www.statista.com/statistics/1098302/olympics-800m-gold-medal-times-since-1896/
First, since women have had their own category, NONE have come close to beating men’s times in over 100 years.

Next, there’s Rio, 2016, in seconds: 115.28. Semenya’s time wasn’t even an Olympic or World best. Semenya’s best time would beat a men’s category all the way back in 1908 (116s).

It is very, very interesting that you claimed that the statistics didn't matter when they indicated that Khelif and Yu-ting are NOT outliers and yet they suddenly matter for Semenya because they indicate that she is an outlier. It's almost like you have double standards or something.

Would Khelif, Yu-ting, or Semanya even have made it to the Olympics had they competed in their male puberty-based sex category? (I realize we know for sure only of Semenya’s DSD but the signs pointing to DSD for the two boxers are mounting).

No, they wouldn't have made it to the Olympics. And that's part of my argument so thank you for making it for me. You see, despite the fact that you (and a lot of others) keep calling these athletes men and despite all the talk of them having an unfair biological advantage, their performances are nowhere near the performances of male athletes.

I’m curious about how they’d fare vs. other DSDs in their respective sports. That may be a more accurate measurement of peer capability. Is it any wonder that there are growing calls from and for XX athletes to have a clearer sex-based category? This includes https://www.telegraph.co.uk/olympics/2024/08/08/daley-thompson-interview-ioc-defend-womens-sport/, Boris Becker, Judy Murray, MV, Christ Evert, among many brave others.

Is it any wonder there are hundreds of biological males are killing it in dozens of XX-only intended sports?

While there clearly needs to be a better solution than the current IOC stance of leaving the female category open in practice, it presently is a great disservice to everyone involved, with holes big enough to punch and run through unimpeded.

DSDs are the exceptions that prove the male puberty vs. female puberty rule. Sex categories by their nature are exclusionary, even considering DSDs. They should not be centered around which all other XX competitors are organized.

In short, bring back sex-based categories via the aforementioned swab tests. We have the means and know how to do so. Get it right.

As I've said in the past, I would definitely agree with a third, intersex category. Intersex athletes have called for such a category to exist as well. Have the athletes that you mentioned supported the existence of such a category?

What's your view on it? Would you agree with the creation of a third category for intersex athletes? And maybe a fourth for transgender athletes?

And since this is the end of my post, let me re-iterate my central argument so that there is no accusation of "swerving" for the umpteenth time:

Is there a scientific consensus that male puberty affects intersex people the same way it affects non-intersex people? Without the existence of this scientific consensus, how do you justify excluding AFAB women from women's competitions?

[California Gold]

Looks like we have a decent chance to tie in gold with China tomorrow. They have one more final in Women's weightlifting that they're favored in and we have Women's Volleyball and Women's Basketball tomorrow that we outta nab the gold in. That should put us at a tie of 40 gold.

[Nuntius]

Yeah it is clear what's going on. It is true what the IOC stance is. But it's swerving because the entire point isn't IOC rules but fair competition between sexes and flaw of mixing of them. Bacayadan and Hiltz would not fare nearly as well vs. XY competition. Too much data points to it to refute it.

You know this and yet the focus has switched from well we don't know competitor chromosomes to well the testing is flawed to now well the IOC permits it.

And so now there's yet another negotiation about yet another set of parameters.

I almost never repost myself but I did put some time and effort into it so to whoever is interested, this stands on its own:

viewtopic.php?p=114624793#p114624793

Yeah, it looks like we're talking past each other here. You seem to be arguing why Bacaydan and Hiltz should be competing in the women's categories. Bulletin #2 of my post was about why Bacaydan and Hiltz are competing in the women's categories.

And I was talking about due to this part of your post:

The reasons for these two athletes being included is obvious.

And my reply to this was:

Yes, it is indeed obvious. Their passport says female and that is the basis that the IOC is using so this is why they are competing in these categories.

That's it. There's no swerve in this point whatsoever. I am simply giving you the reason why the IOC slotted Bacaydan in the women's category. If Bacaydan's passport said male then he would be competing in the men's category. Those are the IOC's current rules.

Oh, and as for this part of your post:

You know this and yet the focus has switched from well we don't know competitor chromosomes to well the testing is flawed to now well the IOC permits it.

Let's clarify a couple of things here:

1) Yes, I did indeed claim that we didn't know the competitor chromosomes earlier in the discussion. I made that claim because, at the time, there was no corroborating evidence for Kremlev's claim. Now, that there finally is corroborative evidence to that claim, I have no reason to dispute that part anymore. When new evidence is brought to your attention, you are obliged to take them into account and review your initial position. That's how evidence-based reasoning is supposed to work. Doing that is NOT **** "swerving".

2) I have been talking about the problems with sex verifications in sports ever since, at least, page 24. Bergmaniac provided the evidence for the chromosome claim on page 40. So, this notion that I have somehow "swerved" and moved the goalposts is inaccurate and, frankly, insulting.

3) I never made the argument that "well, the IOC permits it so this is what should be happening". What the IOC permits isn't part of my central argument. My central argument is that intersex athletes should be studied and that their inclusion or exclusion from the category of their assinged gender should be based on the scientific consensus on the subject matter. I mentioned the IOC rules because they were a direct answer to a question you asked, not as some sort of a "gotcha".

G R E Y, you have accused me of swerving in your last 3 replies. Are you sure that you're interested in a good faith discussion? It certainly doesn't feel like it.

And there it is. The spin. All this posting, all this detail, and not a thing about the original post for which there was no time.

I trust people notice the pattern throughout this discussion with me and others. Back to the point:

viewtopic.php?p=114624793#p114624793

What a **** hypocritical post. Let me ask you this:

How much time did it take you to reply to my post with that long post of yours, G R E Y? I'll tell you how much. It took you 60 hours. Two and a half days. Did I ever bother during that time? Did I call you out for not replying sooner? Did I imply that failure to reply sooner constitutes "a pattern of swerving and ignoring the original post"? No, I didn't.

But you did. It took me significantly less time to respond (around 41 hours) than it took you and yet I am the one that has to defend themselves from accusations of "swerving and ignoring the original post". You are haranguing me about not replying faster even though I replied faster than you did.

So, yeah. Way to argue in "good faith" here, G R E Y. Way to be a hypocrite.