To say the Olympics hates women

[ArabellaScott]

A child rapist performing for the Netherlands.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/olympics/article-13674293/Convicted-child-rapist-Steven-van-Velde-Netherlands-booed-volleyball-olympics.html

Males punching women in the face as sport.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/cnd0drjr4jdo

Offensive caricatures of women everywhere.

https://glaad.org/french-drag-artists-made-history-as-first-in-drag-to-carry-the-olympic-torch/

Yes, note the Y chromosome

They don't though, do they? They don't go into any detail of the results of the chromosome testing.

"Despite her karyotype" - clues in the word "despite".

XXY includes a Y, so unless there is a problem with the SRY (which doesn't fit the profile) is definitely a male disorder. The standard profile for XXY also doesn't fit with either of the boxers - children would be born male, but undergo secondary feminization at puberty. Pretty much the opposite to what we see in these two boxers

People who keep suggesting it either don't know what they are talking about, or are doing the debate equivalent of "oh look, a squirrel"

I wonder when occams razor starts to kick in?

So now we have three lots of testing that shows Khelif is male, one done by his team, yet still posters are clutching at straws.

Seriously what is going on in your heads that you still think there's a chance he is female? 🙈

Sorry, it was late!! 😂

x.com/RoisinMichaux/status/1822027970292412678

And here's footage of the male coach patting Khelif on the "breast".

Come on folks, no one thinks he's a woman, not even his team.

You might have a point if your breast was located on your collarbone.

@MessinaBloom

You might have a point if your breast was located on your collarbone.

Either you're watching a different clip to me or you have a different definition of collarbone. His hand is clearly on the breast area.

Thanks for this.
There was, then, more testing.
As it should be. And monitoring following the findings.
Presumably all of it has been shared with IOC and evaluated by experts.
Only the highly especialised medical teams can assess whether the athletes have an unfair advantage.
If there are discrepancies among the experts, it is for them to sort it, with science. It is complex, even for them.
For me, this is the end of it. I thought for a moment there that they had failed on following up with the tests to clarify unfair advantage, which made zero sense, to be honest. Who would want to risk such a thing? And in boxing, from all sports!

Mate 😀

I would be absolutely with you if you stuck with the ‘woman….therefore sexually assaulted’

but your biology is absolutely shit…mines bad but you must have missed all those lessons

I thought for a moment there that they had failed on following up with the tests to clarify unfair advantage, which made zero sense, to be honest. Who would want to risk such a thing? And in boxing, from all sports!

I can’t tell if this is sarcasm

These are the same type of people who still claim that Caster Semenya is a woman despite there being interviews with him where he's talking about his testicles and an arbitration court ruling clearly stating he has a condition that only affects males. Literally no new information gets through.

Imagine trying to convince a devout Christian that God doesn't exist and Jesus was just some bloke. It's like that.

No, it is because you mistake gender with sex, in the case of your statement above about Semenya.
Semenya is a woman, in all rights, if she was believed to be a woman at birth, raised as a girl and is happy being addressed as a woman. If tomorrow she wants to be addressed as a man, she perfectly can. This has zero to do with the trans debate. This is the experience of a person that was dealt difficult cards during the union of two cells and further development.
She is also, biologically, a male with a DSD, that has an unfair advantage that disqualifies her from the women category is sports. We can now say this because it has been tested, proved and there is an agreement about her condition between the especialists in the matter.
The only part that the public really has a right to fully know is whether a team of doctors deems the athlete suitable for a category or not.

yeah... collarbone seems to now be in a different place now.

Is there anything that won't be attempted to be denied? And to what end?

If you want to believe that when a male calls himself a woman he is a woman, then that is your choice. No-one else is under any obligation to do so.

Semenya is a male athlete, who deliberately and knowingly used Semenya's male pubertal advantage to take opportunities set aside for female people who did not ever have the potential to access male advantage derived from being male.

To be blunt, any discussion about Semenya being brought up as a girl is irrelevant and a distraction. Because by the time Semenya had a pattern of competing in international competitions, Semenya was known to have full knowledge of their medical condition.

No male person who has had male pubertal advantage should be included in the protected category of female sport. It is irrelevant as to their personal history. It is not relevant as to whether they are a male with a DSD or they are a male with a transgender identity. The relevant point is that they have gone through any degree of male puberty.

Personal histories of any athlete can be very emotional and inspiring, but it is bodies that compete in sports. An exceptional athlete should be celebrated for their exceptional skills and talent.

I find myself baffled that the MSM seems to ignore the Erik/a Schinegger case for the most part. (For anyone who's missed previous posts about this, Schinegger's DSD was only picked up because he was one of the first Winter Games competitors to undergo sex testing - in '68, I think.)

Schinegger had previously beaten male competitors. Once he got over the shock and the operation required to move his internal testes to the exterior, he did compete against men (and won) in formal competitions, but the Austrian authorities refused to select him for the men's Olympic team because - according t him - they were embarrassed.

Why is Schinegger being ignored? Is it because he showed that he could compete against other men and offered to give his gold medal to the silver medallist? It really doesn't follow the narrative that's currently being pushed, does it?

Schinegger was mistakenly identified as female at birth. His case sounds very similar to that of the Algerian boxer.

I wonder whether his case is being referenced at all by German speaking media - a feature film in German was made of his life story, so people in German-speaking countries should be more aware.

We seem to have gone - within my lifetime and my awareness of women in sport - from the 1960s, when the men in charge weren't happy that women could run more than 200m because they (this is true) weren't up to it, to now, where the men in charge don't give a feck if men want to punch women in a boxing ring, as long as their passport has an F in it.

I found another trailer with English subtitles.

https://mubi.com/en/films/erik-erika/trailer

I find it interesting that some links that were previously available seem to have disappeared. Also interesting that some that were available pushed the narrative that Erik Schinegger was a transexual.

The debate over the Olympic boxers is "frenzied and toxic" according to BBC sports editor Dan Roan. I must have been looking in the wrong places cos I haven't seen any toxic frenzy. Does women -noticing, objecting and not just shutting up about it, there's a good girl- count as toxic frenzy Dan the Man?

www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/c0l8gxzw6n4o

Indeed.

Women and men carefully explaining over and over how testosterone works, what male advantage is and why male people who have no place in the protected category of female sport, vs the abuse being posted name calling, demonising, and on some platforms the threats, is apparently symmetrical. It is like the labour parties, ‘both sides’, when the reality is very different and it is not ‘both sides’ being unreasonable. It is not feminists making threats and being abusive.

oh. That is right. Apparently using sex based pronouns and not complying to demands to use specific language is considered ‘abuse’ now. Silly me.

To be fair to Dan roan, there has been "toxicity" on both sides - the coincidental link between any that I've seen though has been the implied presence on said people of another pesky Y...