JKR being uncharacteristically quiet

[Jdugsgsgwyd]

Anyone else noticed since the news that JKR is being sued by Imane Khelif she's been very quiet, unless I'm mistaken she's hasn't tweeted at all in about a week.

and hasn't responded at all to the legal action being taken against her. This is very unlike her, I'm thinking she's been advised by her lawyers to keep quiet. Anyone else think she might have put her foot in it this time?

"My 12 year old believes this" may not be the killer argument you think it is. Children often have simplified ideas about reality, as we age we learn life is often much more complicated than we thought.

What matters is that people whose disorder gives them male advantages should not be in women’s sport.

That is a legitimate debate.

Calling this boxer a man/ male, etc, that JKR and others engaged in was wholly unacceptable.

DSD stands for Differences of Sexual Development. Saying someone has developmental problems is a description of the facts not a judgement of that person

How do you have the debate if you can't clearly state what the issues are

the entire rationale for female sport is that being male - particularly testosterone and the virlisation of the male body at puberty - confers physical advantages would make women unable to win in most all mixed sex sport (bar eg dressage where the horse does the physical work)

So how do you have a debate about male advantage in sport if you are not allowed to say that the person concerned is male?

Calling their development a “problem” is absolutely a value judgement. “Differences in development” is no longer called “disorders of sex development” for very good reason . Again, the problem rests in your understanding and judgement, not the lived diversity of human bodies

IK will never sue over being called a man and we know why

Take it up with IK’s coach & endocrinologist

you absolutely cannot have a clear and meaningful
debate on this topic when you refuse to acknowledge the real life complexity of human bodies. acknowledging this complexity is the only way to have a meaningful debate. Saying this boxer is “male” not the truism you believe it to be.

I didn't call their development a problem I said they had developmental problems. If I said someone had bladder problems would you think I was making a value judgement about their bladder?

Saying Khelif is a man isn't stating what the issue is though. The issue, if she has a DSD, is does it give her an advantage and if so what kind, and is this a greater advantage than the natural advantages we accept and celebrate in other athletes (Michael Phelps' unusually proportioned arms and abnormal lung capacity, for example). To discuss the issues we'd need to know specifics about her biology, which we don't. It's debatable whether "we" (ie the general public) even need to know one athlete's personal medical information to have that conversation. Even if the IOC changed its rules this wouldn't entitle the public to know the details of every competitor's test results. There has to be a line between a person's personal privacy and dignity and the public debate, which has been thoroughly crossed for Khelif.

There has to be ways to have these conversations without it becoming a world-wide public scrutiny of one individual, which is - obviously- going to feel horrendous for them. JKR posting "This is man, look at this smirking man" isn't talking about "the issues", it's a targeted nasty libelous bullying comment about one individual who absolutely does not deserve to become the sole focus of this debate, or a whipping girl for the GC movement to vent their misplaced ire on.

This, FFS.

This is just word salad.

What happened is this.

The IOC didn't want to be the ones to say trans women can't compete in women's sports, so they completely abdicated responsibility for regulating eligibility to compete in women's sports by delegating the decision to the individual governing bodies for each sport.

The governing body for boxing ran tests on these two athletes and disqualified them from competing in women's categories on the basis of the results of those tests.

The IOC then decided to no longer recognise the authority of that governing body, but instead of running its own tests so establish the truth of the matter, said, "It says F in their passports so they can compete in women's events, nothing to see here."

As a result, there is a huge question mark over the sex of these two athletes, which the IOC has done nothing to resolve.

Neither you nor I know the truth about what DSD these athletes have and whether the International Boxing Association's decision was correct. But there is no excuse for the IOC not to know the truth.

You said that sex determines genitals except where there are “developmental problems” . There is no objective basis for the use of the word “problems”. A problem for who? You?

I think you should read some of the literature about disability. It might help you to understand these linguistic dynamics when applied to a less inflammatory/ politicised topic.

This boxer is male in every way that matters in sport

I'm disabled, my disabilities are problems ffs. Otherwise they wouldn't be disabling

Clearly you have access to her private medical records in order to make such a definitive statement. Guys, we have Khelif's actual doctor on the thread here, what a privilege, thanks for dropping by with your insight.

you don’t know that , and the Olympic committee seem to disagree with you,

Well it goes without saying that your experience is totally valid!
However, there a lot of people who have disabilities who don’t experience or view their disabilities in that way, and there is a huge literature on this which is why I suggested this reading to that pp, as it sets the issues out very clearly.

similarly people who have differences in sex development do not necessarily experience their differences in development as a “problem” (beyond the discrimination that they often face from others).

Bodies are different. Difference does not equal “a problem”.

But it's equally plausible they may view it as a problem - so as someone who doesn't experience either DSD or disability (as far as you have stated), it's probably not your place to correct anyone else

We can speculate but we don’t know why.

We do know why we have eyes!

But it's equally plausible they may view it as a problem

Of course.
But it’s absolutely important to correct subjective and judgemental statements such as sex defines genitals except where there are “developmental problems”. This implies all differences are problems. This is wrong.

It’s a complete mYSterY