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?

I am far more concerned about the systematic persecution and abuse of a marginalised , minority group , than I am about an elite sportswoman losing a professional sporting match to another cis woman. Hell yes!

Yeah but that didn’t happen

All this “none of us know exactly what IK is, we don’t have access to their medical records” etc is meaningless when you keep asserting that they are a cis woman.
Can you prove they are a cis woman?

It if turned out that IK’s medical records were made publicly available, and it turned out that IK is indeed an XY male with male advantage, would you feel sorry for the other female boxers then?

Dont get me wrong, I don’t agree with attacking IK in this manner either. I don’t blame IK, I blame the IOC. Just interested to know if your stance would change if it was proven that IK is a man.

We don’t need to know her medical records to know she is a cis woman. A cis woman is someone assigned female at birth who identifies as a woman. Her chromosomes don’t change that.

In terms of your other question, as I said I do think there’s a legitimate question to be had about eligibility criteria for participation in female sports.
IK was allowed to participate under the current rules and there is no excuse for the name calling and bullying- called her a “TIM” another example of this.
In terms of how the olympics manages eligibility testing in the future - let’s have a debate. Let’s base it in science- taking on board the views of multiple experts/ perspectives/ commentators.

Meanwhile leave IK- her body, her identity, her religion(!) alone. Stop with the armchair diagnoses, accusing her of cheating, violence, mocking her appearance and genitals, whether she wears the hijab, and all the other misogynistic and racist bullshit being laid at her feet. She has done nothing wrong.

I largely agree with your second paragraph.

The first comes down to the question of what is a female. And I think that’s where we disagree.

The IOC had a duty of care, surely, to every athlete competing. By going ahead and allowing IK to compete, they’ve let IK down. They’ve let the female athletes down.
Was IK exploited?? Possibly, I don’t know. I don’t know them.

I would be interested to know though, as thought experiment, if even IK themselves came out and said “ok, you got me. I am a man and I know I am a man and I participated in the female category knowingly with a hope of winning the gold” would you at least feel sorry for the female boxers in that scenario?

We don’t need to know her medical records to know she is a cis woman. A cis woman is someone assigned female at birth who identifies as a woman. Her chromosomes don’t change that.

If a person is wrongly ‘assigned’ female, finds out later down the line they are in fact actually male and then identifies as male, would they not be ‘cis’ then? Would that make them trans as your two criteria are ‘identity’ and ‘assigned’ (absolutely nothing about actually being a particular sex).

She often goes quiet for days, even weeks at a time. I think you'll find she's just busy with other things.

How do you know Khelif "has a vagina"?

Interesting question. I have never met a person in that situation in the real world who identifies as “cis”.

They may identify as male, and they may well also identify as trans as they have transitioned from living as female to male (however not all people identify with a “trans” label).

But cis refers specifically to a person whose gender identity aligns with their sex assignment at birth- so “cis” would not reflect their experience - it would erase a huge and significant component of their lived reality. Having your sex “wrongly” assigned at birth is not a trivial matter, it’s not like you can wake up one morning and say “Oop whoopsie, now I’m a man, never mind all that then”.

' A woman is someone who was assigned female at birth.....chromosomes don't matter'.
That's as far as I got with your nonsense.

She has been threatened with litigation. It hasn’t actually happened yet as far as we know.

It is far more likely that she is enjoying a summer holiday or busy with a work project.

I thought we established that activists use of using cis for these two boxers have now rendered the word cis as meaningless.

Or, Tandora, have you now come up with a term that means uniquely post puberty female that excludes males who have been born with a DSD that may have caused them to have been incorrectly categorized as female at birth?

If we cannot have a word that uniquely describes female people that excludes all male people, how do we discuss female people’s specific needs relating to their sexed bodies? And how is that not a violation of the human rights for female people?

PS
if the litigation were to go ahead, it would likely require Khalif, as the litigant, to present a lot of personal information about themselves as part of their case. Otherwise, they can’t refute JKR’s opinion. I don’t see that happening.

Cis is a slur. As well as stupid. I don’t ’identify’ as a woman, I just am one. However, how IK identifies is neither here nor there. This issue is that a person with XY chromosomes & testicles that pump out testosterone, virilising their body, does not belong in the female category in sport.

I thought we established that activists use of using cis for these two boxers have now rendered the word cis as meaningless

interested who the “we” are in this sentence.

Or, Tandora, have you now come up with a term that means uniquely post puberty female that excludes males who have been born with a DSD that may have caused them to have been incorrectly categorized as female at birth?

You have totally lost me here. A cis woman is a person assigned female at birth who identifies as a woman.

Cis is a slur. As well as stupid

I understand - you want to ban the use of language that acknowledges / reflects the experiences of gender and sex diverse people. it’s part of your campaign to eliminate these minority groups from participation in society and public life.

Tale as old as time.

We don’t need to know her medical records to know she is a cis woman. A cis woman is someone assigned female at birth who identifies as a woman. Her chromosomes don’t change that.

Neat demonstration of the pointlessness of the term cis. There seems to be a specific word for every type of woman other than biological XX women, and there really should be a word for them. Maybe we could use "woman."

Applying the twisted language of trans activism to people with intersex conditions/DSDs is designed to obfuscate.

So we now have:

Woman= cis women (including male people with DSDs) + transwomen.

*And therefore no word uniquely for female people who are post puberty.^

I think it is very important for posters reading along to understand this. Because I suspect that up to now that some posters have been sharing that other mantra ‘no harm in using preferred language’. I wonder if they now have realised the harm? And that those attempting to have the language adopted through shame still call themselves feminists.

I categorise any person who strips female people from having unique language to use for their needs as misogynistic.

Cis is a slur. It means that women - the boring XX ones - indentify into their own global oppression. We choose it. After all if ‘identifying’ is what makes us women, we could identify out of all of it.

No one is assigned female at birth. It's a nonsensical concept (like how humans can change sex).

Cis is a slur. I cringe at those who use it. It's funny how trans ideology supporters want to compel others to change the meaning of words and use language that suits their fantasy (trans women are women) and throw transphobic insults to those that don't adhere, but don't apply that to themselves when asked not to use the word 'Cis'.

But as I said, this has nothing to do with a person with male advantages unfairly inserting themselves into the female sporting classification. And I’m sure that once boxing sorts out its shitshow of regulation, IK and the like will have to find another job. The tide has turned.

Why do we have to be a gigantic pity party for someone based on their identity?

That's profoundly patronising.

If you enter high level sports and win a gold at the Olympics you open your life up to the public in various ways. That's the nature of the beast.

That includes scrutiny.

In the midst of this pity party we need to acknowledge that Khelif has known about the chromosome issue for some time, and took an active decision to participate knowing that it was controversial.

And we are still supposed to feel pity, despite knowing that action of lowering testosterone that the coaches have admitted to, means an admission they knew there was a problem that potentially put women at risk. Khelif, after the defeats by points (which is on technique), reached a point were it was felt no longer possible to train with women.

That's not a passive thing where you are poor ickle Khelif who everyone hates because of difference. That's an affirmative considered action knowing you are capable of doing significant harm more so that your fellow competitors.

That's fucked up. And yet we are supposed to join the pity party for Khelif who is a grown adult who is in this position after making considered decisions of own free will.

The women concerned have not been in control of the situation. Indeed one quit mid match because of safety fears. A position and a decision she should NEVER have been put in if safety was first and foremost here.

Quite frankly I'm interested in the level of underdevelopment or genetic mutation of genitals. It's irrelevant in terms of sport safety and fairness.

I don't have time or sympathy for competitors who knowingly put others at risk and have a disregard for fairness. That applies all sport - whether it be two driver in a car or two boxers in a ring. You just don't do it. You seek to be the best with your peers but not at their risk.

In terms of sympathy for a difficult psychological issue - frankly it's not for women to be support humans to someone else's distress. That should be dealt with outside the ring and outside the circus of the IOC.

You can't claim distress after knowingly doing all of that and having the opportunity to deal with it prior to the games.

This pity party is the ultimate in othering too. Far from it being enlightened it's massively regressive. It's not treating everyone as equal and capable of making adult decisions and taking responsibility. It's initialising. It's removing their responsibility for their actions.

Seeking equality and having protections in law aren't about infantilising. It's about recognising differences from a legal point of view in terms of discrimination to allow all to take on those responsibilities and to have opportunities. It doesn't involve feeling sorry for people.

This hierarchical liberal tower of oppression doesn't reflect the law nor equality.

To anyone reading along with this thread, male inclusion isn’t an issue just for ‘elite’ sports. Male inclusion, which means any male person who has had their body virilised through the processing of testosterone produced in their body, is a significant issue causing harm to female people at all levels of sport.

An example of this is the metro football league in Sydney for the northers suburbs. A team, the Flying fruit bats, has 5 male players on the team in the female league. This is grassroots level.

One woman has reported that she experienced career ending injuries from one of those players in a game. One team reported that they lost 20-25 players who dropped out of the sport they loved because they wouldn’t risk their health playing the team.

This is a team that allows 16 year old girls to play. These are the grassroots games that encourage girls to continue to play sport. It is counter productive to attempt to encourage teenage girls to play sports when these sports are then unfair and have higher risk of injury.

There have been schoolgirls suffering life changing injuries in the USA in sports where male players have been included in the female teams. A teenaged girl was left partially paralyzed from a volleyball that was spiked from a male player.

It is not just an elite sports issue. It is at all levels that there is increased risk and unfair competition when male athletes with any degree of virilisation are included in the sports categories meant for female people.

I also think that it is strange now that academic papers that use the term ‘cis’ mean that they are not talking about female people specifically.

How fucked up is that when the term ‘cis’ is used in academic papers that people believed were discussing only female people, the papers were also including male people with DSDs that do not have female bodies due to having testes or testes tissue and as opposed to ovaries and ovarian tissue.

And since so many male people now claim the word ‘female’ to describe them, there is half the population who are now left without language to describe their specific category and needs.