Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”

[Signalbox]

A second thread for those who wish to continue the discussion.

Thread 1 can be found here...

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womens_rights/5129412-two-female-boxers-set-to-compete-at-paris-2024-were-previously-disqualified-from-womens-world-championship-for-having-xy-chromosomes?page=1

Thanks for posting Helle. I think Carole's book might be my next audible listen.

And to head off the constant barrage of 'but they didn't win', 'they have been beaten', what does it matter, I hope maybe this will help.

We see so many posts such as:

she still gets beaten by other women. She got beaten by Amy Broadhurst in 2022, a female boxer who SUPPORTS her being allowed to compete.

Mediocre male athletes will be beaten by exceptional female athletes on occasion. It does not mean that the male athlete does not have an advantage.

How is this as an example:

If someone put a motor on their bike and competed in the Tour de France, and lost, does that mean that the competitor didn't have a competitive advantage? Or was not a mediocre competitor to start with?

So this point too is irrelevant for competition. But. Not for safety.

What you are supporting is, in effect, very dangerous for female athletes due to male people have on average 160+% more punch power than female people (that is not athletes, that is just the general population) and many other advantages. In fact, part of the punch power is derived from skeletal leverage that males have to give this power that female people do not have. And bone mass and density that is greater in male people than female people.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/33289906/

This above is the review of 13 studies from Dr Emma Hilton and Tommy Lundberg and it shows these advantages, if anyone wishes to check for themselves.

To be clear. This bone difference means stronger bones!

Female people have been proven to have bones that are more prone to breakage, particularly in the face. And they are more prone to concussion and brain damage due to their more delicate brain fibres. This has been studied and is now shaping Rugby guidelines for female participation, as an example.

Rugby concussion: Swansea University study into protecting women https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-51434749

To those who use the 'but they didn't win' what do you believe will happen to a female with those more delicate bones and brain fibres when hit with punches that are 160+% harder than other female boxers?

The IBA Delhi 2023 results are below - you can see who each boxer met in every round:

Khelif: https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/66-3.pdf

Lin: https://www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/57-2.pdf

Also worth noting that whilst some countries boycotted this competition, many (Spain, France, Australia, Greece, New Zealand, Japan, Italy amongst many others) did not.

Here is one reminder of what Budgett said about male inclusion:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/jul/29/ioc-praises-weightlifter-laurel-hubbard-ahead-of-transgender-athletes-olympic-debut

And while Budgett appeared to accept that Hubbard had an advantage from going through male puberty, he also stressed that inclusivity was an important factor too.

“There are lots of aspects of physiology and anatomy, and the mental side, that contribute to an elite performance, and it’s very difficult to say, ‘yes, she has an advantage because she went through male puberty,’ when there’s so many other factors to take into account,” he said.

“It’s not simple. I think each sport has to make their own assessment depending on the physiology of that sport, so that they can ensure that there is fair competition, but also the inclusion of everyone – whether they’re male or female – so they are able to take part in the sport they love.”

and then

“There is a lot of disagreement across the whole world of sport and beyond on this issue of eligibility,” admitted Budgett. “Everyone agrees transgender women are women. But it’s a matter of eligibility for sport, and particular events, and it really has to be very sport-specific.

“One of the reasons there is no new framework published yet is not just because of the difficulty in coming to any consensus,” he added. “It’s because it would have been inappropriate to come out with new guidelines just before the Olympics. There will be a new framework to help individual sports, and we’re working very closely with them, but it’s not published yet.”

If I find the statement from when they devolved the policy responsibility, I will post it too.

Just seen the bits of the latest IOC press conference on this and they brought out all the old tropes we see on here; Khelif has been beaten by women before; questioning this is hate speech; blah, blah, inclusivity, blah, blah, all women allowed to compete; these women meet the criteria (no mention of what that is).

The lack of scrutiny and questioning is just infuriating. It's just a blatant example of how people get to become top officials and journalists not through intelligence and ability but through their humiliating obeisance to a party line. They're not actually stupid, they are just willing to be seen as stupid if it gets them money and power.

The reading out of Carini's apology was like something from the days of Stalin.

Just to add to the useful links, for anyone who hasn’t yet listened to Ross Tucker's podcast special on this, it’s a cracker. He calmly and methodically sets out the whole thing and utterly dismantles the nonsense spouted by the IOC.

A link Here but it’s available widely ‘wherever you get your podcasts', as they say.

He also makes it very clear that the over-riding principles of the IOC for these games are 'inclusion' and 'identity' - but not for women. These are their top, top priorities. They are captured. So in a way we shouldn’t be remotely surprised by anything that’s happening.

Where do you even begin with that statement @Helleofabore? The IOC are such a slimy disgrace.

Here is the 2021 'new' framework on fairness.

https://olympics.com/ioc/news/ioc-releases-framework-on-fairness-inclusion-and-non-discrimination-on-the-basis-of-gender-identity-and-sex-variations

'This Framework recognises both the need to ensure that everyone, irrespective of their gender identity or sex variations, can practise sport in a safe, harassment-free environment that recognises and respects their needs and identities, and the interest of everyone – particularly athletes at elite level – to participate in fair competitions where no participant has an unfair and disproportionate advantage over the rest.'

This quote above is just dishonest. The IOC said this while seeing the evidence that directly contradicts their approach. But apparently.... we are supposed to believe that the IOC not only know better, but that they don't have form for dishonesty and should be believed above the IBA. It can be true that the IBA may have corruption issues, as does the IOC, while still allowing that the IBA has got as much or more integrity on the issue of testing athletes than the IOC has.

And, honestly, that last press conference was just me and the Olympics done. It's the contempt from the officials, the patronising tone, the treatment of people who don't want women to lose their places to mediocre, cheating men as stupid and bigoted. I am out for good. The IOC is just a dirty organisation.

And to head off the constant barrage of 'but they didn't win', 'they have been beaten', what does it matter,

By that logic we should only be excluding men who are really good!

And let crap male athletes proliferate throughout women's sport!!!

Come on, you outstanding female athletes. Fucking move over for mediocre men who can't cut it otherwise.

Honestly, sexism on steroids is the driver behind all these people.

It's just incredible that a spokesperson from the IOC can be so misleading. Don't they have a duty of candour and honesty?

"The Algerian boxer was born female, was registered female, lived her life as a female, boxed as a female, has a female passport," IOC spokesperson Mark Adams said on Friday.

"This is not a transgender case. There has been some confusion that somehow it's a man fighting a woman. This is just not the case. On that there is consensus, scientifically this is not a man fighting a woman."

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/cye0ex43k63o

Women should stop talking because it puts this athlete in danger

For those like Nancy Kelley who used the tactic of pushing the responsibility of fear to try to silence Nicola Adams as below:

https://x.com/Nancy_M_K/status/1819308546992865664

NancyMK 2 Aug 2024 10.45 am

Please remove this post. Not only is it inaccurate (Imane is not trans), it leaves her at grave risk in her own country.

NOTE: Nicola did not say that the athlete was trans at all, in fact, Nicola was accurate in her statement. But that did not stop Nancy.

And apparently Pink News also published something about all this discussion being dangerous.

I think this danger needs to be taken seriously.

If they are in danger, they need to be protected and this needs to be raised immediately so steps can be taken and this competitor can be kept safe.

However, it is NOT for female athletes to accept being put in harms way because the IOC has flawed and unfair policies and put this athlete into this situation. It is not for female athletes to be a protective shield for this athlete. This situation was entirely preventable. It should have been anticipated by the IOC. It is another piece of their negligence.

It is not female athletes fault or their responsibility.

Only a misogynist would ever suggest this.

The IOC have just had to walk back their earlier statement, pretty much confirming that this is a case of DSD.

It's just incredible that a spokesperson from the IOC can be so misleading. Don't they have a duty of candour and honesty?

My snark would be that people in the NHS and other institutions don't feel that they have a duty of candour and honesty in this area. But, I do agree that it's deplorable.

Thank you CaveMum.

So. Here we have it. The President of the IOC has inadvertantly confirmed the first part of the IBA's statement. That these athletes have XY chromosomes. It could be extrapolated to cover the second part of the IBA's statement about physical advantage being found.

I cannot see what activists actually believe that they will achieve in the end with this, 'the IBA are wrong'. Because, the IOC has not once refuted the IBA findings head on. It is been completely relying on undermining the IBA authority.

It is fuckwittery at its finest.

And so say all of us!

@LilyBartsHatShop · Today 09:17
Thread might close too soon but I just want to get back to the segue into pubertal changes above.
* ^or other knowledgeable posters, is there any published evidence about whether or not cross sex hormones, for teens who have had puberty completely blocked, bring about the brain changes that usually occur in puberty?
Cheers.^*

I saw you had been answered, but I wanted to let you know that a poster whose answers I was thinking of ( but couldn’t remember at the time apart from the fact that they were yesterday), when I responded on the first thread this morning, was @Snowypeaks , though the answers may not have been so much about brain changes.

GarethSouthgatesWaistcoat ·Yesterday 16:37

“Snowy peaks · *Yesterday 16:25
Also, even if oestrogen was administered/androgens suppressed, a male could not go through female puberty. And vice versa. It's puberty or no puberty.

…..

Excellent, thank you.

Separate to this issue (I know it's not relevant to trans) but does that mean that little boys (XY) who are being transitioned in primary school cannot go through a type of artificial female puberty (in the appropriate age range) with the help of hormones and the suppression of male puberty?

I think I naively assumed they'd found a way to vaguely approximate some external aspects of puberty in the opposite sex albeit in an experimental, damaging way (with no favourable long term data, feeding into the beginning of lawsuits from detransitioners whose health has been irreversibly ruined).

I appreciate they're never going to grow female sex organs or menstruate, I was thinking more along the lines of 'aesthetic' elements like breasts, hips, suppressing muscle mass and skeletal growth etc. As I type that I realise how stupid it sounds.

This is all very enlightening thank you.
…..

“Snowypeaks · Yesterday 16:48
^No, the kids are being sold a lie. If puberty is suppressed for long enough, the window closes. The boy will get taller but never fully develop sexually and his brain won't fully mature either. His body doesn't have the instructions to develop as a pubertal female would. It's male puberty or nothing.”*

“Snowypeaks · Yesterday 17:06
Forgot the other things you asked, Gareth

He'd have to go onto cross-sex hormones to get plumper breasts. Hip-to-waist ratio wouldn't change. The testosterone suppression might make him taller than he would have been because testosterone puts a brake on growth.

Thank you for your consistent hard work and thoroughness gathering this information. It’s an excellent resource to point people to when they have questions.

Well done all!

Can anyone answer what would happen to someone with Swyer’s if they were treated with T rather than Oestrogen?

What the IBA said

https://www.iba.sport/news/statement-made-by-the-international-boxing-association-regarding-athletes-disqualifications-in-world-boxing-championships-2023/

This part is relevant

'On 24 March 2023, IBA disqualified athletes Lin Yu-ting and Imane Khelif from the IBA Women’s World Boxing Championships New Delhi 2023. This disqualification was a result of their failure to meet the eligibility criteria for participating in the women’s competition, as set and laid out in the IBA Regulations. This decision, made after a meticulous review, was extremely important and necessary to uphold the level of fairness and utmost integrity of the competition.'

and

'This test conclusively indicated that both athletes did not meet the required necessary eligibility criteria and were found to have competitive advantages over other female competitors.'

So, the statement is really in two parts:
Not xx
Found to have physical advantages

Athletes that don't meet the 'required eligibility criteria' for the IBA's female category is quite simple. They state in their regulations, that female competitors are those who are XX.

p9 on the IBA Technical Competition Rules,

www.iba.sport/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/20240303-IBA-Technical-Competition-Rules-v7-clean.pdf

These competitors have also been found to have competitive advantage. The only way for that to be true is if those male athletes have gone through puberty.

I also believe this statement shows that the IBA certainly also had in mind to make allowances for boxers who were male but with CAIS. Hence they have used two claims here to explain the exclusion of these male athletes. Neither of which has been directly addressed or refuted by the IOC.

The IBA also restated their position

https://www.iba.sport/news/iba-reaffirms-the-position-and-removal-of-boxers-from-all-events/

The did not unpublish their statements. If these statements were untrue, a legal letter would have swiftly had these statements removed from the website.

FFS Yu-Ting had was stripped of a medal! And didn't appeal at CAS where it would have surely been given back if the IBA claims were false.

lol.

So he's not saying it is a DSD.

He is un-saying it isn't a DSD.

Never has the term be-clowning oneself been more appropriate!

I can't think of a clinical justification for that.

I may be wrong.

A thought experiment would be someone with Swyer's Syndrome who decided on hormone tx as part of a gender transition but that would be rare beyond my ability to estimate.

Why are you interested in Swyer's in the context of the boxers or is it another line of thought?

Insanity. How on earth can the IOC come back from this now?

Place marking, the Algerian man is fighting later again and I won’t be able to watch it.

@StickItInTheFamilyAlbum totally different line of thought, sorry, based on trying to understand why people were raising Swyers/explain why this isn’t Swyers.

I find Swyers a little confounding- speaking of clinical justification, I’m shocked that pregnancy can be implanted, and struggling to find anything that explains why Swuers is treated as a female DSD rather than a male DSD.

But I know the boxers’ don’t have Swyers so shouldn’t have asked on this thread and confused things!