Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

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

1000 replies

Signalbox · 03/08/2024 10:07

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

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

Surely this cannot be true. In boxing of all sports. I thought boxing had told men they needed to compete with other men? *”Two athletes competing at...

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

OP posts:
Thread gallery
96
PTSDBarbiegirl · 03/08/2024 10:09

A 3rd category is the place for trans people to compete.

Faffertea · 03/08/2024 10:15

Thanks @Signalbox

I agree with you PTSD that males who identify as something other than male should not be in women’s sports, although neither of these boxers are trans apparently. I think keeping the female category for female and making the male category an ‘open’ category would do the job better. It doesn’t matter what your identity is, if you’re not female, you’re in the open category. It would be up to women who identify as men and female NB people to decide where they want to compete although in the female category they would have to meet the same requirements on testosterone as all female athletes currently do to avoid doping.

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:18

Thanks signal

DailyEnergyCrisis · 03/08/2024 10:22

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

Going to complain to the bbc (not that it’ll make any difference) for this hideous piece of misleading and biased journalism. To ask the question- were they born male or female and then to fill the answer with entirely non relevant points about their passports etc is disingenuous at best.

Khelif fights Carini

Olympics 2024 boxing controversy: What we know and what we don't know - BBC Sport

The IOC's decision to allow the entry of two athletes, that are said to have failed gender eligibility tests, has proved controversial.

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

Signalbox · 03/08/2024 10:24

The argument that certain individuals should be allowed to keep their sex "private" in elite sports is the same tactic that was used by Edinburgh RCC or by those who are against women asking to receive same sex care. It's also the same tactic used by those who want to have sexual activity with others without disclosing what sex they are. It's nearly always used as a way to manipulate others or to discriminate and gaslight women and girls. It really needs to be robustly challenged.

OP posts:
Snowypeaks · 03/08/2024 10:27

PTSDBarbiegirl · 03/08/2024 10:09

A 3rd category is the place for trans people to compete.

Sports categories should be based on factors which are relevant to athletic performance - sex, age, disability. Within those categories, sometimes weight as an additional classification.
Gender identity is not a factor in performance so there isn't a justification for introducing a category for those who claim an identity.

Also, a third category based on gender identity would effectively be just another category for men and boys to win in.

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:28

I found the article relating to the dropping of sex testing from my previous posts.

ww.nature.com/articles/gim2000258.pdf?origin=ppub&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=CONR_PF018_ECOM_GL_PHSS_ALWYS_DEEPLINK&utm_content=textlink&utm_term=PID100045542&CJEVENT=f4d4c8630a0411ed831b01a80a1c0e11

From the article "At the time of testing, all female athletes at the Atlanta Games were offered a questionnaire written in both English and French asking whether in their view testing of females should be continued in future Olympics and whether or not they were made anxious by the testing procedure.18Of the 928 athletes who responded, 82% felt that testing should be continued and 94% indicated that they were not made anxious by the procedure. Forty-six athletes were made "anxious" by the testing requirements that preceded their competitive events. No males were found to masquerade as females, and all females who were found to be SRY positive competed. While a similar proportion of females failed the test as in previous Olympics (Table 2), it is noteworthy that on this occasion no false positive tests were found and no athlete was barred from competition.'

So, 82% of the women answered that they felt sex testing should continue when surveyed at the 1996 Olympics. This was ignored.

In 1996, 8 of the 'female' competitors were found to have a DSD. 7 were CAIS and 1 was 5ARD. This was a rate of 1 in 423 and hence you will see it said that CAIS athletes are found in higher proportions in the female sports categories than in society in general. That rate is significantly higher than the general population. I can only think though that the lower 5ARD number might have been due to them being screened out so much previously? I don't know, the proportion of the males diagnosed with CAIS to 5ARD may be similar still.

ChaChaChooey · 03/08/2024 10:30

Signalbox · 03/08/2024 10:24

The argument that certain individuals should be allowed to keep their sex "private" in elite sports is the same tactic that was used by Edinburgh RCC or by those who are against women asking to receive same sex care. It's also the same tactic used by those who want to have sexual activity with others without disclosing what sex they are. It's nearly always used as a way to manipulate others or to discriminate and gaslight women and girls. It really needs to be robustly challenged.

Absolutely.

Plenty of jobs where sex is irrelevant but in the few where it is relevant (including competitive athlete and providing intimate care) biological sex must be known and recorded (and tested when relevant).

Snowypeaks · 03/08/2024 10:31

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:28

I found the article relating to the dropping of sex testing from my previous posts.

ww.nature.com/articles/gim2000258.pdf?origin=ppub&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=CONR_PF018_ECOM_GL_PHSS_ALWYS_DEEPLINK&utm_content=textlink&utm_term=PID100045542&CJEVENT=f4d4c8630a0411ed831b01a80a1c0e11

From the article "At the time of testing, all female athletes at the Atlanta Games were offered a questionnaire written in both English and French asking whether in their view testing of females should be continued in future Olympics and whether or not they were made anxious by the testing procedure.18Of the 928 athletes who responded, 82% felt that testing should be continued and 94% indicated that they were not made anxious by the procedure. Forty-six athletes were made "anxious" by the testing requirements that preceded their competitive events. No males were found to masquerade as females, and all females who were found to be SRY positive competed. While a similar proportion of females failed the test as in previous Olympics (Table 2), it is noteworthy that on this occasion no false positive tests were found and no athlete was barred from competition.'

So, 82% of the women answered that they felt sex testing should continue when surveyed at the 1996 Olympics. This was ignored.

In 1996, 8 of the 'female' competitors were found to have a DSD. 7 were CAIS and 1 was 5ARD. This was a rate of 1 in 423 and hence you will see it said that CAIS athletes are found in higher proportions in the female sports categories than in society in general. That rate is significantly higher than the general population. I can only think though that the lower 5ARD number might have been due to them being screened out so much previously? I don't know, the proportion of the males diagnosed with CAIS to 5ARD may be similar still.

Thanks, Helleofabore!
I regretted not having saved it before.

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:33

I hope you don't mind Signal but I thought getting this on the front page might be useful to head off the misinformed arguments being posted.

For any reader who believes that any female person can have testosterone in the 'male range' please look at this chart.

Plus

This is from a PCOS advocate on twitter.

PCOS raises female testosterone to up to 5.5 nmol/L (and above 4 can cause serious issues).
5-ARD raised Caster's testosterone to 21 nmol/L.

twitter.com/NathanielHart72/status/1550916276490477568?s=20&t=E8muLvV5kUEpbPeemz8zwQ

and

twitter.com/seaningle/status/1537480540068225031?s=20&t=E8muLvV5kUEpbPeemz8zwQ

Sean Ingle (Guardian sports journalist) mentioned this

The latest scientific publications clearly demonstrate that the return of markers of endurance capacity to "female level" occurs within six to eight months under low blood testosterone, while the awaited adaptations in muscle mass and muscle strength/power take much longer (two years minimum according to a recent study). Given the important role played by muscle strength and power in cycling performance, the UCI has decided to increase the transition period on low testosterone from 12 to 24 months. In addition, the UCI has decided to lower the maximum permitted plasma testosterone level (currently 5 mol/L) to 2.5 mol/L. This value corresponds to the maximum testosterone level found in 99.99% of the female population.

Plus

^https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/sms.14581^

The International Olympic Committee framework on fairness, inclusion and nondiscrimination on the basis of gender identity and sex variations does not protect fairness for female athletes

In adulthood, circulating testosterone concentrations do not come close to overlapping between females (0.1–1.7 nmol/L) and males (7.7–29.4 nmol/L).

plus with handy charts in the tweet

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1819017510005407984

Confirmed. No overlap in T levels between healthy men and women, and rarely in people with atypical levels”.

Below I'll include some info from my book on T and sex diffs. First is an illustration of the combined data from a meta-analysis of studies on a healthy population (by David Handelsman), and another on T levels in ppl with medical conditions/DSDs (by Richard Clark). I've also included my text description of the data. The original illustration is from Doriane Coleman's excellent Sex in Sport article (link is in the graphic). She let me adapt it for my book but hers is clearer!

If you are using the term 'woman with high testosterone', plus check your sources and don't spread misinformation. Female people with PCOS, women, DO NOT HAVE male levels of testosterone!

x.com

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1819017510005407984

CaveMum · 03/08/2024 10:36

Link to the Twitter thread that has been debunking many of the claims being made against the IBA:

https://x.com/slatzism/status/1819427537740558848?s=61&t=haffcpWC9mwmf6zkaHVRIg

x.com

https://x.com/slatzism/status/1819427537740558848?s=61&t=haffcpWC9mwmf6zkaHVRIg

Snowypeaks · 03/08/2024 10:36

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:28

I found the article relating to the dropping of sex testing from my previous posts.

ww.nature.com/articles/gim2000258.pdf?origin=ppub&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=CONR_PF018_ECOM_GL_PHSS_ALWYS_DEEPLINK&utm_content=textlink&utm_term=PID100045542&CJEVENT=f4d4c8630a0411ed831b01a80a1c0e11

From the article "At the time of testing, all female athletes at the Atlanta Games were offered a questionnaire written in both English and French asking whether in their view testing of females should be continued in future Olympics and whether or not they were made anxious by the testing procedure.18Of the 928 athletes who responded, 82% felt that testing should be continued and 94% indicated that they were not made anxious by the procedure. Forty-six athletes were made "anxious" by the testing requirements that preceded their competitive events. No males were found to masquerade as females, and all females who were found to be SRY positive competed. While a similar proportion of females failed the test as in previous Olympics (Table 2), it is noteworthy that on this occasion no false positive tests were found and no athlete was barred from competition.'

So, 82% of the women answered that they felt sex testing should continue when surveyed at the 1996 Olympics. This was ignored.

In 1996, 8 of the 'female' competitors were found to have a DSD. 7 were CAIS and 1 was 5ARD. This was a rate of 1 in 423 and hence you will see it said that CAIS athletes are found in higher proportions in the female sports categories than in society in general. That rate is significantly higher than the general population. I can only think though that the lower 5ARD number might have been due to them being screened out so much previously? I don't know, the proportion of the males diagnosed with CAIS to 5ARD may be similar still.

Helleofabore
I'm trying to click on the link, but it doesn't go to the article, I just get this MN page again.
Would you mind reposting it, please? I'm on my phone, so I can't copy the link to put into my browser.

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:37

And this from Carole Hooven (hoovlet on Twitter).

It touches on the hormone AMH which is the hormone that stops the production if the uterus and fallopian tubes. It is produced in the testes of male people. And as such there are no ovaries, because the body developed testes instead.

There is are male conditions where this hormone is not produced. In Persistent Müllerian Duct Syndrome, male people with this still develop as ‘typical male’ developmentally.

She has numerous tweets about this issue this week. Good stuff.

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1819449064590582073?s=46&t=HTxp6zC_d4GZ2FFv4a-YeQ

The relevant parts of the tweet is below:

Males with 5-ARD do not have a uterus or other female internal structures, but they do have what looks like a vagina, so are often sexed as females. However they are males with normal testes, which produce typical male hormones. Those hormones, among other things, prevent the development of female internal reproductive structures (like the uterus and cervix).

In embryonic development, we all start out with two sets of primordial duct systems, one set that will develop into the male internal reproductive stuff (the Wolffian ducts, which become the epididymis, vas deferens and seminal vesicles), and another that develops into the female internal stuff (the Müllerian ducts, which become the upper part of the vagina, cervix, uterus and fallopian tubes, pic at the end).

In males, fetal testes don't only produce testosterone! They also make Anti-Mullerian Hormone (AMH), which is crucial for getting rid of the Mullerian ducts, and thus, ensuring that the eventual uterus, etc. don't develop. If there's no testes and no AMH, that female internal stuff will develop.

Males need high levels of T for male-typical development of all the male reproductive structures. Without T production and action, the external (penis and scrotum) and internal (described above) genitalia won't develop. But as I wrote in my monster tweet yesterday, T alone isn't enough for development of the penis and scrotum (and prostate): for that, T must be converted into DHT (a more potent androgen, production pathway below), and people with 5-ARD don't make the necessary enzyme to carry out that conversion. So they end up with what appears to be a vagina.

FYI, some males inherit a genetic mutation that means they can't produce AMH. They are typical males, but have a nonfunctional uterus and fallopian tubes inside their abdomen. The condition often not discovered until adulthood (it's called Persistent Müllerian Duct Syndrome). AMH is an important hormone for males, but hardly anyone even knows it exists.

Also, the testes generally don't descend into the scrotum before birth (as usual) without DHT, but they often do at puberty when testosterone levels reach high concentrations. So males with 5-ARD may be "sexed" as female, due to the female-appearing external genitalia.

But brain and the rest of the body are typically male. Most people with the condition will "transition" to living as a male once they realize they are male, and this often happens at puberty, when the testes descend and the body develops in a typically masculine way.

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:39

Snowypeaks · 03/08/2024 10:36

Helleofabore
I'm trying to click on the link, but it doesn't go to the article, I just get this MN page again.
Would you mind reposting it, please? I'm on my phone, so I can't copy the link to put into my browser.

It works for me Snowy, but here is a fresh one.

https://www.nature.com/articles/gim2000258.pdf?origin=ppub&utm_medium=affiliate&utm_source=commission_junction&utm_campaign=CONR_PF018_ECOM_GL_PBOK_ALWYS_DEEPLINK&utm_content=textlink&utm_term=PID100045542&CJEVENT=1c5a59ec517c11ef8252f0270a18ba72

https://www.nature.com/articles/gim2000258.pdf?CJEVENT=1c5a59ec517c11ef8252f0270a18ba72&origin=ppub

Ereshkigalangcleg · 03/08/2024 10:41

Anna Slatz's second post in the linked thread details the "Russian boxer" claim in depth:

To return to point #10 in this post, this appears to now be the narrative that is being manufactured in real time - that Khelif was somehow simply being “punished” for beating a Russian boxer in the 2023 championships.

Note how the AP frames this. They make it seem as though Khelif was disqualified after beating Amineva.

In reality, the AP had to go back TWO MATCHES to find where Khelif had fought a Russian. After besting Amineva, Khelif went on to beat Uzbekistan’s Navbakhor Khamidova, and then Thailand’s Janjaem Suwannapheng. Khelif was disqualified just before facing off against China’s Yang Liu.

No Russian advanced to the finals of this match. The Russian boxer didn’t even came close to it. Disqualifying Khelif wouldn’t have advanced the Russian boxer to a favourable position.

Further, multiple other boxers very easily beat Russian opponents and advanced to win gold without any such problems. Such as Morocco’s Khadija El-Mardi in the heavyweight, who directly beat Russia’s Diana Pyatak for a spot in the gold match that she would ultimately win.

Other Russian boxers were left in the dust in other categories where they didn’t even end up placing at all. Yet no other boxers were “punished” for directly beating these Russian competitors.

It also doesn’t mesh for Lin Yu-Ting, who never matched against a single Russian boxer.

This new narrative they’re inventing is borderline schizophrenic.

Snowypeaks · 03/08/2024 10:41

Helleofabore
That one worked. Thanks so much.

RainWithSunnySpells · 03/08/2024 10:43

CaveMum · 03/08/2024 10:36

Link to the Twitter thread that has been debunking many of the claims being made against the IBA:

https://x.com/slatzism/status/1819427537740558848?s=61&t=haffcpWC9mwmf6zkaHVRIg

I took screenshots of this twitter/X post yesterday so that anyone having issues reading it can have a look at it. I will post them here.

Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
ChaChaChooey · 03/08/2024 10:43

This new narrative they’re inventing is borderline schizophrenic.

TQanon? 😆

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:43

Here is another thread by Carole Hooven, (hoovlet on twitter) this one is a cracker

Thread starts here:

First: People living with DSDs should be treated with compassion and understanding, and receive any heath care they need. These can be challenging conditions for individuals and their families. But when male athletes have DSDs that give them an advantage over females, and they compete in the female category, this raises concerns about safety and fairness, and forces discussion of the relevant physical traits.

Athletes with XY DSDs who have testes (usually internal), XY sex chromosomes, male-typical levels of testosterone, and functional androgen receptors are often described as females with "hyperandrogenism," i.e., abnormally high levels of testosterone. They experience physical benefits of this high testosterone during puberty, which translate into athletic advantages over females. The issue for sports is that athletes with the XY DSD 5-alpha reductase deficiency (5-ARD), may be socialized as female, may be legally female, and may live and identify as female; but they are male.

These individuals are usually born with female-appearing genitalia, which can lead to being sexed as female. Here's why. 5-ARD is caused by a mutation in the gene that codes for the enzyme 5-alpha reductase, which converts testosterone into a more potent androgen, DHT. This androgen interacts with the androgen receptor, like testosterone, and is necessary for the typical development of male external genitalia (penis and scrotum) and the prostate. Without DHT, female-typical external genitalia develop. At the end of this monster post is a graphic of the relevant steroid production pathway, from my book T: The story of Testosterone.

DHT is also responsible for male-pattern baldness and dark, coarse facial hair, which is why people with the condition have smooth skin that can give a feminine appearance.

The “decision makers” are aware that athletes with 5-ARD are male, and that they experience the benefits of male puberty. The requirement to reduce their testosterone to typical female levels isn’t discriminatory, since these are males who are asking to compete in the female category. But more significantly, all the relevant scientific evidence shows that reducing male T in adulthood does not undo the physical benefits of male puberty.

Here's more detail about T, DHT, and male advantage in strength and speed.

I've been asked if men with the DSD 5-ARD (in which ppl cannot convert testosterone into the more potent androgen DHT) experience the typical benefits of male puberty, that would give them an advantage in strength and speed relative to women. This is relevant to questions about whether male athletes with 5-ARD should be allowed to compete in the female category. This is an excellent question, because it could be the case that DHT is necessary for the development and maintenance of male-typical muscle, lean body mass and strength. If that were the case, then people with 5-ARD might not have a typical male advantage, because the lack of DHT would perhaps lead to a more feminine pattern of fat, lean body mass and strength. I've wondered about this myself and have looked into the evidence.

Perhaps the top researcher in this area, Shalendar Bhasin, who is scrupulous in his methods, has examined this very question. The answer appears to be: no, testosterone does not need to be converted to DHT to exert its typical anabolic effects. These findings are reported in his 2012 study, "Effect of Testosterone Supplementation With and Without a Dual 5α-Reductase Inhibitor on Fat-Free Mass in Men With Suppressed Testosterone Production, A Randomized Controlled Trial." (It is linked to below—and since it's paywalled, I've included the graphs that show comparisons between the placebo and DHT— inhibited conditions, with no difference on the various outcomes.)

For more detail, the investigators wanted to examine the effects of suppressing DHT on muscle mass, strength, and sexual function. This important because one of the treatments for benign prostatic hyperplasia and male-pattern baldness is to suppress DHT, but clinicians have been concerned about effects on other outcomes that affect health and quality of life. Participants (healthy men, 18 to 50, with normal T levels) had their T blocked, and were given graded doses of T, along with either placebo or a drug that blocked the conversion of T to DHT. So both groups had T, but only one, the placebo group, also had DHT. After 20 weeks of treatment, changes in lean body mass, muscle, and strength were assessed. There were no significant difference between the placebo and DHT-blocked groups in these outcomes.

For LOTS more detail, here's the relevant text from the results. Please don't ask me questions about the study. Just look at the abstract and results which you can find by Googling. The main point is that while there are predicted effects of the different doses of T received, there were no differences in the outcomes according to whether they had DHT blocked (with dutasteride) or not (placebo). "Fat-Free Mass Fat-free mass and lean body mass increased in a dose-dependent manner in the placebo and dutasteride [THIS IS THE DRUG THAT BLOCKS CONVERSION OF T TO DHT] groups (Figure 2).

The changes in fat-free mass were related to testosterone dose and changes in testosterone concentrations in the placebo and dutasteride groups but did not differ between groups; the dose-adjusted mean difference (placebo minus dutasteride) in fat-free mass was 0.50 kg (95% CI, −0.22 to 1.22 kg; P = .18). There was no significant interaction between testosterone dose and randomization to dutasteride or placebo, indicating a lack of evidence that the relationship of testosterone dose to change in fat-free mass differed between the dutasteride and placebo groups.

The model-based smoothed regression lines, obtained by generalized additive models, describing the relationship between changes in testosterone concentrations and changes in fat-free mass and lean body mass were similar in the placebo and dutasteride groups. Changes in fat mass were negatively related to testosterone dose and concentrations, but the relationship between change in fat mass and dose did not differ significantly between the placebo and dutasteride groups (P = .41; Figure 2)."

"Muscle strength Leg-press and chest-press strength increased dependently by dose in the placebo and dutasteride groups. Increases in leg-press and chest-press strength were greater with larger doses and higher concentrations of testosterone. These relationships did not differ between the placebo and dutasteride groups (Figure 2)."

Really interesting commentary from the authors on the role of DHT in adult men: "Why then did the steroid 5α-reductase system evolve for androgens? Forty-six XY males with steroid 5α-reductase deficiency exhibited ambiguous or female external genitalia at birth and poor prostate development, but underwent normal muscle and bone development during pubertal transition. The phenotype of these patients suggests that steroid 5α-reductase plays an essential role in the development of prostate and phallus by providing local amplification of an androgenic signal without systemic hyperandrogenemia during critical periods of sexual differentiation, illustrating nature's extraordinary ingenuity in creating mechanisms for tissue-selective amplification during development.

We speculate that in adult men, in whom this tissue-specific amplification is not essential because the circulating testosterone concentrations are substantially higher than those in the fetus, testosterone and DHT can interchangeably subserve many androgenic functions. When circulating testosterone concentrations are low, intraprostatic DHT formation may become important in maintaining prostate growth, thus buffering the effects of decreasing testosterone levels, which has been suggested by Marks et al.

Our data are consistent with studies that have reported no effects of 5α-reductase inhibitors on muscle or bone mass. Inferences from these trials are limited by the fact that administration of 5α-reductase inhibitors increases testosterone levels, rendering it difficult to ascribe the outcomes to differences in DHT levels alone. In our trial, inhibition of endogenous testosterone by administration of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist eliminated this problem. Additionally, the high-dose dutasteride regimen effectively inhibited both steroid 5α-reductase isoenzymes."

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1819041282594873759
and the charts

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1819046454922518835

Clear use of male throughout.

x.com

https://x.com/hoovlet/status/1819046454922518835

RainWithSunnySpells · 03/08/2024 10:44

Second half.

Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:44

Sorry, I wish there was a way to truncate these

Datun · 03/08/2024 10:47

i'm copying in this from helle's post on the previous thread

Remember, the IOC pushed the responsibly for policies regarding male inclusion on to the international federations after the Tokyo Olympics. Budgett even stated in the announcement that the IOC prioritised inclusion above fairness. (And even acknowledged the IOC understood it was unfair, to my recollection).

However, this act of pushing responsibility down a level leaves athletes then at risk with this loophole that has now been exposed. Because the IOC created this risk back in the late 90s with policy changes and will not take leadership to fix this issue. Because they prioritise inclusion - of male people in female sports categories.

Just because it's the exact same process that we have now in terms of toilets, changing rooms and prisons, etc. Leaving it up to the individual providers concerned.

The old Swiss cheese analogy. If you leave enough holes, someone will absolutely find a way through. And by someone I mean men.

If men can access women in their private spaces they will. If men can gain kudos and money at women's expense, they will.

You can't possibly 'leave it up to them'.

Signalbox · 03/08/2024 10:47

Resposting this from the end of the other thread because It's important and worth repeating.

Anna Slatz' rebuttal here...

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1819427537740558848.html

Thread 2: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”
OP posts:
Userxyd · 03/08/2024 10:47

Signalbox · 03/08/2024 10:24

The argument that certain individuals should be allowed to keep their sex "private" in elite sports is the same tactic that was used by Edinburgh RCC or by those who are against women asking to receive same sex care. It's also the same tactic used by those who want to have sexual activity with others without disclosing what sex they are. It's nearly always used as a way to manipulate others or to discriminate and gaslight women and girls. It really needs to be robustly challenged.

Very well said. Women (and children) always suffer when this argument is pursued - and that is mostly its intention.

RainWithSunnySpells · 03/08/2024 10:48

Helleofabore · 03/08/2024 10:44

Sorry, I wish there was a way to truncate these

It's all good.
I think that having information that people can read for themselves on the first page of this thread is great, even if some of it does make for long posts!.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.