Where to find reputable sources re boxing controversy

[DSDornot]

I have been reading up on this. I fully oppose men in women's spaces and have been enraged by the Olympic boxing fiasco.
I follow JK, Sharron Davies and Martina Navratilova on X, Plus other more scientific commentators and believe in all they write.
However, I accept that I'm reading/listening to my own echo chamber. Apart from vile abuse and anonymous accounts, is there anyone notable I should look at who will give the opposite view (that self ID or DSD should be allowed in women's sport) - just so I can assess and know that I have a balanced viewpoint?

This is a good question.
We have minimal information so the evidence we have is the statements of the two boxing organisations and our own eyes.

Sasha Ayad on twitter just posted up a thoughtful series of posts.

I think you might struggle as the official line is that these are women fighters who are being abused. Bach's statement yesterday for the IOC comes close to saying its about self-ID as he says that registration at birth, living as a woman, competing as a woman and having legal documents is enough to be a woman. Biology was not mentioned. He initially said he was not talking about DSD, but this changed (was corrected promptly) to being not about trans. So sounds like self-ID but not admitting its self-ID.

Openness is not helped by the IoC having curbed what can be reported about sex/gender and athletes.

The PBU/IOC statement on 1st August effectively says that as the two boxers in question have competed as women for such a long time without challenge then this should continue. But again this is not a defence of self-ID or having DSD atheletes in boxing as they insist these are women.

I wonder, if you are on the inclusion side, would you be permitted to say otherwise?

If you find anything please do post back. I too feel uneasy when all the sound arguments are on one side. But that may be the nature of scientific evidence (I am not a scientist).

This looks good https://quillette.com/2024/08/03/xy-athletes-in-womens-olympic-boxing-paris-2024-controversy-explained-khelif-yu-ting/?fbclid=IwY2xjawEcKOZleHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHbWG_xgk4Xe52NgpjkGqJg2rR732uAqnv2Yr1bBqURgtEzh59DbS2WUhqw_aem_7BjwEoeSiY9aBHG-c1jrsA

@MsGoodenough that article is excellent. Particularly like the conclusion - which helps explain the mess the IOC is in.

'I will close by reiterating the three basic points that I and other experts in girls’ and women’s sport have been making for a long time.

First, the female category in elite sport has no raison d’être apart from the biological sex differences that lead to sex differences in performance and the gap between the top male and female athletes. The suggestion that we could choose to rationalise the category differently—for instance, on the basis of self-declared gender identity—or that we could make increasingly numerous exceptions in the interests of inclusion (as the IOC seems to have done to allow Khelif and Lin to compete in Paris) has no legs outside of certain progressive enclaves.

Second, any eligibility standard—like the IOC’s framework—that denies or disregards sex-linked biology is necessarily category-defeating.

Finally, federations that are committed to the female category and to one-for-one equality for their female athletes must step up and do two things. They must craft evidence-based rules and then stick to them consistently. And they must seriously embrace other opportunities to welcome gender diversity within their sports.'

Listen to the Real Science of Sport Podcast episode, 'Paris 2024: Males Are About To Fight in Women's Boxing. How Did We Get Here?' for a breakdown of what we know about this case. Ross Tucker has been consistently excellent on this and tries not to be partisan.

@DSDornot are you by any chance a 'social scientist', had training or education as such. I have just realised that not only am I not a 'hard' scientist but I am a social scientist by training so always look seriously at other view points.

This is the thread with all the reputable sources linked. There are lots of other threads, but this is the FWR thread with the most up to date commentary and sources from all over media and social media.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/5133749-thread-2-two-female-boxers-set-to-compete-at-paris-2024-were-previously-disqualified-from-womens-world-championship-for-having-xy-chromosomes

Do we have any information on the fights that Khelif participated in on the way to the final?

Did any of the opponents complain about them?

It's very tricky for an observer just wanting facts, because the facts we need are being withheld and people are filling in the gaps. Some of these people have the professional and educational background to form intelligent and objective conclusions, some are consciously or subconsciously interpreting the situation according to a personal agenda, some are outright troublemakers, and many are just sports fans who, quite reasonably, didn't ask to be obliged to understand the minutiae of DSDs and say something based on the last headline they read rather than saying, as the OP has said, "I don't know, I want to understand," or, "I don't know, I can't comment."

A clear and credible statement from the IOC that these athletes do not have XY chromosomes, they have XX chromosomes, might have avoided a great deal of hot air, the wasting of a great deal of many people's time, and a lot of the hostility being directed at the IOC and the athletes. The fact that such a statement has not been forthcoming appears significant.

I can think of a number of individuals who say that self-ID and/or males with DSDs should be allowed to compete in women's sports, but none of whom I could say, "They're credible, they know a lot about this stuff, I should give some weight to their opinion."

I actually wouldn't know who to consider reputable putting the other side's argument, they all seem like they're obfuscating to me. Many newspapers have pro Khelif articles but they are just repeating the IOC line with added "poor Khelif" emotive prose.

It might be better to look for articles about Caster Semenya at the time that happened, and the arguments made in the Court of Arbitration on Caster's behalf? That situation was relatively longer ago and I imagine there are more refined pieces.

I can think of a number of individuals who say that self-ID and/or males with DSDs should be allowed to compete in women's sports, but none of whom I could say, "They're credible, they know a lot about this stuff, I should give some weight to their opinion."

This.

I’m sure I saw a vid on TikTok saying Khelif is born female?

Also - being Algerian from Algeria, they are not very welcoming or adoptive of Trans issues. I doubt she would have got far in her career if she is Trans.

A "vid on Tiktok" and your opinion is not the type of sources the OP is looking for. She's looking for the scientific arguments by subject matter experts.

This boxer isn’t trans but intersex.
It’s possible to have testes pumping out testosterone and a penis alongside an opening that could be blind ended , not leading to a womb and ovaries.

It’s a tricky issue.

Yeah. When the OP is asking for reputable sources, she doesn't mean a video you think you saw on TikTok.

The Quillette article is excellent, as is the Ross Tucker sports science podcast episode. Both are by people who are experts in the field. You could also look up Carole Hooven, a former Harvard academic who has written a well-regarded book on testosterone.

This podcast has a very good explanation of the science and also touches on the political background.

There would be no problem if the IOC were to reintroduce the swab test to verify a contestant's eligibility for inclusion in the female category.

There wouldn't, but as we know there are people who think female sport should be "inclusive" not just of males with DSD conditions but also males who identify as women. So they don't support sex testing at all, or only in terms of testosterone levels being restricted.

Their arguments are usually quite poor and based on emotive appeals to "inclusion" and "kindness", but I think it's a good idea to for people arguing the opposite to understand them in order to better be able to counter them.

No one is saying they are Trans
They are saying the boxer is Male by virtue of having XY chromosomes and internal testes that are producing testosterone and they went through male puberty

She competed in Tokyo and lost. Why was this not an issue then?

She clearly didn’t beat most women then, but 4 years later, she’s still the same biological make up. Nothing has changed, apart from, presumably, her training.

I don’t think this is anything like as controversial as it started out as. This has been whipped up as a trans question and now there’s a lot of backpedaling because it’s nowhere near as clear cut as it was made to seem online and in the press.

The Evening Standard has made a reasonable attempt to explain.

https://www.standard.co.uk/sport/boxing/what-is-dsd-boxing-imane-khelif-gender-scandal-paris-olympics-intersex-b1174430.html

If Khelif is really a woman, rather than a male with a DSD, it would only take a cheek swab and within 10 minutes the controversy would die down.

The Real Science of Sport is always good.

There is this https://reduxx.info/international-olympic-committee-was-warned-about-male-boxers-world-boxing-organization-vice-president-says/

followed by this https://x.com/Slatzism/status/1819427537740558848

Why would it be relevant which matches she has won or lost?

If this person is XY, shes displaced an XX from having the chance to compete.

Lots of good links given here and I also second the PP suggestion that you look up the Caster Semenya case.
I think the difficulty with finding intellectually rigorous and logical arguments going the other way is that there aren't any. I don't mean that flippantly. Sound discussion about any topic has to come from an agreed, evidenced base.
The basis of the argument here is that Males should not compete against Females because of biological differences based on their sex. Males, at population level, are bigger, stronger, faster etc than females.
If working from that basis, those arguing that males should compete against females need to state why...But instead they attempt to subvert the basis itself and that makes all argument pointless.
My teen DD has been telling me about the SM obsession with 'last thursday-ism' where the 'gotcha' is 'you can't prove that the world wasn't created last thursday cos we might all just be in a simulation or thoughts have been put in our heads'. Well OK, yes. We might all be living in the Matrix, or the world might actually be ruled by mice or dolphins.
But we can't create policy and maintain a society if any rational argument is simply countered by whataboutery.
Sex is binary and biology does have an effect on males and females. No scientifically correct and intellectually rigorous argument against that is ever made.

This is a very thorough and detailed explanation from a legal
professor specialising in women’s sport.

quillette.com/2024/08/03/xy-athletes-in-womens-olympic-boxing-paris-2024-controversy-explained-khelif-yu-ting/