Thread 3: TWO “Female Boxers” Set To Compete At Paris 2024 Were Previously Disqualified From Women’s World Championship For Having “XY Chromosomes”

[Ereshkigalangcleg]

To continue the discussion.

Thread 2

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5133749-thread-2-two-female-boxers-set-to-compete-at-paris-2024-were-previously-disqualified-from-womens-world-championship-for-having-xy-chromosomes?utmmcampaign=thread&utmmedium=share

Thread 1

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

Because a woman is someone with an F in their passport.
Or someone who thinks they’re a woman.

And getting this through at the olympics is just one example of normalising it.

Imagine the grovelling apologies, industrial quantities of humble pie and towering moral superiority involved if these two individuals could triumphantly wave an XX chromosome test result at a press conference. All those haters instantly crushed. It would be a glorious moment for them. So why can't they do it?

The arguments in support of these two boxers reduce to-
she thinks she’s a woman.
the ioc say she’s a woman
she has an f in her passport
it would be awful for her to be an effeminate boy in Algeria.
we really shouldn’t wonder what sex other people are.
gosh you’re all so bigoted, but not me. I’m super nice 😊

Yep, that really is it.

It’s all seeming like a repeat of the Semenya debacle where we were told that she’d grown up as a girl, and was now just a woman with a bit of extra testosterone.

Yeah, this doesn't make any sense! Any test that is used to determine sex must necessarily include all members of the sex within its reference range. Eg. The range of female testosterone levels must include literally all women’s testosterone levels. If the test result sits outside of that range, it must be because they are male, or because there is exogenous testosterone. If that's not the case, the test isn't valid.

SM is full of people saying, IK has a vagina. And, indeed, a womb. Although how they could know the latter, I don't know. And the former is surely explained by "had the appearance of a vagina (or at least no penis) at birth, and hence was assigned female at birth". It makes no sense, but people will believe what they choose to believe. Once you're so invested in a position, it's hard to change track.

Are these opponents WOC? Whatever will people do once they can't use the "white women's tears" meme?

I know it’s been shared before but would really recommend this very short Podcast by Ross Tucker.

https://twitter.com/Scienceofsport/status/1820491201830641826

This really crystallised it for me (from Ross Tucker’s twitter but similar points are made in the podcast):

‘That's the fundamental issue here - the IOC are defending their choice: inclusion over safety and fairness. It's that choice that necessitates the sidestep of the test result, to instead undermine the test reason. If you're trying to make sense of anything the IOC says on this, just remember - they've made a choice, and everything has to now justify that choice. Pretty simple.’

@SabrinaThwaite

BTW It’s 93 not 350 for the month of August, since I find accuracy rather than disinformation important.
Well, it will be 94 now.

Okay. I rarely use the Search function so that could explain the discrepancy. Still, 16/94 is rather a difference. Can we agree bringing up post numbers is silly?

Mark Adams "just to look at the key members who took part in that travesty yesterday tells you everything you need to know".
Well indeed.
From The Guardian 4/2/13 by John Owens
Former Conservative Part co-treasurer Peter Cruddas has won £45,000 in libel damages plus costs from lobbyst Mark Adams. Adams a former Lansons PA head and private secretary to Tony Blair has been sued for a 'persistent & public campaign' against Cruddas on social media.

Adams was also best man at Keir "The phrase 'only women have a cervix' is something that shouldn't be said. It is not right" Starmer's wedding.

Interesting @gailforce2

The Science of Sport podcast is generally excellent - who knew that fancy trainers and American Football related brain injuries could be so interesting?

It’s a bit like the MN saying ‘Came for the pram reviews, stayed for the feminism’. I started listening to the episodes on sex differences in sport a couple of years ago but now I listen to all of it regularly.

This particular podcast features (seasoned sports journalist) Sean Ingle of the Guardian asking a very sensible question and getting an absolutely nothingburger of an answer back from that Mark whatsit of the IOC. It’s genuinely flabbergasting that a press conference could give such a non-answer.

Puts me in mind of the Trump Whitehouse. Press Secretaries!

There's something about disregarding biological reality when it comes to the physicality of sport and chromosomes being discussed on SM that is especially flabbergasting. Maybe in other scenarios I am pretending to myself that people still know that men and women are real, immutable categories.

We've been told for about a decade now to educate ourselves on sex being a spectrum and far more complicated than we'd ever realized. Many people will assume there must be something to it and that they won't want to be perceived as ignorant.

Also, the whole debate about Khelif's sex feels like it can be simplified to: no/tiny penis = female. What an insult!

Why is all the focus on IK and not Lin?

I think it must be a deliberate distraction and I know it has been raised before. Because with IK they can leverage in the oppression aspect. But everything seems to revolve around IK . It is rather significant.

Adams was also best man at Keir "The phrase 'only women have a cervix' is something that shouldn't be said. It is not right" Starmer's wedding.

It genuinely makes me think less of Keir Starmer that this tosser is one of his closest friends. I won't be giving him the benefit of the doubt on anything in future.

Late to the party, but thanks for the new thread.

Where is this "ironclad evidence" he speaks of?

His parents dressed him in pretty pink clothes when he was little, which is apparently way more persuasive and reliable than silly sciencey shit like chromosomes and testosterone levels.

I think it is the perception that IK must be more disadvantaged. (Or maybe because he has braids and as we know, that makes someone a woman.)

I think there are now questions about the pic too now, and whether that the child in pretty pink clothes is Imane or Imane's sister.

yep.

Pure distraction.

As I said on another thread, my speculation is that Khelif is the focus because the "Russian boxer revenge" suggestion makes some sort of weird sense as a theory when it comes to Khelif but not with Lin Yu Ting. I also think there is the backstory, tearful interviews etc.

Discrediting the IBA test was better when people could point to a motive.

I was scrolling through Facebook, I never react, don't post anything and read anything that comes up irrespective of which side its arguing, mostly because I enjoy the comments. The IOC have lost respect, its very obvious that the tide of public opinion has turned against them over this. Its now overwhelmingly people stating they are male and should be disqualified with a few shouting bigot. Someone even claimed khelif has given birth to 2 children its getting that bad trying to prove they are women.

It no longer matters if both boxers take the gold it will be forever tainted for most people. This whole thing is going to cause a major backlash and hopefully a return sanity.