Imane Khelif

[LHayday]

Just reading the thread on here for the first time. What I fail to understand is why so many contributors are so desperate for her to be a man. Someone who has lived their entire life as a woman. Beggars belief.

A mere glance at JKR’s Twitter account would reveal all the IK posts are still there. But as we’ve discovered on these threads, some people prefer to scream BIGOT! rather than engage with reality

This fake news spreading is a hallmark of TRA discourse.

Yep.

And another way in which it's glaringly obvious that "transactivism" isn't a genuine civil rights movement.

Genuine civil rights movements don't have to lie or project constantly. Or use the known tactics of propagandists, narcissists, manipulators or abusers. They don't need to because they can rely on facts. They also don't have to glom onto or appropriate actual civil rights movements either just to give themselves power because they don't have anything else.

As an aside, I love the word glom.

I was just thinking the same thing. One of those words I don't use, haven't seen written down but can work out from context. I'm off to google it!..
Etymology
probably from Scottish Gaelic glàim to handle awkwardly, seize voraciously
Well fancy that!
Every day a schoolday

..and I've just checked and it's still in use in modern Irish Gaelic:
glám meaning to grab or to clutch.

De la Chappelle syndrome

e.g. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0377123723001296

https://www.reddit.com/r/ImaneKhelif/comments/1exkzqy/best_vogue_cover

Khelif's fans are having fun with Photoshop

Never was the phrase 'More issues than Vogue' more apt!🙄

The subheading of that Reddit thread is ImanesMeatyGirlDick 😬

That's the name of the poster...

Just saw this. Let's hope that the IOC takes note and never repeats the 'no one has suggested anything approach'. It is good for a historical perspective too.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/sms.14715

Fair and Safe Eligibility Criteria for Women’s Sport.

10 August 2024

Ross Tucker, Emma N. Hilton, Kerry McGawley, Noel Pollock, Grégoire P. Millets, Oyvind Sandbakke, Glyn Howatson, Gregory A. Brown, Lara A. Carlson, Mark A. Chen, Neil Heron, Christopher Kirk, Marie H. Murphy, Jamie Pringle, Andrew Richardson, Jordan Santos-Concejero, Ask Vest Christiansen, Carwyn Jones, Juan-Manuel Alonso, Rebecca Robinson, Nigel Jones, Mathew Wilson, Michael G. Parker, Arabah Chintoh, Sandra Hunter, Jonathon W. Senefeld, Mary I. O'Connor, Michael Joyner, Eva M. Carneiro, Cathy Devine, Jon Pike, Tommy R Lundberg.

During press conferences at the 2024 Olympic Games, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) invited solutions to address eligibility for women's sport. We take this opportunity to propose our solution, which includes: (a) recognizing that female sport that excludes all male advantage is necessary for female inclusion; (b) recognizing that exclusion from female sport should be based on the presence of any male development, rather than current testosterone levels, (c) not privileging legal "passport" sex or gender identity for inclusion into female sport; and (d) accepting that sport must have means of testing eligibility to fulfill the category purpose.

Historically, administering sex-based eligibility testing has been controversial, mainly due to failures in protecting athlete con-sent, dignity, and confidentiality. As early as the 1950s, eligibility was based on visual inspection of entrants into women's sport. In 1968, these "nude parades" were replaced by more discreet molecular methods including sex chromosome screening, and later by the more specific and sensitive test for the presence of Y chromosome genetic material. However, mandatory sex verification was abolished in 1999. Among concerns at the time was the risk that sport would discover that entrants in female events had an XY difference of sex development (DSD), and that the potential for traumatization and stigmatization of these athletes was not justified, given the prevailing understanding that such athletes are not advantaged in the female category.

Today, 25 years later, there is ample evidence that biological sex is a crucial differentiator in ensuring fairness and influencing safety for female athletes. The participation of male-born competitors (e.g., transgender women) and athletes with certain XY DSDs in female sport is a growing concern. These athletes experience male-typical development from testes producing tes-tosterone, with resultant physiological differences creating athletic advantages and safety risks, even in athletes with XY DSDs who might have been observed as female at birth.

The ethical failures of sports federations in the past cannot be allowed to obstruct accessible solutions to such an important issue in women's sport. The ethical framework that governs modern genetic testing is thorough and, importantly to overcome the shortcomings of the past, it emphasizes individual consent, confidentiality, and dignity. Current technology enables a screening procedure for "sports sex" that involves a simple cheek swab to determine sex chromosomes. This screen can be performed reliably and quickly and should be done in duplicate to ensure reliable results.

The results of this sex chromosome screening should be used to indicate the need for follow-up tests as part of standard medical care, including counseling and psychological support as part of the ongoing duty of care to the athlete. This will permit greater understanding of a potential medical condition, but also allow for an evidence-based assessment of male advantage in sport. However, to preserve confidentiality and dignity, athletes must be screened early-perhaps when they first register in the female category in an affiliated competition and before they are thrust into the global spotlight. This would prevent the individual targeting and unsolicited public scrutiny that has occurred numerous times, most recently in the 2024 Olympic Games. An early, cohort-wide approach that treats all participants equally is overwhelmingly preferable to the current approach that invites targeted testing based on allegation, suspicion, subjective assessment, and bias. Despite the potential for unexpected outcomes, a survey of female athletes after the Atlanta 1996 Olympics revealed that 82% supported sex testing, with only 6% reporting discomfort about the test protocol. Nearly three decades later, we should revisit and respect the female athlete's voice.

It is crucial that sports federations in sex-affected sports are empowered to protect female athletes and ensure fair competition. At least one major international federation (World Aquatics) is explicit in that the eligibility criteria include genetic sex screen-ing, and more federations should consider this addition to eligibility criteria. Rather than "policing female bodies," screening followed by comprehensive follow-up in the rare cases that require extra consideration, with emphasis on the duty of care to every athlete, will ensure preservation of the female category for fair and safe sport.

Since OP doesn't seem to come back, I think that Menno has nailed the summary.

It is that 'Y' chromosome and male pubertal advantage.

https://x.com/MrMennoTweets/status/1826550769966891072

Love Mr M, if he ever needs a kidney he can have one of mine.

I wonder what facile argument the IOC would put forward to refute this very clear, reasoned and fair article.

I do hope they aim higher than “Aw! It’s not fair to that tiny proportion of the human race who through negligent medical support from their parents, coaches and national sports bodies are surprised and shocked when they are “unexpectedly” identified as DSD athletes in elite international competitions.”

Love the 'Still a dude' comment. At least someone can see what's going on 🙂

Has anyone got a link to the video telling women they just need to train harder? Thought I’d saved it but can’t locate it.

Here you go

Here is some more about the inclusion of males in female sports categories from David Handelsman

From David Handelsman
5th April 2024

https://academic.oup.com/edrv/advance-article/doi/10.1210/endrev/bnae013/7641481?login=false

There is a good diagram showing the stages of genital development and 5ARD & CAIS here as well.

Essential Points

“A definition of the term sport sex is proposed based on an individual's experience of male puberty integrating related physiological factors such as male birth sex, the presence of a testis, and adult male circulating testosterone levels.“

“Male puberty involves a 20- to 30-fold increase in testosterone production over that prevailing in children and women at any age, creating the postpubertal male physical advantages of sex differences in athletic performance through the androgen-dependent uplift forming larger and stronger muscles and bone, more powerful cardiorespiratory function, and higher hemoglobin.“

“Physiological mechanisms of the sex differences in performance may involve muscle memory and the effects of neonatal minipuberty, but alternative explanations claiming effects of GH or an unspecified Y chromosome gene are not credible.“

“While many genetic factors contribute to sporting success, the genetic mutations creating 46XY DSDs defeat the sex classification of sport and are incompatible with fair play in elite individual competitions for the vast majority of non-DSD, non-transgender females. The degree to which sustained complete testosterone suppression eliminates the legacy advantages of male puberty remains uncertain and difficult to evaluate decisively.“

“As a result, traditionally elite individual sports where success depends on power, speed, or endurance are classified into male and female events aiming to create a protected female category allowing women to achieve fame and fortune from success that competing against men would deny.“

“Participation in elite female sports of unmodified transgender (male-to-female) women or 46XY disorders of sexual differentiation in elite female events represents male-bodied athletes using unfair postpubertal physical advantages and is category-defeating for the binary sex classification of sport.“

“Recreational, community, and junior (<12 years old) sports, as well as sports not reliant on physical prowess, may not need a sex classification based on male physical advantages and could operate fairly with an open category.“

“The optimal management in team sport participation of transgender and 46XY DSD individuals is a complex and still unresolved issue depending on the relevant team skills and contribution of any single individual to team success.“

Why males with DSDs where there is virilisation and those males with transgender identities should be considered the same. Ie. Males with DSDs where there is virilisations is not a ‘different issue’ at all as some people claim. Those claims are then used as a silencing tactic.

“These physiological issues of the 46 XY DSD individuals have important ramifications for male-to-female (M2F) transgender individuals in relation to elite sports competition. While neither condition involves deliberate cheating, when unmodified by any testosterone suppressive treatment after completing a male puberty, they both provide the same unfair male physical advantage over all other female athletes as would a non-transgender, non-DSD male.”

An interesting insight into why ‘gender’ is not useful for sports categories.

“The subjective nature of gender identity, which can only be verified by asking the individual, with its potential for volitional change at any time, means that no fixed, invariant gender can be ascribed to individuals. As such, gender cannot form a sound durable objective basis for defining sport sex. Hence, a previous proposal to define “athletic gender” as a means to stratify elite athletic events would be unable to provide consistent objective classifications over different times or events including even within the same competition.”

Interesting point on the hypothesis of muscle memory

“An important amplifier of androgen effects on muscle is the concept of muscle memory arising from the innovative experiments of Gundersen. He first showed in rodents that myonuclei created during androgen- or exercise-induced muscle hypertrophy are not lost when the androgen or exercise stimulus is withdrawn. Furthermore, the residual expanded pool of myonuclei enhance muscle functional responses to subsequent training or androgen exposure. This makes the permanence of myonuclear expansion a pivotal factor in the muscle memory mechanism with relevance to short-term androgen doping and longer-term androgen exposure in individuals who are transgender and XY DSD. Nevertheless, achieving proof (or refutation) of this concept in humans is a formidable challenge due to the practical constraints on decisive but ethical human investigation.”

And

“Ultimately, further rigorous evidence is required to confirm this important hypothesis in humans. If true in humans, the muscle memory hypothesis has many important implications. By explaining the durable uplift in muscle function arising from the dramatic increase in circulating testosterone during male puberty, it forms a key contribution to the sex difference in athletic performance. It also suggests that androgen doping may have lasting effects for many years, if not indefinitely, thereby raising questions about the adequacy of the present maximum 4-year suspension period for androgen doping under the WADA Code.”

And

“Finally, if this mechanism is confirmed in humans, testosterone effects on muscle memory among those who have completed male puberty casts doubt over whether transgender women or androgen-sensitive 46XY DSD individuals could compete fairly in elite female events.”

Just pulling this bit out because I have seen this argument used often - that males with DSDs where there is virilisation and those males with transgender identities should not be considered the same.

Handelsman makes the point very clearly. Ie. Males with DSDs where there is virilisations is not a ‘different issue’ to male people with a transgender identity at all as some people claim. Those claims are then used as a silencing tactic.

“These physiological issues of the 46 XY DSD individuals have important ramifications for male-to-female (M2F) transgender individuals in relation to elite sports competition. While neither condition involves deliberate cheating, when unmodified by any testosterone suppressive treatment after completing a male puberty, they both provide the same unfair male physical advantage over all other female athletes as would a non-transgender, non-DSD male.”

Unless you send it, they will never ever see it.

I suspect that the authors of this will be sending it with their commentary. Along with a number of women's campaign groups.

I doubt that the IOC will remain unaware of this.

It just feels, and actually is, that the IOC can do what the bloody hell they like, they're not accountable, they can single-handedly decimate women's sport and no one can stop them

Not sure if it was on here or TwiX, but I’ve seen both groups described as “men with a sob story”.

The DSD sob story is perhaps marginally more compelling, though when you see the obvious abuse of their incorrectly identified sex at birth in sport, by men who are obviously enjoying all the advantages that being male brings in every other aspect of their lives, there’s very little to choose between them.

It just feels, and actually is, that the IOC can do what the bloody hell they like, they're not accountable, they can single-handedly decimate women's sport and no one can stop them

It's snail's pace, but things are moving forwards. Just so frustrating that it takes a blatant case of unfairness which public opinion can react to before anything happens in a particular area. Caster Semenya. Lia Thomas. I'm convinced that these two are the test case for boxing, and it will get done as long as we don't let the IOC vanish them from public view, but they didn't want egg on their face given they failed to make rules in time for these games and the male boxers were perfectly within the letter of the rules even if blatantly outside the spirit of them.