IOC President says (the) female category must be protected.

[WeMeetInFairIthilien]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/cq8zyn041llo.amp

Just popped up in my news feed.

Somewhat washy, but some good quotes too.

Bril

Thanks for sharing this, sounds promising.

And just simply the exposure and it being talked about is a good thing.

The more sunlight we shine on this the better. Women want our stuff back!

The pretence that some revolutionary new science is needed to resolve this ‘complicated’ issue. Urgh. Such bollocks. They should just admit that the ONLY reason the IOC is finally acting on this is because the US won’t give visas to men intending to compete in female events in LA. And because the next Khelif enters an olympic boxing ring he could kill a woman, and then the IOC could find itself facing (wo)manslaughter charges because there is now unequivocal proof that he is male.

More here:

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2025/jun/26/new-olympics-chief-kirsty-coventry-vows-ioc-will-ensure-fairness-for-female-athletes

Nah, Kirsty Coventry has been talking about this before she became president. She’d be pushing on it anyway without any help from Trump

yeah Utterly ridiculous that women's sports still has this sword of Damocles hanging over it until the political environment once again favors the TRAs and the next round of bogus research is released.

Reminds one that even when the yoke of GI is finally thrown off, eternal vigilance will be necessary.

Seems like Bach was the main obstacle, then?

I wonder if he'd been taking some, ah, Bach-handers...?

Isn't it likely that Trump's visa bans were (one of) the reason(s) that Coventry was elevated and that the prohibition was already settled before she assumed office? Not an expert, but it seems that with the executive orders, the question was not whether the IOC would ban trans athletes from opposite sex sports, but how and when they would be banned.

Here is the archive link for the guardian article.

https://archive.is/XuLSl

It sounds positive. But as with anything to do with the IOC, I will hold out until they actually release their findings.

Too fucking right they are only going to ‘look forward’ and not back. Because then they would have to admit the fucked up decisions they made by only considering the campaigners from the 1990s. Those who argued emotional reasoning instead of looking at the science and the negative impact of their decisions.

It was always a distraction tactic though. The organisation used the changes to benefit of what they categorised as marginalised athletes as a distraction for their systemic and corrupted failings.

It will take me a very long time before I trust the IOC to actually do the right thing based on solid evidence rather than still taking the politically expedient option.

It's promising news for the forthcoming Olympics.

An apology from the IOC for the failings in the last competition wouldn't go amiss. There was so much talk of keeping competitors safe in the Olympic village, yet they deliberately placed biological males in the boxing ring to fight female athletes. They blatantly put women in danger of serious harm, filmed it and then rewarded the males.

Who would have thought it would prove so hard.

Presumably it’s only hard because effort is being made to limit the male tantrum from such a decision, like putting on an episode of In the Night Garden for a toddler who is screaming about the wrong socks.