Gender in Sport (Split)

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, trousers said:

I guess what I'm getting at is that if I'd come on here and said "That Algerian boxer is male" and others then said: "no, she's a woman" I would've then said: "ok, fair enough, I disagree but that's fine" and the conversation would've ended there rather than turn into a futile 17 day debate... 

Fair enough. In some ways that's what a forum is for though. Would be pretty empty if no one was prepared to put forward views robustly. Particularly when those views are backed up by more than just opinion. 

[trousers]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Anyway, enjoy your day spent trying to convince yourself and a few strangers that a woman is a bloke. Feck knows why you would, but each to their own. 

# devil's advocate klaxon #

Why does it matter if that's Hypo's point of view? Why not let him have that point of view rather than trying to change it? What's wrong with different views sitting side by side, even if you think one view is 'right' and the other view 'wrong'? It takes dogma on both 'sides' for a debate such as this to go on ad-infinitum...

[trousers]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Fair enough. In some ways that's what a forum is for though. Would be pretty empty if no one was prepared to put forward views robustly. Particularly when those views are backed up by more than just opinion. 

Agree, but what I don't get is why people feel the need to put forward the same 'robust' view 74 times when once would suffice? I knew what everyone's view was on this topic about 7 pages ago. I'm not sure what everyone repeating the same thing many times thereafter actually achieves... 

[AlexLaw76]

7 minutes ago, trousers said:

# devil's advocate klaxon #

Why does it matter if that's Hypo's point of view? Why not let him have that point of view rather than trying to change it? What's wrong with different views sitting side by side, even if you think one view is 'right' and the other view 'wrong'? It takes dogma on both 'sides' for a debate such as this to go on ad-infinitum...

You've entered the bear-pit Trousers. Keep your wits about you.

When the argument is lost, you will be labelled a Nazi and / or Islamophobic 

 

Edited August 4 by AlexLaw76

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, trousers said:

Agree, but what I don't get is why people feel the need to put forward the same 'robust' view 74 times when once would suffice? I knew what everyone's view was on this topic about 7 pages ago. I'm not sure what everyone repeating the same thing many times thereafter actually achieves... 

Most of my replies have been in response to posters either asking me a question, misrepresenting what I've posted or posting outright falsehood which I've corrected. Inevitably that means there will some repition of my views. 

[AlexLaw76]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Most of my replies have been in response to posters either asking me a question, misrepresenting what I've posted or posting outright falsehood which I've corrected. Inevitably that means there will some repition of my views. 

And obviously means you hate all muslins, females, muslim females and want to see the complete destruction of Palestine.

It's the only logical outcome given your posts on this thread.

Edited August 4 by AlexLaw76

[egg]

10 minutes ago, trousers said:

# devil's advocate klaxon #

Why does it matter if that's Hypo's point of view? Why not let him have that point of view rather than trying to change it? What's wrong with different views sitting side by side, even if you think one view is 'right' and the other view 'wrong'? It takes dogma on both 'sides' for a debate such as this to go on ad-infinitum...

It's a question of science and fact, not opinion. That said, I'm not trying to change Hypo's view, and I haven't asked him to. Rather, I don't understand:

a) what he defines a woman as (he's asked others to, do entirely reasonable that he does); and

b) how he's so convinced that this woman is a bloke.

Re a) He's asked others to define a woman but doesn't himself. 

Re b) He's been asked to link to evidence to support his assertion.

These are his points, not mine. He needs to put up or shut up imo. 

[egg]

12 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

You've entered the bear-pit Trousers. Keep your wits about you.

When the argument is lost, you will be labelled a Nazi and / or Islamophobic 

 

Trousers isn't either of those things. Hope that helps. 

Who's lost an argument?

The boxer lady is a lady. She isn't a bloke cos hypo says so. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Trousers isn't either of those things. Hope that helps. 

Who's lost an argument?

The boxer lady is a lady. She isn't a bloke cos hypo says so. 

I'm sure trousers will be relieved to know that you're the judge! 

Regarding your second point I agree. Khelif isn't a bloke because I say they are. 

[egg]

3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'm sure trousers will be relieved to know that you're the judge! 

Regarding your second point I agree. Khelif isn't a bloke because I say they are. 

Any chance of links to your evidence that she's a bloke please? 

[hypochondriac]

10 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And obviously means you hate all muslins, females, muslim females and want to see the complete destruction of Palestine.

It's the only logical outcome given your posts on this thread.

It's only a professional troll in the form of soggy and the likes of egg who only started with this sort of thing when he agreed with soggy over Palestine and can't handle Israeli support. 

The amusing thing in this case is that I hadn't even realised that Khelif was a Muslim until egg Brough it up (assuming what he says is true.) The fact that one of the first things he looks at is the religion of the person involved says more about him I would say. 

[hypochondriac]

4 minutes ago, egg said:

Any chance of links to your evidence that she's a bloke please? 

Read my posts. I'm not repeating it all again I set it all out extensively in more than one post. I assume you have eyes and working hands. Now would be a good time to use them.

Edited August 4 by hypochondriac

[sadoldgit]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

It's only a professional troll in the form of soggy and the likes of egg who only started with this sort of thing when he agreed with soggy over Palestine and can't handle Israeli support. 

The amusing thing in this case is that I hadn't even realised that Khelif was a Muslim until egg Brough it up (assuming what he says is true.) The fact that one of the first things he looks at is the religion of the person involved says more about him I would say. 

Just like you saying that you didn’t know who Tommy Robinson and Katie Hopkins were when you jumped in to defend them anyway. You are a busted flush.

[Lighthouse]

Ha! This thread is amazing, people have completely swapped arguments from when a transgender issue comes up. A psychologist would have a field day on this forum.

[hypochondriac]

14 minutes ago, egg said:

It's a question of science and fact, not opinion. That said, I'm not trying to change Hypo's view, and I haven't asked him to. Rather, I don't understand:

a) what he defines a woman as (he's asked others to, do entirely reasonable that he does); and

b) how he's so convinced that this woman is a bloke.

Re a) He's asked others to define a woman but doesn't himself. 

Re b) He's been asked to link to evidence to support his assertion.

These are his points, not mine. He needs to put up or shut up imo. 

A) adult female human. That is the definition of a woman. 

B) I've answered that extensively in previous posts. 

So I've answered both and you're not satisfied with the answers. That seems to be your problem not mine. 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Lighthouse said:

Ha! This thread is amazing, people have completely swapped arguments from when a transgender issue comes up. A psychologist would have a field day on this forum.

In what way? Genuinely interested to hear your views. My stance is that you can't change your sex. That's true for transgender people and for people unfortunate enough to be born with DSD. 

[sadoldgit]

40 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Being a shit boxer with male advantages doesn't mean they aren't male. I'd lose to the top female sprinters it doesn't make me not a man. 

But aren’t you actually concerned about someone who is disadvantaged being taken advantage of? Sounds to me like you really should be defending shit boxers 🤔

[egg]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Read my posts. I'm not repeating it all again I set it all out extensively in more than one post. I assume you have eyes and working hands. Now would be a good time to use them.

Links to evidence please Hypo?

Your phobic based opinion that she's a bloke ain't evidence. 

 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Links to evidence please Hypo?

Your phobic based opinion that she's a bloke ain't evidence. 

 

Correct. My opinion is not evidence. The evidence is evidence. Read the thread egg. It isn't a hard thing to do. 

[sadoldgit]

24 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

And obviously means you hate all muslins, females, muslim females and want to see the complete destruction of Palestine.

It's the only logical outcome given your posts on this thread.

No Delldays, it is the only logical outcome given his posting history for years.

And yours.

[egg]

4 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

A) adult female human. That is the definition of a woman. 

B) I've answered that extensively in previous posts. 

So I've answered both and you're not satisfied with the answers. That seems to be your problem not mine. 

A) That's not an answer. What's an adult female human in your view? Tits/fanny? Innards? Hormones? Chromosomes? 

B) You haven't. You have an opinion. That's not evidence. If you believe there's evidence (other bigots views on X and Reddit ain't evidence btw) you'll be able to link to it. Alternatively, you could be honest and just say that there's no evidence...chop chop. 

[hypochondriac]

You've had your answers. Get reading. 

[egg]

12 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

It's only a professional troll in the form of soggy and the likes of egg who only started with this sort of thing when he agreed with soggy over Palestine and can't handle Israeli support. 

The amusing thing in this case is that I hadn't even realised that Khelif was a Muslim until egg Brough it up (assuming what he says is true.) The fact that one of the first things he looks at is the religion of the person involved says more about him I would say. 

Ha!!  Of course you didn't. 

If you're as well versed on this topic as you claim (you're not, you just have a bigoted opinion) you'll have noted that if she wanted to trans to a man, she couldn't because of the laws in her country and her religion. You've gotta read actual facts Hypo, you'll learn stuff. 

[egg]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

You've had your answers. Get reading. 

Your inability to put up links to support your opinion tells it's own story. Your a bigot mate, pure and simple. 

I'm off out. I'll check back for links to evidence later. 

[hypochondriac]

2 minutes ago, egg said:

Ha!!  Of course you didn't. 

If you're as well versed on this topic as you claim (you're not, you just have a bigoted opinion) you'll have noted that if she wanted to trans to a man, she couldn't because of the laws in her country and her religion. You've gotta read actual facts Hypo, you'll learn stuff. 

I was aware they wouldn't be allowed to be trans in their country but had no idea what religion they were. Not everyone from Algeria is a Muslim. Irrelevant anyway as they aren't trans. 

[hypochondriac]

1 minute ago, egg said:

Your inability to put up links to support your opinion tells it's own story. Your a bigot mate, pure and simple. 

I'm off out. I'll check back for links to evidence later. 

I've set out my argument with evidence earlier. Probably better to ignore it as doesn't suit your argument. 

[egg]

5 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I've set out my argument with evidence earlier. Probably better to ignore it as doesn't suit your argument. 

Final request - links to EVIDENCE please. I repeat, what you believe and/or claim to have read is not evidence. 

You're a tryer Hypo, I'll give you that, but you've got a shit argument, and you can't prove it. Bless you. 

[hypochondriac]

Just now, egg said:

Final request - links to EVIDENCE please. I repeat, what you believe and/or claim to have read is not evidence. 

You're a tryer Hypo, I'll give you that, but you've got a shit argument, and you can't prove it. Bless you. 

Final response - I have provided evidence I this thread. I haven't simply posted beliefs. I don't need to provide you with an external link to a site for evidence, I have given evidence in my responses. It's not my fault you can't read it. Maybe some glasses would help. 

[sadoldgit]

I have a lot more respect for Delldays and Duckie. At least they don’t try and pretend that they are something other than they are.

[hypochondriac]

Good to see some sports women having the courage to speak out. This from Nicola Adams is welcome:

 

Edited August 4 by hypochondriac

[sadoldgit]

It’s a shame that people don’t speak out against boxing as a dangerous sport rather than just using it as another weapon in  the culture wars. 
I can understand why men think it is okay to rattle each others brains around in each other’s craniums, but would have thought that women would have more sense.

Punching anyone in the head, whatever their gender, is not ok and is dangerous. (Or funny, if you are hypochondriac).

Edited August 4 by sadoldgit
Added text

[Lighthouse]

45 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

In what way? Genuinely interested to hear your views. My stance is that you can't change your sex. That's true for transgender people and for people unfortunate enough to be born with DSD. 

In the sense that the people who normal argue transgender issues from a standpoint of what somebody feels must be correct are now demanding definitions and evidence, which you’ve failed to satisfy.

For the sake of helping the debate move along, the definition of a woman is; ‘a person whose reproductive organs, if healthy and free from deformity, would produce eggs upon reaching sexual maturity.’ Would you agree or disagree on that?

[hypochondriac]

Just now, Lighthouse said:

In the sense that the people who normal argue transgender issues from a standpoint of what somebody feels must be correct are now demanding definitions and evidence, which you’ve failed to satisfy.

For the sake of helping the debate move along, the definition of a woman is; ‘a person whose reproductive organs, if healthy and free from deformity, would produce eggs upon reaching sexual maturity.’ Would you agree or disagree on that?

I'd probably have something about larger gametes in there but I expect so. 

[badgerx16]

29 minutes ago, sadoldgit said:

It’s a shame that people don’t speak out against boxing as a dangerous sport rather than just using it as another weapon in  the culture wars. 
I can understand why men think it is okay to rattle each others brains around in each other’s craniums, but would have thought that woman would have more sense.

Punching anyone in the head, whatever their gender, is not ok and is dangerous.

Nobody forces them, and why can't women have equality in sport ?

Would you ban rugby because of brain injuries ? What about sports with weapons, such as hockey ?

Edited August 4 by badgerx16

[Holmes_and_Watson]

1 hour ago, trousers said:

I guess what I'm getting at is that if I'd come on here and said "That Algerian boxer is male" and others then said: "no, she's a woman" I would've then said: "ok, fair enough, I disagree but that's fine" and the conversation would've ended there rather than turn into a futile 17 day debate... (The latter being fine, of course, if that's what floats people's boat)

While it sometimes/often/always ( delete as appropriate) might end up that way, it's interesting to get underneath that a bit. Here for example there's been interesting posts on sex, gender, how both are determined scientifically and societally (with interpretations, definitions and views) and then how that applies to sport. We've also seen the different criteria sporting organisations use, and the history behind that.

Off to watch the boat floating, which is on after the windsurfing. 🙂

[hypochondriac]

28 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

I'd probably have something about larger gametes in there but I expect so. 

Pretty hypocritical of @Colinjbto laugh at a definition when has admitted he is incapable of providing one! 

[badgerx16]

I don't want to stoke the fires, but part of the confusion on this is actually the "evidence" that is openly in the public domain; Khalif has been accepted as being able to compete as a woman by both boxing and Olympic authorities, and her passport states she is female.

Until the alleged medical tests are made public all the rest is built-on degrees of conjecture.

[Colinjb]

1 minute ago, hypochondriac said:

Pretty hypocritical of @Colinjbto laugh at a definition when has admitted he is incapable of providing one! 

Bless.

[hypochondriac]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

I don't want to stoke the fires, but part of the confusion on this is actually the "evidence" that is openly in the public domain; Khalif has been accepted as being able to compete as a woman by both boxing and Olympic authorities, and her passport states she is female.

Until the alleged medical tests are made public all the rest is built-on degrees of conjecture.

No she wasn't accepted as being able to compete by "boxing" authorities. The IOC have become the boxing authority for this Olympics after the suspension of the IBA. The only test that the IOC do is to accept what is on your passport. The medical tests can only be made public by a request from the athlete as it's illegal to release it otherwise. Why haven't they done so? Would clear it up in minutes. 

[badgerx16]

18 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

No she wasn't accepted as being able to compete by "boxing" authorities.

She has been boxing competitively, and winning tournaments, as a female, since 2018, including the last Olympics, so yes, she has been accepted as such by the boxing authorities.

She boxed in the 2022 edition of the IBA tournament whithout issue, but was disqualified part way through the 2023 edition of the same event.

Edited August 4 by badgerx16

[hypochondriac]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

It’s a shame that people don’t speak out against boxing as a dangerous sport rather than just using it as another weapon in  the culture wars. 
I can understand why men think it is okay to rattle each others brains around in each other’s craniums, but would have thought that woman would have more sense.

Punching anyone in the head, whatever their gender, is not ok and is dangerous.

I didn't expect you to come out so publically against women's equality. It's a bold decision I'll admit. 

Edited August 4 by hypochondriac

[hypochondriac]

Just now, badgerx16 said:

She has been boxing competitively, as a female, since 2018, including the last Olympics, so yes, she has been accepted as such by the boxing authorities.

Tgat was prior to the test which confirmed them to be a biological male. Before that they weren't aware. I agrer though that all athletes in the female category should be tested when they turn professional to prevent things like this. It wasn't the athletes fault prior to them finding out. 

[AlexLaw76]

1 hour ago, sadoldgit said:

It’s a shame that people don’t speak out against boxing as a dangerous sport rather than just using it as another weapon in  the culture wars. 
I can understand why men think it is okay to rattle each others brains around in each other’s craniums, but would have thought that woman would have more sense.

Punching anyone in the head, whatever their gender, is not ok and is dangerous.

We should also ensure Professional Football is played in empty stadiums. Too many have had 'cardiac episodes' in the stands...just too dangerous.

[hypochondriac]

"Alan Abrahamson, an award winning sportswriter and previous columnist for NBC Sports says that he has seen the tests and letter in which the IBA concluded that the boxer, Imane Khelif has DNA which is that “of a male consisting of XY chromosomes.”

“The New Delhi lab reports for both Khelif and Lin say the same thing: 
Result Summary: “Abnormal”
Interpretation: “Chromosomal analysis reveals Male karyotype.”

Edited August 4 by hypochondriac

[Holmes_and_Watson]

14 minutes ago, AlexLaw76 said:

We should also ensure Professional Football is played in empty stadiums. Too many have had 'cardiac episodes' in the stands...just too dangerous.

You would actually have them play in those empty stadiums?! With all that tackling, loss of balance and risk of running and other contact injury?!

Why don't people care about the safety of others?! Why?!

And don't get me started on the lack of fully ergonomically designed stadia with all their sharp, pointy, injury causing angles!

🙂

[Holmes_and_Watson]

53 minutes ago, badgerx16 said:

Nobody forces them, and why can't women have equality in sport ?

Would you ban rugby because of brain injuries ? What about sports with weapons, such as hockey ?

And, in midst of a controversy, the world turns as one, puts aside genotypes and phenotypes and calls out, in one unifying voice... "Stop being a sexist, SOG!" 🙂

[pingpong]

4 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

That's a lie. Khelif was not banned after fighting a Russian. The other fighter who was also banned has never fought a Russian. At the same tournament another fighter prevented a Russian from winning the gold yet was never banned. Why the discrepancy? Why pick on and invent results for a ban for two random fighters for no reason? If there was no due process why would you not appeal it immediately to CAS? Why accept the conclusion of the IBA without an appeal? There is no evidence that the IBA were banned for anything to do with faulty chromosome tests, in fact there's no evidence that any tests of that nature have ever been faulty.

"she passed all of the tests before the Olympics" - what does that mean? The IOC regulations themselves state that the only way they check eligibility is if they have a female marker on their passport. So in reality there were no "tests" for the fighter to pass other than the chromosome test from the ibo which they failed. 

How good they are at boxing is entirely irrelevant and doesn't mean there is no advantage. The Algerian OC stated they were "like Caster Semenya". Caster Semenya is 5-ARD, a DSD that exclusively occurs in biological males. Caster Semenya has fathered children. 

If - as seems likely due to the chromosome test, the quote from officials at the IBO, WBO and the Algerian OC - that Khelif has the DSD 46XY - 5ARD, then this means that while in their mother's womb, their genitalia failed to develop appropriately. Khelif was wrongly assumed to be female at birth due to malformed male genitals.

As a result of DSD, Khelif may have believed they were a girl in early childhood. At puberty, their actual sex would have become blindingly obvious.

By now, Khelif knows without question that they are biologically male. 

Imane Khelif was disqualified from the International Boxing Association's world championships three days after she won an early-round bout with Azalia Amineva, a previously unbeaten Russian prospect.

You seemed to have missed the answer to your question, in that the Istanbul test did not result in her disqualification, or prevent the iba from allowing her to compete in the worlds. (And it was only deep into the competition that they decided to disqualify her, after she had beaten amineva)

 

[hypochondriac]

12 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Imane Khelif was disqualified from the International Boxing Association's world championships three days after she won an early-round bout with Azalia Amineva, a previously unbeaten Russian prospect.

You seemed to have missed the answer to your question, in that the Istanbul test did not result in her disqualification, or prevent the iba from allowing her to compete in the worlds. (And it was only deep into the competition that they decided to disqualify her, after she had beaten amineva)

 

Khelif beat Thailand's Janjaem Suwannapheng and was set to compete against China's Yang Liu for gold in the Welterweight category.

Lin beat Bulgaria's Svetlana Kamenova Staneva for bronze in the Featherweight category.

They were scheduled to fight no Russian boxers in either one of their categories, and only one Russian boxer won a gold medal in the entire championship (Anastasiia Demurchian, Light Middleweight).

India won the most gold medals (4) at the 2023 Women's Championship. China won the most medals overall (7). Kazakhstan won the second most medals overall (6). Russia only won 3 medals at the championship.

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. 
 

Also worth noting that another Taiwanese boxer, Huang Hsiao-wen, won gold in the Bantamweight category. So no discrimination against Taiwan there. 

Explain the disqualification of Lin, who never boxed a Russian a single time.

Once you’re done explaining that, explain the unchallenged victory of the other boxers at the WWBC who beat Russian boxers, including for major critical medal positions, and were not disqualified.

Edited August 4 by hypochondriac

[Holmes_and_Watson]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/articles/c0w44q1nlw2o

Lin now guaranteed a medal.

The article says "an interview with BBC sports editor Dan Roan on Thursday, IBA chief executive Chris Roberts said XY male chromosomes were found in "both cases".

Not that this would have impacted the IOC's eligibility criteria, as I understand it. And the IOC are disputing the process that resulted in that finding too.

 

[egg]

The chromosome thing has been known for ages. It seems to be the thing that bigots like Hypo hang on to while overlooking the very minor details of being born with female genitalia, registered at birth as female, being raised a female, and actually being a female.