Jump to content

Gender in Sport (Split)

AlexLaw76

By AlexLaw76,
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Holmes_and_Watson said:

From just the opening summary...

While the IBA indicated it was a genetic test, although they disagreed with themselves around that press conference, we have no detail on the result.

They were widely discredited on practically everything except testing. As the story progressed, that was also disputed. And all that was before one of them went on a religious based rant, that undermined any shred of credibility they had.

It's not sufficient to say "read between the lines." That sort of insinuation could be used for practically anything. It's not evidence that can be tested, and the IBA testing is in doubt.

There's no indication that the athletes "know that about themselves." At all. No evidence has been presented.

The IOC is less likely to be "ideologically captured" than it is not wanting to enter a legal and cultural minefield. Which is why it's keen to pass it over to another body, and why it's keen to let the countries decide through things like passports, birth certificates etc. It's why the ground on this issues has been shifting, as sporting bodies have had to adapt.

Less "ignoring science for woo woo" and more avoiding a number of another issues. Just because an organisation has gone against the wishes of the programme makers, doesn't mean it's automatically captured.

"Main stream media" is never a good look. Neither was "woo woo"

Since we have no details or evidence, they can moan about other people's use of "men" and "women"  " male" and "female" all they like.

I hope that the programme itself gives a lot of depth to the summary. Because, regardless of their credentials, jumping to unsupported conclusions is poor science.

The reason there is no definitive chromosome result is because the medical information is not allowed to be released and the athletes are relying on the tiny amout of ambiguity from this to continue to compete. There is zero logical reason why they wouldn't clear this up apart from the fact that they know the result and what it says already. 

You simply can't allow countries to decide for themselves when it's combat sports. It's a question of safety before you consider everything else like unfairness or robbing women of opportunities. As to your criticism of the language, that's the interviewer and not the interviewee. Allowing athletes to compete in the female category because their passport says female is imo ideological capture or at best a total abdication of responsibility and it's dangerous. Even those who support Khalif should want to get to the bottom of this. Why are they not demanding a resolution? 

Oh and we have this from Khalif's coach:

"said that a doctor confirmed that there was a “a problem with [Khelif’s] hormones” and “with [Khelif’s] chromosomes,”

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Holmes_and_Watson

Holmes_and_Watson

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

The reason there is no definitive chromosome result is because the medical information is not allowed to be released and the athletes are relying on the tiny amout of ambiguity from this to continue to compete. There is zero logical reason why they wouldn't clear this up apart from the fact that they know the result and what it says already.

As the medical information hasn't been released, we don't know what's in it. Neither do the people in that interview.

The athletes were cleared to compete in the Olympics. It's under the same rules as the last one, I believe. The IOC eligibility rules are very clear. The athletes didn't have to depend on a tiny amount of ambiguity to take part in them. Under the rules, there was absolutely no doubt that they could have competed, based on the information held.

There's absolutely no pressure on the athletes to clear up anything in order to compete in those olympics. Why should they allow the release of sensitive medical information, based on information from a discredited organisation (and doubt was thrown on the tests, as well as everything else the IBA touched.)?

Since there's no evidence to assume they knew anything untoward outside of those tests, why would they lose the chance to compete?

I get that the other line of the argument is along the lines of they failed a IBA test - they must have known before - if they didn't know before they did then -they should have pulled out of competition until resolved. But to follow that line is to support evidence that's just not there. Further, to support an interpretation of evidence that's just not there.

Quote

You simply can't allow countries to decide for themselves when it's combat sports. It's a question of safety before you consider everything else like unfairness or robbing women of opportunities.

For me, this is a different part of this. Above, the athletes met the eligibility criteria to compete.

Going forward, the IOC will look to get in another organisation. What criteria are they going to introduce, if any?

Perhaps they will introduce a whole set of new tests (there are a number of them at varying levels of intrusion - so even what tests would be required are up for debate.)

But then you're going to have adult athletes identifying as one sex, only to be told that they are not by a sporting governing body. Testoserone levels is one thing. Being the arbiter of someone's biological sex, when it's not something their own country would do, is something else.

I've seen some calls to introduce the testing when the athletes first compete (and if you're doing it for boxing, why not everything else). That would be done by their national/regional federations. Again, a massive fallout from tests not reflecting the country's own laws. Perhaps testing the world's population at birth, just in case they become athletes? At least everyone would know at the start.

And this is assuming that everyone interprets the test results in the same way. Which they clearly don't. And then there's debate around if/how some of the results actually impact biological sex definitions, let alone sporting advantage.

Quote

Allowing athletes to compete in the female category because their passport says female is imo ideological capture or at best a total abdication of responsibility and it's dangerous. Even those who support Khalif should want to get to the bottom of this. Why are they not demanding a resolution? 

From aobve the IOC would have to put into place set of testing that had the agreement not only from the sporting bodies, but the scientific community, their lawyers and every entering country. The countries the boxers represented refused to allow the release of any data. There is no cultural, scientific or sporting agreement.

You bet the IOC walked slowly away from it. 🙂 

I've not heard anything from the athletes camps afterwards. They met the Olympic entry criteria, won their competitions, and will no doubt look to see what comesinto effect, if anything, going forward. They are under no obligation to demand anything. In the absence of evidence, they haven't done anything wrong.

Quote

Oh and we have this from Khalif's coach:

"said that a doctor confirmed that there was a “a problem with [Khelif’s] hormones” and “with [Khelif’s] chromosomes,”

Is that not the coach referring to the IBA testing? The IBA disqualified her. We don't know what the issues were, no one is releasing it, and the tests themselves are now disputed.

The closing paragraph on the beeb article was:-

"For now, science is not yet able to offer a definitive view on how people with differing chromosomal make-ups should be categorised for the purposes of elite sport. For those who spend their lives trying to make sense of the science, their hope is that this latest row will propel much-needed research."

You could argue that the Beeb has been ideologically caputred too, I suppose. But the point being that there's still a lot of issues involved. It will be interesting to see if the IOC can get to the bottom of all that before the next Olympics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
On 12/08/2024 at 18:38, Holmes_and_Watson said:

As the medical information hasn't been released, we don't know what's in it. Neither do the people in that interview.

The athletes were cleared to compete in the Olympics. It's under the same rules as the last one, I believe. The IOC eligibility rules are very clear. The athletes didn't have to depend on a tiny amount of ambiguity to take part in them. Under the rules, there was absolutely no doubt that they could have competed, based on the information held.

There's absolutely no pressure on the athletes to clear up anything in order to compete in those olympics. Why should they allow the release of sensitive medical information, based on information from a discredited organisation (and doubt was thrown on the tests, as well as everything else the IBA touched.)?

Since there's no evidence to assume they knew anything untoward outside of those tests, why would they lose the chance to compete?

I get that the other line of the argument is along the lines of they failed a IBA test - they must have known before - if they didn't know before they did then -they should have pulled out of competition until resolved. But to follow that line is to support evidence that's just not there. Further, to support an interpretation of evidence that's just not there.

For me, this is a different part of this. Above, the athletes met the eligibility criteria to compete.

Going forward, the IOC will look to get in another organisation. What criteria are they going to introduce, if any?

Perhaps they will introduce a whole set of new tests (there are a number of them at varying levels of intrusion - so even what tests would be required are up for debate.)

But then you're going to have adult athletes identifying as one sex, only to be told that they are not by a sporting governing body. Testoserone levels is one thing. Being the arbiter of someone's biological sex, when it's not something their own country would do, is something else.

I've seen some calls to introduce the testing when the athletes first compete (and if you're doing it for boxing, why not everything else). That would be done by their national/regional federations. Again, a massive fallout from tests not reflecting the country's own laws. Perhaps testing the world's population at birth, just in case they become athletes? At least everyone would know at the start.

And this is assuming that everyone interprets the test results in the same way. Which they clearly don't. And then there's debate around if/how some of the results actually impact biological sex definitions, let alone sporting advantage.

From aobve the IOC would have to put into place set of testing that had the agreement not only from the sporting bodies, but the scientific community, their lawyers and every entering country. The countries the boxers represented refused to allow the release of any data. There is no cultural, scientific or sporting agreement.

You bet the IOC walked slowly away from it. 🙂 

I've not heard anything from the athletes camps afterwards. They met the Olympic entry criteria, won their competitions, and will no doubt look to see what comesinto effect, if anything, going forward. They are under no obligation to demand anything. In the absence of evidence, they haven't done anything wrong.

Is that not the coach referring to the IBA testing? The IBA disqualified her. We don't know what the issues were, no one is releasing it, and the tests themselves are now disputed.

The closing paragraph on the beeb article was:-

"For now, science is not yet able to offer a definitive view on how people with differing chromosomal make-ups should be categorised for the purposes of elite sport. For those who spend their lives trying to make sense of the science, their hope is that this latest row will propel much-needed research."

You could argue that the Beeb has been ideologically caputred too, I suppose. But the point being that there's still a lot of issues involved. It will be interesting to see if the IOC can get to the bottom of all that before the next Olympics.

I'd welcome your thoughts on this twitter thread:

https://x.com/MForstater/status/1823463950413152716?t=Q7XBuYa7kOduPSgbDS5tIA&s=19

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Sheaf Saint

Sheaf Saint

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, hypochondriac said:

I'd welcome your thoughts on this twitter thread:

https://x.com/MForstater/status/1823463950413152716?t=Q7XBuYa7kOduPSgbDS5tIA&s=19

 

It's a very interesting, well researched thread, but it still falls short of providing any actual evidence. The closest it gets is providing a link to an article on an independent website that makes an unverified claim as to what the lab reports for Khelif and Lin said: "abnormal". In another article, the author claims to have seen the lab results, but we only have his word for that, and if he has then it means someone has leaked them because I very much doubt the boxers themselves gave their permission for that information to be shared with the press. And if they have been leaked, then I have no doubt they would have been shared elsewhere by now.

The letter from the IBA to the IOC is interesting. But, again, the really important bit is, understandably, redacted to protect the confidentiality of the athletes. On the face of it, they seem to present a compelling case, but then they went and shot themselves in the foot with that farcical press conference last week, which further eroded their credibility. Let's also remember that an IBA spokesperson was quoted as saying that there were still some irregularities with Khelif's chromosome test that prevented them from being able to commit to the assertion that she is in fact genetically male.

Ultimately Hypo, you might turn out to be right after all. But it's the way you have so stubbornly and arrogantly insisted you are right over the course of this thread, without any actual concrete evidence to back up your claims, that rubs people up the wrong way. That and the very obtuse way you deliberately keep referring to Khelif as 'they/them'. She has always believed herself to be a woman, was raised as a woman and continues to identify as a woman. so until such time as it is medically proven otherwise, it is very disrespectful to dismiss that and choose to gender her however you wish, based on some unconfirmed stuff you read online.

Anyway, in an interesting development, Khelif has now launched a lawsuit against, among others, Elon Musk and JK Rowling for online harassment, following their Twitter comments about her sex and eligibility. This is an interesting move, because these are two very rich people who can no doubt afford the world's best legal counsel, who will no doubt demand Khelif's legal team provide evidence to prove their clients' claims were false. It will be fascinating to see how this plays out.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 2 months later...
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
On 04/08/2024 at 14:43, egg said:

FFS. You're as boring as you are bigoted. 

I don't need evidence for anything. She's born a woman. Recognised as a woman. Has competed as a woman.

It's dinlo's like you trying to prove from behind a keyboard that a woman with female genitalia is a bloke who need to prove their argument. 

I'm still waiting for the links to your evidence that she's a man.

Cough cough. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

Amazing. The first ever woman with testicles in existence. 

Screenshot_20241104_115031_Chrome.jpg

Screenshot_20241104_115304_Chrome.jpg

Where have you sourced this? The recent credible news reports about her are all about her starting her professional female career. That suggests that she is welcome to continue to compete as woman. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
50 minutes ago, whelk said:

Can anyone on here honestly say they haven’t taken a woman home only to find they had a pair of bollocks? Just me then? 

Thailand is a beautiful country btw

No but I did once take a girl home, only to find out that she was in fact two midgets in a trench coat.

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, egg said:

Where have you sourced this? The recent credible news reports about her are all about her starting her professional female career. That suggests that she is welcome to continue to compete as woman. 

https://reduxx.info/algerian-boxer-imane-khelif-has-xy-chromosomes-and-testicles-french-algerian-medical-report-admits/

Why is this story not credible? Can a woman have testicles? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, egg said:

There was no link so I had no idea whether it was credible. 

Glad I could provide the link then. Are you happy for someone with no uterus, a micropenis and testicles to be referred to as a biological male now? Or is that still a bigoted opinion to have? 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Glad I could provide the link then. Are you happy for someone with no uterus, a micropenis and testicles to be referred to as a biological male now? Or is that still a bigoted opinion to have? 

I could tell a story about micropenises as well. A friend obviously 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Glad I could provide the link then. Are you happy for someone with no uterus, a micropenis and testicles to be referred to as a biological male now? Or is that still a bigoted opinion to have? 

She doesn't have testicles. Read it again. 

Regardless, I'm not going to rely an a report from that website, and I'm not here to define her sex.

She competed as a recognised woman.

Let's see what people who know what they're talking about decide. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
45 minutes ago, egg said:

She doesn't have testicles. Read it again. 

Regardless, I'm not going to rely an a report from that website, and I'm not here to define her sex.

She competed as a recognised woman.

Let's see what people who know what they're talking about decide. 

'but instead had internal testicles and a “micropenis”' 

People who know what they are talking about like expert endocrinologists? I'd say they're a pretty decent authority on the matter. You asked for evidence and when it is provided you suggest it isn't credible because it doesn't say what you want it to. Khelif competed as a "recognised woman" because the criteria to compete was that your passport said you are a woman even if you are a biological man with internal testicals and a penis. 

I'm entirely comfortable with saying that someone who has a penis is a man. Glad we can clarify that there's nothing bigoted whatsoever in that statement. 

If you have a penis - micro or otherwise - then you're a biological man. It's unfortunate for the person involved but no biological man should be competing in combat sports against biological women. Khelif knew the results of the test and knowingly put the health of women in danger in order to steal a medal. Simple as that. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lighthouse

Lighthouse

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, whelk said:

I could tell a story about micropenises as well. A friend obviously 

I asked the woman in WH Smith’s if they had the new self help book for men with small willies. She said, "I’m sorry, I’m not sure it’s in yet." I said, "yes, that’s the one."

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, hypochondriac said:

'but instead had internal testicles and a “micropenis”' 

People who know what they are talking about like expert endocrinologists? I'd say they're a pretty decent authority on the matter. You asked for evidence and when it is provided you suggest it isn't credible because it doesn't say what you want it to. Khelif competed as a "recognised woman" because the criteria to compete was that your passport said you are a woman even if you are a biological man with internal testicals and a penis. 

I'm entirely comfortable with saying that someone who has a penis is a man. Glad we can clarify that there's nothing bigoted whatsoever in that statement. 

If you have a penis - micro or otherwise - then you're a biological man. It's unfortunate for the person involved but no biological man should be competing in combat sports against biological women. Khelif knew the results of the test and knowingly put the health of women in danger in order to steal a medal. Simple as that. 

Hypo, you crack on, you're plainly excited by this possible news. I really couldn't give a monkeys. I'm just here for the jokes. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
10 minutes ago, egg said:

Hypo, you crack on, you're plainly excited by this possible news. I really couldn't give a monkeys. I'm just here for the jokes. 

Sure. It was all a joke just like when you were going off on one calling me a bigot, dinlo multiple times amongst other things and saying she was "born a woman" which as I pointed out at the time is not correct. Definitely worth highlighting that what I said initially was correct that Khelif is a biological man and that your stance to deny this and insult me in the process was the wrong one.

Keep biological men out of women's sport, particularly the sports where they are hitting women in the face. 

Edited by hypochondriac
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Turkish

Turkish

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, whelk said:

I could tell a story about micropenises as well. A friend obviously 

Officially a micro penis can be as long as 3.67inches. Few lads on here pushing the tape measure a bit deeper into their skin?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skintsaint

skintsaint

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Officially a micro penis can be as long as 3.67inches. Few lads on here pushing the tape measure a bit deeper into their skin?

Not too sure, always measured mine in Feet. Mines quarter of a foot long.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
whelk

whelk

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Turkish said:

Officially a micro penis can be as long as 3.67inches. Few lads on here pushing the tape measure a bit deeper into their skin?

Any reason for such detailed research?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
26 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Sure. It was all a joke just like when you were going off on one calling me a bigot, dinlo multiple times amongst other things and saying she was "born a woman" which as I pointed out at the time is not correct. Definitely worth highlighting that what I said initially was correct that Khelif is a biological man and that your stance to deny this and insult me in the process was the wrong one.

Keep biological men out of women's sport, particularly the sports where they are hitting women in the face. 

You came across as a bigot, and your pursuing it months later confirms that. As I say, crack on mate if it's that important to you. I'll wait for a proper report from somewhere credible, and see what people with knowledge of this complex issue decide should be the fate of this woman. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted (edited)
9 minutes ago, egg said:

You came across as a bigot, and your pursuing it months later confirms that. As I say, crack on mate if it's that important to you. I'll wait for a proper report from somewhere credible, and see what people with knowledge of this complex issue decide should be the fate of this woman. 

Like I said, endocrinologists have plenty of knowledge of this complex issue. It's an important issue and needs highlighting months later now that more information has come to light which confirms my original view and frankly makes yours look completely foolish. We can return in a few months when we have more sources confirming what I said originally if you like and then you can say again that you're waiting for even more sources to tell you what is already obvious. 

Edit: I see you @Colinjb. Still struggling to know what a woman is? 

Edited by hypochondriac
  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pingpong

pingpong

Posted
Posted

Could be androgen insensitivity syndrome then, which would match up with the fact that she has grown up and lived as a woman with no indication otherwise.

Affects more people than you probably realise, just that many wouldn't get tested for it. 

If that was the case, it doesn't justify the hate they get for it ‐ imagine living your life into your 20s as a girl and woman, and then finding that out only after winning olympic gold and being hounded by a bunch of angry antiwoke snowflakes baying for your head.

Source seems shit though, so equally who knows. Hopefully such reports don't put her in any physical danger.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Could be androgen insensitivity syndrome then, which would match up with the fact that she has grown up and lived as a woman with no indication otherwise.

Affects more people than you probably realise, just that many wouldn't get tested for it. 

If that was the case, it doesn't justify the hate they get for it ‐ imagine living your life into your 20s as a girl and woman, and then finding that out only after winning olympic gold and being hounded by a bunch of angry antiwoke snowflakes baying for your head.

Source seems shit though, so equally who knows. Hopefully such reports don't put her in any physical danger.

Hold on. Khelif only found out after winning Olympic gold? You sure about that? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pingpong

pingpong

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

Hold on. Khelif only found out after winning Olympic gold? You sure about that? 

I don't think there's any evidence she knows now even - and judging by the Olympics backstory, I'd be surprised.

There's certainly every indication she grew up beyond adolescence with no knowledge of any intersex conditions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
8 minutes ago, pingpong said:

Seems like a dodgy link based on personal vendetta.

As you were.

 

https://tribune.com.pk/story/2507413/algerian-boxer-imane-khelifs-leaked-medical-report-reveals-xy-male-chromosomes

 

Thanks. Searching Khelif and looking at news articles doesn't take you to it the reduxx. You've gotta be pretty obsessed/determined to seek out loopy websites like that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
18 minutes ago, pingpong said:

I don't think there's any evidence she knows now even - and judging by the Olympics backstory, I'd be surprised.

There's certainly every indication she grew up beyond adolescence with no knowledge of any intersex conditions.

Why does Khelif think they were banned prior to the Olympics then? What did they think the controversy was about during the competition? Be serious. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
20 minutes ago, egg said:

Thanks. Searching Khelif and looking at news articles doesn't take you to it the reduxx. You've gotta be pretty obsessed/determined to seek out loopy websites like that. 

Not really. It's all over social media including from someone like piers Morgan who has a giant following. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
egg

egg

Posted
Posted
14 minutes ago, hypochondriac said:

What a complete joke of an article. No attempt at all to refute any of the allegations in the other article. As you were. 

Reduxx. The new authority on all things bigoted. 

Jeez. 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
hypochondriac

hypochondriac

Posted
Posted
13 minutes ago, egg said:

Reduxx. The new authority on all things bigoted. 

Jeez. 

In what way is that a refutation of the medical report? Are you suggesting it's been made up? If that's true then any day now Khelif will sue and win easily. You can't go around faking medical reports. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
pingpong

pingpong

Posted
Posted
On 04/11/2024 at 18:55, hypochondriac said:

In what way is that a refutation of the medical report? Are you suggesting it's been made up? If that's true then any day now Khelif will sue and win easily. You can't go around faking medical reports. 

She is suing, so we will see.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...