Bottom Line

The only purported evidence for the claim that Khelif is trans comes from an undisclosed test performed by an allegedly corrupt sports governing body that may have shown she has a DSD condition. The IOC has said Khelif meets its requirements for participation, with Adams, the IOC spokesman, specifically clarifying, “This is not a transgender issue.”

Because Khelif is not transgender, claims attempting to make her victory against Carini an issue about transgender rights or “woke” politics are without basis.

  • UncleArthur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    3 months ago

    No-one is saying she’s trans. She is, however, chromosomally male (DSD), which is the issue under debate.

    • Unruffled [he/him]@lemmy.dbzer0.comOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      3 months ago

      You mustn’t have read the article. There is zero proof of that, just a half-baked claim with no proof to back it up, from the corrupt and sanctioned International Boxing Association (IBA). Women really shouldn’t have to their genitals or chromosomes inspected just to prove they are a ‘real’ woman, just because some arsehole thinks they don’t look feminine enough.

      • NoiseColor@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        So:

        • iba is wrong and corrupt,

        • the tests were fake and even if they weren’t they shouldn’t even be done

        • everyone who thinks she looks very atypical for a woman and very typical for a man is wrong

        • if anyone doesn’t agree with you, they are an “arshole”

        Brilliant! Bravo!

        • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago
          1. Correct, with proof.
          2. Correct, see bullet point 1.
          3. There’s nothing that describes a “typical woman” or “typical man”.
          4. Correct, I think the actual term is a “bigot”.
        • EpeeGnome@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          Unironically, yes, that is a decent summary of the situation. I mean your last bullet wasn’t in the article and is somewhat subjective, but…

          • NoiseColor@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            3 months ago

            Ok. Wow. You really don’t see how you look like, claiming this?

            I mean if nothing else, you look like the “arshole” in the situation .

            • EpeeGnome@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              3 months ago

              So, the test administered by the IBA was “We can’t tell you, it’s proprietary” and the results of the test were “Trust me bro, she failed,” and now this supposed test result is being used by people to jump to conclusions about her appearance and to try and drag her down just to make a rallying point in arguments about sex and gender in sports. Sorry if people blatantly ignoring how flimsy their evidence is so they can make a point by accusing some athlete of being really a male led me to make my own uncouth assumptions about the personality of someone who would hold such a view.

              • NoiseColor@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                arrow-down
                2
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                So you had no thought about iba not releasing the full tests to protect the athlete?

                You are jumping to conclusion that it’s all a big conspiracy against this athlete. That sounds unlikely to me.

                Also, you accuse me of using this situation as some kind of rallying cry and I will assume everyone that is not 100% in line with what you think. I was banned from another community just by saying that there is an issue in woman sports by individuals with certain conditions and that it should be addressed. Who is in total mob mode here? Not even a mention of discussion is allowed.

                • acosmichippo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  3 months ago

                  So you had no thought about iba not releasing the full tests to protect the athlete?

                  You are jumping to conclusion that it’s all a big conspiracy against this athlete. That sounds unlikely to me.

                  Are you aware of the circumstances around the decision, the IBA being banned for having a long history of shadiness, and only failing this woman as soon as she beat a Russian? I suppose the IOC could all be conspiracy theorists too…

            • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              …says the person downvoted to ovlivion for being an arsehole.

              Some people… How can you be so… unaware.

                • Prandom_returns@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Whether you’re an asshole or not absolutely depends on the opinion of others, not your own.

                  Again… Fucking unaware of your surroundings.

                  • NoiseColor@startrek.website
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    3
                    ·
                    3 months ago

                    You must be very thick to think I would notice being banned, down votes, insults and all kind of vomit only for mentioning that this is an issue in women’s sports.

                    Very very thick. I would use a harsher word, but I’d immediately banned. Unlike some.

    • m-p{3}@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      There are genetic conditions, termed differences of sexual development, in which biological females are born with XY chromosomes but possess female anatomy

      Though there is no independent confirmation that Khelif has these conditions, people born this way would legally be considered female or intersex.

    • Bassman1805@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Not even. The IBA never clarified what test she supposedly failed, they just randomly disqualified her and never explained why.

      And yes, TONS of people are claiming she’s trans.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The IBA says this was not a testosterone test, which means it’s referring to a genetic test.

          At no point has the IBA said it was a genetic test, nor has it shared the results of any test.

        • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          The Snopes article conflates the unfounded claims that these athletes are transgender with the more serious claims that their testosterone levels are outside the standard female range, and then dismisses the latter based on evidence against the former. Your article does a much better job at distinguishing these claims and addresses each one thoughtfully and in detail.

          The sort of zero-information Twitter posters making this a “woke” issue one way or the other should be ignored. With that said, I think its valid to criticize the IOC for the lack of standards and testing which would exclude athletes with masculine levels of testosterone from women’s competitions. I also think that the IBA’s accusations are currently unsupported by any publicly-available evidence; respect for the athletes’ medical privacy would justify this in a normal situation, but the IBA is both untrustworthy and motivated to cause specifically this sort of controversy.

          The athletes caught in the middle may actually be biologically typical women, in which case the entire controversy is moot. I wonder if they will volunteer to be tested by some reliable third party in order to settle this issue. They aren’t obligated to, but I admit that if they don’t then I will be suspicious about their motives.

          • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            They already have been “tested” and passed.

            Interesting how you want to draw a hard line around something with extremely fuzzy borders, almost like you want to control the world instead of understand it…

            • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Are you saying that the IOC tested the testosterone levels of these athletes? That’s not something I have read anywhere else. Do you have a link?

              The hard line is between athletes who are allowed to compete in the women’s games and athletes who aren’t. There’s no possibility of fuzziness there.

              • MotoAsh@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 months ago

                “… no possibility of fuzziness there.”

                … and yet you ask ME to provide the proof. Just move along bigot. At least if you value your life.

        • Plum@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Quillette?

          Never heard of it.

          It has been described as libertarian-leaning,[2][3][4] “the right wing’s highly influential answer to Slate”[5] as well as an “anti-PC soapbox.”[6]

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            That doesn’t make it wrong in this specific case or even necessarily less trustworthy in the general case. The Wall Street Journal is generally considered a conservative-leaning newspaper but their reporting is very reliable.

            • Plum@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              We’re at a point where vetting news corps is an important step in wading through disinformation and vitriol.

                • Eldritch@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Trusting it is just as much being in a partisan bubble. I don’t trust any of them honestly. Any corporately owned media I automatically have a bias against. And that’s not a bad thing. Because I know what their bottom line is and I know what’s important to them.

                  That does not mean that they cannot have a good reporters and reporting. That happens much less often. Far less often than it used to even. But you only trust reporters. And those who have earned it. The outlets that they belong to are superficial.

                  Rupert media is using the outfits former credibility to launder batshit opinion and twisted facts to push an agenda as much as any place else these days. Even if I tend to agree with things they publish that I see. You never trust a capitalist. Well to do anything other than enrich themselves that is.

      • barooboodoo (he/him)@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        What the heck? Why would they do something like that? Banning a person for blatantly lying about a subject they know nothing about in the first place? That’s so weird!

        • NoiseColor@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 months ago
          • I never said a lie

          • I know te subject as much as anyone here

          The problem is that some subjects are tabu here and they should not even be mentioned, let alone discussed. Its ironic and quite idiotic considering what extreme views you can find on the same lemmy communities.

          • barooboodoo (he/him)@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago
            • Yes, you did.

            • No, you don’t.

            Yeah it’s so taboo, look how little discussion is going on here. Although I guess it might seem like that when you ignore all the comments disproving your misinformation.

            • NoiseColor@startrek.website
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 months ago
              • nope

              • yes I most certainly do. But you on the other hand are way out of your depth

              What are you even taking about? Now you are just pulling stuff out of your dumb ass. Nobody is proving or disproving anything here. Just a lot of hysteria and insults.

              Pointless. I will leave you to your warm and cozy bubble where any challenge is met with vitriol and vomit. Bye.

              • barooboodoo (he/him)@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                3 months ago

                Cool thanks. Have fun continuing not to watch or support women’s combat sports and deciding you get to have terrible opinions about subjects you’re completely uninformed on!

      • UncleArthur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        It’s weird. I’m left-wing but am being accused of being right-wing because I believe men should not compete in women’s sports.

        Two hundred years ago, a woman was someone’s property. Now, apparently, it’s just a feeling, or something that is defined by a passport rather than chromosomes. Women are losing their rights to men who are taking over every aspect of their sex and it makes me angry.

        • Eldritch@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You’re being down voted because you’re asserting something maliciously as fact that there’s no actual evidence of.

        • dexa_scantron@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          No, instead someone’s gender should be determined by randos on the internet who believe lies spread by corrupt Russian boxing officials. As God intended. /s

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You started a tirade against someone without any evidence available yet.

          IBA claimed that she was ineligible due to some unspecified test they did. Perhaps they will disclose tomorrow.

          Everything points out that this ban was political to protect a Russian boxer who lost to her. Khelif fought for many years she also lost 9 times to other women, but just that one time when she fought to Russian boxer she got disqualified by organization that itself got disqualified for corruption and ties with Kremlin.